The T|T3 is and probably always will be the pinnacle of Palm's product design. [...] I wish I'd bought two. Why don't you? Just because they're "obsolete" does not make them obsolete, or impossible to get hold of. May I direct your attention to http://tinyurl.com/2nzewo That's what I did. Then I sent them both to Chris Short, and now I have peace of mind knowing that my 'plastic brains' are trustworthy.
Palm needs to either focus heavily on the user experience like they did a decade ago, or get out of the business before their legacy becomes one of eye rolling and snickering. Oh, you mean like what happened to Psion? That was so sad. I mean, their devices (5mx, Revo) were better than ewen T3's.
I want an affordable (>$500 2007 dollars), multi-purpose (music / web / email / ebook / addresses), computing device, that isn't tied to being a cell phone.
Consumers don't want Windows Mobile, and they don't want Palm OS Hacket, but they do want PDAs. Otherwise, hacking the iPhone and the iPod wouldn't even be an issue. My sentiment exactly.
What I want, instead of my Palm T3 + (crummy) mobile phone, is a Psion Series 5mx, with modern comms (bluetooth+wifi+usb) and perhaps a camera, in a Psion Revo size-and-weight package.
You can still find 5mx'es, but with serial comms they *are* a bit behind the times.
Goals
1. Stop the adverse effects of light pollution on dark skies, including
* Energy waste and the air and water pollution caused by energy waste
* Harm to human health
* Harm to nocturnal wildlife and ecosystems
* Reduced safety and security
* Reduced visibility at night
* Poor nighttime ambience
2. Raise awareness about light pollution, its adverse effects, and its solutions
3. Educate everyone, everywhere, about the values of quality outdoor lighting
4. Help stop other threats to our view of the universe, such as radio frequency interference (RFI) and space debris.
There are a bunch of very interesting articles on how less exterior lighting gives better visibility, roughly speaking because floodlights don't really light up everything and end up blinding you more than general darkness with point illumination.
When you write that you prefer a CPU over a human for reasons of predictability, it's what I too have been saying for years.
These books sound very fascinating, and I will make a note of them and see what they're up to.... but... you claim to have read some of these, and that they've helped you... yet you still saying:
I am introverted myself and found the course very helpful. Hmm? Should that not be "I *was* introverted"? I really don't mean to be offensive, but the change does not seem to be that, um, deep-rooted if you're still using your old self-image like that. Or have I misunderstood?
My video recorder is in fact not a VCR, it's an HDR. For the sake of multiple tuners, I already plan to build a MythTV-based one (or just buy a Dragon), but it's rather pointless if that set-top box is a roadblock, signal-wise.
When I bought the tv, What they said at the shop was that even the new TVs that do have digital tuners won't be compatible and will require a set-top box. Why this must be so I cannot fathom. Please note that the "shop" I bought this in is not just any vendor, but the country's premier hifi-connaisseur-oriented chain; they are supposed to be in the know.
The most pressing reason for me ---being in Denmark, where the switch will decidedly happen in 2009--- is that nobody seems able to give a clear answer about what that "box" really is.
The most enlightened answer I got was that you will need a converter box, even for new tv's.
What I *really* want to know, and nobody seems able to answer, is *what comes out of that box?* Does it deliver an analog antenna signal, or one analog tv channel? This is important because in one case I can't use my own tuner, and that's a bit daft when I have a VCR as well. If one has to manually set the channel on this additional box, all television recording becomes, well, tricky at best.
Perhaps that's what they're after, and they're just not saying (remind you of online radio, anyone?).
Whether you're hooked on Day of Defeat or the latest XBox Live game, the real-life consequences are negligible (unless you forget to eat or something). Traditionally (if one can use such a word about the online media) games are relatively simple affairs. Do something, get a reward. Whee. Big deal.
However, during the last decade or so, games have developed an entirely new facet: social structure. Be it World of Warcraft or Second Life (is that even a game? I can't decide), people are getting deeply involved not only with the game itself but with each other, albeit in a virtual world. One might even say that actually playing the game is less important than being socially active in its context.
When social interactions become a part of the picture, changes occur in the balance between gaming and living. There separation between the game world and the real world begins to blur and fade as players make connections between game-world and real-world values. We have already seen people defining their real-life life by their in-game personas, businesses, and achievements. And this may be a problem. Maybe it's not very apparent now, but this kind of game is a relatively new phenomenon.
If a person forms a relationship in Second Life (for instance), there are bound to be more than virtual feelings involved. This is fundamentally different from being, say, a GTA addict. In GTA, one can be a car-stealin', cop-beatin' badass, and still be a loving family member (assuming that person can tell one world from the other).
A player's character would not start a virtual relationship with another player's ditto unless there is some emotional bond between the players themselves. One would have to be particularly schizophrenic (that's a joke) or an unnaturally good role player to claim that there is no conflict of interest between having a real-life relationship with one person and having an online romance with another. It would take a very well-spoken husband to convince his wife that he is happily married.
More and more, your online persona is a reflection and augmentation of your actual self. And yes, this is the case even if your online persona is Batman or GothGirl -- however radically different from your physical appearance, it's still a form of self-realization. Unless you're seriously schizophrenic (again with the humour...).
The old mantra that "on the Internet, nobody know you're a dog" is being obsoleted. Perhaps it should be replaced by "if you die in the game, you die for real" (what movie is that from again?). My point is that as games become ever more social, they're not just games anymore. Online romances equal emotional unfaithfulness and should be taken seriously.
They deserve it. Deserve what? To be monitored and maintained? Hm, I realize that statement could be read in several ways. I don't know what the maintainers deserve, that's not what I meant.
The Voyagers, having survived thus far and giving us the unexpected opportunity to study the heliopause and interstellar space, deserve to be maintained and kept alive. It would be a shame not to make the most of that opportunity. I really feel the probes should be tracked for as long as they live. And, if possible, even after they eventually have to shut down. The probes may have lost their 'senses', but if one could still track their whereabouts and movements, that alone may yet yield interesting data (for the next long-range mission, if or when one would ever be undertaken).
Whenever I come across news about the Voyagers, I generally dig deep and read a lot. I am utterly in awe -- of the spacecraft themselves, that they are still functioning, that they are so mind-bogglingly far away, and that humans have created them with the tools of their time. Wow. The link you posted shows in what incredible detail the mission was thought through.
I am very glad that there are still people who monitor and maintain the Voyagers. They deserve it.
Watching that video, I got a truly creepy feeling.
Rather uncomfortable actually. Then I thought about it for a little while, and I think the reason was this.
Let's get that thing a kill switch *first and foremost*, and *then* think about imparting sentience.
Well, no, we can't actually "set the time". All we can do is adjust our clocks to it. ^_^ Sorry couldn't resist.
All I know is, none of my friends' phones are in sync (unless we manually sync them, bad-guy-style). I keep mine somewhat synced to my pc's which are synced to pool.ntf.org.
Do you really mean to say that USians don't have to set the time on newly purchased phones, and remember to adjust to summer/winter time? Do you really mean to say that all USians have the same time on their phones? Wow... that'd really be something.
It's not just an euphemism, it's what happens after you die, according to that religion. Just like christians prefer to believe in heaven and hell than that it ends for ever.
Anyway, they're not saying you need permission to die. You can still jolly well die whenever you wish. Just go demonstrate for democracy in front of some tanks, if you ran out of other suicide ideas, and they'll oblige. They're saying that they can make your death a lot more permanent and scarier. Granted, demonstrably the chinese government have ways of making their *authority* known; but I don't see what makes people accept their *influence* on the matter.
I mean, what possible way does the government have in actually influencing the actions of a soul of a deceased citicen? Or, for that matter, how will they (claim to) check if it's doing what it's allowed to? How can a stamped certificate make any difference in this matter?
It's like having a subscription on gravity. You can fine the hell out of me if I choose to not subscribe --- but I'd like to see you deny me access. (Um, actually this would probably make a really poor business model, but that's not the point.)
[Disclaimer: I am about as non-religious as one can get. I have no vested interests either way. I just think the chinese government are "talking a talk" they can't possibly "walk".]
Yup, now I've looked at my rpms under accelleration. Relatively lively accelleration on a highway on-ramp takes me to about 3k rpm in 3rd and 4th, but nowhere near 4k. In 4th gear, 4k rpm equals 110km/h which is the speed limit. In 5th, it's more than 140 (don't know how much because that would not just be a ticket more, but a license less...).
Must be different gear ratios. Otherwise I don't get our different observations.
I can't see going from 40km/h to 100km/h without hitting at least 3K RPM,unless you're the type that merges on the highway at 20km/h under the limit. Ugh no, I rather dislike that, too. But I do shift as early as possible, and for casual accelleration (that is, NOT highway ramps) I often shift directly from 3rd to 5th (the ratio difference between 4th and 5th is not that great; when accellerating away from a red light I will usually spend only about 1/2 to 1 second in 4th).
The only time I do high rpms is when I'm in 5th, driving fast. Or so I think! You know, now you got me curious... I'll make a note of my rpm at various intervals when I drive home from work today (it's afternoon here now). I suspect I may have a slightly inaccurate idea of my engine rpm at speed.:-p
And I get about the same mileage as you do btw (well for highway driving). Um, what I stated is my "total monthly average", including when my wife is driving. My home-to-work route is about 90% highway and 3% residential, so my highway average is better.
Our data seem surprisingly different; I wonder if there is a difference in the petrol, gearing, tires, suspenson, or something else. Are Canadians (generally speaking) using the soft "american-style" suspension, or the harder "continental-style" suspension?
Re:I wish mainstream CPUs / GPUs would focus on po
on
Via Unveils 1-Watt x86 CPU
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
(I've found discussing car performance where USians can eavesdrop always leads to flaming. Still...)
In Denmark, a sizeable chunk of the total car park are small or family cars with engines in the 1.3-2.0L range. Sporty cars (Alfa Romeo et al, not Ferrari) are probably in the 2-3L range, no more. Of course the SUV-style cars will have way bigger engines (but I suspect that's more to help push the ego rather than the car).
A relevant tidbit: we pay ~7$ per gallon of petrol.
I drive a VW station wagon. It's 4 cylinders, 2L, 115bhp, ~1500kg. I don't have the stats for 0-60 (or 0-100) because I just don't drive that way, but its accelleration is quite adequate even without going over 3000rpm (usually I stay within 900-2500). I think I hit 4000rpm maybe three times a year. I average 7.3L/100km, or 32.2mpg.
My old car (Peugeot 206) had 1.4L and 75bhp to push its 975kg, and its performance was quite comparable (better low end, worse top end).
I lurk on an american classic car forum, and the rule of thumb there seems to be "(at least) 1bhp of power per 10lb og car", which translates to >300bhp for a station wagon, which again translates into race car (ok sports car) performance. I can't help wondering if that is really necessary for a family car, or a classic built for cruising.
If one is considering a live CD in a situation such as this then let me suggest Polippix, which is a live CD which uses TOR by default and offers encrypted VOIP and other privacy-protecting goodies.
It seems a bit odd that the article is so focused on the *artifacts*, when it ends in stating that the museum's purpose is to convey the stories of the *people* behind them.
But I'm just jeleaous(sp!)really. I live too far away, I'll never get to make a visit.
I still have the IIe and IIgs in my closet, plus a crapload of 5.25 and 3.5 floppies. Maybe I'll take them out this weekend and see if they still work. Pretty sure the machines still work. Good luck with that. (Honestly -- no sarcasm intended.) I have about 5kg worth of Mac disks with everything from various OS versions, apps, games, and tons of HyperCard stacks... and vanishingly little of it is still readable. Floppies degrade over time...:'-(
Slashdot Mirror
That's what I did. Then I sent them both to Chris Short, and now I have peace of mind knowing that my 'plastic brains' are trustworthy. Palm needs to either focus heavily on the user experience like they did a decade ago, or get out of the business before their legacy becomes one of eye rolling and snickering. Oh, you mean like what happened to Psion? That was so sad. I mean, their devices (5mx, Revo) were better than ewen T3's.
Also, a large detail of the eyes is provided by Wikipedia:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/Mona_Lisa_detail_eyes.jpg
The most hi-res (unrestored) image I could find was this:
http://abm-enterprises.net/artgall2/monalisa.jpg
Pixellation is only effective if done really, really coarsely ... so you might as well just opt for the classic black bar to begin with.
The link about cheques in the summary tells more (if it's that old article I think it is).
I want an affordable (>$500 2007 dollars), multi-purpose (music / web / email / ebook / addresses), computing device, that isn't tied to being a cell phone.
Consumers don't want Windows Mobile, and they don't want Palm OS Hacket, but they do want PDAs. Otherwise, hacking the iPhone and the iPod wouldn't even be an issue. My sentiment exactly.
What I want, instead of my Palm T3 + (crummy) mobile phone, is a Psion Series 5mx, with modern comms (bluetooth+wifi+usb) and perhaps a camera, in a Psion Revo size-and-weight package.
You can still find 5mx'es, but with serial comms they *are* a bit behind the times.
From http://www.darksky.org/about/ :
Goals
1. Stop the adverse effects of light pollution on dark skies, including
* Energy waste and the air and water pollution caused by energy waste
* Harm to human health
* Harm to nocturnal wildlife and ecosystems
* Reduced safety and security
* Reduced visibility at night
* Poor nighttime ambience
2. Raise awareness about light pollution, its adverse effects, and its solutions
3. Educate everyone, everywhere, about the values of quality outdoor lighting
4. Help stop other threats to our view of the universe, such as radio frequency interference (RFI) and space debris.
There are a bunch of very interesting articles on how less exterior lighting gives better visibility, roughly speaking because floodlights don't really light up everything and end up blinding you more than general darkness with point illumination.
Right, so I misunderstood you. Thank you for your clarifying post. :)
These books sound very fascinating, and I will make a note of them and see what they're up to.
My video recorder is in fact not a VCR, it's an HDR. For the sake of multiple tuners, I already plan to build a MythTV-based one (or just buy a Dragon), but it's rather pointless if that set-top box is a roadblock, signal-wise.
When I bought the tv, What they said at the shop was that even the new TVs that do have digital tuners won't be compatible and will require a set-top box. Why this must be so I cannot fathom.
Please note that the "shop" I bought this in is not just any vendor, but the country's premier hifi-connaisseur-oriented chain; they are supposed to be in the know.
The most pressing reason for me ---being in Denmark, where the switch will decidedly happen in 2009--- is that nobody seems able to give a clear answer about what that "box" really is.
The most enlightened answer I got was that you will need a converter box, even for new tv's.
What I *really* want to know, and nobody seems able to answer, is *what comes out of that box?* Does it deliver an analog antenna signal, or one analog tv channel? This is important because in one case I can't use my own tuner, and that's a bit daft when I have a VCR as well. If one has to manually set the channel on this additional box, all television recording becomes, well, tricky at best.
Perhaps that's what they're after, and they're just not saying (remind you of online radio, anyone?).
Whether you're hooked on Day of Defeat or the latest XBox Live game, the real-life consequences are negligible (unless you forget to eat or something). Traditionally (if one can use such a word about the online media) games are relatively simple affairs. Do something, get a reward. Whee. Big deal.
However, during the last decade or so, games have developed an entirely new facet: social structure. Be it World of Warcraft or Second Life (is that even a game? I can't decide), people are getting deeply involved not only with the game itself but with each other, albeit in a virtual world. One might even say that actually playing the game is less important than being socially active in its context.
When social interactions become a part of the picture, changes occur in the balance between gaming and living. There separation between the game world and the real world begins to blur and fade as players make connections between game-world and real-world values. We have already seen people defining their real-life life by their in-game personas, businesses, and achievements. And this may be a problem. Maybe it's not very apparent now, but this kind of game is a relatively new phenomenon.
If a person forms a relationship in Second Life (for instance), there are bound to be more than virtual feelings involved. This is fundamentally different from being, say, a GTA addict. In GTA, one can be a car-stealin', cop-beatin' badass, and still be a loving family member (assuming that person can tell one world from the other).
A player's character would not start a virtual relationship with another player's ditto unless there is some emotional bond between the players themselves. One would have to be particularly schizophrenic (that's a joke) or an unnaturally good role player to claim that there is no conflict of interest between having a real-life relationship with one person and having an online romance with another. It would take a very well-spoken husband to convince his wife that he is happily married.
More and more, your online persona is a reflection and augmentation of your actual self. And yes, this is the case even if your online persona is Batman or GothGirl -- however radically different from your physical appearance, it's still a form of self-realization. Unless you're seriously schizophrenic (again with the humour...).
The old mantra that "on the Internet, nobody know you're a dog" is being obsoleted. Perhaps it should be replaced by "if you die in the game, you die for real" (what movie is that from again?). My point is that as games become ever more social, they're not just games anymore. Online romances equal emotional unfaithfulness and should be taken seriously.
Um, feeling like Ender? That's the only one I can come up with...
The Voyagers, having survived thus far and giving us the unexpected opportunity to study the heliopause and interstellar space, deserve to be maintained and kept alive. It would be a shame not to make the most of that opportunity. I really feel the probes should be tracked for as long as they live. And, if possible, even after they eventually have to shut down. The probes may have lost their 'senses', but if one could still track their whereabouts and movements, that alone may yet yield interesting data (for the next long-range mission, if or when one would ever be undertaken).
Whenever I come across news about the Voyagers, I generally dig deep and read a lot. I am utterly in awe -- of the spacecraft themselves, that they are still functioning, that they are so mind-bogglingly far away, and that humans have created them with the tools of their time. Wow. The link you posted shows in what incredible detail the mission was thought through.
I am very glad that there are still people who monitor and maintain the Voyagers. They deserve it.
Seconded!
Watching that video, I got a truly creepy feeling.
Rather uncomfortable actually. Then I thought about it for a little while, and I think the reason was this.
Let's get that thing a kill switch *first and foremost*, and *then* think about imparting sentience.
Well, no, we can't actually "set the time". All we can do is adjust our clocks to it. ^_^ Sorry couldn't resist.
All I know is, none of my friends' phones are in sync (unless we manually sync them, bad-guy-style). I keep mine somewhat synced to my pc's which are synced to pool.ntf.org.
Except *any* phone I've ever seen (in Europe).
... that'd really be something.
Do you really mean to say that USians don't have to set the time on newly purchased phones, and remember to adjust to summer/winter time? Do you really mean to say that all USians have the same time on their phones? Wow
Anyway, they're not saying you need permission to die. You can still jolly well die whenever you wish. Just go demonstrate for democracy in front of some tanks, if you ran out of other suicide ideas, and they'll oblige. They're saying that they can make your death a lot more permanent and scarier. Granted, demonstrably the chinese government have ways of making their *authority* known; but I don't see what makes people accept their *influence* on the matter.
I mean, what possible way does the government have in actually influencing the actions of a soul of a deceased citicen? Or, for that matter, how will they (claim to) check if it's doing what it's allowed to? How can a stamped certificate make any difference in this matter?
It's like having a subscription on gravity. You can fine the hell out of me if I choose to not subscribe --- but I'd like to see you deny me access. (Um, actually this would probably make a really poor business model, but that's not the point.)
[Disclaimer: I am about as non-religious as one can get. I have no vested interests either way. I just think the chinese government are "talking a talk" they can't possibly "walk".]
The world needs unreasonable nerds such as you
Yup, now I've looked at my rpms under accelleration. Relatively lively accelleration on a highway on-ramp takes me to about 3k rpm in 3rd and 4th, but nowhere near 4k. In 4th gear, 4k rpm equals 110km/h which is the speed limit. In 5th, it's more than 140 (don't know how much because that would not just be a ticket more, but a license less...).
Must be different gear ratios. Otherwise I don't get our different observations.
The only time I do high rpms is when I'm in 5th, driving fast. Or so I think! You know, now you got me curious
Our data seem surprisingly different; I wonder if there is a difference in the petrol, gearing, tires, suspenson, or something else.
Are Canadians (generally speaking) using the soft "american-style" suspension, or the harder "continental-style" suspension?
(I've found discussing car performance where USians can eavesdrop always leads to flaming. Still...)
In Denmark, a sizeable chunk of the total car park are small or family cars with engines in the 1.3-2.0L range. Sporty cars (Alfa Romeo et al, not Ferrari) are probably in the 2-3L range, no more. Of course the SUV-style cars will have way bigger engines (but I suspect that's more to help push the ego rather than the car).
A relevant tidbit: we pay ~7$ per gallon of petrol.
I drive a VW station wagon. It's 4 cylinders, 2L, 115bhp, ~1500kg. I don't have the stats for 0-60 (or 0-100) because I just don't drive that way, but its accelleration is quite adequate even without going over 3000rpm (usually I stay within 900-2500). I think I hit 4000rpm maybe three times a year. I average 7.3L/100km, or 32.2mpg.
My old car (Peugeot 206) had 1.4L and 75bhp to push its 975kg, and its performance was quite comparable (better low end, worse top end).
I lurk on an american classic car forum, and the rule of thumb there seems to be "(at least) 1bhp of power per 10lb og car", which translates to >300bhp for a station wagon, which again translates into race car (ok sports car) performance. I can't help wondering if that is really necessary for a family car, or a classic built for cruising.
If one is considering a live CD in a situation such as this then let me suggest Polippix, which is a live CD which uses TOR by default and offers encrypted VOIP and other privacy-protecting goodies.
Main site (in Danish):
http://www.prosa.dk/om_prosa/polippix.shtml
Review (in English):
http://www.madpenguin.org/cms/?m=show&id=7822
It seems a bit odd that the article is so focused on the *artifacts*, when it ends in stating that the museum's purpose is to convey the stories of the *people* behind them.
But I'm just jeleaous(sp!)really. I live too far away, I'll never get to make a visit.