I couldn't disagree more. Flashing things on the screen in PowerPoint allows the lecturer to go way to fast and makes the lectures almost useless. There is a reason why I always learned more in math lectures and the only way I learned from CS lecturers was to reread their powerpoint slides after the class. Take a piece of chalk to a chalkboard and you have to write at a speed that can be digested and understood by the attending students. Take a powerpoint and you find that you can easily breeze through way too much information in a single lecture.
The problem that it is trying to solve is finding particular points of interest along a street without having to click a move arrow a hundred times and reset your view as you do in StreetView. The idea is that this representation succinctly captures the data a user would need to perform certain types of manual search operations that are not currently handled by other systems. They also presented the technology required to produce that accordion view in such a way that relevant information remains visible as the user browses. It was a pretty cool paper. Maybe not earth shattering, but definitely cool.
The OS starts up, the OS tells an application to launch and register its hooks into the OS, then the OS periodically gets interrupts and runs some code which may result in it messaging the application, the application then runs some of its own code which may or may not interface with OS code.
?
Basically my point is, if your code loading and running my code and then our two programs having some kind of dialog is the basis for inheriting something like the GPL license then any code running on a GPL licensed OS has the same problem. After all, at the end of the day, everything is just machine code that reads and writes bits from memory and performs operations using the chip.
Don't know, but that is somewhat irrelevant. The main point is that I see plenty of tech geeks buying Macs, so I think the argument that Macs are only for "not-hugely-geeky tech men" doesn't have basis in fact.
I had to price a dell tower vs. a mac pro (fairly well spec'd out, not the bottom of the line) about two years ago and for the same hardware the dell was $2000 more than the Mac, though it did have an extra year of warranty--so it can go either way depending on what you are buying.
Well, presumably, if he owned half the company, he would be entitled to half the profits. But IANAL nor do I know a whole lot about business. It just seems like this would have come up before now. If I owned half of FB, I'd be asking why I haven't seen any checks in the mail or been contacted about the direction of the company, or anything.
It is highly contrived because Apple isn't stupid and this being added to people's OSX software would be an epic fail. Only Apple Haters would see anything like that in this patent. I personally would stop using Apple products if this were added even though I'm a pretty rabid fanboy (a fact that I'm sure many smart marketers at Apple understand). And with the phone, they probably will add it to the phone to try to push down the cost of the smart phone plans--$40 bucks gets you a nice smartphone plan + ads, $100 gets you the normal no-ad smartphone plan. People will probably be willing to do it.
There are so many potential uses for this patent that it is patently stupid to take the most obviously heinous and most likely destructive-to-Apple-itself option and claim that is what the patent will be used for (that in effect is the definition of trolling). That is why the OP claims it is "highly contrived."
Oh, just to clarify, by "poorer grad students," I'm pointing out that we grad students have less money than professors and therefore are less able to afford Macs. I did not mean a comparison between various grad students' cash flow (we're all poor, as far as I can tell).
That's funny. I look around my CS department and most professors and a good portion of the poorer grad students have switched to Mac. I'm just saying. (Oh, and I'm typing this from a Win7 machine.)
Did you bother to RTFA? Or the root post you are replying to? It is clear that this is for things like internet kiosks at airports and not for your computer at home. Its an alternative to paying for internet access at a kiosk that a kiosk would have the ability (enforced by the OS) to give you the option to watch an ad rather than pay for more time. Nothing to see here, or complain about, move along. Oh, and next time read the article and the post you are replying to.
It depends on what you mean by "day to day." The colors are much better (the blacks are blacker and the whites are whiter) on the glossy screens and as I do lots of graphically intensive stuff as part of my day to day computer use, I definitely prefer it.
I also think the claim that glossy screens "make it impossible to work unless you are doing it in the dark," is a bit overstated. I use my laptop with no problem in well lit rooms regularly. The glossy screen is worse if you are outside or have a very bright window or lamp directly behind you and you are sitting in the dark, but a normal well lit room should not be a problem for a glossy screen, and I personally try not to allow any of my screens to get too much sunlight as I believe it isn't that good for them anyway.
When the screen is off it does show dust and/or fingerprints more than a matte finish, but the increased brightness of the screen makes up for it when the thing is on.
Right, because FTA: "it was discovered by chance rather than through any code review process." Open source is really working out well there isn't it?
Don't get me wrong, I support open source, but the tired old claim that all the code is open so anyone can check its security and it is therefore more secure is preposterous as is shown by this incident. There is too much code to have it all checked--especially by unpaid volunteers (do you really want to go read over lines and lines of someone else's code for no pay? No. I, personally, would be willing to write code for a project I believed in but I'm not going to waste my hard earned free time reading someone else's code). Furthermore, if I were a malware author I would look for holes in open source code on bits of code that weren't touched regularly or updated. A lot easier than looking for them in closed source.
"it's kind of funny that you get bombed with advertisement when just using your phone that you paid for up to $600"
Actually, you only get "bombed with advertisement" when you use an app that a developer worked hard on and the only way they get payed by your cheapskate self is by selling ads for the app. If you don't like the ads, buy non-ad apps. As a developer I am sick and tired of hearing claims that my years of training and honing my skills should be used only to make completely free AND ad-free apps for rich people who can afford $600 smart phones.
The strange thing is that your post with the invisible LESS_THAN has still been modded +5 Funny, even though the punch line was removed by/. html. Seems like some/.ers don't actually know coding and just mark as funny any piece of code that seems like it was written in jest, whether they get it or not.
I thought it was because he was angry with some well known profs who he had talked to about his proof method and they had pretty much shut him out when he was a grad student or postdoc or something, and that because these awards are for leaders of the mathematical community, and he feels ostracized by the community, he won't participate.
That said, the dude is being supported by his mother--last I checked--which, if true, in my mind means he ought to take the money and give it to his mom if he doesn't want it.
That's true, but I think that there might be some good reasons to have a sort of LaTeX light, that is a bit of a cross between WYSIWYG editing like Word, and some embedded markup for things like references and importing documents.
It is the standard for mathematics, and computer science, and maybe some other sciences, but I'm not familiar with those.
It is not, sadly, the standard for the "soft" sciences nor for humanities. My friend in economics is using Word and has never written a line of TeX. When he tried to merge docs for his thesis in Word he ran into huge trouble.
By the way, just so we're clear, when I used "language" in the sentence, "common language for the least common denominator is not always the best option," I did not mean computer language, but more protocol. My example of C++/Java just happened to be a computer language.
So what, is the law going to dictate the protocol to be used to talk between them all? Is every device going to have to support a custom protocol for every other type of device. Non-interoperability exists in part because making a common language for the least common denominator is not always the best option. Look at Java vs. C++. Java works everywhere but there are some things that are better done in a platform specific way in C++. Also, what if one company wants to innovate in the way a product works, does it have to wait for all the other companies to support its ideas before it is allowed to do so?
This is clearly a train wreck and a pipe dream rolled up into one.
The article seems misleading. It says that Google has 20,000 employees and fewer than 200 of them over the age of 40 are working to "make Google culture... welcome to people of all ages."
It makes it sound as if they are saying Google is a company of 20,000 with fewer than 200 employees of age 40 or over, but that isn't true. It's just that fewer than 200 of them have joined this specific group to make Google culture welcome to people of all ages. Seems like we've made a "news story" out of thin air. Slow news day?
Slashdot Mirror
I couldn't disagree more. Flashing things on the screen in PowerPoint allows the lecturer to go way to fast and makes the lectures almost useless. There is a reason why I always learned more in math lectures and the only way I learned from CS lecturers was to reread their powerpoint slides after the class. Take a piece of chalk to a chalkboard and you have to write at a speed that can be digested and understood by the attending students. Take a powerpoint and you find that you can easily breeze through way too much information in a single lecture.
The problem that it is trying to solve is finding particular points of interest along a street without having to click a move arrow a hundred times and reset your view as you do in StreetView. The idea is that this representation succinctly captures the data a user would need to perform certain types of manual search operations that are not currently handled by other systems. They also presented the technology required to produce that accordion view in such a way that relevant information remains visible as the user browses. It was a pretty cool paper. Maybe not earth shattering, but definitely cool.
How is this different from:
The OS starts up, the OS tells an application to launch and register its hooks into the OS, then the OS periodically gets interrupts and runs some code which may result in it messaging the application, the application then runs some of its own code which may or may not interface with OS code.
?
Basically my point is, if your code loading and running my code and then our two programs having some kind of dialog is the basis for inheriting something like the GPL license then any code running on a GPL licensed OS has the same problem. After all, at the end of the day, everything is just machine code that reads and writes bits from memory and performs operations using the chip.
Don't know, but that is somewhat irrelevant. The main point is that I see plenty of tech geeks buying Macs, so I think the argument that Macs are only for "not-hugely-geeky tech men" doesn't have basis in fact.
I had to price a dell tower vs. a mac pro (fairly well spec'd out, not the bottom of the line) about two years ago and for the same hardware the dell was $2000 more than the Mac, though it did have an extra year of warranty--so it can go either way depending on what you are buying.
Well, presumably, if he owned half the company, he would be entitled to half the profits. But IANAL nor do I know a whole lot about business. It just seems like this would have come up before now. If I owned half of FB, I'd be asking why I haven't seen any checks in the mail or been contacted about the direction of the company, or anything.
It is highly contrived because Apple isn't stupid and this being added to people's OSX software would be an epic fail. Only Apple Haters would see anything like that in this patent. I personally would stop using Apple products if this were added even though I'm a pretty rabid fanboy (a fact that I'm sure many smart marketers at Apple understand). And with the phone, they probably will add it to the phone to try to push down the cost of the smart phone plans--$40 bucks gets you a nice smartphone plan + ads, $100 gets you the normal no-ad smartphone plan. People will probably be willing to do it.
There are so many potential uses for this patent that it is patently stupid to take the most obviously heinous and most likely destructive-to-Apple-itself option and claim that is what the patent will be used for (that in effect is the definition of trolling). That is why the OP claims it is "highly contrived."
Oh, just to clarify, by "poorer grad students," I'm pointing out that we grad students have less money than professors and therefore are less able to afford Macs. I did not mean a comparison between various grad students' cash flow (we're all poor, as far as I can tell).
That's funny. I look around my CS department and most professors and a good portion of the poorer grad students have switched to Mac. I'm just saying. (Oh, and I'm typing this from a Win7 machine.)
Did you bother to RTFA? Or the root post you are replying to? It is clear that this is for things like internet kiosks at airports and not for your computer at home. Its an alternative to paying for internet access at a kiosk that a kiosk would have the ability (enforced by the OS) to give you the option to watch an ad rather than pay for more time. Nothing to see here, or complain about, move along. Oh, and next time read the article and the post you are replying to.
My question: why didn't this come out like, say, 5 years ago instead of a full 7 years after facebook's launch?
I agree with Anarke_Incarnate.
It depends on what you mean by "day to day." The colors are much better (the blacks are blacker and the whites are whiter) on the glossy screens and as I do lots of graphically intensive stuff as part of my day to day computer use, I definitely prefer it.
I also think the claim that glossy screens "make it impossible to work unless you are doing it in the dark," is a bit overstated. I use my laptop with no problem in well lit rooms regularly. The glossy screen is worse if you are outside or have a very bright window or lamp directly behind you and you are sitting in the dark, but a normal well lit room should not be a problem for a glossy screen, and I personally try not to allow any of my screens to get too much sunlight as I believe it isn't that good for them anyway.
When the screen is off it does show dust and/or fingerprints more than a matte finish, but the increased brightness of the screen makes up for it when the thing is on.
Life is too short to use such a limited OS out of fear of identity theft. The cost/benefit analysis just doesn't line up.
Right, because FTA: "it was discovered by chance rather than through any code review process." Open source is really working out well there isn't it?
Don't get me wrong, I support open source, but the tired old claim that all the code is open so anyone can check its security and it is therefore more secure is preposterous as is shown by this incident. There is too much code to have it all checked--especially by unpaid volunteers (do you really want to go read over lines and lines of someone else's code for no pay? No. I, personally, would be willing to write code for a project I believed in but I'm not going to waste my hard earned free time reading someone else's code). Furthermore, if I were a malware author I would look for holes in open source code on bits of code that weren't touched regularly or updated. A lot easier than looking for them in closed source.
"it's kind of funny that you get bombed with advertisement when just using your phone that you paid for up to $600"
Actually, you only get "bombed with advertisement" when you use an app that a developer worked hard on and the only way they get payed by your cheapskate self is by selling ads for the app. If you don't like the ads, buy non-ad apps. As a developer I am sick and tired of hearing claims that my years of training and honing my skills should be used only to make completely free AND ad-free apps for rich people who can afford $600 smart phones.
The strange thing is that your post with the invisible LESS_THAN has still been modded +5 Funny, even though the punch line was removed by /. html. Seems like some /.ers don't actually know coding and just mark as funny any piece of code that seems like it was written in jest, whether they get it or not.
No. Multiple awards. Field medal first, now millennium prize.
I thought it was because he was angry with some well known profs who he had talked to about his proof method and they had pretty much shut him out when he was a grad student or postdoc or something, and that because these awards are for leaders of the mathematical community, and he feels ostracized by the community, he won't participate.
That said, the dude is being supported by his mother--last I checked--which, if true, in my mind means he ought to take the money and give it to his mom if he doesn't want it.
That's true, but I think that there might be some good reasons to have a sort of LaTeX light, that is a bit of a cross between WYSIWYG editing like Word, and some embedded markup for things like references and importing documents.
I'm pretty sure this is a joke. All the twitter posts have a parody flag, and Knuth is renowned for his odd sense of humor.
It is the standard for mathematics, and computer science, and maybe some other sciences, but I'm not familiar with those.
It is not, sadly, the standard for the "soft" sciences nor for humanities. My friend in economics is using Word and has never written a line of TeX. When he tried to merge docs for his thesis in Word he ran into huge trouble.
Of course, its turing complete.
Or they will just point out the obvious stupidity of it all and call it a day.
By the way, just so we're clear, when I used "language" in the sentence, "common language for the least common denominator is not always the best option," I did not mean computer language, but more protocol. My example of C++/Java just happened to be a computer language.
So what, is the law going to dictate the protocol to be used to talk between them all? Is every device going to have to support a custom protocol for every other type of device. Non-interoperability exists in part because making a common language for the least common denominator is not always the best option. Look at Java vs. C++. Java works everywhere but there are some things that are better done in a platform specific way in C++. Also, what if one company wants to innovate in the way a product works, does it have to wait for all the other companies to support its ideas before it is allowed to do so?
This is clearly a train wreck and a pipe dream rolled up into one.
The article seems misleading. It says that Google has 20,000 employees and fewer than 200 of them over the age of 40 are working to "make Google culture... welcome to people of all ages."
It makes it sound as if they are saying Google is a company of 20,000 with fewer than 200 employees of age 40 or over, but that isn't true. It's just that fewer than 200 of them have joined this specific group to make Google culture welcome to people of all ages. Seems like we've made a "news story" out of thin air. Slow news day?