As a lover of classical music, I applaud this model. A search of their site shows most of the classical pieces to be under ten cents. However, as I expected, the selection is practically non-existent. Searching for "Tchaikovsky" yields ONE result. It's too bad too, because classical music fans have been so long-snubbed by the digital music download industry-- iTunes is particularly broken-- while their selection is decent, the iTMS contract states that songs over seven minutes cannot be purchased individually. No surprise that classical tracks are hardly ever under this limit. Hopefully Amazon's acquisition of this company, combined with Amazon's wide collection of classical CDs, will make for a much more robust classical selection in the future.
You just don't get it. Nobody is claiming to have lost any privacy they once had, but rather a sense of privacy. We all know we're putting personal information online, and we all know it's public and available to anyone in our friend network. But it at least felt intimate before this. It's the feel of the website, the sense of community, that has been altered. And people don't like it.
Don't misinterpret "we want our old Facebook back" as "we want our privacy back". It's not the same thing.
The problem here is that it's often hard or even impossible to get primary sources.
I've written countless scientific papers where, in the search of a primary article, I wasn't able to get it because:
(a) it was in a database that my institution does not have a subscription to
(b) it was in a journal that my library doesn't carry (or doesn't have a complete archive)
(c) it seemed to disappear from the face of the Earth after having been cited
Secondary sources, tertiary sources, and beyond, especially on obscure/older research subjects, can oftentimes be all there is to go by.
People were hoping for some intellectual discourse on DRM in Steal This Film, but it seems most were disappointed with the result. This thread seems like a much better, more logical, well thought-out response to the recording industries, explaining why DRM is bad, why people commit piracy, and why people feel justified to do so.
I'm pretty sure/. should make it's own documentary with a bunch of talking heads with impressive titles below their names on the screen, reading these comments verbatim. It would probably do a lot to bring open otherwise apathetic eyes to the failings of the current media distribution system.
Hardware markets where MS has a competitive disadvantage? Oh you mean like-- the video game console market? Yeah I bet the shareholders are wishing Microsoft stayed out of that one too.
It doesn't matter where neither the calendar system nor the computer was invented. It's simply differing convention. If you want to get technical about which format Slashdot should use, it should probably be by where Slashdot servers are located, or where the site was founded. Or if we're a democracy, by which demographic makes up the larger portion of Slashdot visitors.
"Few people realize that when they buy software or music or movies, they are actually buying a license to use, watch or listen."
So why is it that when I buy a "license to watch" The Matrix, for instance, I have to re-purchase such a license when I want to watch it on the BluRay/HD-DVD format? If we truely are buying an intellectual property license, we should be completely liberated from the limitations of the physical medium. If we buy such a license and our DVD is damaged, a replacement should be provided to us free of cost (or at cost of materials, at least). Same thing when a new (and better) format comes out. The intellectual property doesn't change, only the medium on which it is stored. So why do we have to buy it all over again?
Are we buying the disc or are we buying license to the intellectual property? The entertainment industry can't have it both ways, as far as I'm concerned.
What effect will this technology have on the amount of microwave radiation that a user is subject to during an average call? Seems to me that if the cell phone switches through a router only a few meters away, instead of a cell tower several blocks away, that it would be able to drop its power output considerably.
Less microwaves to the head is always a good thing...
It is widely believed that this new architechture will be based on, or at least have very close similarities to, the current Pentium M chip design.
Current Pentium 4 CPUs utilize Intel's NetBurst design, which allowed for higher clock frequencies through it's longer piplines. With shoter pipelines, AMD CPUs and the Pentium M have been able to achieve comperable performance at lower clock speeds and at less power.
Less power is the most important part of that, as heat dissipation is becoming more and more of an issue as CPUs become more and more powerful.
Expect the next generation chips to be at a lower clock frequency than the Pentium 4, a departure from Intel's historical patterns.
Another satisfied customer of PDX. Spent a night there waiting for my early morning flight-- most painless airport stay I've had in a while. I just set up my laptop and extermal mouse at a table. Imagine my delight when I found out the wireless was free! PDX has a lifetime fan in me.
"...mice are quite often perfectly symmetrical..."
Tell that to someone who's left handed. Sure, lower-end mice are often perfect blobs or rectangles, but far too many "real" mice are ergonomically biased towards right-handed folk.
Dude, it's a start page. Of course it's gonna have weather and headlines and a search bar. Coloring and placement is basically all there is to either page. You call the style generic, but it's simple for a reason: usabilitiy. People don't want flashy or complicated start pages.
Hanging out with fellow nerds, it really is easy to think along these lines. And then you remember all the poor saps that actually buy their PCs from retailers that force you to buy a legitimate copy of the OS. Oh the horror!
Can open source software compete against commercial software? Depends on what type of software.
Gaming software strikes me as one market that will never be anything but commercial. Most of the fun of games would be ruined if you had helped design them: knowing all the twists and turns in the plot, exactly how to beat every boss, and knowing how the story ends before you take your first step ina run-though.
When designing games, you're entertaining others but not yourself-- something you'll certainly always want to be paid for. Open source OSes and the like is giving increased usability and productivity to everyone, yourself included.
So while I see promise for the viability of open-source software competing against commercial software in things like instant messaging clients, I just wanted to point out that I don't think it has a chance in gaming software.
I've often questioned the validity of that CNET list. Some Samsung phones I've seen are so similar they are almost certainly based on the same internals, yet one might have twice the radiation exposure of the other. *shrug*
Does anyone know of a good website out there that compares the different radaiation output levels of 802.11a, 802.11b, and 802.11g, compared to cell phones? I think that would be interesting information to look at.
I disagree, this android is not "smack in the middle" of the Uncanny Valley. She is in fact, to the right of it-- she is too human looking to be considered in the Valley. In my mind, something that looks very very human is only creepy when it's immediately and obviously NOT human.
TFA says that it's possible that this thing could fool people into thinking she's real for ten seconds or so. This says to me that what would give her away is her mannerisms and actions, not the way she looks. You could stare at a picture of her all day long and not realize she wasn't human.
Something that is smack in the middle of the Valley is something more like the characters in The Polar Express animated movie. They do look very human, but there's something you can't quite put your finger on that lets you know immediately that they are not human at all. And that's what is so disturbing.
Personally I don't think this is all that bad for Rockstar at all. EVERYONE and their dog is talking about their company and their game right now, and remember: there's no such thing as bad publicity. A fair number of the over-18 gaming crowd (there are a lot of us) might head out and buy the game to see what all the fuss is about, and when the cleaned up version is released, it's still gonna be the most well-known racing name to any kid that's been following the media this week.
...and don't harm the environment with ozone-depleting freon like today's car air conditioners.
Wrong. "Today's car air conditioners" don't utilize Freon (R-12) for just that reason. In 1992, R-134a ( a more environmetally-friendly refrigerant) was introduced as a replacement, and since 1995, all new cars in the United States have used R-134a A/C systems, NOT Freon systems.
Why do people want to save OS/2? Why has it stuck around this long? Isn't there some other, better operating system around that fills whatever niche OS/2 satisfied?
Slashdot Mirror
As a lover of classical music, I applaud this model. A search of their site shows most of the classical pieces to be under ten cents. However, as I expected, the selection is practically non-existent. Searching for "Tchaikovsky" yields ONE result. It's too bad too, because classical music fans have been so long-snubbed by the digital music download industry-- iTunes is particularly broken-- while their selection is decent, the iTMS contract states that songs over seven minutes cannot be purchased individually. No surprise that classical tracks are hardly ever under this limit. Hopefully Amazon's acquisition of this company, combined with Amazon's wide collection of classical CDs, will make for a much more robust classical selection in the future.
You just don't get it. Nobody is claiming to have lost any privacy they once had, but rather a sense of privacy. We all know we're putting personal information online, and we all know it's public and available to anyone in our friend network. But it at least felt intimate before this. It's the feel of the website, the sense of community, that has been altered. And people don't like it.
Don't misinterpret "we want our old Facebook back" as "we want our privacy back". It's not the same thing.
The problem here is that it's often hard or even impossible to get primary sources.
I've written countless scientific papers where, in the search of a primary article, I wasn't able to get it because:
(a) it was in a database that my institution does not have a subscription to
(b) it was in a journal that my library doesn't carry (or doesn't have a complete archive)
(c) it seemed to disappear from the face of the Earth after having been cited
Secondary sources, tertiary sources, and beyond, especially on obscure/older research subjects, can oftentimes be all there is to go by.
People were hoping for some intellectual discourse on DRM in Steal This Film, but it seems most were disappointed with the result. This thread seems like a much better, more logical, well thought-out response to the recording industries, explaining why DRM is bad, why people commit piracy, and why people feel justified to do so.
/. should make it's own documentary with a bunch of talking heads with impressive titles below their names on the screen, reading these comments verbatim. It would probably do a lot to bring open otherwise apathetic eyes to the failings of the current media distribution system.
I'm pretty sure
Hardware markets where MS has a competitive disadvantage? Oh you mean like-- the video game console market? Yeah I bet the shareholders are wishing Microsoft stayed out of that one too.
It doesn't matter where neither the calendar system nor the computer was invented. It's simply differing convention. If you want to get technical about which format Slashdot should use, it should probably be by where Slashdot servers are located, or where the site was founded. Or if we're a democracy, by which demographic makes up the larger portion of Slashdot visitors.
"Few people realize that when they buy software or music or movies, they are actually buying a license to use, watch or listen."
So why is it that when I buy a "license to watch" The Matrix, for instance, I have to re-purchase such a license when I want to watch it on the BluRay/HD-DVD format? If we truely are buying an intellectual property license, we should be completely liberated from the limitations of the physical medium. If we buy such a license and our DVD is damaged, a replacement should be provided to us free of cost (or at cost of materials, at least). Same thing when a new (and better) format comes out. The intellectual property doesn't change, only the medium on which it is stored. So why do we have to buy it all over again?
Are we buying the disc or are we buying license to the intellectual property? The entertainment industry can't have it both ways, as far as I'm concerned.
What effect will this technology have on the amount of microwave radiation that a user is subject to during an average call? Seems to me that if the cell phone switches through a router only a few meters away, instead of a cell tower several blocks away, that it would be able to drop its power output considerably.
Less microwaves to the head is always a good thing...
One step closer to LCARS! ;)
It is widely believed that this new architechture will be based on, or at least have very close similarities to, the current Pentium M chip design.
Current Pentium 4 CPUs utilize Intel's NetBurst design, which allowed for higher clock frequencies through it's longer piplines. With shoter pipelines, AMD CPUs and the Pentium M have been able to achieve comperable performance at lower clock speeds and at less power.
Less power is the most important part of that, as heat dissipation is becoming more and more of an issue as CPUs become more and more powerful.
Expect the next generation chips to be at a lower clock frequency than the Pentium 4, a departure from Intel's historical patterns.
Another satisfied customer of PDX. Spent a night there waiting for my early morning flight-- most painless airport stay I've had in a while. I just set up my laptop and extermal mouse at a table. Imagine my delight when I found out the wireless was free! PDX has a lifetime fan in me.
"...mice are quite often perfectly symmetrical..."
Tell that to someone who's left handed. Sure, lower-end mice are often perfect blobs or rectangles, but far too many "real" mice are ergonomically biased towards right-handed folk.
So... "aural feedback" means the mouse makes a clicking sound, and "touch sensitivity" means it has buttons?
Dude, it's a start page. Of course it's gonna have weather and headlines and a search bar. Coloring and placement is basically all there is to either page. You call the style generic, but it's simple for a reason: usabilitiy. People don't want flashy or complicated start pages.
Easy to remember if you're looking at it like F-CK G(eorge) W.
Hanging out with fellow nerds, it really is easy to think along these lines. And then you remember all the poor saps that actually buy their PCs from retailers that force you to buy a legitimate copy of the OS. Oh the horror!
Can open source software compete against commercial software? Depends on what type of software.
Gaming software strikes me as one market that will never be anything but commercial. Most of the fun of games would be ruined if you had helped design them: knowing all the twists and turns in the plot, exactly how to beat every boss, and knowing how the story ends before you take your first step ina run-though.
When designing games, you're entertaining others but not yourself-- something you'll certainly always want to be paid for. Open source OSes and the like is giving increased usability and productivity to everyone, yourself included.
So while I see promise for the viability of open-source software competing against commercial software in things like instant messaging clients, I just wanted to point out that I don't think it has a chance in gaming software.
I've often questioned the validity of that CNET list. Some Samsung phones I've seen are so similar they are almost certainly based on the same internals, yet one might have twice the radiation exposure of the other. *shrug*
Does anyone know of a good website out there that compares the different radaiation output levels of 802.11a, 802.11b, and 802.11g, compared to cell phones? I think that would be interesting information to look at.
I disagree, this android is not "smack in the middle" of the Uncanny Valley. She is in fact, to the right of it-- she is too human looking to be considered in the Valley. In my mind, something that looks very very human is only creepy when it's immediately and obviously NOT human.
TFA says that it's possible that this thing could fool people into thinking she's real for ten seconds or so. This says to me that what would give her away is her mannerisms and actions, not the way she looks. You could stare at a picture of her all day long and not realize she wasn't human.
Something that is smack in the middle of the Valley is something more like the characters in The Polar Express animated movie. They do look very human, but there's something you can't quite put your finger on that lets you know immediately that they are not human at all. And that's what is so disturbing.
A Character Shot from The Polar Express
Personally I don't think this is all that bad for Rockstar at all. EVERYONE and their dog is talking about their company and their game right now, and remember: there's no such thing as bad publicity. A fair number of the over-18 gaming crowd (there are a lot of us) might head out and buy the game to see what all the fuss is about, and when the cleaned up version is released, it's still gonna be the most well-known racing name to any kid that's been following the media this week.
Well done, Rockstar.
Man, HampsterDance was so freakin' 1337 back in the day. Ah nostalgia.
...and don't harm the environment with ozone-depleting freon like today's car air conditioners.
Wrong. "Today's car air conditioners" don't utilize Freon (R-12) for just that reason. In 1992, R-134a ( a more environmetally-friendly refrigerant) was introduced as a replacement, and since 1995, all new cars in the United States have used R-134a A/C systems, NOT Freon systems.
By the look of it, the Benfey table is far superior to the article's table in terms of intuitiveness as well. Mod article -1.
Why do people want to save OS/2? Why has it stuck around this long? Isn't there some other, better operating system around that fills whatever niche OS/2 satisfied?