...wasn't to grant Congress the power to control what we could purchase. It was to enable Congress to prevent the individual states from setting up trade barriers with one another
Again, what you were trying to say here?
Really, don't you people realise the only way to achieve the latter is to have that dreadful power of control what you can purchase? If you think "the framers" didn't see that...well, yeah, what would that tell us about them...
And who gives those "people of power" their...power? For that matter, from where those people come from? After all, they must come from some different place - they are "them", not "us". From what place those people get their fascination with power and wealth for their own sake?
No, system of governance is simply a reflection of the society. How it is influenced by the latter depends also on whether the society "fights" or "tends"/"nurses"/"cares" for the things valued (or slogans, for that matter)
If that's how the society is, "very good at dismantling civil unrest", then isn't that enough of an evidence that contemplating a civil war or revolution is specifically against the society? (not some "them the gov")
I'm curious, how one manages to miss that its much easier to track small number of stolen but active accounts? (really, that's what it is about, not phones; plus its easy to block them after theft...)
I'm rather pessimistic about our chances of reversing this trend, absent a constitutional convention and/or revolution, neither of which will happen because both would require Americans to stop watching TV long enough to realize how many rights they are losing.
If they're content with it, then they are not losing anything; this is what they want.
Why does it always have to be a "fight"?... (I catch what you're saying; but a society apparently spawning the habit of presenting everything as a fight has another set of problems)
You have short memory. When was the time that Intel introduced first netbook design / first cheap ultraportable? (not relying much on proper application of Moore's law too - they simply quickly threw together a bit old at that point, and not fully adequate, tech)
While your device has probably quite "ordinary" transflective screen (which is good at what it does, don't get me wrong) - this new screen is most likely very noticeably better.
Check out pics from the blog of its manufacturer (essentially they also made the screen for XO-1). Or look up videos on Youtube - a lot of them depicting early, still unoptimised prototypes from a year ago; shot by very visibly amateur 3rd party videographers during trade shows (yes, outside), and the screen still looks fabulous. One tablet announced some time ago ("Adam"?...) also uses it IIRC; and we should see quite a bit of new products at Computex soon.
Or describing some of the desing criteria shortly: OLPC XO is an inexpensive variant of...Toughbook.
BTW, screens essentially from the XO are perhaps finally coming also to some netbooks, via Pixel Qi (PQ also seems to start supplying them to tablets in general of course; and will do it for XO-3)
keyboards can't grow with children's hands! Sure, there are three directions of change - not only 1) the hands grow, also 2) precision and profficiency of child grows and 3) strenght available for typical key press gets bigger; that still means keyboards for wide spectrum of kids have to be a compromise, probably.
UI on a tablet, not so much of a problem. It can grow with child, not only when it comes to physical size of the elements. Plus touchscreens are sensitive enough that registering presses of youngest kids won't be a problem.
BTW, perhaps building into the device also a...vibrator would be good? (plenty of cheap ones should be available, from fabs supplying mobile phone makers) That's always some haptic feedback (possibly better than on the rubber keyboard of XO-1)
Tablets can be much more effectively sealed against the elements, should be useful in many places; probably also cheaper to make. Plus the plan is not to replace XO-1 (or "XO-1.75", also ARM based; they schould have done so from the beginning), only supplant it.
Generally, with $75 this should make any "buy2get1" interesting. Or if they won't manage to do 75 (perhaps at least sub-100 is likely), that should at least put some nice pressure on consumer products; exactly what happened with XO-1 -> netbooks.
Question is - where is the "optimal" point for such evolutionary pressure? I don't think we can assume we have it (who even knows in which direction is our deviation), even if our limited data suggest we're quite close (and for exactly what kind of life? We can probably assume that for complex biological one, sure, even it exists for few hundred millions years only - the rest of the time being dominated by bacteria...which still rule this place; but is it for "intelligent" life? So far we seem to be quite self-destructive, triggering one of the biggest extinction events...)
However, don't forget that the tools are also influenced by different circumstances.
If they, by using your example, would be naturally more armored (plus what's stopping them from also adding artificial armor, even to the point of modifying bone exoskeleton into a kind of composite armor that our modern tanks use?) - there could be pressure present to develop more effective weapons. If they would evolve in a place with 2g, they would be able to effortlessly carry a cargo equal to their mass when on Earth (that would be actually required for them to move comfortably - look at footage from the Moon;p ). Who knows if their LEO figthers wouldn't tend to outclass ours in such case, meant to routinelly "fight" much deeper gravity well...
(all of this of course assuming we're on roughly equal footing, discarding the required huge technological advancement to get to us)
If anything, all of this could be mean that our system is quite weird; at least on average.
And probably still wouldn't be a problem for "life" in general, considering there are several places suspected of harboring life in our own system, all of them quite "hostile" at first sight.
Complex life is another thing, of course... (or - we're frakked, because the aliens will turn out to be total badasses; due to evolving in very harsh conditions;p )
OTOH there's some potential that the titles utilising Natal won't be only shelf fillers, using it just for the sake of it. They could be sensibly thought out around it. Yeah, I don't have much hopes for that.
But there might be another thing going on, at some point in the future - when Wii successor shows up, I suspect it will be...quite comparable to raw capabilities of X360/PS3. That could be of some use to marketing departmens of the latter, might influence customer adoption.
I'm not surprised he would claim that. Meanwhile citizens (not "consumers"!) are choosing BBC quite readily. It's not merely "state-sponsored journalism - ultimatelly states are a reflection of their society; it anything, it chooses to have plularity and independance from profit-oriented journalism also via BBC.
Slashdot Mirror
Contemplate the meaning of "must rely", you fucking buffoon.
Hypothetically yes, if particular law (part of the constitution, I believe?) was worded in just the proper way. So why it isn't?
Even if it is vaporware (might as well be for all practical purposes / scale / software), there are almost certainly many more coming.
...wasn't to grant Congress the power to control what we could purchase. It was to enable Congress to prevent the individual states from setting up trade barriers with one another
Again, what you were trying to say here?
Really, don't you people realise the only way to achieve the latter is to have that dreadful power of control what you can purchase? If you think "the framers" didn't see that...well, yeah, what would that tell us about them...
And who gives those "people of power" their...power? For that matter, from where those people come from? After all, they must come from some different place - they are "them", not "us". From what place those people get their fascination with power and wealth for their own sake?
No, system of governance is simply a reflection of the society. How it is influenced by the latter depends also on whether the society "fights" or "tends"/"nurses"/"cares" for the things valued (or slogans, for that matter)
That's what we do, balancing some limits on freedom of everybody with targeting mostly stupid, also destructively stupid, criminals.
It's not for determining how or what is to be sold, it is to maintain conditions such that commerce between states cannot be limited.
What were you trying to say here again?
If that's how the society is, "very good at dismantling civil unrest", then isn't that enough of an evidence that contemplating a civil war or revolution is specifically against the society? (not some "them the gov")
If you must rely on anonimity to have free soeech, then you already don't have much of it. Not more than people in China or Iran.
I'm curious, how one manages to miss that its much easier to track small number of stolen but active accounts? (really, that's what it is about, not phones; plus its easy to block them after theft...)
I'm rather pessimistic about our chances of reversing this trend, absent a constitutional convention and/or revolution, neither of which will happen because both would require Americans to stop watching TV long enough to realize how many rights they are losing.
If they're content with it, then they are not losing anything; this is what they want.
Why does it always have to be a "fight"?... (I catch what you're saying; but a society apparently spawning the habit of presenting everything as a fight has another set of problems)
You have short memory. When was the time that Intel introduced first netbook design / first cheap ultraportable? (not relying much on proper application of Moore's law too - they simply quickly threw together a bit old at that point, and not fully adequate, tech)
While your device has probably quite "ordinary" transflective screen (which is good at what it does, don't get me wrong) - this new screen is most likely very noticeably better.
Check out pics from the blog of its manufacturer (essentially they also made the screen for XO-1). Or look up videos on Youtube - a lot of them depicting early, still unoptimised prototypes from a year ago; shot by very visibly amateur 3rd party videographers during trade shows (yes, outside), and the screen still looks fabulous. One tablet announced some time ago ("Adam"?...) also uses it IIRC; and we should see quite a bit of new products at Computex soon.
Or describing some of the desing criteria shortly: OLPC XO is an inexpensive variant of...Toughbook.
BTW, screens essentially from the XO are perhaps finally coming also to some netbooks, via Pixel Qi (PQ also seems to start supplying them to tablets in general of course; and will do it for XO-3)
OLPC XO-1 is the thing that largely brought you netbooks & cheap ultraportables in the first place.
Now, as far as consumer markets are concerned, they might be doing this with tablets. Publicly showing PR drones what's their proper price range.
There might another bonus:
keyboards can't grow with children's hands! Sure, there are three directions of change - not only 1) the hands grow, also 2) precision and profficiency of child grows and 3) strenght available for typical key press gets bigger; that still means keyboards for wide spectrum of kids have to be a compromise, probably.
UI on a tablet, not so much of a problem. It can grow with child, not only when it comes to physical size of the elements. Plus touchscreens are sensitive enough that registering presses of youngest kids won't be a problem.
BTW, perhaps building into the device also a...vibrator would be good? (plenty of cheap ones should be available, from fabs supplying mobile phone makers) That's always some haptic feedback (possibly better than on the rubber keyboard of XO-1)
Tablets can be much more effectively sealed against the elements, should be useful in many places; probably also cheaper to make. Plus the plan is not to replace XO-1 (or "XO-1.75", also ARM based; they schould have done so from the beginning), only supplant it.
Generally, with $75 this should make any "buy2get1" interesting. Or if they won't manage to do 75 (perhaps at least sub-100 is likely), that should at least put some nice pressure on consumer products; exactly what happened with XO-1 -> netbooks.
Question is - where is the "optimal" point for such evolutionary pressure? I don't think we can assume we have it (who even knows in which direction is our deviation), even if our limited data suggest we're quite close (and for exactly what kind of life? We can probably assume that for complex biological one, sure, even it exists for few hundred millions years only - the rest of the time being dominated by bacteria...which still rule this place; but is it for "intelligent" life? So far we seem to be quite self-destructive, triggering one of the biggest extinction events...)
However, don't forget that the tools are also influenced by different circumstances.
If they, by using your example, would be naturally more armored (plus what's stopping them from also adding artificial armor, even to the point of modifying bone exoskeleton into a kind of composite armor that our modern tanks use?) - there could be pressure present to develop more effective weapons. If they would evolve in a place with 2g, they would be able to effortlessly carry a cargo equal to their mass when on Earth (that would be actually required for them to move comfortably - look at footage from the Moon ;p ). Who knows if their LEO figthers wouldn't tend to outclass ours in such case, meant to routinelly "fight" much deeper gravity well...
(all of this of course assuming we're on roughly equal footing, discarding the required huge technological advancement to get to us)
That wording is still a bit unfortunate, almost itself...a display of what it warns against.
More simply, "what's known to us is perceived as the expected way of how things can be"
If anything, all of this could be mean that our system is quite weird; at least on average.
And probably still wouldn't be a problem for "life" in general, considering there are several places suspected of harboring life in our own system, all of them quite "hostile" at first sight.
Complex life is another thing, of course... (or - we're frakked, because the aliens will turn out to be total badasses; due to evolving in very harsh conditions ;p )
OTOH there's some potential that the titles utilising Natal won't be only shelf fillers, using it just for the sake of it. They could be sensibly thought out around it.
Yeah, I don't have much hopes for that.
But there might be another thing going on, at some point in the future - when Wii successor shows up, I suspect it will be...quite comparable to raw capabilities of X360/PS3. That could be of some use to marketing departmens of the latter, might influence customer adoption.
I'm not surprised he would claim that. Meanwhile citizens (not "consumers"!) are choosing BBC quite readily. It's not merely "state-sponsored journalism - ultimatelly states are a reflection of their society; it anything, it chooses to have plularity and independance from profit-oriented journalism also via BBC.
Oh well, in that case you're Poe's Law in action, it seems.