That was one of my points. Many of the examples provided are actually examples of illegal material properly taken down because of the DCMA - yet many don't see it that way because the feel entitled to steal.
it's the lack of enforcement with respect to its false claims penalties that is the problem.
With so many willing to crawl on their hands and knees to steal someone else's $0.01 property simply because they feel entitled to steal, its all but impossible to enforce any type of incorrect application of the DCMA. Because piracy is so prolific, the law has no choice but to side with property owner rights. Anything else is wrong - way wrong. Realistically, the number of accidental causalities has been extremely limited and isn't even noise on the radar compared to the level of theft which is otherwise rampant every day on the Internet.
Simply put, the DCMA is doing its job and tighter restrictions *are* needed on those who are willingly violating the spirit of law to steal - rapidshare, etc... where their "read between the lines" response is, "yes we fully understand 99% of our business is stealing but we can't do anything about it because we don't officially look at what people share with our services."
Which I guess brings us full circle - the blog author is completely full of shit and is completely out of touch with reality. His article is nothing but fear mongering feeding self entitled thieves hoping to rail against to system so they can continue their rampant stealing.
We have a winner. There is no reason whatsoever to ever allow public monies (save perhaps elections with tighter contribution controls) to go to elected officials. If you agree with their ideology, you elect them. Period. Anything else is corporatism and is in no way, shape, or form representative of a true democracy.
I disagree - I think DMCA takedowns have been a disaster. When the WB music group issues takedowns on things it doesn't even own - and YouTube meekly complies without even bothering to do a trivial search at copyright.gov for ownership - something has gone terribly, terribly wrong.
Then you're confusing two distinct issues. One is the DCMA and the other is a company's policy to protect themselves from legal liability. You've just validated the DCMA and damed YouTube's policy. Thus far, you've only managed to attack YouTube. So what's the problem with the DCMA?
Yes, that's a disaster because using someone else's music to which they have no legal right is clearly a disaster.
To prevent the problem, they could have simply used a different song. Fair use does not mean what you think it does. When you create content using someone else's property and place it on a web site for mass public consumption, you are well outside of fair use.
To summarize, you believe the DCMA is a failure because it worked exactly as intended, exactly when it should have been used. Try again.
At this point, the law says that the video should be put back up, and if the rightsholder still isn't convinced, they are to file suit.
Because if they put it up again, requiring the owner to file suit, they open themselves up to a suit. Basically you're arguing that because a company doesn't want to expose themselves to legal liability, to which they would already been exposed had they not removed it under the first notification, the DCMA is deeply flawed. Try again.
As I originally said, DCMA take down abuse has clearly occurred but you've not provided a single example. Congratulations, you've just validated the DCMA has been hugely successful.
Many types of pain actually show as heat. As such, they can be captured via thermal imaging. This technology has been available to doctors for many, many years and is not at all uncommon for those involved in physical therapy. The heat scales available even allow doctors to rate the level of pain. Of course, categorizing the pain does not quantify a patient's pain threshold.
That ISPs have to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material. This means that it will be impossible to run a service like Flickr or YouTube or Blogger, since hiring enough lawyers to ensure that the mountain of material uploaded every second isn't infringing will exceed any hope of profitability.
How can this be true? He says services like Flickr, YouTube, and Bloggers would be impossible. That's seems like completely bull. YouTube already does this and yet still exists. Its safe to say he's not only full of bullshit but completely scaremongering too. Its not that hard to scan your systems for hashes of content which is known to violate.
That ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability. This means that your entire family could be denied to the internet -- and hence to civic participation, health information, education, communications, and their means of earning a living -- if one member is accused of copyright infringement, without access to a trial or counsel.
He doesn't provide any real details here and it sounds like scaremongering. There likely is some truth to the statement by exactly what that truth is is a completely mystery. Given we know from his first assertion he's full of complete bullshit, probably best to read the actual document than trust his scaremongering.
That the whole world must adopt US-style "notice-and-takedown" rules that require ISPs to remove any material that is accused -- again, without evidence or trial -- of infringing copyright. This has proved a disaster in the US and other countries, where it provides an easy means of censoring material, just by accusing it of infringing copyright.
Has proved a disaster in the US? Where? Seems like more bullshit to me. Yes, we all know invalid take downs have been issued and some abuse exists, but that's a far cry from "disaster." Using his definition, the US Constitution is c complete and utter disaster on a scale the world has never known before. More bullshit and scare tactics.
I haven't read the actual document but its safe to say, anyone who takes this blogger's interpretation at face value is going out of their way to be mislead. When someone has actually read the document and can comment on it in an unbiased manner, get back to me - then we can talk. Until then, there's nothing to see here - at least not from that bullshit artist of a blogger.
Handing over complete control of any further automotive function to a computer is goddamn terrifying.
And yet people fly commercial airliners every day without a second thought.
Interesting note, at least three commercial jet crashes are known to have been as a direct result of failed fly by wire (hydraulic) controls. As many as six, in total, are suspected, which were previously deemed pilot error. The failure is in its hydraulic system which controls the rudder of the aircraft.
It seems the hydraulic jack which moves the rudder left or right can spontaneously reverse direction in a linear manner. This reversal forces pilots to compensate to prevent the aircraft from spiraling into the ground. Yet because the rudder is moving in the opposite direction than pilot input, it exacerbates the problem. This in turn forces the pilot to compensate far more aggressively which only continues to aggressively make the death spiral worse. An impact into the ground is all but assured because the correction required of the pilot is completely unintuitive (exactly opposite of all training); requiring input which pilots know would classically make the problem far, far worse.
The manufacturer's engineers have verified the problem is theoretically impossible and yet have somewhat recreated the problem. The exact problem has never been fully recreated. To date they are at a complete loss as to exactly how or why it happens; though unverified theories exist and they do know large temperature deltas are a component. To address the problem the manufacturer added a third hydraulic jack such that no single jack reversal can overpower the other two; thusly ensuring the pilot always maintains control of the rudder during a single hydraulic jack failure. And that's what much of America's passengers are flying with today, via commercial passenger air travel.
Bullshit - they aren't "geared" toward anything. Wind and solar don't work like that - the grid operators cannot simply turn on the wind or the sun. And that level of control is necessary for how we run our grid presently.
I think I smell some more bullshit coming from you. Base load must always be available and be available to increase demand - which is what you're talking about. Peak load is capacity available beyond base which is normally only used to satisfy load beyond base. After all, base load is typically, dramatically cheaper to boot.
While in theory, wind can provide some base load capacity, simply because its likely to be available, its availability and exactly capacity is always unknown, if available at all, and as such, it not dubbed "base load". So in short, wind absolutely is geared to satisfy "peak" capacity as it is simply not reliable enough to meet base load requirements.
From here, your rant seems to go full circle and support exactly what I'm saying....which brings me full circle - what the fuck is your point because you don't seem to have one at all...
Power generation is broken into two basic categories; base and peak. Wind and solar are both geared to address peak. Wind is never intended to be base load, so what is your point?
Furthermore, power generation from wind improvements now allow for peak generation over a much larger variation of wind as well as higher efficiency (less loss) for the power which is generated. As I understand it, your 30% is far too low now. IIRC, its somewhere in the 40+% range now.
There is no need. The people who drive poorly already pay more for their insurance because of reality. In other words, of the people who pay higher rates, a subset of them are likely those who have the gene variant. Genetic testing is not required. They are already covered by existing rates.
Although it is early days yet, the concept that you own your data may be what sets this apart from Google Wave.
Whoever wrote that part is either dumber than a bag of hammers or is purposely attempting to confuse and mislead people with misinformation. Wave is a protocol, not an application. One of the purposes of Wave is to provide a reference implementation (what everyone has been testing) such that others are free to either run the reference implementation, some variation thereof, or create their own server (via publicly available documentation) such that they can run their own servers and maintain ALL DATA INTERNALLY. Even the video purposely makes it clear you can run as many Wave servers as you like and NEVER HAVE YOUR DATA EXPOSED OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN COMPANY.
The Wave protocol is built from the ground up such that everyone is free to own as much or as little of their data as they desire. Period. Anyone who says otherwise is full of bullshit.
It also means that each phone can be tied to a particular US provider, probably with certain non-profitable features disabled
People keep saying this but there hasn't even been a hint this is even remotely close to reality. The reality is, with so many phones on so many carriers, gimping a phone means pushing sales to your competition. Even Verizon has publicly stated then will not be gimping their Android phones. This means carriers are forced to compete based on hardware features and value added applications and services.
Until there is at least a hint that carriers intend to screw over their users with these phones, statements like this only serve to provide misinformation and scaremonger.
Because it doesn't require my instantaneous attention and I get to control when I reply.
The same is also true for Wave, which is why the constant wave of anti-Wave articles are nothing but complete bullshit from ignorant masses of end users who got excited about a developer's technology and release, which in turn underscores the authors have no clue what the hell Wave is in the first place. Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge, no one at Google has claimed Wave is the death of email which further underscores how much anti-Google fanaticism is behind these types of absolute bullshit articles. It is true, however, Wave is capable of both usurping and even co-existing with email as we know it today, in many, many capacities. It is a competing technology.
Furthermore, Wave's big claim to fame is improved collaboration. From the demos, its rather obvious it does, in fact, deliver. Anyone who has ever attempted to use email as a collaboration tool will absolutely stand up and tell you it sucks badly for serious collaboration. Wave hopes to address this while at the same time either usurping email in this capacity or extending the capabilities of email as a collaborative end product.
This means Wave is poised to address collaboration and email remains a simple tool for communication; where its even possible to make wave part of such email communication or the end work product of a wave as the email communication. Or, its also possible to use Wave as an email replacement altogether.
This constant stream of anti-Wave articles where its clear the author doesn't have even the basic understanding of what the heck Wave is, instantly qualifies one as a douche bag of the year candidate. I can't stress it enough...wave is a protocol not an application. Wait at least six months to see what form applications may take which truly showcase Wave's collaborate capabilities. In other words, now that its in the hands of developers, lets see what developers can make with it. Development takes time. Lets see what's out there in six months to two years. Declaring a tool dead before it can even be used is the height of ignorance and stupidity.
The fact Wave can be used as SMTP+IRC+IM pretty well supports Wave is a very powerful and enabling technology. The real wow factor is going to come when federations of Wave servers are running various services and they all magically work together, including you or your own private server. Unless someone can attack and invalidate the technology base, people only come off sounding like ignorant idiots with a anti-Google ax to grind.
Sounds exactly like a job I had... except the jump from task to task happened at least a half dozen times per day... and then I got dinged in review for not staying on task by the very same boss. Then when I informed the boss the reason I was not staying on task, he was shocked and horrified. The constant interruptions then dropped from a half dozen per day to two to three times per day where the new tasks took longer to perform; usually 1/2 - half the day and at his side, helping him with his own, self aggrandizing pet project. The next review the boss was absolutely sure his constant interruptions never happened, despite having been physically with him, and he could not understand where I was spending my time. Yep, got dinged again by the very same idiot. He couldn't understand where I had been spending my time - which was usually at his side...literally at his insistence and always after informing him tasks were suffering because of his insistence.
Meanwhile the rest of the office became jealous because they believed I was being shown favoritism and excused from the actual work product while having a grand 'ol time. After informing my co-workers of what was going on, I was then openly accused of lying. In reality, I was miserable and frustrated to no end...literally cringing every time my cell or office phone rang. Quiting that job was one of the happiest days of my life.
Even worse, the higher ups (Directors and CEO/CTO) thought the boss walked on water... I guess they took turns blowing each other...because reality was so far apart from perception.
Every time I watch the office, I'm always reminded of my experience of having worked with the smartest, incompetent idiots I've ever met in my life. So I can assure you Dilbert and the "Office" is very much alive in Corporate America. In my opinion, they are single handedly ruining American business.
Last time I did the math, only a couple of months back, for T-Mobile (Android) vs AT&T (iPhone), the difference was $400 over the term (two years) of the contract. I consider that to be a big difference.
Well right now Android is still a techie's phone for the most part.
Unfortunately that is the perception despite the fact is hasn't been true with pretty much every phone post-G1. With phones like the Cliq and Hero, nothing could be farther from the truth.
Maybe Google needs to make it just a little harder to put apps on Android outside of the apps store.
Or they could provide copy protection like they promised developers they would. Thus far, they blatantly lied and everyone seems content to ignore it. Pirates sure are not in a hurry to complain.;) Besides, locking the device down is only going to anger users and developers - ask would-be iPhone developers and users.
If Android becomes more mainstream I think more people will pirate but it will be a much lower percentage.
I sincerely hope you're right. Right now, piracy as a ratio, depending on the applications, is in the many thousands of percent higher than actual sales. That means for every actual sale, dozens if not hundreds of illegal copies are currently installed. If piracy ever reaches single or double digit percentiles, only then does Android as a platform stand a chance. Without commercial interest, I do not believe Android is sustainable in the long run.
Right now you can only get an Android phone in the US on the number 4 carrier. That should change very soon. Let us hope for the best since I want to write some 99 cent apps for it.
You're not alone there. But don't get your hopes up. I read a developer's account on IRC about after many months he finally had made enough to take his GF out to dinner.
On a brighter note, rumor has it at least one carrier is to allow carrier billing. If true, that one feature may do wonders to help turn the market around. Numbers I've read elsewhere suggest maybe as few as 20% of Android owners currently have a Google Checkout account. Right now, without a Google Checkout account, you can't buy anything. Even worse, Google's Checkout is fairly limited in its supported payment options...which is also supposedly an improvement to be announced right around the corner.
Sprints offers an unlimited plan for $70/mo in the US. The plan provides for unlimited text/data and something like 450 minutes plus nights and weekends. But real catch is, all calls to and from any other cell does not count against your minutes. For many, that's practically the same as unlimited call/data/text.
Generally speaking, Sprint + Android phone is pretty much impossible to beat anywhere else.
I haven't heard electronics being affected by a call in ages - only if I've been near some really _REALLY_ cheap electronics.
That's still only true on the cheapest of the cheap phones. Pragmatically, no such clicking exists, and its certainly not true for any of the Android phones.
Most users will not take the time to root their phone anymore than they take the time to jail break.
On Android, rooting is not required to pirate applications. Rooting/jailbreaking is only required for the iPhone.
Why steal a.99 cent app when you can just buy it from the store. That is the real key to piracy make it not worth the effort.
Several recent studies indicate many are pirating because they feel entitled and because they feel they are not hurting anyone. Price is generally not a factor in the equation. If it were, piracy would practically not exist for Android and the iPhone. Unfortunately, many pirates wrongly assume that stealing applications does not injure the bottom line for small developers; if for no other reason that because multi-billion dollar corporations can weather piracy and survive. The reality is, its putting small developers out of business and preventing new developers from entering into the Android market. Those who are entering, are generally not relying on sales to make a profit. That means value added services, ad revenue, or both.
Its a prediction based on market trends compared to the iPhone. Android has matched the iPhone at each significant milestone, except in app sales. The iPhone established its trend in a booming economy. Android has matched it in a recession to borderline depression. Needless to say, once you factor in multiple carriers plus multiple hardware manufacturers, you really don't need any salt at all. Many are saying the writing is pretty clearly on the wall.
Hell, many of the new features provided in the 3GS (hardware and SDK) are thanks to Android putting pressure on Apple. There isn't an iPhone 3GS user that doesn't owe a heart felt thank you to Android.
It seems you only need salt if you choose to ignore what is right in front of your face - especially when you consider Android is a tiny market share but is already taking web (ad revenue) share away from everyone, including the iPhone.
1. Apps. Android needs more developers for more apps. With more android phones hitting the market the developers will follow so will the apps.
Maybe. Piracy is killing developers on a massive scale. Even the most successful Android developers barely make enough to scrape by (~63.00/day for two top selling apps). Piracy for Android exists for many reasons. One often cited is pay apps are not available in many markets; so people pirate simply because its not otherwise available. Once people start pirating apps, it seems many don't reconsidering supporting their developers once pay apps are available in their market. Even after excusing the pirates where because pay apps are not available in their market, piracy is still killing the platform.
Without the ability to actual make money on Android, commercial developer interest in non-ad driven applications will continue lag. On the other hand, ad-driven apps continue to grow on the platform while continuing to piss off the user base. After all, people are tired of bloated apps and seeing ads all the time. Those users pissed off about plentiful ad driven apps, blame your local pirate, or even yourself for not purchasing more applications. Developers need your support!
Carriers. Android is going to be available in the US on T-Mobile, Sprint, Verizon, and probably AT&T soon. Unlocked phones are already available in the EU so Android is available on a lot more carriers.
All major us carriers will have a phone within the next six to eight months; with AT&T being the furtherest out. Within the next six months, Motorola alone should have ten Android offerings. Many other hardware manufacuturers are also jumping on the Android train. Both Garmin and Asus have both said they are dumping their other OSs and using Android. Most all carriers will have at least one Android offer. Several will have two or more. At least two will have three or more Android offerings within the next four months.
As for AT&T, don't get excited. It looks like they are working with Dell?!? to provide them an Android offering. Thus far, Dell's Android offering sucks to the extent, everyone but a carrier in China has passed. Unless Dell makes huge hardware improvements, AT&T will not offer an Android phone worth talking about.
Long story short, if you want good Android applications, us users need to support our developers by purchasing their applications. Of course, it doesn't hurt to kick your local pirate in the nuts for causing a long list of problems in the first place. Remember, purchased applications are supported applications. Applications which are supported are those which receive continued development.
One last note about piracy. If you have a pirated application on your phone right now, by keeping it installed you are assigning value to that application. By taking something of value to which you have no right, you are stealing. You are a thief, hurting the application's developer and damaging the platform as a whole. You can easily address the situation by simply purchasing the applications which you have installed. Go support your developers and the platform. Stop stealing.
has patented a way to apply force to a car's wheels from an electric motor or internal combustion engine.
So anyone who has ever down shifted and allowed engine braking is in violation of their patent! The patent office is useless and completely broken. Will they ever stop granting completely fucking obvious patents?!?!
Slashdot Mirror
There's nothing wrong with the DMCA
That was one of my points. Many of the examples provided are actually examples of illegal material properly taken down because of the DCMA - yet many don't see it that way because the feel entitled to steal.
it's the lack of enforcement with respect to its false claims penalties that is the problem.
With so many willing to crawl on their hands and knees to steal someone else's $0.01 property simply because they feel entitled to steal, its all but impossible to enforce any type of incorrect application of the DCMA. Because piracy is so prolific, the law has no choice but to side with property owner rights. Anything else is wrong - way wrong. Realistically, the number of accidental causalities has been extremely limited and isn't even noise on the radar compared to the level of theft which is otherwise rampant every day on the Internet.
Simply put, the DCMA is doing its job and tighter restrictions *are* needed on those who are willingly violating the spirit of law to steal - rapidshare, etc... where their "read between the lines" response is, "yes we fully understand 99% of our business is stealing but we can't do anything about it because we don't officially look at what people share with our services."
Which I guess brings us full circle - the blog author is completely full of shit and is completely out of touch with reality. His article is nothing but fear mongering feeding self entitled thieves hoping to rail against to system so they can continue their rampant stealing.
We have a winner. There is no reason whatsoever to ever allow public monies (save perhaps elections with tighter contribution controls) to go to elected officials. If you agree with their ideology, you elect them. Period. Anything else is corporatism and is in no way, shape, or form representative of a true democracy.
I disagree - I think DMCA takedowns have been a disaster. When the WB music group issues takedowns on things it doesn't even own - and YouTube meekly complies without even bothering to do a trivial search at copyright.gov for ownership - something has gone terribly, terribly wrong.
Then you're confusing two distinct issues. One is the DCMA and the other is a company's policy to protect themselves from legal liability. You've just validated the DCMA and damed YouTube's policy. Thus far, you've only managed to attack YouTube. So what's the problem with the DCMA?
Yes, that's a disaster because using someone else's music to which they have no legal right is clearly a disaster.
To prevent the problem, they could have simply used a different song. Fair use does not mean what you think it does. When you create content using someone else's property and place it on a web site for mass public consumption, you are well outside of fair use.
To summarize, you believe the DCMA is a failure because it worked exactly as intended, exactly when it should have been used. Try again.
At this point, the law says that the video should be put back up, and if the rightsholder still isn't convinced, they are to file suit.
Because if they put it up again, requiring the owner to file suit, they open themselves up to a suit. Basically you're arguing that because a company doesn't want to expose themselves to legal liability, to which they would already been exposed had they not removed it under the first notification, the DCMA is deeply flawed. Try again.
As I originally said, DCMA take down abuse has clearly occurred but you've not provided a single example. Congratulations, you've just validated the DCMA has been hugely successful.
Many types of pain actually show as heat. As such, they can be captured via thermal imaging. This technology has been available to doctors for many, many years and is not at all uncommon for those involved in physical therapy. The heat scales available even allow doctors to rate the level of pain. Of course, categorizing the pain does not quantify a patient's pain threshold.
From the blog:
That ISPs have to proactively police copyright on user-contributed material. This means that it will be impossible to run a service like Flickr or YouTube or Blogger, since hiring enough lawyers to ensure that the mountain of material uploaded every second isn't infringing will exceed any hope of profitability.
How can this be true? He says services like Flickr, YouTube, and Bloggers would be impossible. That's seems like completely bull. YouTube already does this and yet still exists. Its safe to say he's not only full of bullshit but completely scaremongering too. Its not that hard to scan your systems for hashes of content which is known to violate.
That ISPs have to cut off the Internet access of accused copyright infringers or face liability. This means that your entire family could be denied to the internet -- and hence to civic participation, health information, education, communications, and their means of earning a living -- if one member is accused of copyright infringement, without access to a trial or counsel.
He doesn't provide any real details here and it sounds like scaremongering. There likely is some truth to the statement by exactly what that truth is is a completely mystery. Given we know from his first assertion he's full of complete bullshit, probably best to read the actual document than trust his scaremongering.
That the whole world must adopt US-style "notice-and-takedown" rules that require ISPs to remove any material that is accused -- again, without evidence or trial -- of infringing copyright. This has proved a disaster in the US and other countries, where it provides an easy means of censoring material, just by accusing it of infringing copyright.
Has proved a disaster in the US? Where? Seems like more bullshit to me. Yes, we all know invalid take downs have been issued and some abuse exists, but that's a far cry from "disaster." Using his definition, the US Constitution is c complete and utter disaster on a scale the world has never known before. More bullshit and scare tactics.
I haven't read the actual document but its safe to say, anyone who takes this blogger's interpretation at face value is going out of their way to be mislead. When someone has actually read the document and can comment on it in an unbiased manner, get back to me - then we can talk. Until then, there's nothing to see here - at least not from that bullshit artist of a blogger.
Handing over complete control of any further automotive function to a computer is goddamn terrifying.
And yet people fly commercial airliners every day without a second thought.
Interesting note, at least three commercial jet crashes are known to have been as a direct result of failed fly by wire (hydraulic) controls. As many as six, in total, are suspected, which were previously deemed pilot error. The failure is in its hydraulic system which controls the rudder of the aircraft.
It seems the hydraulic jack which moves the rudder left or right can spontaneously reverse direction in a linear manner. This reversal forces pilots to compensate to prevent the aircraft from spiraling into the ground. Yet because the rudder is moving in the opposite direction than pilot input, it exacerbates the problem. This in turn forces the pilot to compensate far more aggressively which only continues to aggressively make the death spiral worse. An impact into the ground is all but assured because the correction required of the pilot is completely unintuitive (exactly opposite of all training); requiring input which pilots know would classically make the problem far, far worse.
The manufacturer's engineers have verified the problem is theoretically impossible and yet have somewhat recreated the problem. The exact problem has never been fully recreated. To date they are at a complete loss as to exactly how or why it happens; though unverified theories exist and they do know large temperature deltas are a component. To address the problem the manufacturer added a third hydraulic jack such that no single jack reversal can overpower the other two; thusly ensuring the pilot always maintains control of the rudder during a single hydraulic jack failure. And that's what much of America's passengers are flying with today, via commercial passenger air travel.
The aircraft is question is a Boeing 737.
Have a happy flight!
Bullshit - they aren't "geared" toward anything. Wind and solar don't work like that - the grid operators cannot simply turn on the wind or the sun. And that level of control is necessary for how we run our grid presently.
I think I smell some more bullshit coming from you. Base load must always be available and be available to increase demand - which is what you're talking about. Peak load is capacity available beyond base which is normally only used to satisfy load beyond base. After all, base load is typically, dramatically cheaper to boot.
While in theory, wind can provide some base load capacity, simply because its likely to be available, its availability and exactly capacity is always unknown, if available at all, and as such, it not dubbed "base load". So in short, wind absolutely is geared to satisfy "peak" capacity as it is simply not reliable enough to meet base load requirements.
From here, your rant seems to go full circle and support exactly what I'm saying....which brings me full circle - what the fuck is your point because you don't seem to have one at all...
Power generation is broken into two basic categories; base and peak. Wind and solar are both geared to address peak. Wind is never intended to be base load, so what is your point?
Furthermore, power generation from wind improvements now allow for peak generation over a much larger variation of wind as well as higher efficiency (less loss) for the power which is generated. As I understand it, your 30% is far too low now. IIRC, its somewhere in the 40+% range now.
There is no need. The people who drive poorly already pay more for their insurance because of reality. In other words, of the people who pay higher rates, a subset of them are likely those who have the gene variant. Genetic testing is not required. They are already covered by existing rates.
Although it is early days yet, the concept that you own your data may be what sets this apart from Google Wave.
Whoever wrote that part is either dumber than a bag of hammers or is purposely attempting to confuse and mislead people with misinformation. Wave is a protocol, not an application. One of the purposes of Wave is to provide a reference implementation (what everyone has been testing) such that others are free to either run the reference implementation, some variation thereof, or create their own server (via publicly available documentation) such that they can run their own servers and maintain ALL DATA INTERNALLY. Even the video purposely makes it clear you can run as many Wave servers as you like and NEVER HAVE YOUR DATA EXPOSED OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN COMPANY.
The Wave protocol is built from the ground up such that everyone is free to own as much or as little of their data as they desire. Period. Anyone who says otherwise is full of bullshit.
It also means that each phone can be tied to a particular US provider, probably with certain non-profitable features disabled
People keep saying this but there hasn't even been a hint this is even remotely close to reality. The reality is, with so many phones on so many carriers, gimping a phone means pushing sales to your competition. Even Verizon has publicly stated then will not be gimping their Android phones. This means carriers are forced to compete based on hardware features and value added applications and services.
Until there is at least a hint that carriers intend to screw over their users with these phones, statements like this only serve to provide misinformation and scaremonger.
I don't think its necessarily "supported" but you may be able to get code in place via the gcc pragma and stuff.
Because it doesn't require my instantaneous attention and I get to control when I reply.
The same is also true for Wave, which is why the constant wave of anti-Wave articles are nothing but complete bullshit from ignorant masses of end users who got excited about a developer's technology and release, which in turn underscores the authors have no clue what the hell Wave is in the first place. Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge, no one at Google has claimed Wave is the death of email which further underscores how much anti-Google fanaticism is behind these types of absolute bullshit articles. It is true, however, Wave is capable of both usurping and even co-existing with email as we know it today, in many, many capacities. It is a competing technology.
Furthermore, Wave's big claim to fame is improved collaboration. From the demos, its rather obvious it does, in fact, deliver. Anyone who has ever attempted to use email as a collaboration tool will absolutely stand up and tell you it sucks badly for serious collaboration. Wave hopes to address this while at the same time either usurping email in this capacity or extending the capabilities of email as a collaborative end product.
This means Wave is poised to address collaboration and email remains a simple tool for communication; where its even possible to make wave part of such email communication or the end work product of a wave as the email communication. Or, its also possible to use Wave as an email replacement altogether.
This constant stream of anti-Wave articles where its clear the author doesn't have even the basic understanding of what the heck Wave is, instantly qualifies one as a douche bag of the year candidate. I can't stress it enough...wave is a protocol not an application. Wait at least six months to see what form applications may take which truly showcase Wave's collaborate capabilities. In other words, now that its in the hands of developers, lets see what developers can make with it. Development takes time. Lets see what's out there in six months to two years. Declaring a tool dead before it can even be used is the height of ignorance and stupidity.
The fact Wave can be used as SMTP+IRC+IM pretty well supports Wave is a very powerful and enabling technology. The real wow factor is going to come when federations of Wave servers are running various services and they all magically work together, including you or your own private server. Unless someone can attack and invalidate the technology base, people only come off sounding like ignorant idiots with a anti-Google ax to grind.
I can't believe how many people have no idea what, "milestone", means.
Sounds exactly like a job I had... except the jump from task to task happened at least a half dozen times per day... and then I got dinged in review for not staying on task by the very same boss. Then when I informed the boss the reason I was not staying on task, he was shocked and horrified. The constant interruptions then dropped from a half dozen per day to two to three times per day where the new tasks took longer to perform; usually 1/2 - half the day and at his side, helping him with his own, self aggrandizing pet project. The next review the boss was absolutely sure his constant interruptions never happened, despite having been physically with him, and he could not understand where I was spending my time. Yep, got dinged again by the very same idiot. He couldn't understand where I had been spending my time - which was usually at his side...literally at his insistence and always after informing him tasks were suffering because of his insistence.
Meanwhile the rest of the office became jealous because they believed I was being shown favoritism and excused from the actual work product while having a grand 'ol time. After informing my co-workers of what was going on, I was then openly accused of lying. In reality, I was miserable and frustrated to no end...literally cringing every time my cell or office phone rang. Quiting that job was one of the happiest days of my life.
Even worse, the higher ups (Directors and CEO/CTO) thought the boss walked on water... I guess they took turns blowing each other...because reality was so far apart from perception.
Every time I watch the office, I'm always reminded of my experience of having worked with the smartest, incompetent idiots I've ever met in my life. So I can assure you Dilbert and the "Office" is very much alive in Corporate America. In my opinion, they are single handedly ruining American business.
Someone please mode this up!
The latest release of the NDK now officially allows OpenGL ES access from C/C++.
Last time I did the math, only a couple of months back, for T-Mobile (Android) vs AT&T (iPhone), the difference was $400 over the term (two years) of the contract. I consider that to be a big difference.
Well right now Android is still a techie's phone for the most part.
Unfortunately that is the perception despite the fact is hasn't been true with pretty much every phone post-G1. With phones like the Cliq and Hero, nothing could be farther from the truth.
Maybe Google needs to make it just a little harder to put apps on Android outside of the apps store.
Or they could provide copy protection like they promised developers they would. Thus far, they blatantly lied and everyone seems content to ignore it. Pirates sure are not in a hurry to complain. ;) Besides, locking the device down is only going to anger users and developers - ask would-be iPhone developers and users.
If Android becomes more mainstream I think more people will pirate but it will be a much lower percentage.
I sincerely hope you're right. Right now, piracy as a ratio, depending on the applications, is in the many thousands of percent higher than actual sales. That means for every actual sale, dozens if not hundreds of illegal copies are currently installed. If piracy ever reaches single or double digit percentiles, only then does Android as a platform stand a chance. Without commercial interest, I do not believe Android is sustainable in the long run.
Right now you can only get an Android phone in the US on the number 4 carrier. That should change very soon. Let us hope for the best since I want to write some 99 cent apps for it.
You're not alone there. But don't get your hopes up. I read a developer's account on IRC about after many months he finally had made enough to take his GF out to dinner.
On a brighter note, rumor has it at least one carrier is to allow carrier billing. If true, that one feature may do wonders to help turn the market around. Numbers I've read elsewhere suggest maybe as few as 20% of Android owners currently have a Google Checkout account. Right now, without a Google Checkout account, you can't buy anything. Even worse, Google's Checkout is fairly limited in its supported payment options...which is also supposedly an improvement to be announced right around the corner.
Sprints offers an unlimited plan for $70/mo in the US. The plan provides for unlimited text/data and something like 450 minutes plus nights and weekends. But real catch is, all calls to and from any other cell does not count against your minutes. For many, that's practically the same as unlimited call/data/text.
Generally speaking, Sprint + Android phone is pretty much impossible to beat anywhere else.
I haven't heard electronics being affected by a call in ages - only if I've been near some really _REALLY_ cheap electronics.
That's still only true on the cheapest of the cheap phones. Pragmatically, no such clicking exists, and its certainly not true for any of the Android phones.
Piracy will decrease with popularity.
Maybe, no proof one way or the other.
Most users will not take the time to root their phone anymore than they take the time to jail break.
On Android, rooting is not required to pirate applications. Rooting/jailbreaking is only required for the iPhone.
Why steal a .99 cent app when you can just buy it from the store. That is the real key to piracy make it not worth the effort.
Several recent studies indicate many are pirating because they feel entitled and because they feel they are not hurting anyone. Price is generally not a factor in the equation. If it were, piracy would practically not exist for Android and the iPhone. Unfortunately, many pirates wrongly assume that stealing applications does not injure the bottom line for small developers; if for no other reason that because multi-billion dollar corporations can weather piracy and survive. The reality is, its putting small developers out of business and preventing new developers from entering into the Android market. Those who are entering, are generally not relying on sales to make a profit. That means value added services, ad revenue, or both.
This is just an analyst's prediction though.
Its a prediction based on market trends compared to the iPhone. Android has matched the iPhone at each significant milestone, except in app sales. The iPhone established its trend in a booming economy. Android has matched it in a recession to borderline depression. Needless to say, once you factor in multiple carriers plus multiple hardware manufacturers, you really don't need any salt at all. Many are saying the writing is pretty clearly on the wall.
Hell, many of the new features provided in the 3GS (hardware and SDK) are thanks to Android putting pressure on Apple. There isn't an iPhone 3GS user that doesn't owe a heart felt thank you to Android.
It seems you only need salt if you choose to ignore what is right in front of your face - especially when you consider Android is a tiny market share but is already taking web (ad revenue) share away from everyone, including the iPhone.
1. Apps. Android needs more developers for more apps. With more android phones hitting the market the developers will follow so will the apps.
Maybe. Piracy is killing developers on a massive scale. Even the most successful Android developers barely make enough to scrape by (~63.00/day for two top selling apps). Piracy for Android exists for many reasons. One often cited is pay apps are not available in many markets; so people pirate simply because its not otherwise available. Once people start pirating apps, it seems many don't reconsidering supporting their developers once pay apps are available in their market. Even after excusing the pirates where because pay apps are not available in their market, piracy is still killing the platform.
Without the ability to actual make money on Android, commercial developer interest in non-ad driven applications will continue lag. On the other hand, ad-driven apps continue to grow on the platform while continuing to piss off the user base. After all, people are tired of bloated apps and seeing ads all the time. Those users pissed off about plentiful ad driven apps, blame your local pirate, or even yourself for not purchasing more applications. Developers need your support!
Carriers. Android is going to be available in the US on T-Mobile, Sprint, Verizon, and probably AT&T soon. Unlocked phones are already available in the EU so Android is available on a lot more carriers.
All major us carriers will have a phone within the next six to eight months; with AT&T being the furtherest out. Within the next six months, Motorola alone should have ten Android offerings. Many other hardware manufacuturers are also jumping on the Android train. Both Garmin and Asus have both said they are dumping their other OSs and using Android. Most all carriers will have at least one Android offer. Several will have two or more. At least two will have three or more Android offerings within the next four months.
As for AT&T, don't get excited. It looks like they are working with Dell?!? to provide them an Android offering. Thus far, Dell's Android offering sucks to the extent, everyone but a carrier in China has passed. Unless Dell makes huge hardware improvements, AT&T will not offer an Android phone worth talking about.
Long story short, if you want good Android applications, us users need to support our developers by purchasing their applications. Of course, it doesn't hurt to kick your local pirate in the nuts for causing a long list of problems in the first place. Remember, purchased applications are supported applications. Applications which are supported are those which receive continued development.
One last note about piracy. If you have a pirated application on your phone right now, by keeping it installed you are assigning value to that application. By taking something of value to which you have no right, you are stealing. You are a thief, hurting the application's developer and damaging the platform as a whole. You can easily address the situation by simply purchasing the applications which you have installed. Go support your developers and the platform. Stop stealing.
has patented a way to apply force to a car's wheels from an electric motor or internal combustion engine.
So anyone who has ever down shifted and allowed engine braking is in violation of their patent! The patent office is useless and completely broken. Will they ever stop granting completely fucking obvious patents?!?!