I understand the problem; the direct connection criteria between two different things might be completely indecipherable or insurmountably complex and subtle (let alone indirect relationships i.e. six degrees of Kevin Bacon). That means whatever you build has to account for trends to narrow the band of complexity which leads to the same old problem of only suggesting status quo.
A tool that can only suggest "obvious" or "random" things leads to undesirable results and at best can only fractionally provide you with "success".
I still think it's a cool project with a lot of opportunity for discovery but I just can't get past the idea that you either tell people what they want (advertising) or let people discover things on their own (interconnection).
...until Steam goes down or your EA key doesn't validate (etc, etc, etc). This is becoming endemic to electronic gaming as a whole not just console gaming.
A word of caution; make sure you're whole company is in on this or you develop a rift.
The company I work at has a couple of offsite offices for more intimate client support, everyone back in the main office has beer Friday et al, but the rest of us drabs have to keep the wheels turning with our clients. Resentment begins to grow between the people in the field toward those back in the main office.
The iPad is a huge step sideways, it's neither good nor bad. Unfortunately it tries to fill a position already inhabited by existing devices (some of which are Apple products).
Of course, I also have my voicemail set to pick up after four rings so I don't annoy the bejesus out of people when I'm attending meetings and calls come in.
1. The queuing spots are marked (in most cases) 2. The queuing spots correlate to stop markers which the drivers manage to actually stop on
Where I live when people see a train roll into the station they all rush toward the doors as if it's simultaneously the first train they've ever seen AND the last they're likely to see. Meanwhile the people on board seem rather confused by their stop and linger in the doorways. The drivers are content to stop "in the vicinity" of the station.
I won't even talk about the people who sit next to their bags or leave a newspaper where they were sitting. I suspect they are the same people who enjoy pulling the heads off of small mammals.
Seriously, if your phone rings, bleeps, vibrates, whatever and you are engaged in a conversation with a live person (or people) DO NOT pull out your phone and look at it.
Whatever it is, it can wait at least 30 seconds.
In fact I had a meeting with someone in my cube not too long ago, my phone rang and I just kept talking with them. They seemed quite surprised that I gave them preference over the machine. Somehow we've all been trained to dash for the phone no matter what.
I rather imagine it would be something like sending semaphore signals from one merry go round to someone on a different merry go round who can't read semaphore signals.
Which would you rather talk to on the phone? Horrible robot voice or Real live human voice?
Now imagine instead of just the voice it's the whole face, body, movement, etc. NO THANKS.
It's odd though, I think I could somehow handle talking to "Robbie the Robot" better than I could these creepy rubber dolls (like the one in TFA). Creepy as hell.
The historical answer to this problem has been to make new instruments, new sounds, new rhythms and break all the old rules.
Video games were successfully doing this until the Compact Disc became the delivery media of choice, allowing room for bland theatrical scores to dominate.
In the blind community there are very few people who just see 100% blackness, low or no vision is often dark cloudy grey or with vague shapes, sometimes even just "nothing" (not even black, it's hard to explain...). There is a large perception in the world that blindness is a binary thing but it is really quite varied. So while there are people who are "totally" blind there are a lot more people who cannot see well that they are classified as blind or legally blind (with or without corrective eye wear).
A person with low vision who can wear corrective lenses to achieve near 20/20 vision is not legally blind.
To be fair, the Canadian National Institute for the Blind taught me to be more outgoing and self-reliant during grade school. Skills that serve me well in IT.
??? you seemed to have missed the point entirely Mr. Coward
If you have a blind kid in a class where the Kindle is used for educating what happens? At least offer an alternative, and if enabling text-to-speech on the Kindle does the trick then hooray! Problem solved!
"Or is someone bitter that they don't get all the latest shiny toys, and are therefore being discriminated?"
Mmm, I look at it this way, when you are a school buying things for standard classroom use it should be accessible for everyone or at the very least there should be an alternative, right?
In terms of toys it's actually quite the opposite (in my case anyway), I had a lot of awesome toys to help me read once I got the support I needed. For me to work at the same level as everyone else I had to use devices like a computer, monocular, video book magnifier (like this http://www.nmmu.ac.za/default.asp?id=7107&bhcp=1 ). All this was back in the 80s so it was all gargantuan and impressive looking but it helped me become a good student even though I had quite a few setbacks to overcome from the beginning.
The alternative for a lot of children with disabilities that can't get private care is to just get ignored by the system, which benefits no one.
Slashdot Mirror
Seems fine to me...
In this case "the goggles do something"...
Is killing a zombie legal outside of self-defense?
Won't someone think of the zombies???
I understand the problem; the direct connection criteria between two different things might be completely indecipherable or insurmountably complex and subtle (let alone indirect relationships i.e. six degrees of Kevin Bacon). That means whatever you build has to account for trends to narrow the band of complexity which leads to the same old problem of only suggesting status quo.
A tool that can only suggest "obvious" or "random" things leads to undesirable results and at best can only fractionally provide you with "success".
I still think it's a cool project with a lot of opportunity for discovery but I just can't get past the idea that you either tell people what they want (advertising) or let people discover things on their own (interconnection).
...until Steam goes down or your EA key doesn't validate (etc, etc, etc). This is becoming endemic to electronic gaming as a whole not just console gaming.
I guess Oracle didn't want to feed the alien...
A word of caution; make sure you're whole company is in on this or you develop a rift.
The company I work at has a couple of offsite offices for more intimate client support, everyone back in the main office has beer Friday et al, but the rest of us drabs have to keep the wheels turning with our clients. Resentment begins to grow between the people in the field toward those back in the main office.
The iPad is a huge step sideways, it's neither good nor bad. Unfortunately it tries to fill a position already inhabited by existing devices (some of which are Apple products).
I often wonder if part of the success of the original XBox was it's "hackability".
Anyone care to weigh in?
The office phone, that is.
Of course, I also have my voicemail set to pick up after four rings so I don't annoy the bejesus out of people when I'm attending meetings and calls come in.
About the Japanese subway stations:
1. The queuing spots are marked (in most cases)
2. The queuing spots correlate to stop markers which the drivers manage to actually stop on
Where I live when people see a train roll into the station they all rush toward the doors as if it's simultaneously the first train they've ever seen AND the last they're likely to see. Meanwhile the people on board seem rather confused by their stop and linger in the doorways. The drivers are content to stop "in the vicinity" of the station.
I won't even talk about the people who sit next to their bags or leave a newspaper where they were sitting. I suspect they are the same people who enjoy pulling the heads off of small mammals.
Seriously, if your phone rings, bleeps, vibrates, whatever and you are engaged in a conversation with a live person (or people) DO NOT pull out your phone and look at it.
Whatever it is, it can wait at least 30 seconds.
In fact I had a meeting with someone in my cube not too long ago, my phone rang and I just kept talking with them. They seemed quite surprised that I gave them preference over the machine. Somehow we've all been trained to dash for the phone no matter what.
Would lasers work for interstellar communication?
I rather imagine it would be something like sending semaphore signals from one merry go round to someone on a different merry go round who can't read semaphore signals.
Which would you rather talk to on the phone? Horrible robot voice or Real live human voice?
Now imagine instead of just the voice it's the whole face, body, movement, etc. NO THANKS.
It's odd though, I think I could somehow handle talking to "Robbie the Robot" better than I could these creepy rubber dolls (like the one in TFA). Creepy as hell.
I didn't know what MapReduce was so I looked it up:
The historical answer to this problem has been to make new instruments, new sounds, new rhythms and break all the old rules.
Video games were successfully doing this until the Compact Disc became the delivery media of choice, allowing room for bland theatrical scores to dominate.
I would like it to control some kind of slapping device linked to Xbox Live Chat...
Ah I see.
In the blind community there are very few people who just see 100% blackness, low or no vision is often dark cloudy grey or with vague shapes, sometimes even just "nothing" (not even black, it's hard to explain...). There is a large perception in the world that blindness is a binary thing but it is really quite varied. So while there are people who are "totally" blind there are a lot more people who cannot see well that they are classified as blind or legally blind (with or without corrective eye wear).
A person with low vision who can wear corrective lenses to achieve near 20/20 vision is not legally blind.
I was born in the '70s
To be fair, the Canadian National Institute for the Blind taught me to be more outgoing and self-reliant during grade school. Skills that serve me well in IT.
Does that mean the Microsoft icon changes to a Borg Ballmer?
??? you seemed to have missed the point entirely Mr. Coward
If you have a blind kid in a class where the Kindle is used for educating what happens? At least offer an alternative, and if enabling text-to-speech on the Kindle does the trick then hooray! Problem solved!
That's very true when you put it that way.
Mmm, I look at it this way, when you are a school buying things for standard classroom use it should be accessible for everyone or at the very least there should be an alternative, right?
In terms of toys it's actually quite the opposite (in my case anyway), I had a lot of awesome toys to help me read once I got the support I needed. For me to work at the same level as everyone else I had to use devices like a computer, monocular, video book magnifier (like this http://www.nmmu.ac.za/default.asp?id=7107&bhcp=1 ). All this was back in the 80s so it was all gargantuan and impressive looking but it helped me become a good student even though I had quite a few setbacks to overcome from the beginning.
The alternative for a lot of children with disabilities that can't get private care is to just get ignored by the system, which benefits no one.
That's awesome! It's finally available in Canada I may have to check it out.
Try lugging around some Asimov in large print and you'll either get big arms or stop reading hahaha