It's not the access to the stories that is the useful function. It's the visualisation of the relative importance of the stories, or - rather - how important the stories are perceived to be by the media (or how successful the propoganda/marketing has been, depending on the story).
1001 news sources have the same stories, yes. The vast majority have the placment and hence importance of those stories decided by editors who, because they're human, have biases and agendas. Google News (and some others) places the stories based on algorithmic results and hence only shows the "group bias" of the world's media. This is just an easy way to visualise that, allowing single-click filtering on various fields and the ability to see many more stories per page and pick out the "important" ones.
Yes, nothing terribly mindblowing (and I've seen a file display recently with a very similar layout, showing files as blocks with proportionate sizes and colours based on last access) but it's still neat, and did help me spot some interesting stories that I'd missed on my regular news sites.
Sounds like you're only familiar with talk or music radio, and listen to whatever is on rather than choosing what you want to listen to.
Personally, I have a TiVo that spends most of its day recording stuff from BBC7, a mixture of radio drama and comedy shows. I then have lots of late night listening for those boughts of insomnia. I would never bother listening to these shows if I had to wait for them to come on, the same way as I don't usallly watch any TV live these days. So it makes perfect sense for some radio, just not for recording the breakfast inane chatter every day... (shudder)
the jury must only consider the genericness of the term 'windows' prior to the introduction of Microsoft's products, and that a term that is generic cannot be made ungeneric
If that's the instructions given to the jury, then they can't possibly find for Microsoft.
The term "windows" - ignoring the obvious hole-in-a-wall - has been used since the WIMP interface (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer) was developed at Xerox PARC in the 70s (commercially available in 1981). Later developments of that interface - the Apple Lisa in January 1983, Project Athena (which generated the first versons of X) was set up in May 1983, and based X upon the preexisting W window system, plus others - were around before Microsoft Windows was.
Microsoft Windows 1.0 was announced in November 1983, and released in 1985. At a rough count I reckon that there were at least 3 or 4 prior windowing systems using the phrase "windows" generically prior to that - and specifically using it in the same sense as Microsoft use it, not in any of the other ways that the term "windows" can be used generically.
Moral of the story; when naming products, make words up... you listening, Firefox?
I wonder how many of these routers Linksys have sold simply because it runs Linux and is hackable
If that number is X, it's now X+1 - I just ordered one to replace my Belkin wireless router, which replaced the Netgear router that started giving off "the Brown Smell" before dying completely.
Why? The Belkin is a nice piece of kit, but it doesn't have the features I need. The Netgear had most of the features, and was actually pretty okay. The Linksys doesn't have the features I need, but looking at the hacked firmware versions available it'll be soup and nuts to give it those features, and the price is right.
Someone said that they may be hurting sales of their more expensive products which have the advanced features these hacks are adding. I don't believe that's true. People who need those features badly (from a business sense) will still buy the expensive kit; they need the support. Cheap-ass hobbyists like myself will buy the cheaper kit and hack it. So all they're doing is persuading me to buy their cheap kit over someone else's cheap kit, and sales are sales...
Nothing like starting to watch a series which has already been canned!
And boy does it happen a lot... I've lost count of the number of series that have made it to UK TV (usually Sky One or SciFi) just as they were cancelled. It almost makes you wish that they put a flashing red icon in the corner of the screen reading;
WARNING:DO NOT ENJOY
OR GET INTO THIS SHOW,
IT HAS BEEN CANCELLED
It's quite sad how quickly a show is canned these days. Everyone has a favourite show that was a bit dodgy in the first season. These days, if it's not a smash inside three episodes they start fiddling with the schedules (even here in the UK, where schedules used to be stable) and if it's still not a smash inside fix, bam, that's it. Of course, once you start fiddling with the schedules any fanbase you had built up loses interest because they can't find it any more...
I wonder why the phrase "as clever as a TV executive" isn't used more often?
Indeed, I was aware of that... but it's 2D animation produced on a computer. Almost all 2D animation is this days, including at Disney.
The argument isn't traditonal cel animation versus computer animation, it's 2D versus 3D. And just as you can produce 3D animation traditionally (the original UK Max Headroom feature, claymation, etc) you can produce 2D animation on computer.
The traditional side of Disney has never really succeeded in finding that balance between entertaining the kids and entertaining adults. Most of their 2D work has, for whatever reason, been extremely child-centric of late. They stuff they've released with Pixar, on the other hand, has got the balance right - kids love the bright, colourful characters, the slapstick, the excitement, and the adults with them love the sly humour, the in jokes, the bits that go over the heads of the kids.
You can't please everyone all of the time, but Toy Story and Finding Nemo just about managed it. I can't believe that a company with as much industry experience as Disney would thing that the style of animation has anything to do with it... I mean, wasn't one of the biggest animated hits in recent years "South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut"? Not only 2D but not even good 2D...
Oh, and specifically satellites - they may last years, but they're in an environment without dust, moisture or weather. There might not be much moisture on Mars, but there's lots of dust and weather, and eventually dust and weather will break things good.
It's not designed for 90 days, it's expected to last at least 90 days. Basically, that's about the point where dust build up on the solar panels and the charge/discharge cycle of the batteries are expected to cut into performance. It may last longer, or there may be a dust storm before then that drops enough dust on the panels to cause power problems early. No one is sure.
And before anyone says; it's unlikely that just tilting the panels will shift it as it'll be held in place electrostatically. Also, there aren't any "wipers" - more possible failures and the dust is likely to scratch the panels if wiped.
And finally; the data gathered in those 90 days will take years to process and study anyway.
Well, there is... TiVo. I don't know about your particular area, but in the UK most cable, satellite or digital terrestrial services transmit several radio channels in spare bandwidth. Not all of them have full program details provided by Tribune Media (TiVo's data provider), but certainly the major national ones do and so TiVo can record from them as normal.
I wouldn't think that the Apollo CSM's are ready to build.
They're not. I did say "close to being ready-to-build", and it's not that close - just a heck of a lot closer than anything else. Nothing else is off the drawing boards and into even static testing.
But it's a flight-proven design capable of taking five people (in an emergency configuration - one was planned for a potential Skylab emergency) and as such is probably a good base to start from.
Apollo had a similar number of possible spinoffs, as did the Saturn V launcher (apart from Skylab 1 and the unflown Skylab 2, which were modified from Saturn IVB casings - Apollo third stages). But unforunately reusable craft became the total focus of the US space programmme, instead of just one aspect of it.
The chances of there being a replacement that is reusable appear to be lessening, true.
Currently the US does not have a non-resuable space capsule available at all. Non-reusuable means that for every flight a new vehicle must be built from scratch; this might seem a bad thing, but it means that a) new design features can be added all the time, b) the components are all "new" so fatigue and wear are less of an issue and c) the production lines are in constant use.
The latter is vital. It's now pretty much impossible for a new shuttle to be built as the tools, production techniques and knowledge to build them were all lost or destroyed years ago. Endeavour, built to replace Challenger, was constructed from spare parts that were already fabricated at the time. The contract to build it was awarded in 1987, but construction on the crew module started in 1982 (as a spare module). If a single use capsule had been in use (in addition to the Shuttle or not) then the tooling, production data and knowledge would still be current.
Russia has the Soyuz capsule, which has been constantly upgraded over the decades the design has been in use. China now has Shenzou, which is Soyuz based (although it appears that there may be some quite radical differences under the hood). The only non-Shuttle design that the US has that is close to being ready-to-build is the Apollo CSM (or Mercury or Gemini, of course).
In some ways concentrating on the Shuttle at the expense of other designs of spacecraft has lead to the situation that NASA now finds itself in - and, to a large extent, the fault can be laid at the doors of those who control their pursestrings.
We aleady do harvest light (or at least part of the energy of light) for later use anyway - solar cells connected to batteries (as used on satellites, ISS, etc). I don't think storing the light and then converting to required power is going to be that much more effcient than converting to power and storing in batteries.
Generating power in space and then "transmitting" back with lasers isn't a new idea, but does have certain drawbacks if anything goes wrong.
Probably safer to use a Dyson shell... lots more power available on one of those. Ringworlds just don't cut it.
Who is going to tell us that every plot of every US scifi show was done in the 70's by Dr Who?
Actually, most of them were done in the 60s by Doctor Who. 40 years of doing all the plots first and with 1/1000th the budget....
And Babbage.
Long since closed. There was a recent documentary on the history of the Radiophonic Workshop on BBC4 called Alchemists of Sound.
However, as far as music went they were only involved in the second radio series; in the first radio series the music was all taken from commercially available sources (which explains the continuing lack of the "Do you realise that this robot can hum like Pink Floyd?" joke on the CDs and tapes - not because of the Pink Floyd music, but because of the Beatles music Marvin hums next. They never got recording rights, and so only have broadcast rights)
Sorry, can't agree. Remember that all the way through casting the original series Douglas Adams and the other people involved always said that they were looking for a "you know, a Peter Jones-y sort of voice." Eventually someone pointed out that they could achieve that by casting Peter Jones.
What DNA was after was a slight air of befuddled incomprehension but total authority, a sort of "I have no idea why this might be the case - but it most certainly is the case" state of mind. If you've heard Peter Jones on "Just a Minute" you'll know why he was perfect for the role.
I still reckon that the best replacement would have been Oliver Postgate... not only does he have that same befuddled air when narrating the Clangers (et al) but for at least two generations he's a voice you'd instinctively trust. If he said "Don't Panic", you wouldn't...
Although, of course, you could listen to non-normal radio and get a tremendous fix of HitchHiker's Guide, The Goon Show, I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue, Just a Minute, Earthsearch, Sherlock Holmes and a whole host of other comedy and drama radio shows on BBC7 (DAB, Freeview, Cable, Satellite and Internet)
Radio 4, where the new series will be transmitted, is also streamed and quite a lot of recent stuff is also available for a while after transmission (depending on rights).
I have a TiVo connected to an old Freeview box dedicated to picking up stuff from BBC7 and Radio 4...
Of course, there's not much of the original cast left... and I hope they're taking good care of Peter Sallis on set, he's still got the Wallace and Gromit movie to do the voice for.
Well, okay, admittedly the Mac versions of Internet Explorer and Office might give the impression that MicroSoft have never seen Macs... but seriously, are you trying to argue that MicroSoft having some Macs is confidential corporate information about a company that makes Mac software?
We can do that in the UK too - in theory the network operator can charge for a PAC (Porting Authorisation Code) but most don't (as this page says, "[if they charge then] that may be as good a reason as any to switch".
Of course, if you're using the same phone on the new network then the locking problem applies. However in the case of moving network it's usually a case of calling the existing network and asking for it to be unlocked - again, they may charge but I believe most don't under those circumstances, as long as the phone is out of any minimum contract period. And of course there are the slightly dodgy local phone emporiums.
OFTEL, which controls telecommunications in the UK, has a bunch of publications covering network switching - part of their remit is to encourage competition and so they are very much against anything that prevents consumers having a free choice, in theory.
Um... you can. If you buy a phone direct from Nokia it won't be locked to a network, and you can swamp SIM cards as much as you like. And if you get one via a deal with a network you can get the phone unlocked relatively cheaply at any slightly dodgy local phone emporium.
(I'm assuming that T-Mobile, AT&T and Cingular are all GSM, of course - if they aren't, then forget I said anything...)
Well, there's a whole chunk of Ximian technology in the Nterprise Linux Services beta, plus Novell is now selling Ximian Connector via Novell resellers.
Besides, that merger was only a few months ago - barely enough time to change the logos on existing Ximian products, really...
Let's not forget he was also one of the first people to get to grips with TiVo hacking; see the TiVo ISA ethernet stuff for a start. Proper TiVo hardware & software hacking in the days before you could just buy a TurboNet from 9thTee...
Slashdot Mirror
1001 news sources have the same stories, yes. The vast majority have the placment and hence importance of those stories decided by editors who, because they're human, have biases and agendas. Google News (and some others) places the stories based on algorithmic results and hence only shows the "group bias" of the world's media. This is just an easy way to visualise that, allowing single-click filtering on various fields and the ability to see many more stories per page and pick out the "important" ones.
Yes, nothing terribly mindblowing (and I've seen a file display recently with a very similar layout, showing files as blocks with proportionate sizes and colours based on last access) but it's still neat, and did help me spot some interesting stories that I'd missed on my regular news sites.
... All glory to the HypnoToad ...
Personally, I have a TiVo that spends most of its day recording stuff from BBC7, a mixture of radio drama and comedy shows. I then have lots of late night listening for those boughts of insomnia. I would never bother listening to these shows if I had to wait for them to come on, the same way as I don't usallly watch any TV live these days. So it makes perfect sense for some radio, just not for recording the breakfast inane chatter every day... (shudder)
If that's the instructions given to the jury, then they can't possibly find for Microsoft.
The term "windows" - ignoring the obvious hole-in-a-wall - has been used since the WIMP interface (Windows, Icons, Menus, Pointer) was developed at Xerox PARC in the 70s (commercially available in 1981). Later developments of that interface - the Apple Lisa in January 1983, Project Athena (which generated the first versons of X) was set up in May 1983, and based X upon the preexisting W window system, plus others - were around before Microsoft Windows was.
Microsoft Windows 1.0 was announced in November 1983, and released in 1985. At a rough count I reckon that there were at least 3 or 4 prior windowing systems using the phrase "windows" generically prior to that - and specifically using it in the same sense as Microsoft use it, not in any of the other ways that the term "windows" can be used generically.
Moral of the story; when naming products, make words up... you listening, Firefox?
If that number is X, it's now X+1 - I just ordered one to replace my Belkin wireless router, which replaced the Netgear router that started giving off "the Brown Smell" before dying completely.
Why? The Belkin is a nice piece of kit, but it doesn't have the features I need. The Netgear had most of the features, and was actually pretty okay. The Linksys doesn't have the features I need, but looking at the hacked firmware versions available it'll be soup and nuts to give it those features, and the price is right.
Someone said that they may be hurting sales of their more expensive products which have the advanced features these hacks are adding. I don't believe that's true. People who need those features badly (from a business sense) will still buy the expensive kit; they need the support. Cheap-ass hobbyists like myself will buy the cheaper kit and hack it. So all they're doing is persuading me to buy their cheap kit over someone else's cheap kit, and sales are sales...
(for "series" read "season", of course..., and bear in mind that a UK series generally has about 10-13 episodes per run, not 26)
If that isn't the show in question, your guess is as good as mine.
And boy does it happen a lot... I've lost count of the number of series that have made it to UK TV (usually Sky One or SciFi) just as they were cancelled. It almost makes you wish that they put a flashing red icon in the corner of the screen reading;
It's quite sad how quickly a show is canned these days. Everyone has a favourite show that was a bit dodgy in the first season. These days, if it's not a smash inside three episodes they start fiddling with the schedules (even here in the UK, where schedules used to be stable) and if it's still not a smash inside fix, bam, that's it. Of course, once you start fiddling with the schedules any fanbase you had built up loses interest because they can't find it any more...
I wonder why the phrase "as clever as a TV executive" isn't used more often?
The argument isn't traditonal cel animation versus computer animation, it's 2D versus 3D. And just as you can produce 3D animation traditionally (the original UK Max Headroom feature, claymation, etc) you can produce 2D animation on computer.
So the medium isn't the issue here.
You can't please everyone all of the time, but Toy Story and Finding Nemo just about managed it. I can't believe that a company with as much industry experience as Disney would thing that the style of animation has anything to do with it... I mean, wasn't one of the biggest animated hits in recent years "South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut"? Not only 2D but not even good 2D...
Oh, and specifically satellites - they may last years, but they're in an environment without dust, moisture or weather. There might not be much moisture on Mars, but there's lots of dust and weather, and eventually dust and weather will break things good.
And before anyone says; it's unlikely that just tilting the panels will shift it as it'll be held in place electrostatically. Also, there aren't any "wipers" - more possible failures and the dust is likely to scratch the panels if wiped.
And finally; the data gathered in those 90 days will take years to process and study anyway.
I use this all the time to record from BBC 7.
Now, if only some nice hardware manufacturer would please get round to releasing a UK series 2 TiVo, or preferably a DVD-/+R TiVo...
They're not. I did say "close to being ready-to-build", and it's not that close - just a heck of a lot closer than anything else. Nothing else is off the drawing boards and into even static testing.
But it's a flight-proven design capable of taking five people (in an emergency configuration - one was planned for a potential Skylab emergency) and as such is probably a good base to start from.
It's not the first time that an existing design has been considered for a reuse. The Gemini capsule was at the heart of a single stage to orbit design as well as a small space station, a rescue craft for stranded Apollo astronauts and a cargo truck.
Apollo had a similar number of possible spinoffs, as did the Saturn V launcher (apart from Skylab 1 and the unflown Skylab 2, which were modified from Saturn IVB casings - Apollo third stages). But unforunately reusable craft became the total focus of the US space programmme, instead of just one aspect of it.
Currently the US does not have a non-resuable space capsule available at all. Non-reusuable means that for every flight a new vehicle must be built from scratch; this might seem a bad thing, but it means that a) new design features can be added all the time, b) the components are all "new" so fatigue and wear are less of an issue and c) the production lines are in constant use.
The latter is vital. It's now pretty much impossible for a new shuttle to be built as the tools, production techniques and knowledge to build them were all lost or destroyed years ago. Endeavour, built to replace Challenger, was constructed from spare parts that were already fabricated at the time. The contract to build it was awarded in 1987, but construction on the crew module started in 1982 (as a spare module). If a single use capsule had been in use (in addition to the Shuttle or not) then the tooling, production data and knowledge would still be current.
Russia has the Soyuz capsule, which has been constantly upgraded over the decades the design has been in use. China now has Shenzou, which is Soyuz based (although it appears that there may be some quite radical differences under the hood). The only non-Shuttle design that the US has that is close to being ready-to-build is the Apollo CSM (or Mercury or Gemini, of course).
In some ways concentrating on the Shuttle at the expense of other designs of spacecraft has lead to the situation that NASA now finds itself in - and, to a large extent, the fault can be laid at the doors of those who control their pursestrings.
We aleady do harvest light (or at least part of the energy of light) for later use anyway - solar cells connected to batteries (as used on satellites, ISS, etc). I don't think storing the light and then converting to required power is going to be that much more effcient than converting to power and storing in batteries.
Generating power in space and then "transmitting" back with lasers isn't a new idea, but does have certain drawbacks if anything goes wrong.
Probably safer to use a Dyson shell... lots more power available on one of those. Ringworlds just don't cut it.
Who is going to tell us that every plot of every US scifi show was done in the 70's by Dr Who? Actually, most of them were done in the 60s by Doctor Who. 40 years of doing all the plots first and with 1/1000th the budget.... And Babbage.
However, as far as music went they were only involved in the second radio series; in the first radio series the music was all taken from commercially available sources (which explains the continuing lack of the "Do you realise that this robot can hum like Pink Floyd?" joke on the CDs and tapes - not because of the Pink Floyd music, but because of the Beatles music Marvin hums next. They never got recording rights, and so only have broadcast rights)
What DNA was after was a slight air of befuddled incomprehension but total authority, a sort of "I have no idea why this might be the case - but it most certainly is the case" state of mind. If you've heard Peter Jones on "Just a Minute" you'll know why he was perfect for the role.
I still reckon that the best replacement would have been Oliver Postgate... not only does he have that same befuddled air when narrating the Clangers (et al) but for at least two generations he's a voice you'd instinctively trust. If he said "Don't Panic", you wouldn't...
Radio 4, where the new series will be transmitted, is also streamed and quite a lot of recent stuff is also available for a while after transmission (depending on rights). I have a TiVo connected to an old Freeview box dedicated to picking up stuff from BBC7 and Radio 4...
Of course, there's not much of the original cast left... and I hope they're taking good care of Peter Sallis on set, he's still got the Wallace and Gromit movie to do the voice for.
Well, okay, admittedly the Mac versions of Internet Explorer and Office might give the impression that MicroSoft have never seen Macs... but seriously, are you trying to argue that MicroSoft having some Macs is confidential corporate information about a company that makes Mac software?
Of course, if you're using the same phone on the new network then the locking problem applies. However in the case of moving network it's usually a case of calling the existing network and asking for it to be unlocked - again, they may charge but I believe most don't under those circumstances, as long as the phone is out of any minimum contract period. And of course there are the slightly dodgy local phone emporiums.
OFTEL, which controls telecommunications in the UK, has a bunch of publications covering network switching - part of their remit is to encourage competition and so they are very much against anything that prevents consumers having a free choice, in theory.
Um... you can. If you buy a phone direct from Nokia it won't be locked to a network, and you can swamp SIM cards as much as you like. And if you get one via a deal with a network you can get the phone unlocked relatively cheaply at any slightly dodgy local phone emporium.
(I'm assuming that T-Mobile, AT&T and Cingular are all GSM, of course - if they aren't, then forget I said anything...)
Well, there's a whole chunk of Ximian technology in the Nterprise Linux Services beta, plus Novell is now selling Ximian Connector via Novell resellers. Besides, that merger was only a few months ago - barely enough time to change the logos on existing Ximian products, really...
Let's not forget he was also one of the first people to get to grips with TiVo hacking; see the TiVo ISA ethernet stuff for a start. Proper TiVo hardware & software hacking in the days before you could just buy a TurboNet from 9thTee...