actually Microsoft bought IE from Spyglass for a price that included a portion of the money they'd make selling it. Then gave it away free, so the revenue share that went to Spyglass was nothing
I don't think that Palm is necessarily in the right here, but why on earth would the fact that Palm has leached onto iTunes mean that Apple has to publish and maintain a plug-in API? There's a difference between someone making assumptions about your software and then later versions of your software break the integration, and deliberately breaking it just so that the integration fails. I don't think Palm has the right to demand that iTunes make changes or publish APIs that make their job easier, but deliberately black-flagging Pre devices and making the synch fail is completely different.
The summary is very misleading, all Palm did was state in a letter that they planned to use the Apple's Vendor ID in order to synch. It doesn't appear that they've actually done it yet.
$700,000 is way, way, way more than sufficient to pay someone to block the Remotely Anywhere port on their network firewall, it's over a thousand times the sufficient amount actually.
that's too bad, I was kind of looking forward to the movie of "Slashdot and the Magical Ponies" due out next year. I hear they were going to have singing CowboyNeals
I would have considered it harsh if BellKor had been in the lead for most all of the multi-year contest and then suddenly lost in the final 20 minutes. But even if that happened I'm not sure that I would be clammoring for them to give out two prizes. It'd be nice of them to do that, since they got a lot of value out of all the teams. But that was true regardless of the 20 minute margin, and everyone knew there was no second million dollar prize from day 1. On the bright side, I'm sure even the second place contestant can make some money licensing their algorithm to Blockbuster.
True, except that rejections to homosexual advances can often take the shape of violence, which is probably a little more hurtful than "No, I don't like you"
Unfortunately political parties in America have become more of a tool for politicians to acquire a block of votes by picking a team, than for voters to get their voice heard by backing people that support their views on issues. All of the compromise is being done by the voters looking for the candidate that is closest to their ideal, and none by the elected officials looking to represent the viewpoints of their constituency or the "right thing to do" ethically. Too many people will back the members of their party no matter what the issue is, and too many media outlets feel that airing the viewpoint from each party on an issue is more important than reporting on the issue and its impact.
I think you're confusing Democrat voters with Democrat lawmakers. Most of the lawmakers from both parties have been on-board the Patriot Act train from day 1. It's the Democrat [and Libertarian] voters that haven't been happy with it. The reason Democrat voters haven't held their own candidates to the fire is because you can't vote with your feet if the other candidate supports it too. We live in a sound-bite era, and "____ wants terrorists to escape capture and blow up your grandmother" has more resonance than "____ wants the government to be able to listen to your phone calls without a warrant"
sales tax and income tax are used to pay for things completely unrelated to commerce and industry, why is it true that road repair must necessarily only be paid for by something that's tied to auto fuel?
the point is not to magically return your kindle, the point is to remove all incentive to steal a Kindle
The real issue is probably that Amazon doesn't want to get in the middle of disputes between people who resell a Kindle and the buyers. After all what's to stop someone from reporting their Kindle "stolen" if they decide later that the person who bought it from them should have paid them more money. They want a police officer to be involved to cover that end, and they'll take action if the police officer decides the case has merit.
It's either people acting dumber than they are to get on TV, or TV producers selectively sampling dumb people and showing just those. Either way it's not an honest depiction of asking questions to random people on the street. But hey, it doesn't cost much for them to make, and people still watch it...so welcome to the reality TV age. They used to have to hand out $25,000 prizes to whoever is the smartest person on the show, now they can hand out nothing to whoever is dumbest.
The tests in TFA aren't multitasking either. In all but one test described in the article there is only one set of instructions (and the single exception was just a task with two switched modes), meaning that the users were asked to do one single thing and ignore everything else going on around them. That's not a test of multitasking, it's a test of concentration which is the exact opposite way of doing things and probably the biggest casualty of a multi-tasking lifestyle.
There's actually a page in Facebook where you can control what apps that someone else has installed can see about you (go to Settings -> Privacy Settings -> Applications):
When a friend of yours allows an application to access their information, that application may also access any information about you that your friend can already see. Learn more.
...
You can use the controls on this page to limit what types of information your friends can see about you through applications. Please note that this is only for applications you do not use yourself:
What I don't like is that there is no way to control what apps that you install can see until after you've installed them (and they've presumably had that one opportunity to grab everything). You basically have to allow them to see everything and then can lock things down later?
it reminds me more of the hype around Polar Express "making live actors extraneous." I think that movie made money, but it wasn't exactly game changing
There are multiple sides to every story and I'm fairly certain that in this day and age there would be a lot of outrage to see extraterrestrials being treated this way.
Lots of people would be outraged, but most of them wouldn't know about it or at least how bad it is. They'd probably send donations to fix the problem, and those donations would end up used for something else. A lot more people wouldn't care because "it's over there, and I'm over here." The aliens in District 9 were treated better than the people in some parts of Africa today, and we're not exactly shipping our army to Darfur or the DRC to straighten that all out. Heck, we didn't even do such a good job straightening the New Orleans mess in our own backyard
so do your neighborly duty and any time you see a parking enforcement person walking towards someone else's car, yell "I'm at the pay station!" even though you took the train downtown
unfortunately they never had an intergalactic Ralph Nader (therefore no "Unsafe at Hyperspeed"), and all the space ship manufacturers are colluding to not add safety features so that the government won't get the idea to regulate space ship safety
They're probably just tired of eating whatever per-unit loss they have on consoles for people that aren't going to buy games to make back the money. And since this new hardware costs less than the last generation used to, their per-unit loss is probably even higher? (Production costs keep dropping and probably make this less of a loss than the previous generation was when it was introduced, but their loss is probably higher on this new model than the old model had at the end?)
I'm not denegrating people that install and run Linux on their PS3, you bought the hardware and can enjoy it how you want to. But from Sony's perspective those customers that aren't buying games are a loss.
I haven't seen it, but it doesn't seem like the time travel aspect of the story is ever really explored. Any movie where asking "why" something happens would be seen as getting in the way of the story is definitely not going to pass sci-fi muster.
Slashdot Mirror
actually Microsoft bought IE from Spyglass for a price that included a portion of the money they'd make selling it. Then gave it away free, so the revenue share that went to Spyglass was nothing
I don't think that Palm is necessarily in the right here, but why on earth would the fact that Palm has leached onto iTunes mean that Apple has to publish and maintain a plug-in API? There's a difference between someone making assumptions about your software and then later versions of your software break the integration, and deliberately breaking it just so that the integration fails. I don't think Palm has the right to demand that iTunes make changes or publish APIs that make their job easier, but deliberately black-flagging Pre devices and making the synch fail is completely different.
The summary is very misleading, all Palm did was state in a letter that they planned to use the Apple's Vendor ID in order to synch. It doesn't appear that they've actually done it yet.
$700,000 is way, way, way more than sufficient to pay someone to block the Remotely Anywhere port on their network firewall, it's over a thousand times the sufficient amount actually.
that's too bad, I was kind of looking forward to the movie of "Slashdot and the Magical Ponies" due out next year. I hear they were going to have singing CowboyNeals
I would have considered it harsh if BellKor had been in the lead for most all of the multi-year contest and then suddenly lost in the final 20 minutes. But even if that happened I'm not sure that I would be clammoring for them to give out two prizes. It'd be nice of them to do that, since they got a lot of value out of all the teams. But that was true regardless of the 20 minute margin, and everyone knew there was no second million dollar prize from day 1. On the bright side, I'm sure even the second place contestant can make some money licensing their algorithm to Blockbuster.
True, except that rejections to homosexual advances can often take the shape of violence, which is probably a little more hurtful than "No, I don't like you"
Unfortunately political parties in America have become more of a tool for politicians to acquire a block of votes by picking a team, than for voters to get their voice heard by backing people that support their views on issues. All of the compromise is being done by the voters looking for the candidate that is closest to their ideal, and none by the elected officials looking to represent the viewpoints of their constituency or the "right thing to do" ethically. Too many people will back the members of their party no matter what the issue is, and too many media outlets feel that airing the viewpoint from each party on an issue is more important than reporting on the issue and its impact.
I think you're confusing Democrat voters with Democrat lawmakers. Most of the lawmakers from both parties have been on-board the Patriot Act train from day 1. It's the Democrat [and Libertarian] voters that haven't been happy with it. The reason Democrat voters haven't held their own candidates to the fire is because you can't vote with your feet if the other candidate supports it too. We live in a sound-bite era, and "____ wants terrorists to escape capture and blow up your grandmother" has more resonance than "____ wants the government to be able to listen to your phone calls without a warrant"
sales tax and income tax are used to pay for things completely unrelated to commerce and industry, why is it true that road repair must necessarily only be paid for by something that's tied to auto fuel?
the point is not to magically return your kindle, the point is to remove all incentive to steal a Kindle
The real issue is probably that Amazon doesn't want to get in the middle of disputes between people who resell a Kindle and the buyers. After all what's to stop someone from reporting their Kindle "stolen" if they decide later that the person who bought it from them should have paid them more money. They want a police officer to be involved to cover that end, and they'll take action if the police officer decides the case has merit.
It's either people acting dumber than they are to get on TV, or TV producers selectively sampling dumb people and showing just those. Either way it's not an honest depiction of asking questions to random people on the street. But hey, it doesn't cost much for them to make, and people still watch it...so welcome to the reality TV age. They used to have to hand out $25,000 prizes to whoever is the smartest person on the show, now they can hand out nothing to whoever is dumbest.
Why is it that you only tell your secrets to parentheses? Admit it, you like them better
The tests in TFA aren't multitasking either. In all but one test described in the article there is only one set of instructions (and the single exception was just a task with two switched modes), meaning that the users were asked to do one single thing and ignore everything else going on around them. That's not a test of multitasking, it's a test of concentration which is the exact opposite way of doing things and probably the biggest casualty of a multi-tasking lifestyle.
unfortunately I'm sure it's illegal, just like feeding someone else's meter
it's also somehow not tied into the Application Settings page though it would seem that people might look there for it first
When a friend of yours allows an application to access their information, that application may also access any information about you that your friend can already see. Learn more.
...
You can use the controls on this page to limit what types of information your friends can see about you through applications. Please note that this is only for applications you do not use yourself:
What I don't like is that there is no way to control what apps that you install can see until after you've installed them (and they've presumably had that one opportunity to grab everything). You basically have to allow them to see everything and then can lock things down later?
it reminds me more of the hype around Polar Express "making live actors extraneous." I think that movie made money, but it wasn't exactly game changing
There are multiple sides to every story and I'm fairly certain that in this day and age there would be a lot of outrage to see extraterrestrials being treated this way.
Lots of people would be outraged, but most of them wouldn't know about it or at least how bad it is. They'd probably send donations to fix the problem, and those donations would end up used for something else. A lot more people wouldn't care because "it's over there, and I'm over here." The aliens in District 9 were treated better than the people in some parts of Africa today, and we're not exactly shipping our army to Darfur or the DRC to straighten that all out. Heck, we didn't even do such a good job straightening the New Orleans mess in our own backyard
wait til you go see "9" and then two months later they release "Nine"
so do your neighborly duty and any time you see a parking enforcement person walking towards someone else's car, yell "I'm at the pay station!" even though you took the train downtown
unfortunately they never had an intergalactic Ralph Nader (therefore no "Unsafe at Hyperspeed"), and all the space ship manufacturers are colluding to not add safety features so that the government won't get the idea to regulate space ship safety
They're probably just tired of eating whatever per-unit loss they have on consoles for people that aren't going to buy games to make back the money. And since this new hardware costs less than the last generation used to, their per-unit loss is probably even higher? (Production costs keep dropping and probably make this less of a loss than the previous generation was when it was introduced, but their loss is probably higher on this new model than the old model had at the end?)
I'm not denegrating people that install and run Linux on their PS3, you bought the hardware and can enjoy it how you want to. But from Sony's perspective those customers that aren't buying games are a loss.
since it got a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes, the reviewer in the Houston paper is in the minority
I haven't seen it, but it doesn't seem like the time travel aspect of the story is ever really explored. Any movie where asking "why" something happens would be seen as getting in the way of the story is definitely not going to pass sci-fi muster.