There was even an article on it previously on Slashdot, but I can't be bothered to look it up
Here is that Slashdot story. It was developed by TDK. Here's a quote...
In one of the most convincing technology demonstrations this reporter has witnessed, I was handed a CD, a wire-wool pan scourer and some permanent marker pens, and invited to scratch or mark the discs. Hard as I tried, I could not make a single mark on the disc with the scourer. And the ink simply wiped off.
The day SCO is finally obliterated will be one serious celebration here on Slashdot. All around the world. Like friggin' New Years, complete with the dreadful hangover the next day. Should we come up with a name for it already? "NetCraft Confirms SCO is Dead Day"? You know, so we can all greet each other with a phrase like "Happy SCO is Dead Day" or "Happy GNU Years"? Help me out here.
and still 98% of their profits are from one source...so yes if that one source changes or goes away, Google will too.
Are you speaking of advertising revenue? I don't think that would likely disappear, given that the vast majority of broadcast and print media companies have run on that same business model since their inceptions. And if that business model does change, it looks like Google would be at the forefront with services like Froogle. There's also their search appliances.
And how is it they live in such a delusional world in which they are the only company with the only "worthwhile" products?
And how is it they live in such a delusional world that they would host a convention and introduce their CEO using Gloria Estefan's "Get On Your Feet" as background music? What PR firm came up with that bright idea? You'd think their deep pockets would get them top-notch PR, and not the kind that should come with a barf bag.
I never even try other search engines because google finds what i need right away.
google has a clean interface...
I'm actually really surprised how well Google does that. Every time I search for something like a shareware title that has a common-sounding name, for example SuperDuper, the first result is almost always what I'm looking for. I know their software does things like rank pages according to how many other pages link to it, but I would think that in some cases some other pages might still manage to outrank the actual one I'm looking for. I don't know how they do that, especially with all those keyword-filled porn pages that used to flood search engine results in the past. Filtering out those pages is a great accomplishment in itself, because the porn industry always managed to test the limits of the internet and find every loophole to get you to see an ad.
And their interface is deceptively clean. There must be some really complicated programming continuously going on to keep up with the rapidly changing state of the internet, and it isn't a "one-hit wonder". If compared to music, it would be more akin to continuously making new chart-topping music, rather than just having gained brand name recognition from doing it just once. Microsoft never really struck me as a company that had excellent software development as part of their corporate culture, so Google is just going to be running circles around them in that respect.
Combine them and make them better than the sum of their parts and I'll happily give up my iPod.
I saw a friend use a new Nokia phone that surprisingly enough used only a scroll wheel for the interface. It didn't have any numbered buttons, just the "Navi spinner" which is the name for their scroll wheel. It wasn't even a touch-sensitive surface and actually rotated mechanically, like the first generation of iPods.
If this interface is actually being applied to mobile phones, then there is no reason a newer generation of iPods can't have built-in mobile phone functionality with just a little hardware modification and very slight alterations to their outward appearance. The design can be simply altered to have an innocuous earpiece added to the top and a microphone on the bottom, and it would be nearly indistinguishable from current iPod models. Headphones can double as hands-free kits as well, or bluetooth headsets could be used. iPods already have displays and address books like mobile phones.
I'm assuming from the other posts that the unethical journalist you're referring to Maureen O'Gara. I'm still confused though- is this her or is this her? And don't say the ugly one, because that doesn't help.
Similar software on each computer that receives the query would then check the message against its own spam database, and so on, until a match is found, or the message is deemed original.
Spammers can ranodomly generate content for their spam to bypass this. Have the actual spam message text as a JPEG image followed by random, gibberish text in both the same background and foreground colour so it is invisible. If the system looks for messages that are identical by comparing the text, then spam messages would appear different from the computer's point of view.
This will just be an ongoing thing. Spammers will figure a way around this, then people will get on to what the spammers are doing and fix things so they block the spam again (like filter out text with the same foreground and background, compare JPEGs), but then the spammers come up with new methods... Besides, it seems like in order to compare emails, it will have to distribute more, so this method will cause Spam to take up even more network traffic.
I think a real simple solution would be to have an email client allow only emails from addresses in the address book or from websites that have been bookmarked. Other emails should be kept separate and dealt with as potential spam.
Try it with other words, and it takes a second to even recognize what the word is (reading them aloud is cheating, unless you stress the 'i'): iDea, iRate, iCicle, iAmbic.
I vaguely recall hearing years ago about how holographic storage was being developed in the form of cubes or something. I presume it meant being able to store information in three dimensions rather than on a two-dimensional flat surface somehow, without any moving parts. I can also recall that optical processors were being developed that used light rather than electricity, which allegedly would have made them much faster. I've always thought that technology was going to develop to the point that computers could eventually be entirely optical, with optical processors and holographic storage - with no moving parts or electricity for those parts of the computer, except perhaps for the light source.
Really, the only display tech that really blew me away used dual rear projectors that fed back into one another to achieve alignment, then emitted polarized light onto a single screen. With very light and simple glasses, the effect was utterly seamless.
I vaguely remember the spinning display approach also worked.
I found some info on the web about 3D projectors for use with polarised glasses as well as a spinning display a while back. Are these the ones you are talking about? This website has a lot of information about 3D displays and technology if you're interested.
Imagine layering a room with this, and getting images on all 6 sides
It's not exactly what you describe, but there's the VT-CAVE. It needs LCD shutter glasses and displays on the front, right, and left walls, and on the floor.
I''ve been trying to find out if it is possible to get the Sharp Actius AL3DU laptop to run 3DS Max in autostereo mode together with a plugin for a 3D haptic input device called the SensAble PHANTOM Omni. It also might be cool to add the 3Dconnexion SpacePilot input device for navigation.
I think this would be the ultimate interface for 3D design. Has anyone had any experience with this? I've been emailing all the companies involved and have gotten responses saying that there are problems with this setup. I'd like to try it out on my own, but putting it together would cost a fortune and I don't want to blow all that cash just to find out it doesn't work.
Anybody know how things like the NASDAQ building were made? I was wondering if people were out there actually making their own large RGB LED displays from scratch. And I was also wondering if there were any LEDs out there that were something like tiles that contained an array of multiple LEDs in the same plastic bit.
Re:Not that bold, ask a creationist!
on
Mapping the Mind
·
· Score: 1
I think cosmology was regarded as nearly being pseudo-science because its scope was too broad, with too many different theories, until the mapping of discrete variations in cosmic microwave background radiation in the past few years. The Big Crunch was still a viable theory up until as recently as 2002. I was amazed that scientific evidence was found to disprove it, because when I was a student, I was under the impression that it was considered to be the most popular theory regarding the direction of universal expansion.
Here is a link to some information covered by a Nova documentary of Ramachandran's work. I saw the doco and found it really interesting. The case studies give summaries about what it covered. I was particularly interested in the one in which Ramachandran simply used a mirror in a box to get rid of the phantom limb pain a subject was experiencing. It gives an interesting insight into the connection between body and mind, because in this instance, it was just the visual image of the person's missing limb that somehow provided some neurological feedback that affected the physical sensation of that missing limb.
Slashdot Mirror
So, I reiterate...exactly what crap am I being forced to run in my XP system that could be removed?
Windows XP.
There was even an article on it previously on Slashdot, but I can't be bothered to look it up
Here is that Slashdot story. It was developed by TDK. Here's a quote...The day SCO is finally obliterated will be one serious celebration here on Slashdot. All around the world. Like friggin' New Years, complete with the dreadful hangover the next day. Should we come up with a name for it already? "NetCraft Confirms SCO is Dead Day"? You know, so we can all greet each other with a phrase like "Happy SCO is Dead Day" or "Happy GNU Years"? Help me out here.
Google dead in 5 years? Did NetCraft confirm this?
and still 98% of their profits are from one source...so yes if that one source changes or goes away, Google will too.
Are you speaking of advertising revenue? I don't think that would likely disappear, given that the vast majority of broadcast and print media companies have run on that same business model since their inceptions. And if that business model does change, it looks like Google would be at the forefront with services like Froogle. There's also their search appliances.
And how is it they live in such a delusional world in which they are the only company with the only "worthwhile" products?
And how is it they live in such a delusional world that they would host a convention and introduce their CEO using Gloria Estefan's "Get On Your Feet" as background music? What PR firm came up with that bright idea? You'd think their deep pockets would get them top-notch PR, and not the kind that should come with a barf bag.
I never even try other search engines because google finds what i need right away.
google has a clean interface...
I'm actually really surprised how well Google does that. Every time I search for something like a shareware title that has a common-sounding name, for example SuperDuper, the first result is almost always what I'm looking for. I know their software does things like rank pages according to how many other pages link to it, but I would think that in some cases some other pages might still manage to outrank the actual one I'm looking for. I don't know how they do that, especially with all those keyword-filled porn pages that used to flood search engine results in the past. Filtering out those pages is a great accomplishment in itself, because the porn industry always managed to test the limits of the internet and find every loophole to get you to see an ad.
And their interface is deceptively clean. There must be some really complicated programming continuously going on to keep up with the rapidly changing state of the internet, and it isn't a "one-hit wonder". If compared to music, it would be more akin to continuously making new chart-topping music, rather than just having gained brand name recognition from doing it just once. Microsoft never really struck me as a company that had excellent software development as part of their corporate culture, so Google is just going to be running circles around them in that respect.
Combine them and make them better than the sum of their parts and I'll happily give up my iPod.
I saw a friend use a new Nokia phone that surprisingly enough used only a scroll wheel for the interface. It didn't have any numbered buttons, just the "Navi spinner" which is the name for their scroll wheel. It wasn't even a touch-sensitive surface and actually rotated mechanically, like the first generation of iPods.
If this interface is actually being applied to mobile phones, then there is no reason a newer generation of iPods can't have built-in mobile phone functionality with just a little hardware modification and very slight alterations to their outward appearance. The design can be simply altered to have an innocuous earpiece added to the top and a microphone on the bottom, and it would be nearly indistinguishable from current iPod models. Headphones can double as hands-free kits as well, or bluetooth headsets could be used. iPods already have displays and address books like mobile phones.
As has been pointed out, cows would have been the better choice.
You mean like this?
I'm assuming from the other posts that the unethical journalist you're referring to Maureen O'Gara. I'm still confused though- is this her or is this her? And don't say the ugly one, because that doesn't help.
... a noble spirit embiggens the smallest man
Spammers can ranodomly generate content for their spam to bypass this. Have the actual spam message text as a JPEG image followed by random, gibberish text in both the same background and foreground colour so it is invisible. If the system looks for messages that are identical by comparing the text, then spam messages would appear different from the computer's point of view.
This will just be an ongoing thing. Spammers will figure a way around this, then people will get on to what the spammers are doing and fix things so they block the spam again (like filter out text with the same foreground and background, compare JPEGs), but then the spammers come up with new methods... Besides, it seems like in order to compare emails, it will have to distribute more, so this method will cause Spam to take up even more network traffic.
I think a real simple solution would be to have an email client allow only emails from addresses in the address book or from websites that have been bookmarked. Other emails should be kept separate and dealt with as potential spam.
Try it with other words, and it takes a second to even recognize what the word is (reading them aloud is cheating, unless you stress the 'i'): iDea, iRate, iCicle, iAmbic.
iHole.
As one poster pointed out, it is a reference to Sienfeld, crabby.
Shrinkage.
I vaguely recall hearing years ago about how holographic storage was being developed in the form of cubes or something. I presume it meant being able to store information in three dimensions rather than on a two-dimensional flat surface somehow, without any moving parts. I can also recall that optical processors were being developed that used light rather than electricity, which allegedly would have made them much faster. I've always thought that technology was going to develop to the point that computers could eventually be entirely optical, with optical processors and holographic storage - with no moving parts or electricity for those parts of the computer, except perhaps for the light source.
Really, the only display tech that really blew me away used dual rear projectors that fed back into one another to achieve alignment, then emitted polarized light onto a single screen. With very light and simple glasses, the effect was utterly seamless.
I vaguely remember the spinning display approach also worked.
I found some info on the web about 3D projectors for use with polarised glasses as well as a spinning display a while back. Are these the ones you are talking about? This website has a lot of information about 3D displays and technology if you're interested.
If you like panoramic displays, check out the products from Elumens and Panoram Technologies.
You think that's annoying- what about clippy in 3D?
Imagine layering a room with this, and getting images on all 6 sides
It's not exactly what you describe, but there's the VT-CAVE. It needs LCD shutter glasses and displays on the front, right, and left walls, and on the floor.
I''ve been trying to find out if it is possible to get the Sharp Actius AL3DU laptop to run 3DS Max in autostereo mode together with a plugin for a 3D haptic input device called the SensAble PHANTOM Omni. It also might be cool to add the 3Dconnexion SpacePilot input device for navigation.
I think this would be the ultimate interface for 3D design. Has anyone had any experience with this? I've been emailing all the companies involved and have gotten responses saying that there are problems with this setup. I'd like to try it out on my own, but putting it together would cost a fortune and I don't want to blow all that cash just to find out it doesn't work.
Anybody know how things like the NASDAQ building were made? I was wondering if people were out there actually making their own large RGB LED displays from scratch. And I was also wondering if there were any LEDs out there that were something like tiles that contained an array of multiple LEDs in the same plastic bit.
I think cosmology was regarded as nearly being pseudo-science because its scope was too broad, with too many different theories, until the mapping of discrete variations in cosmic microwave background radiation in the past few years. The Big Crunch was still a viable theory up until as recently as 2002. I was amazed that scientific evidence was found to disprove it, because when I was a student, I was under the impression that it was considered to be the most popular theory regarding the direction of universal expansion.
Here is a link to some information covered by a Nova documentary of Ramachandran's work. I saw the doco and found it really interesting. The case studies give summaries about what it covered. I was particularly interested in the one in which Ramachandran simply used a mirror in a box to get rid of the phantom limb pain a subject was experiencing. It gives an interesting insight into the connection between body and mind, because in this instance, it was just the visual image of the person's missing limb that somehow provided some neurological feedback that affected the physical sensation of that missing limb.
Yes, but if someone has gay sex in a forest and there's no one there to hear it, does that make them gay?