Is any slashdotter involved with science journalism [in an printed medium for the uneducated masses]? This one piece makes me think of how pressure to come up with news (quantitative production) can be an incentive for the proliferation of this kind of sensationalist headline.
During the 90's, I remember reading at least three times (two or three years apart, each) that the first flying car had been invented. Different people, different projects (one was just a small aircraft, not an ground/air vehicle), and generally old news trying to recover a sense of wonder with technological advancement that doesn't happen that often again.
What I'm trying to say is that popular science journalism's main "product" is that sense of wonder. Should I be surprised that they'll go to any length to sell the wonder without any actual news behind it?
But then again, I was pretty impressed by the Segway.
There is extensive research in the academic literature on this kind of phenomenon. It's called a "network externality".
Good undergrad microeconomics textbooks (Pindick or Varian will do) cover the basics on that. The academic journals have quite a few interesting solutions to such market failures.
Potential market failures are still in less quantity and less gravity than government failures. Three characters: ADA.
...waiting for the rainbow's end to cast its gold
on
The Map of Innovation
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
well you can't have something for nothing
you can't have freedom for free
you won't get wise while the sleep is still in your eyes
no matter what your dream might be
Even though I'm in the finance business (and not in the computer technology industry), I feel the whole case for pumping up technology-related economic growth with better management techniques is overstated.
I don't think you can go wrong, business-wise, with a new technological concept that people or business can actually use. "Creating something out of nothing" means adding value, and value comes from utility.
I do feel that the current "can't patent concepts" ideology hampers conceptual innovation, since it's just easier and more profitable to replicate existing technologies' functionalities.
Last time I checked out Linux, X had a Start button. A large thread can be woven on how the Windows GUI concepts come from the Mac, or how that one comes from Xerox Something, but the very thought that they bothered enough to copy minor details of Windows' interface concepts is depressing. Of course, MS has done that quite a few times. In this whole conceptual innovation game, people who have actually changed the world (like the guy who came up with VisiCalc) are more often than not deprived from the immense wealth growth their idea created.
Of course, we don't want to have semi-old concepts remain half-baked while an incessant quest for the new continues. How do we solve this research incentive problem?
You have to do a present-value cashflow comparison between the two investment projects.
As anyone who remembers high-school math can assert, infinite cashflows have finite present value (and that's why governments come up with stuff like perpetuities and consols).
Somewhat against what the article would claim, switching to Open Source has high costs _right now_, and gets gradually cheaper as knowledge deepens and disseminates within the organization. Even coming up with an open source install where there were no computers before can be expensive, as the whole Linux-for-administrative-automation deal is quite half-baked yet.
I think that just about explains why the corporate world still uses proprietary software en masse. Network externalities (the fact that other people using Windows makes Windows more useful for you) take care of the rest.
A couple of weeks ago, WinXP went snafu for the usual reasons Windows goes snafu for, and I considered once again getting rid of it. I popped in the Red Hat CD that had been sitting around here, and found out it wouldn't support my el-cheapo network card. Besides, I'm not too sure it'd read (let alone write) my abCD-formatted CD-RW's. abCD is a handy piece of software that came with my cd-burners that makes cd-burning seamless making it work like another disk drive.
I happen to have an actual life (and little time to invest in the learning-tweaking-coding curve) and actual practical uses for this computer. So I'm running 98SE instead.
Re:now, really, what's with the arms?
on
The "Spider Case"
·
· Score: 1
I know this is supposed to be a geek place and you prolly have all seen this already. But it's still an interesting spin on the case mod cooling thread.
Be sure to read the whole saga from that point on.
Being pleased that privately owned protocols are being left open with a limited license is short-sighted. Even Yahoo realizes the meaning of "network externalities".
Shouldn't they be adopting an open basic protocol - even if they are going to extend it with proprietary featuritis?
You can't blame people for acting in their best interest, and you can't bleat once ICQ lite is turned into bloatware again. That's the way it works.
now, really, what's with the arms?
on
The "Spider Case"
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Isn't a case mod supposed to be a new, creative way of arranging a computer? With the lights out, the arms look like connections for stuff lying out. How cool would it be to plug in harddrivers or cdburners in those arms?
I was really disappointed to find out they were just plastic arms. There's no new concept there, just cool-ish design. I'll stay with the computer in a several stories bookcase in the movie "Pi". Its waay cooler as a concept, primitive as it is.
Some pre-MP material illustrates the development of the "MP style". Some of those are just great, judging by the individual sketches that sometimes make it through MP biographies.
Oh, come on. Ozzy included more than a couple of Sabbath tracks in his retrospective album. And no, no Ozzy retrospective is complete without "Paranoid" and "War Pigs"
Is there already a proper Monty Python box set - including the older pre-MP John Cleese TV comedies and the movies?
Also, did someone bother to put up together a Seinfeld boxed set already?
For instance, I used to go to CDNow.com for all of my music info needs - tracklisting, release dates, etc.
A bit off-topicky, but have you tried the All Music Guide? It was founded by a rock writer - who has already cashed out - with a long history dating back to the 60's, and it became the major music information resellers - Microsoft and Windows Media Player uses them, while still offering all the goodies for free in their website.
Oh, the countless hours spent browsing that thing. Oh the countless hours.
Alright, it was off-topic. So sue me.
Slashdot Mirror
During the 90's, I remember reading at least three times (two or three years apart, each) that the first flying car had been invented. Different people, different projects (one was just a small aircraft, not an ground/air vehicle), and generally old news trying to recover a sense of wonder with technological advancement that doesn't happen that often again.
What I'm trying to say is that popular science journalism's main "product" is that sense of wonder. Should I be surprised that they'll go to any length to sell the wonder without any actual news behind it?
But then again, I was pretty impressed by the Segway.
How can the asteroid come from _inside_ the Earth's orbit? Was it just orbiting around for centuries unnoticed, or did a piece of earth get loose?
Both scenarios are unlikely.
Good undergrad microeconomics textbooks (Pindick or Varian will do) cover the basics on that. The academic journals have quite a few interesting solutions to such market failures.
Potential market failures are still in less quantity and less gravity than government failures. Three characters: ADA.
you can't have freedom for free
you won't get wise while the sleep is still in your eyes
no matter what your dream might be
Even though I'm in the finance business (and not in the computer technology industry), I feel the whole case for pumping up technology-related economic growth with better management techniques is overstated.
I don't think you can go wrong, business-wise, with a new technological concept that people or business can actually use. "Creating something out of nothing" means adding value, and value comes from utility.
I do feel that the current "can't patent concepts" ideology hampers conceptual innovation, since it's just easier and more profitable to replicate existing technologies' functionalities.
Last time I checked out Linux, X had a Start button. A large thread can be woven on how the Windows GUI concepts come from the Mac, or how that one comes from Xerox Something, but the very thought that they bothered enough to copy minor details of Windows' interface concepts is depressing. Of course, MS has done that quite a few times. In this whole conceptual innovation game, people who have actually changed the world (like the guy who came up with VisiCalc) are more often than not deprived from the immense wealth growth their idea created.
Of course, we don't want to have semi-old concepts remain half-baked while an incessant quest for the new continues. How do we solve this research incentive problem?
Man, I don't have the slightest idea. *sigh*
As anyone who remembers high-school math can assert, infinite cashflows have finite present value (and that's why governments come up with stuff like perpetuities and consols).
Somewhat against what the article would claim, switching to Open Source has high costs _right now_, and gets gradually cheaper as knowledge deepens and disseminates within the organization. Even coming up with an open source install where there were no computers before can be expensive, as the whole Linux-for-administrative-automation deal is quite half-baked yet.
I think that just about explains why the corporate world still uses proprietary software en masse. Network externalities (the fact that other people using Windows makes Windows more useful for you) take care of the rest.
A couple of weeks ago, WinXP went snafu for the usual reasons Windows goes snafu for, and I considered once again getting rid of it. I popped in the Red Hat CD that had been sitting around here, and found out it wouldn't support my el-cheapo network card. Besides, I'm not too sure it'd read (let alone write) my abCD-formatted CD-RW's. abCD is a handy piece of software that came with my cd-burners that makes cd-burning seamless making it work like another disk drive.
I happen to have an actual life (and little time to invest in the learning-tweaking-coding curve) and actual practical uses for this computer. So I'm running 98SE instead.
I know this is supposed to be a geek place and you prolly have all seen this already. But it's still an interesting spin on the case mod cooling thread. Be sure to read the whole saga from that point on.
Being pleased that privately owned protocols are being left open with a limited license is short-sighted. Even Yahoo realizes the meaning of "network externalities". Shouldn't they be adopting an open basic protocol - even if they are going to extend it with proprietary featuritis? You can't blame people for acting in their best interest, and you can't bleat once ICQ lite is turned into bloatware again. That's the way it works.
Isn't a case mod supposed to be a new, creative way of arranging a computer? With the lights out, the arms look like connections for stuff lying out. How cool would it be to plug in harddrivers or cdburners in those arms?
I was really disappointed to find out they were just plastic arms. There's no new concept there, just cool-ish design. I'll stay with the computer in a several stories bookcase in the movie "Pi". Its waay cooler as a concept, primitive as it is.
Some pre-MP material illustrates the development of the "MP style". Some of those are just great, judging by the individual sketches that sometimes make it through MP biographies. Oh, come on. Ozzy included more than a couple of Sabbath tracks in his retrospective album. And no, no Ozzy retrospective is complete without "Paranoid" and "War Pigs"
Is there already a proper Monty Python box set - including the older pre-MP John Cleese TV comedies and the movies? Also, did someone bother to put up together a Seinfeld boxed set already?
Three words: uncovered call options.
Someone has made infinite money here.