An innovative product is something that is new and different. It is something that people didn't think about before but now go "Oooo, I see a use for that." For example the microwave was an innovative product. It cooked food in a completely different way, using a different technology.
The Microwave oven was invented when Percy Spencer realised that his active radar set was melting his chocolate bar. Radar was discovered independently by eight different powers, but was based on the invention of the radio. The radio was invented by Thomas Edison when he noticed high frequency electromagnetic waves while experimenting with his Acoustic telegraph. The acoustic telegraph could not have been invented without the pioneering discovery of Heinrich Hertz, who was the first to discover the photoelectric effect, and later developed the first dipole receiver. Hertz could not have made this discovery without the work of Michael Faraday, who discovered electromechanical induction. Without the work of Simon Ohm on the discovery of electromotive force, he probably wouldn't have got that far, but only after Wilhelm Weber improved upon Johann Schweigger's newly invented galvanometer. Probably skipping a few steps up the chain, but these developments could not have occured without the discovery by Alessandro Volta of the electric battery. William Watson and Benjamin Franklin discovered electrical potentials, without which none of the preceding could have occurred. In fact, you can go right back to Gerolamo Cardano who was the first to have really discovered electricity in the 16th Century.
My point here, is that all inventions and innovation is built on work that proceeds it. That includes the iPhone. That innovation is something that is so totally original and isolated from all other inventions is ridiculous, as I think that my potted history of the Microwave Oven shows. Thus, the iPhone, which builds on and brings together a lot of different technologies, is a truly innovative device.
Fair enough, I'm not trying to convince you one way or the other, I'm just trying to find out your sources. I, also, don't trust Tony Abbott and I won't be voting for him. It's just my lack of trust is based on other things than yours, that's all.
However, I have to note that Hansard is unreliable in this respect, because anyone can say anything they want as they are under immunity from libel law while in the Parliament, and thus can say what they like without any need to back their statements with fact. Sure, there's the Privileges Committee, but it is rare that anyone is referred to this.
Secondly, I don't trust much of what is reported in newspapers - they have not exactly been accurate sources of information over time. It's quite possible that Abbott doesn't prosecute as a libel case would look far worse than just keeping a dignified silence. Politicians have thick skins, and and Abbott probably more so than the average.
Like I said above (before you changed the topic), how do you know that? He left on his own accord - nobody kicked him out. Their is nowhere on record that says he was "asked to leave", or even that we was expelled from the seminary. Where are you getting your information from?
I'll tell you something now: if they can cable up homes to have the potential to go 1GB as technology matures, then it will be a lot cheaper to do it right the first place than do it later. And I'll personally be happy to get 0.03GB/sec - that's still a tremendous data rate!
Yeah, I know - those darned miners and farmers! Anyone would think that they provided something useful to the economy, like raw materials for export overseas, or food or natural materials for clothing. Honestly! What do they provide the economy? Total welfare sponges, every one of them. I agree and in fact in the next election that will be my campaign platform: no more roads, telecommunications or electricity for those who "choose" to leave in regional areas. Bludgers!
Don't for one instant mistake me for being a supporter of Tony Abbott. But the sexual assault charge that you speak of was thrown out of court - over 30 years ago! You are somehow associating this with him leaving the seminary. I cannot see the connection, especially as the court case happened in 1978 and Abbott joined the seminary in 1983. Methinks that if it was a case that they asked him to leave, they probably would have first asked him not to enter.
The other advantage of a State monopoly is that it will provide services in areas that may not necessarily be profitable for a private company. That's important for infrastructure where you need universality of coverage to have an equitable society.
Tony Abbott was never thrown out of the seminary. He left there all by himself. As one who seems so interested in truth, perhaps a little of your own might be a good tonic?
Oh, he's using it. Or rather, he's misusing it to try to mislead the Australian public, or hoodwink a lot of people who don't understand economics. Like I say, not trustworthy.
I'm sure that more major network links will be created over time. There's no reason why they shouldn't be.
Your problem is that you feel that everything is hosted overseas. It's not. Not everything runs through the International links, unless you are some sort of stupid corporation that uses an MPLS network to route your traffic - hi EMC network admins! There are vast numbers of servers and Internet based services within Australia that are required or are extremely useful to Australian organizations. That isn't just businesses, it's Universities, charitable organizations, government services, medical organizations - you name it, it will be used.
Actually... he graduated from Sydney University with a Bachelor of Economics (BEc) and a Bachelor of Laws (LLB) and graduated as an Oxford Rhodes Scholar with a Master of Arts (MA) in Politics and Philosophy.
I don't like him, and I don't feel he'd be great for the economy - certainly I won't be voting for him! - but you can't say he doesn't have a background in Economics. Now if he would actually use that background, that would be great, but he's too busy running cynical political lines like "we'll stop the boats!" to actually do the right thing for Australia.
Which of course means I don't trust him, and to be honest, neither should anyone else. Sad really. But he has a background in Economics.
Not to mention that it's not going to be seriously a factorial to work this out. If you can work out who you want to vote for in the top 15-20 spots, and the ones you dislike the most (c'mon, I'm sure that the Communist Party, or the Christian Democratic Party must be at the bottom of a lot of people's list!) you put at right down the bottom, the rest you can just number in any way you like.
And if you can work out the top 15-20, then that's not even 20!, because you'll probably know what order to put it in. And interestingly, you have... "how to vote" suggestions to look at - who knows, they might be useful.
In the Senate, you can choose where the preferences go. Just vote below the line. There'd be no guessing then!
If you don't vote below the line, then you will basically find that the major parties watch huge swings in preferences to them, and start getting worried. If the Greens win seats for a number of Senators, then they'll have to deal with them though. I'd say take the risk: it's worth it, as the "risk" is low.
Hey... you know, I could have said that about Tony Abbott.
This idea that "hey presto" we are suddenly going to get an improved economy, less waste and an excellent immigration policy from someone we haven't elected yet I find utterly implausible.
Slashdot Mirror
Who said anything about that being the bug?
I'd suggest that he remove the image and claim the higher moral ground.
Is this really something he wants to go into battle over?!? I'm sure he has better things to do.
The Microwave oven was invented when Percy Spencer realised that his active radar set was melting his chocolate bar. Radar was discovered independently by eight different powers, but was based on the invention of the radio. The radio was invented by Thomas Edison when he noticed high frequency electromagnetic waves while experimenting with his Acoustic telegraph. The acoustic telegraph could not have been invented without the pioneering discovery of Heinrich Hertz, who was the first to discover the photoelectric effect, and later developed the first dipole receiver. Hertz could not have made this discovery without the work of Michael Faraday, who discovered electromechanical induction. Without the work of Simon Ohm on the discovery of electromotive force, he probably wouldn't have got that far, but only after Wilhelm Weber improved upon Johann Schweigger's newly invented galvanometer. Probably skipping a few steps up the chain, but these developments could not have occured without the discovery by Alessandro Volta of the electric battery. William Watson and Benjamin Franklin discovered electrical potentials, without which none of the preceding could have occurred. In fact, you can go right back to Gerolamo Cardano who was the first to have really discovered electricity in the 16th Century.
My point here, is that all inventions and innovation is built on work that proceeds it. That includes the iPhone. That innovation is something that is so totally original and isolated from all other inventions is ridiculous, as I think that my potted history of the Microwave Oven shows. Thus, the iPhone, which builds on and brings together a lot of different technologies, is a truly innovative device.
Someone want inform the digitizor admins?
Typo of the century! I think you meant "then" :-)
"I challenge you to name another tech company that innovates like Apple--with game-changing technologies like the iPod, iTunes, iPhone, and iPad."
VMWare. It's owned 80% by EMC, which is a behomoth and totally innovation free. Yet VMWare puts out a lot of very innovative products.
Fair enough, I'm not trying to convince you one way or the other, I'm just trying to find out your sources. I, also, don't trust Tony Abbott and I won't be voting for him. It's just my lack of trust is based on other things than yours, that's all.
However, I have to note that Hansard is unreliable in this respect, because anyone can say anything they want as they are under immunity from libel law while in the Parliament, and thus can say what they like without any need to back their statements with fact. Sure, there's the Privileges Committee, but it is rare that anyone is referred to this.
Secondly, I don't trust much of what is reported in newspapers - they have not exactly been accurate sources of information over time. It's quite possible that Abbott doesn't prosecute as a libel case would look far worse than just keeping a dignified silence. Politicians have thick skins, and and Abbott probably more so than the average.
Yeah, cause Cable is ubiquitous.
Voting is compulsory in Australia.
Like I said above (before you changed the topic), how do you know that? He left on his own accord - nobody kicked him out. Their is nowhere on record that says he was "asked to leave", or even that we was expelled from the seminary. Where are you getting your information from?
It's funny you say that. Have your taxes increased recently?
I'll tell you something now: if they can cable up homes to have the potential to go 1GB as technology matures, then it will be a lot cheaper to do it right the first place than do it later. And I'll personally be happy to get 0.03GB/sec - that's still a tremendous data rate!
Yeah, I know - those darned miners and farmers! Anyone would think that they provided something useful to the economy, like raw materials for export overseas, or food or natural materials for clothing. Honestly! What do they provide the economy? Total welfare sponges, every one of them. I agree and in fact in the next election that will be my campaign platform: no more roads, telecommunications or electricity for those who "choose" to leave in regional areas. Bludgers!
Don't for one instant mistake me for being a supporter of Tony Abbott. But the sexual assault charge that you speak of was thrown out of court - over 30 years ago! You are somehow associating this with him leaving the seminary. I cannot see the connection, especially as the court case happened in 1978 and Abbott joined the seminary in 1983. Methinks that if it was a case that they asked him to leave, they probably would have first asked him not to enter.
You know this great insight because you were there?
The other advantage of a State monopoly is that it will provide services in areas that may not necessarily be profitable for a private company. That's important for infrastructure where you need universality of coverage to have an equitable society.
Tony Abbott was never thrown out of the seminary. He left there all by himself. As one who seems so interested in truth, perhaps a little of your own might be a good tonic?
Oh, he's using it. Or rather, he's misusing it to try to mislead the Australian public, or hoodwink a lot of people who don't understand economics. Like I say, not trustworthy.
I'm sure that more major network links will be created over time. There's no reason why they shouldn't be.
Your problem is that you feel that everything is hosted overseas. It's not. Not everything runs through the International links, unless you are some sort of stupid corporation that uses an MPLS network to route your traffic - hi EMC network admins! There are vast numbers of servers and Internet based services within Australia that are required or are extremely useful to Australian organizations. That isn't just businesses, it's Universities, charitable organizations, government services, medical organizations - you name it, it will be used.
Actually... he graduated from Sydney University with a Bachelor of Economics (BEc) and a Bachelor of Laws (LLB) and graduated as an Oxford Rhodes Scholar with a Master of Arts (MA) in Politics and Philosophy.
I don't like him, and I don't feel he'd be great for the economy - certainly I won't be voting for him! - but you can't say he doesn't have a background in Economics. Now if he would actually use that background, that would be great, but he's too busy running cynical political lines like "we'll stop the boats!" to actually do the right thing for Australia.
Which of course means I don't trust him, and to be honest, neither should anyone else. Sad really. But he has a background in Economics.
True. But the Senate, as the house of review, is really where it all happens. Not to mention they have rotating 8 year terms.
Not to mention that it's not going to be seriously a factorial to work this out. If you can work out who you want to vote for in the top 15-20 spots, and the ones you dislike the most (c'mon, I'm sure that the Communist Party, or the Christian Democratic Party must be at the bottom of a lot of people's list!) you put at right down the bottom, the rest you can just number in any way you like.
And if you can work out the top 15-20, then that's not even 20!, because you'll probably know what order to put it in. And interestingly, you have... "how to vote" suggestions to look at - who knows, they might be useful.
In the Senate, you can choose where the preferences go. Just vote below the line. There'd be no guessing then!
If you don't vote below the line, then you will basically find that the major parties watch huge swings in preferences to them, and start getting worried. If the Greens win seats for a number of Senators, then they'll have to deal with them though. I'd say take the risk: it's worth it, as the "risk" is low.
Hey... you know, I could have said that about Tony Abbott.
This idea that "hey presto" we are suddenly going to get an improved economy, less waste and an excellent immigration policy from someone we haven't elected yet I find utterly implausible.
Oh, and just in case you are wondering where this is stored here is the location.