I'm not trying to defend Conroy or anything here (I dislike him, his policies and the way he acts politically as much as any sensible Australian nerd with a love of uncensored internet), but are you actually trying to imply that Conroy had something to do with iinet being sued by film companies? p
The whole "If you don't see this at the theatres now, you won't be able to rent/buy it for another six+ months, and by that time some jackass will have told you that Bruce Willis' character was dead" thing kind of keeps people going...
I don't think they'll be all that concerned. It sounds like Microsoft have found a way to make wireless sharing almost more useless to the average user.
The bigger problem, though, is the draconian copy protection on beamed music (though not photos). You can play a transmitted song only three times, all within three days. After that, it expires. You're left with only a text tag that shows up on your PC so that -- how convenient! -- you can buy the song from Microsoft's store.
The article goes on to say that this happens even with files of your own creation. I.e. You record a song and want to share it around, and then everyone who gets it can have three whole (or partial) listens before its wiped. That sounds nigh on useless to me, and pretty much removes any incentive I had to get a wireless equipped player.
I can understand that they need to protect the copyrights of the songs they sell, but wiping songs for which the user (presumably) owns the copyright is going annoy many people. And it really does make the wireless aspect of the device close to worthless (at least in my opinion).
To play devil's advocate to myself though, if they did allow unrestricted sharing of mp3s (even ones they didn't sell) then it would only be a matter of time before they got sued to hell and back by the RIAA et al.
I think that the more people we have in the software industry with CS degrees, the better. I guess I had better qualify this with the statement that I have no real idea what CS degrees these days are like, I got mine back in '93. There was only 1 software engineering class, the rest was math, hardware/circuits, or programming. I hope that these days they have added more to the curriculum that deals with the process of developing software.
In answer to your implied question...
I did a bachelor of engineering in software engineering (finished last year), and I found that a significant portion of the degree was focused on the various processes of software development, including things such as project management (as well as a significant amount of mathematics, electrical engineering, programming and computer science subjects).
The Comp Sci students I know did a fair amount the software process work also, though somewhat less, and less project management, though this is probably a function of the fact that their degree is a year shorter, and has more electives (they could do some of the extra software process & management subjects the software eng students did as electives).
I also read the article (and the accompanying pdf of reference notes), and I picked up on something you apparently did not.
Your claim & evidence that the medieval warming period that the medieval warming period has been debunked ignores the fact that a large portion of the article discusses why claim that there is no medieval warming period are, apparently, wrong.
Your source (the noaa.gov site) claims:
For example, Mann et al. (1999) generated a 1,000 year Northern Hemisphere temperature reconstruction (shown above) using data from multiple ice cores and tree ring records. This reconstruction suggests that the 1998 annual average temperature was more than two standard deviations warmer than any annual average temperature value since AD 1,000 (shown in yellow)
The study by Mann et al. is discussed in the article and accompanying references, and indeed the large part of this points out why this study is flawed, and the UN's use of the study is flawed:
The UN's 2001 graph, variously known as the "hockey-stick" or "foxtail" or "J-curve", had first
appeared in Nature (Mann et al., 1998) and, the following year, in Geophysical Review Letters (Mann
et al., 1999). After its appearance in the UN's 2001 report, McIntyre et al. (2003, 2005) demonstrated
that the erasure of the mediaeval warm period in the 2001 graph had been caused by inappropriate data
selection and incorrect use of statistical methods.
The first mistake made by Mann et al. and copied by the UN in 2001 lay in the choice of proxy data.
The UN's 1996 report had recommended against reliance upon bristlecone pines as proxies for
reconstructing temperature, because 20th-century carbon-dioxide fertilization accelerated annual growth
and caused a false appearance of exceptional recent warming. Notwithstanding the warning against
reliance upon bristlecones in UN 1996, Mann et al. had relied chiefly upon a series of bristlecone-pine
datasets for their reconstruction of mediaeval temperatures. Worse, their statistical model had given the
bristlecone-pine datasets 390 times more prominence than the other datasets they had used
I don't know what the truth of the whole issue is, but simply claiming 'They're wrong we're right, I totally read the article' without actually paying attention to the articles claims doesn't seem to be a smart way of arguing it. A large portion of the accompanying pdf, and the article itself discusses why Mann's calculations are wrong, so your claim that the article is wrong because the medieval warming period didn't occur because Mann says it didn't occur demonstrates either a poor reading of the article, or an unwillingness to pay attention to the claims you disagree with.
On the topic of functioning extensions, I use a few, and they've all updated themselves and are functioning perfectly.
For those intereseted (I'm guessing none of you), they are: Ablock, Adblock Filterset.G Updater, All-in-One-Gestures, DownloadThemAll!,ForecastFox,IE Tab, and Web Developer (toolbar).
Also, since the http://www.mozilla.com/ is linking to the 2.0 downloads it seems safe to assume this is the official release.
I wish such companies would do so, but it's no defence for Apple.
Sure, the other companies intend to spread the malware, whereas Apple did not intend to spread the virus, but the other companies don't try and defend their actions by saying 'its not our fault, blame Microsoft for letting us do it' which is what Apple appears to be doing.
If apple are going to make products for use with windows, then it is their responsibility to ensure that those products don't contain virii for windows systems. Suggesting that the virus being present in their product that they're shipping (regardless of the susceptibility of Windows to that virus) is the fault of Microsoft is passing the buck in a most horrible way.
The simple fact is that they choose to make their device work with Microsoft Windows systems, and they are damned sure responsible for ensuring that their device will not cause problems with those systems, regardless of the flaws or vulnerabilities of Microsoft systems.
I quite like Mac hardware and software, and have previously been glad that they may be gaining market share, but frankly if they are going to continue to market themselves by making stabs at Microsoft (and no I'm not suggesting the virus was placed intentionally), rather than by marketing their products' strengths and features, I'm not so sure I will continue to feel the same way.
If you're just looking to print the letter, you can use GSView http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/ to nicely avoid the print restrictions you find in acrobate etc. (or at least the windows version of GSView does in my experience).
Not voting in Australia results in a monetary fine.
I fully support compulsory voting, because I believe it encourages some people to be more aware of the relevant issues around election time (though obviously if someone wants to be ignorant you can't force them not to be), and it reduces (not eliminates) the power of highly dedicated groups being able to sway elections too easily (i.e. there is no risk of a party or group who ordinarily wouldn't show up to vote, all showing up and voting a specific way because they're all pissed off about one issue). That said, Australian politicians still pander to such groups to a degree because one group pissed off about an issue can still vote in a coordinated manner, but I *think* its less an issue than in the US, since more people vote, including those on both sides of the issue, rather than just those who stand to suffer negative consequences.
The main criticism of compulsory voting here is that people who don't have an interest in voting will just tick random boxes, or fill out their voting form incorrectly so their vote doesn't get counted (You only get fined for not turning up, as long as you show and take a form, you don't get fined).
Arguments about wether referring to the competitions for market share in this multitude of software based industries aside, this image is an interesting (and mildly funny) way of showing the sheer number of software 'pies' Microsoft has its numerous fingers in.
The image highlights very effectively the way in which Microsoft's 'Empire' like status (and yes, its business practices) has placed it in direct and indirect competition with so much of the technological marketplace.
Can you imagine the result if one of the growing number of text messaging spammers got ahold of the number for your chandelier?
You would be sitting at dinner with the lights beeping every 20 seconds and messages showing up saying
Natural herb increases size by 50-100%
Drunk high school girls waiting for you at badpornsite.com
I'm thinking I'll take a pass on the text messaging enabled chandelier.
At the very least it is an interesting idea, and the fact that it is being done by someone who (one would assume) knows their way the engine they are using, and who has the experience of being involved in the making of a very successful games means that the project should have a fair bit of potential.
Personally I am excited to see him trying a development process that is, if not entirely new, new to the games industry. I look forward to seeing what the game they come out with is like.
The way it's supposed to be? Gaming on PC because of the constant flow of technology? Sorry but that sounds very elitist to me.
I choose to game on PC simply because historically PC's have provided different styles of games to what is available on the console market. This may or may not be changing in the current day and age (whether it is changing is a completely separate argument), but the fact is that a number of games becoming available that I myself enjoy playing are only available on PC. Also, many of the games that I enjoy playing that are available on console and PC are (in my opinion) better interfaced (ie: the keyboard mouse, as opposed to the controller) and more playable on PC.
If you yourself choose to play games on PC because it allows you to feel as if you are using constantly changing up to date technology then good for you, but suggesting that the main reason people play games is so that can utilise the latest technology is, at least in my opinion, outright wrong.
I hope the games developers don't start to think life you, else PC gaming is going to become both less accessible, and less worthwhile. In some ways I think this might be a failing hope, because as this article points out games being released nowadays are forcing people to spend several hundred dollars on a new video card, simply so they can play a game with the latest DirectX 9 features.
With people thinking like this I am honestly worried about the future of PC gaming.
Back onto the topic of the creators not being willing to test it because of the damage it might cause, does anyone else think that this essentially means they have (at least partially) wasted the production of the car?
Surely they can do a test under safe conditions (eg: on the Utah Salt flats as was suggested previously, with some form of automated or remote braking system added)
It just seems an incredible waste to construct this car, and not test it and thus miss out on any of the numerous applications it could be used in.
That is a fairly interesting way of doing it, but it could cause a fair few continuity issues (eg: If people don't answer these questions consistantly in the game, which of the possible endings will the game rely on?)
Also, it could result in the game having little to do with the previous games story line, because main events in the game will not be able to rely on events from the past game (unless the whole storyline of the game were to change based on the answers you give).
It will be interesting to see how they implement this.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not trying to defend Conroy or anything here (I dislike him, his policies and the way he acts politically as much as any sensible Australian nerd with a love of uncensored internet), but are you actually trying to imply that Conroy had something to do with iinet being sued by film companies? p
We actually had Howard for a few years before Bush showed up on the scene. John Howard was Prime Minister from 1996.
Coincidentally it's a topic I wish you'd never discussed on Slashdot. Ever.
This discussion and esepcially the parent comments remind me of the poem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...:
When the Nazis came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
He does actually use "mores" in a way that you're apparently unfamiliar with, a word which is synonymous with morals...
From http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mores/
mores -plural noun
"folkways of central importance accepted without question and embodying the fundamental moral views of a group."
mores pl.n.
1. The accepted traditional customs and usages of a particular social group.
2. Moral attitudes.
3. Manners; ways.
The whole "If you don't see this at the theatres now, you won't be able to rent/buy it for another six+ months, and by that time some jackass will have told you that Bruce Willis' character was dead" thing kind of keeps people going...
The article goes on to say that this happens even with files of your own creation. I.e. You record a song and want to share it around, and then everyone who gets it can have three whole (or partial) listens before its wiped. That sounds nigh on useless to me, and pretty much removes any incentive I had to get a wireless equipped player.
I can understand that they need to protect the copyrights of the songs they sell, but wiping songs for which the user (presumably) owns the copyright is going annoy many people. And it really does make the wireless aspect of the device close to worthless (at least in my opinion).
To play devil's advocate to myself though, if they did allow unrestricted sharing of mp3s (even ones they didn't sell) then it would only be a matter of time before they got sued to hell and back by the RIAA et al.
I did a bachelor of engineering in software engineering (finished last year), and I found that a significant portion of the degree was focused on the various processes of software development, including things such as project management (as well as a significant amount of mathematics, electrical engineering, programming and computer science subjects).
The Comp Sci students I know did a fair amount the software process work also, though somewhat less, and less project management, though this is probably a function of the fact that their degree is a year shorter, and has more electives (they could do some of the extra software process & management subjects the software eng students did as electives).
Your claim & evidence that the medieval warming period that the medieval warming period has been debunked ignores the fact that a large portion of the article discusses why claim that there is no medieval warming period are, apparently, wrong.
Your source (the noaa.gov site) claims: The study by Mann et al. is discussed in the article and accompanying references, and indeed the large part of this points out why this study is flawed, and the UN's use of the study is flawed: I don't know what the truth of the whole issue is, but simply claiming 'They're wrong we're right, I totally read the article' without actually paying attention to the articles claims doesn't seem to be a smart way of arguing it. A large portion of the accompanying pdf, and the article itself discusses why Mann's calculations are wrong, so your claim that the article is wrong because the medieval warming period didn't occur because Mann says it didn't occur demonstrates either a poor reading of the article, or an unwillingness to pay attention to the claims you disagree with.
On the topic of functioning extensions, I use a few, and they've all updated themselves and are functioning perfectly.
For those intereseted (I'm guessing none of you), they are: Ablock, Adblock Filterset.G Updater, All-in-One-Gestures, DownloadThemAll!,ForecastFox,IE Tab, and Web Developer (toolbar).
Also, since the http://www.mozilla.com/ is linking to the 2.0 downloads it seems safe to assume this is the official release.
I wish such companies would do so, but it's no defence for Apple.
Sure, the other companies intend to spread the malware, whereas Apple did not intend to spread the virus, but the other companies don't try and defend their actions by saying 'its not our fault, blame Microsoft for letting us do it' which is what Apple appears to be doing.
If apple are going to make products for use with windows, then it is their responsibility to ensure that those products don't contain virii for windows systems. Suggesting that the virus being present in their product that they're shipping (regardless of the susceptibility of Windows to that virus) is the fault of Microsoft is passing the buck in a most horrible way.
The simple fact is that they choose to make their device work with Microsoft Windows systems, and they are damned sure responsible for ensuring that their device will not cause problems with those systems, regardless of the flaws or vulnerabilities of Microsoft systems.
I quite like Mac hardware and software, and have previously been glad that they may be gaining market share, but frankly if they are going to continue to market themselves by making stabs at Microsoft (and no I'm not suggesting the virus was placed intentionally), rather than by marketing their products' strengths and features, I'm not so sure I will continue to feel the same way.
If you're just looking to print the letter, you can use GSView http://www.cs.wisc.edu/~ghost/ to nicely avoid the print restrictions you find in acrobate etc. (or at least the windows version of GSView does in my experience).
Not voting in Australia results in a monetary fine.
I fully support compulsory voting, because I believe it encourages some people to be more aware of the relevant issues around election time (though obviously if someone wants to be ignorant you can't force them not to be), and it reduces (not eliminates) the power of highly dedicated groups being able to sway elections too easily (i.e. there is no risk of a party or group who ordinarily wouldn't show up to vote, all showing up and voting a specific way because they're all pissed off about one issue). That said, Australian politicians still pander to such groups to a degree because one group pissed off about an issue can still vote in a coordinated manner, but I *think* its less an issue than in the US, since more people vote, including those on both sides of the issue, rather than just those who stand to suffer negative consequences.
The main criticism of compulsory voting here is that people who don't have an interest in voting will just tick random boxes, or fill out their voting form incorrectly so their vote doesn't get counted (You only get fined for not turning up, as long as you show and take a form, you don't get fined).
Arguments about wether referring to the competitions for market share in this multitude of software based industries aside, this image is an interesting (and mildly funny) way of showing the sheer number of software 'pies' Microsoft has its numerous fingers in. The image highlights very effectively the way in which Microsoft's 'Empire' like status (and yes, its business practices) has placed it in direct and indirect competition with so much of the technological marketplace.
Can you imagine the result if one of the growing number of text messaging spammers got ahold of the number for your chandelier?
You would be sitting at dinner with the lights beeping every 20 seconds and messages showing up saying
Natural herb increases size by 50-100%
Drunk high school girls waiting for you at badpornsite.com
I'm thinking I'll take a pass on the text messaging enabled chandelier.
At the very least it is an interesting idea, and the fact that it is being done by someone who (one would assume) knows their way the engine they are using, and who has the experience of being involved in the making of a very successful games means that the project should have a fair bit of potential.
Personally I am excited to see him trying a development process that is, if not entirely new, new to the games industry.
I look forward to seeing what the game they come out with is like.
The way it's supposed to be? Gaming on PC because of the constant flow of technology? Sorry but that sounds very elitist to me.
I choose to game on PC simply because historically PC's have provided different styles of games to what is available on the console market. This may or may not be changing in the current day and age (whether it is changing is a completely separate argument), but the fact is that a number of games becoming available that I myself enjoy playing are only available on PC.
Also, many of the games that I enjoy playing that are available on console and PC are (in my opinion) better interfaced (ie: the keyboard mouse, as opposed to the controller) and more playable on PC.
If you yourself choose to play games on PC because it allows you to feel as if you are using constantly changing up to date technology then good for you, but suggesting that the main reason people play games is so that can utilise the latest technology is, at least in my opinion, outright wrong.
I hope the games developers don't start to think life you, else PC gaming is going to become both less accessible, and less worthwhile. In some ways I think this might be a failing hope, because as this article points out games being released nowadays are forcing people to spend several hundred dollars on a new video card, simply so they can play a game with the latest DirectX 9 features.
With people thinking like this I am honestly worried about the future of PC gaming.
Back onto the topic of the creators not being willing to test it because of the damage it might cause, does anyone else think that this essentially means they have (at least partially) wasted the production of the car?
Surely they can do a test under safe conditions (eg: on the Utah Salt flats as was suggested previously, with some form of automated or remote braking system added)
It just seems an incredible waste to construct this car, and not test it and thus miss out on any of the numerous applications it could be used in.
That is a fairly interesting way of doing it, but it could cause a fair few continuity issues (eg: If people don't answer these questions consistantly in the game, which of the possible endings will the game rely on?)
Also, it could result in the game having little to do with the previous games story line, because main events in the game will not be able to rely on events from the past game (unless the whole storyline of the game were to change based on the answers you give).
It will be interesting to see how they implement this.