Interesting. We have what appears to be possibly science and the argument becomes, "If you disagree with me and him, you're a troll." Unless of course the discussion can be broken down into an us-versus-them debate, in which case you're either a tree-hugging-anti-vaccination-baby-killing-Prius-driving-vegan-liberal, or a planet-raping-woman-hating-big-pharma-loving-corporate-shill-Teabagger. In either case you're allowed to angrily deny any facts which may contradict your favorite meme. The internet is only fun to read these days if you can make fun of almost everybody.
If you haven't seen the movie, "Forks over Knives," it's worth a look. The problem we have is that our culture has evolved to make food quick, convenient, and satisfying –these three together do not equal healthful. I'm particularly sensitive to this issue since I'm going back to work Monday in the later stages of recovering from a quintuple bypass operation.
The carriers have Open Source phones on the shelves, all equipped with price tags and UPC codes. They aren't mainstream because not very many people are buying them. The phones lots of people buy are mainstream because lots of people buy them. An over-engineered, fetid, steaming, convoluted pile of logic wrapped around a predetermined conclusion doesn't change the facts. Reality is much simpler than that. Mainstream is what the stupid consumer gets out his wallet for.
I didn't mean to post that last as an anonymous coward. I thought I was logged in.
Apple strength as "marketing" and cool facade is male bovine excrement. People who promote that myth either don't know what they're talking about, or are deliberately misrepresenting what they know. Meaning: stupid or lying. There is no third option.
Technical reviews and popular opinion indicate that the Macintosh user experience is superior to that of other personal computers.
Psystar is deliberately violating copyright laws. Apple's lawyers are going to beat up Psystar, steal their milk money, stuff them in their locker, and eat their bologna sandwich. And their orange.
It's silly to suppose anything else.
It's a simple equation, really. People - the mass market, as opposed to coders, hackers, and IT managers - need a computer that lets them do their stuff easily. It should be easy to learn and fun to use.
Windows is not easy to learn or fun to use. Customization is tricky and requires some schoolin' and practice to accomplish. The system completely locks you out of places MS doesn't want you messing around. If the average guy gets through the interlocks he could be in deep doodoo.
Linux is fun to use if you like playing around in the guts of the computer, don't care much about GUI, and you're into full tilt customization, but it is not easy to use. If you don't know what you're doing you can break it really easily. Joe Neurosurgeon just wants to do his taxes and send email without having to think about it too much.
OS X is easy to learn and fun to use for non-geeks. The average doink can figure out how to customize a few aesthetic and cosmetic parts of the interface without breaking it. The system protects me from myself unless I'm smart enough to circumvent the boundaries. In other words, the average dumba$$ like me can function just fine on OS X with very few problems and actually enjoy it. That's the mass market experience in a nutshell.
The Zune looks like a 1965 Artists concept of a 1985 portable radio - in Uzbekistan. Of course, looking like a festered, crusty, oozing zit wouldn't hurt it (might even be a fashion statement) if it were more functional and had more useful features than the competition. It isn't and doesn't.
It may someday be the leading not-an-iPod. There's a distinction. Only doctored statistics with data editing after the fact will ever show Zune leading iPod in anything except possibly dust-collection on blister packs, and number and size of discounts.
Stephenson probably doesn't understand the rules of Apple's game. He blurted what he wasn't supposed to. He probably didn't hurt anything. The iPhone isn't for geeks who get 3G. It's for Joe Insuranceadjuster, who just wants a cool phone with some extra goodies. Net effect on anybody...Nada. Unless you count it as blogfodder and fuel for the punditbots.
His Steveness probably lay awake last night long enough to think, "what a jackass," then didn't lose any additional sleep over it.
Apple hasn't missed any opportunities. Vista made a negative splash for MS. Vista continues to get more negative than positive press. If Leopard had been release as "not quite ready for prime time," then Apple would have missed an opportunity by making a similar negative splash. It isn't likely that Leopard will suffer the beating in the press that Vista has. Also, as with all Apple OS versions, if you don't like the new OS, you can painlessly do a clean install with your original discs. What better time for Apple to ship a new OS than at the very beginning of a Holiday shopping season where they're almost completely drowning out Microsoft?
You're absolutely correct. There was practically no impact on surrounding areas from TMI. Pardon my pedantic behavior, but... EVERY material absorbs radiation. Heat, light, radio waves, and ultraviolet waves are radiation. Radiation is merely energy emitted from a source. Energy from nuclear radiation (alpha, beta, gamma, neutron) is absorbed by any material that is in it's range. The material mentioned in the article (number 27-4, whatever the hell that means) absorbs radioactive material. Absorption of radioactive material is entirely dependent on the chemical composition of the radioactive isotope. There is no way for any material to absorb something based on its nuclear stability (radioactivity). Number 27-4 may have a high affinity for common chemical compounds of high abundance radioisotopes. It does not have absorptive properties related to radioactivity. In other words, it may have an affinity for oxides of Cobalt. It will not care if it is Co-57 or Co-60. I hope this helps.
If another race is advanced enough to find us, they are either intelligent enough to remain hidden from us, or they are biding their time for the right moment to move in and reclaim a perfectly serviceable planet from inhabitants who clearly don't appreciate it.
A paradox would be a race advanced enough to get here, and stupid enough to contaminate themselves with human stupidity.
The FSF may be hypocritical, but that gives them more intellectual credit than they're due. They've mentally walled off software as an island of communism. That's very nice and pretty and all, but the hive mentality cannot succeed surrounded by the world of tech. The world of tech is antithetical to the hive utopia. Tech is a young free market like gold-mining in the 1800s and oil wildcatting in the 1900s. As long as the FSF's vision is nice and pretty and makes everybody want to hold hands and sing Kumbaya around the campfire, it will be tolerated. As they start costing real businesses significant amounts of money, they will become more and more marginalized. If they accept marginalization well enough, they may not be crushed like a bug.
Perhaps Apple isn't really entering the browser war at all. Maybe Apple's taking on of the mobile phone market needs a Windows presence with Safari in order to win that. Another possibility is that Apple's dominance of the online entertainment marketplace and their upcoming movie strategy requires their browser to in place on machines that will use their service. Another possibility is that Safari for Windows is a diversionary tactic. Steve Jobs has proven over the last ten years that while he may make the occasional mistake, he isn't stupid. My guess is that Safari for Windows has far broader implications than merely trying to win converts to an application.
Apple PIE. I like it.
How about:
The Screen-Actuated User Communication Environment (SAUCE) for "OS X Mobile"
Computer Interface/Download Entertainment Resource (CIDER) for the WiFi controller
Hey. It's the day after Christmas, and I didn't get any toys. I'm bored.
This has got to be the most ass-backward situation imaginable.
I purchased a computer with an operating system that is more reliable, and has less malware written for it.
I am willing to state that publicly.
I encourage others to buy computers with operating systems more reliable, that have less malware written for them.
For this I am labeled by the pejorative, "fanboy," and am regarded as stupid by security researchers.
In 20 years as a Macintosh user - all of them online, and downloading like a fiend, by the way - I've never had a single virus or malware attack. Not one. Boy am I stupid.
I don't think the Mac is bulletproof. There is no such thing, but I'm really not worried about security, either. My theory is that you have to be pretty smart to crack a Mac. Malicious code-writing is mostly the work of stupid people. That cuts the odds that malicious code will appear in the wild.
Add the fact that criminals don't like to work hard. The smart criminal will write malicious code where it is easiest. Most malicious code is derivative - tweaked here and there to go around patches that thwarted the last iteration. It's mostly effective only against Windows and Microsoft applications because that's where most of it started. Again, criminals are too lazy and for the most part too stupid to write original code. Statistically, the Mac is even more secure.
Add the fact that real security experts are constantly trying to find vulnerabilities in OS X, and publishing their findings. They are looking for exploits that could be - hacks that haven't happened yet. In the Windows world, the bad guys have the lead. Mac is even more secure.
So, to me, the Month of Apple Bugs is largely a joke. A month of burnt matches would be more interesting. "Look! It doesn't work the second time."
I'm a non-geek Mac user. I've been running Macs for 20 years. I don't own a MacBook yet. I will soon. If I did, I would have questions that would require answers that I could hang my white earbuds on.
1. Is this a viable hack that I need to be concerned about?
2. How will I protect myself from it?
3. What is being done about it in places where the geeks live?
That's all. I don't really care much about who is right or wrong. I do care about the security of hardware I intend to purchase. Later on I'll decide who I should or should not listen to based on the accuracy of predictions and prognostications when compared against actual events.
Oh for crying out loud. Can we please quit belaboring this one.
It is easier to use an iPod than any other mp3 player. iPods work better than any other mp3 player. iPods are cool. All other players are "not an iPod."
Steve Jobs gets it. Always has. SJ will reassume his rightful place as "king of geekdom" soon.
The most important thing we could do about nuclear security is to educate the public on the real dangers of nuclear radiation.
Radiation in large doses is dangerous. The most likely dirty bombs will not result in large doses, but mass panic. The panic will be far more dangerous than the radiation in most cases.
I work with radioactive material for a living. I don't know the ins and outs of a Hafnium Bomb, but I know that once the radioactive material is dispersed by an explosion, it starts being less of a hazard immediately.
Panic is the most dangerous aspect for those not in the immediate vicinity of any detonation.
Increased security is important, but it is harder to wreak terror in an informed group.
email me at raymeyers13@mac.com
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting. We have what appears to be possibly science and the argument becomes, "If you disagree with me and him, you're a troll." Unless of course the discussion can be broken down into an us-versus-them debate, in which case you're either a tree-hugging-anti-vaccination-baby-killing-Prius-driving-vegan-liberal, or a planet-raping-woman-hating-big-pharma-loving-corporate-shill-Teabagger. In either case you're allowed to angrily deny any facts which may contradict your favorite meme. The internet is only fun to read these days if you can make fun of almost everybody.
If you haven't seen the movie, "Forks over Knives," it's worth a look. The problem we have is that our culture has evolved to make food quick, convenient, and satisfying –these three together do not equal healthful. I'm particularly sensitive to this issue since I'm going back to work Monday in the later stages of recovering from a quintuple bypass operation.
The carriers have Open Source phones on the shelves, all equipped with price tags and UPC codes. They aren't mainstream because not very many people are buying them. The phones lots of people buy are mainstream because lots of people buy them. An over-engineered, fetid, steaming, convoluted pile of logic wrapped around a predetermined conclusion doesn't change the facts. Reality is much simpler than that. Mainstream is what the stupid consumer gets out his wallet for.
I didn't mean to post that last as an anonymous coward. I thought I was logged in. Apple strength as "marketing" and cool facade is male bovine excrement. People who promote that myth either don't know what they're talking about, or are deliberately misrepresenting what they know. Meaning: stupid or lying. There is no third option. Technical reviews and popular opinion indicate that the Macintosh user experience is superior to that of other personal computers. Psystar is deliberately violating copyright laws. Apple's lawyers are going to beat up Psystar, steal their milk money, stuff them in their locker, and eat their bologna sandwich. And their orange. It's silly to suppose anything else.
It's a simple equation, really. People - the mass market, as opposed to coders, hackers, and IT managers - need a computer that lets them do their stuff easily. It should be easy to learn and fun to use. Windows is not easy to learn or fun to use. Customization is tricky and requires some schoolin' and practice to accomplish. The system completely locks you out of places MS doesn't want you messing around. If the average guy gets through the interlocks he could be in deep doodoo. Linux is fun to use if you like playing around in the guts of the computer, don't care much about GUI, and you're into full tilt customization, but it is not easy to use. If you don't know what you're doing you can break it really easily. Joe Neurosurgeon just wants to do his taxes and send email without having to think about it too much. OS X is easy to learn and fun to use for non-geeks. The average doink can figure out how to customize a few aesthetic and cosmetic parts of the interface without breaking it. The system protects me from myself unless I'm smart enough to circumvent the boundaries. In other words, the average dumba$$ like me can function just fine on OS X with very few problems and actually enjoy it. That's the mass market experience in a nutshell.
The Zune looks like a 1965 Artists concept of a 1985 portable radio - in Uzbekistan. Of course, looking like a festered, crusty, oozing zit wouldn't hurt it (might even be a fashion statement) if it were more functional and had more useful features than the competition. It isn't and doesn't. It may someday be the leading not-an-iPod. There's a distinction. Only doctored statistics with data editing after the fact will ever show Zune leading iPod in anything except possibly dust-collection on blister packs, and number and size of discounts.
Stephenson probably doesn't understand the rules of Apple's game. He blurted what he wasn't supposed to. He probably didn't hurt anything. The iPhone isn't for geeks who get 3G. It's for Joe Insuranceadjuster, who just wants a cool phone with some extra goodies. Net effect on anybody...Nada. Unless you count it as blogfodder and fuel for the punditbots. His Steveness probably lay awake last night long enough to think, "what a jackass," then didn't lose any additional sleep over it.
Apple hasn't missed any opportunities. Vista made a negative splash for MS. Vista continues to get more negative than positive press. If Leopard had been release as "not quite ready for prime time," then Apple would have missed an opportunity by making a similar negative splash. It isn't likely that Leopard will suffer the beating in the press that Vista has. Also, as with all Apple OS versions, if you don't like the new OS, you can painlessly do a clean install with your original discs. What better time for Apple to ship a new OS than at the very beginning of a Holiday shopping season where they're almost completely drowning out Microsoft?
In a related note, Microsoft was the first to commercially use an emoticon as a trademark, with Windows XP.
You're absolutely correct. There was practically no impact on surrounding areas from TMI. Pardon my pedantic behavior, but... EVERY material absorbs radiation. Heat, light, radio waves, and ultraviolet waves are radiation. Radiation is merely energy emitted from a source. Energy from nuclear radiation (alpha, beta, gamma, neutron) is absorbed by any material that is in it's range. The material mentioned in the article (number 27-4, whatever the hell that means) absorbs radioactive material. Absorption of radioactive material is entirely dependent on the chemical composition of the radioactive isotope. There is no way for any material to absorb something based on its nuclear stability (radioactivity). Number 27-4 may have a high affinity for common chemical compounds of high abundance radioisotopes. It does not have absorptive properties related to radioactivity. In other words, it may have an affinity for oxides of Cobalt. It will not care if it is Co-57 or Co-60. I hope this helps.
If another race is advanced enough to find us, they are either intelligent enough to remain hidden from us, or they are biding their time for the right moment to move in and reclaim a perfectly serviceable planet from inhabitants who clearly don't appreciate it. A paradox would be a race advanced enough to get here, and stupid enough to contaminate themselves with human stupidity.
The FSF may be hypocritical, but that gives them more intellectual credit than they're due. They've mentally walled off software as an island of communism. That's very nice and pretty and all, but the hive mentality cannot succeed surrounded by the world of tech. The world of tech is antithetical to the hive utopia. Tech is a young free market like gold-mining in the 1800s and oil wildcatting in the 1900s. As long as the FSF's vision is nice and pretty and makes everybody want to hold hands and sing Kumbaya around the campfire, it will be tolerated. As they start costing real businesses significant amounts of money, they will become more and more marginalized. If they accept marginalization well enough, they may not be crushed like a bug.
Perhaps Apple isn't really entering the browser war at all. Maybe Apple's taking on of the mobile phone market needs a Windows presence with Safari in order to win that. Another possibility is that Apple's dominance of the online entertainment marketplace and their upcoming movie strategy requires their browser to in place on machines that will use their service. Another possibility is that Safari for Windows is a diversionary tactic. Steve Jobs has proven over the last ten years that while he may make the occasional mistake, he isn't stupid. My guess is that Safari for Windows has far broader implications than merely trying to win converts to an application.
Apple PIE. I like it. How about: The Screen-Actuated User Communication Environment (SAUCE) for "OS X Mobile" Computer Interface/Download Entertainment Resource (CIDER) for the WiFi controller Hey. It's the day after Christmas, and I didn't get any toys. I'm bored.
This has got to be the most ass-backward situation imaginable. I purchased a computer with an operating system that is more reliable, and has less malware written for it. I am willing to state that publicly. I encourage others to buy computers with operating systems more reliable, that have less malware written for them. For this I am labeled by the pejorative, "fanboy," and am regarded as stupid by security researchers. In 20 years as a Macintosh user - all of them online, and downloading like a fiend, by the way - I've never had a single virus or malware attack. Not one. Boy am I stupid. I don't think the Mac is bulletproof. There is no such thing, but I'm really not worried about security, either. My theory is that you have to be pretty smart to crack a Mac. Malicious code-writing is mostly the work of stupid people. That cuts the odds that malicious code will appear in the wild. Add the fact that criminals don't like to work hard. The smart criminal will write malicious code where it is easiest. Most malicious code is derivative - tweaked here and there to go around patches that thwarted the last iteration. It's mostly effective only against Windows and Microsoft applications because that's where most of it started. Again, criminals are too lazy and for the most part too stupid to write original code. Statistically, the Mac is even more secure. Add the fact that real security experts are constantly trying to find vulnerabilities in OS X, and publishing their findings. They are looking for exploits that could be - hacks that haven't happened yet. In the Windows world, the bad guys have the lead. Mac is even more secure. So, to me, the Month of Apple Bugs is largely a joke. A month of burnt matches would be more interesting. "Look! It doesn't work the second time."
I'm a non-geek Mac user. I've been running Macs for 20 years. I don't own a MacBook yet. I will soon. If I did, I would have questions that would require answers that I could hang my white earbuds on. 1. Is this a viable hack that I need to be concerned about? 2. How will I protect myself from it? 3. What is being done about it in places where the geeks live? That's all. I don't really care much about who is right or wrong. I do care about the security of hardware I intend to purchase. Later on I'll decide who I should or should not listen to based on the accuracy of predictions and prognostications when compared against actual events.
Oh for crying out loud. Can we please quit belaboring this one. It is easier to use an iPod than any other mp3 player. iPods work better than any other mp3 player. iPods are cool. All other players are "not an iPod." Steve Jobs gets it. Always has. SJ will reassume his rightful place as "king of geekdom" soon.
The most important thing we could do about nuclear security is to educate the public on the real dangers of nuclear radiation. Radiation in large doses is dangerous. The most likely dirty bombs will not result in large doses, but mass panic. The panic will be far more dangerous than the radiation in most cases. I work with radioactive material for a living. I don't know the ins and outs of a Hafnium Bomb, but I know that once the radioactive material is dispersed by an explosion, it starts being less of a hazard immediately. Panic is the most dangerous aspect for those not in the immediate vicinity of any detonation. Increased security is important, but it is harder to wreak terror in an informed group. email me at raymeyers13@mac.com