I cannot count the number of times that I have been filling out a form on a web page and hit the backspace to edit only to discover that I had lost focus on the form and had the tab slammed shut and all information on the form lost.
To solve that problem, you need the Lazarus Form Recovery addon http://getlazarus.com/download
"Previous recipients have included Florence Nightingale, Sir Winston Churchill, Bertrand Russell, Graham Greene, Sir Edward Elgar, Mother Teresa and Margaret Thatcher."
Whatever equipment you end up using, get the acoustics in the meeting room right. If you get that wrong, it doesn't matter what geek toys are in there, it'll still sound like shit.
In my work we have meeting rooms with large VC TVs, expensive polycom gear etc and voice conferences on them sound like complete and utter crap because they just got this gear and set it up in a room paying no attention to lighting or echo or anything.
The scary part of this patent isn't the user settings stuff, it's this claim:
25. A method for asset management using the World Wide Web, comprising: [...]
This seems to cover cases where every computer on a network (say in a corporate IT environment) uploads a bit of information about itself to a server, and then someone prepares a report based on that information
No, it doesn't quite cover that. Actually it doesn't cover that at all. The patent specifies "The World Wide Web". This is an important point. An http server on a lan is NOT "the World Wide Web" it is an http server on a lan. If you're going over a lan to an http server that doesn't face the Internet, they you are arguably not transferring anything over the World Wide Web at all.
This seems to be a recurrent point in a lot of employment contracts I've seen - that the company owns everything you come up with in perpetuity and you're not allowed to use it for anything else. Even when that 'thing' you have come up with is an idea. If I wake up at 3am with a 'eureka' solution to a problem I came across at work then who owns that solution?
How long is it going to be before a frontal lobotomy is an integral part of the exit procedures from an IT job, or are we going to end up with another dilbert-as-reality situation?
You really don't want to block all of 202/8 and 203/8 - that's almost all of Australia and New Zealand. I suspect you will incur the just wroth of a large number of admins in this part of the world if you were to do that.
No matter how 'intuitive' the GUI, or how simple the metaphor presented to the user there is always going to be a limit to how simple computers can be made. The fact is that computers are not simple machines. We may be able to present the user with a metaphor of a desktop with which they can relate to some extent but that covers approximately 1% of the filesystem space on most computers, particularly when a lot of software insists on hiding it's saved documents in it's own magic folder nestled away in the depths of the filesystem somewhere so that users don't even know where to start looking for it without opening it in that program again.
I think there is almost certainly a hard limit to the level of simplicity that computers can be reduced to and still remain a productive tool for people to actually get things done with. I don't know if this limit can be pushed down to the point where joe-average's grandma can pull a computer out of the box and start getting things done but at the same time I don't really see that as a worthwhile goal.
Almost every single thing we do in todays world requires some level of training, or some process or learning to become familiar with it. Ever seen bank staff trying to train people how to use an ATM properly? I see no reason whatsoever for computers to be exempt from this process.
What I see as needed is general training in the way computers work, not the way windows works, or the way MacOS works but the fundamental themes behind computers. Here's the disk, here's a directory, look inside and see the files...
Once people have a few basic concepts of the way computers do things it becomes a hell of a lot easier for them to realise that "Hey, this program has saved my file to a funny place on the disk" and either go find it, or reopen it using the original program and save it where they want.
It seems obvious to me that within a few years Linux will be the standard for operating systems just as TCP/IP is the standard for networking. We're not talking about a product but about a technology that so outstrips any of its rivals that the competition is moot.
Don't be so sure of this. Linux is good, hell yes I wouldn't have been using it for the past six years if it weren't but don't make the mistake of automatically assuming it's technologically superior to everything else out there just because it's free and reasonably popular.
It might turn out to be the best but right now there's still a ways to go before Linux can live up to the dream of technological OS perfection.
BeOS, *BSD, Solaris (maybe:) all have things going for them that Linux just doesn't do, and even in ISP server space which is generally considered it's strongest market, Linux is a long way off totally outstripping the competition. Why do you think places like yahoo and hotmail run BSD? Then there's the big iron like OS/3[6|9]0, sure there's a Linux port to the S360 but that's not enough to make up for the fact that it was never designed as a mainframe OS.
General technological excellence is all well and good but absolute technological superiority is a long long way away for any OS out there, if it's possible at all. Personally I don't think it is and that the requirements of OS-space are so varied that attempting to have one uber-kernel do it all just isn't viable. There are design decisions that you make for a desktop OS that are completely invalid on a mainframe and models you want in your mainframe OS that are utterly innapropriate for an ISP server
How can the open source development model obtain the necessary user feedback to development interfaces that the user will intuitively able to use?"
The only intuitive interface is the nipple. Everything after that is learned.
The problem is not making an intuitive interface it's getting over the magical force that takes an otherwise intelligent human being and turns them into a total moron the second they see a computer.
Part of the solution to this problem is good documentation. You don't need a gui that your grandmother can use. You need a manual your grandmother can understand.
Unix is no harder to use than Windows, it does need a GUI, there is no question about that but even GUIs need to be learned. Has anyone seen the manuals that come with macintoshes? They explain in great detail how to achieve things, using pictures and examples that even a moron could understand but helpdesks still get calls from macintosh users wanting to know how to create a new folder.
I remember a BBS I used to frequent in NZ called the Realms of Insanity. There was a definite community that developed around that BBS, made up mostly of univerity students from the local uni.
We used to have parties fairly regularly where you could meet 'in the meat' people you had met on the BBS and try and guess which person fitted which alias on the BBS.
That sort of community that developed around small local BBSes is largely nonexistent in todays web forums. Sure, they are much larger and have a far more diverse user base then the BBSes of old but unless you are lucky enough to live in the US and have a fair amount of money to travel to meeet people then most of them are just web pages with interestingly variable content.
I must say that I miss the BBSes I used to frequent. Almost all of the BBSes I used to know died with the explosion of net usage in this country in the early to mid 90s.
The problem with the net as more and more people get access is that places like usenet and irc are drowning in a sea of mindless crap, spam and ads for sex sites that it is becoming almost impossible to filter to the point of readability any more. That was another point in favour of BBSes, as relatively closed systems they didn't suffer the deluge of crap that accompanies large easily accessable public forums like the net.
How close can computers simulate the human brain and all of its associated nuances? Would neural networks be created one day where each node represents one specific neuron?
Perhaps. There are more than a few problems with this idea.
Firstly there is the fact that nobody actually has much of an idea of how the brain works to produce the characteristics such as memory, (self) conciousness etc, that it does from the soggy substrate that it is. Simply having a neural net node for each neuron is worthless if you don't know how to connect them together. As someone (on comp.ai I think) once said "I have a computer capable of simulating every neuron in the brain of a fruit fly. If someone can tell me how the neurons in the brain of a fruit fly work, I'll simulate them." Needless to say nobody did, because nobody knows.
There are a lot of fundamental things about the workings of the mind and brain that congnitive science simply hasn't worked out yet. It is entirely possible that they will not be able to work them out at all. Consider: The more you know, the more (and more complex) the neural interconnections in your brain get, it is conceivable that the human brain will be simply too complex for a human brain to comprehend.
That said, I don't see that AI is an impossibility, simply that basing AI on human like brains and neural patterns is probably not the best way of going about it. Sadly I don't have any stunningly better ideas off the top of my head
It doesn't matter what browsers are avaliable for Linux, what I really want is decent plugin support for things like Realvideo, shockwave etc that actually work without crashing the browser every time. That and stable java support that actually works out of the box.
Noble though the ideal of universally accessible web pages may be the fact is that many many sites these days are unworkable unless you have javascript, java, and the latest set of wibbleforce2000 plugins enabled.
Until this sort of support is widely avaliable for browsers under linux it will remain a second rate platform for web browsing.
If you doubt this go to netscape.com and have a look at the plugin list for netscape under windows, then go and have a look at the plugin list for netscape under linux. I'm not suggesting that all of the 200 or so plugins avaliable are needed but the core ones most certainly are.
If this ever happened (which I seriously doubt it would) you could just carry a small can of spray coolant with you. A 10 second squirt on the sensor and bingo! 10c coke:)
Hi, mostly a good reply, but remember you are talking to lawyers here and to paraphrase MIB "No m'am the legal profession do not have a sense of humor that we are aware of"
For the most part their initial letter seems to be a polite relatively non-threatening (aside from the fact that it came from a legal firm) request that you correct an apparent potential dilution of their highly valuable copyright.
They have notably failed to mention any proposed legal action they may take against you and their closing paragraph does indicate a wish to resolve the matter amicably "Therefore, we hope that this matter can be resolved quickly and amicably."
I would suggest that you alter the paragraph:
That message is really nothing more than a suggestion that someone publish a book entitled "Sendmail for Dummies". (Presumably, IDG Books would publish this volume, since anyone else who published that title would get a rather nasty letter from IDG's trigger-happy lawyers.)
to read as follows:
That message is really nothing more than a suggestion that someone publish a book entitled "Sendmail for Dummies". Presumably, IDG Books would publish this volume, being the holders of the "For Dummies" copyright mark.
This has the double effect of acknowleging IDG as the holders of the TM and removing a potentially offensive reference to their lawyers.
It would probably also be worthwhile to include an explanation of the nature of the archives and pointing out A) That you have no control of the contents of the archive and B) that the controversial material is part of a publicly archived message (and as such is protected under the 1st amendment) and is not listed in any way as a subject of the site itself.
Stating in closing that you are happy to enter into discussions with them regarding this problem would not only be polite but also demonstrate that you are also willing to find an amicable solution to the problem.
Keep up the good work! You're a pro!
This strikes me as somewhat condescending, but that's just me
PS: any and all attempts to sue Joe Dietz or The Skylab Group would be a considerable waste of effort. Both are fictional entities.
The fact that they are fictional entities does not protect the real person behind them from legal action.
It's good to see he's still going strong
on
Sir Arthur Speaks
·
· Score: 1
I had the pleasure to meet Sir Aurthur in 1996 on a visit to Sri Lanka and was struck by how incredibly sharp this guy is, despite how frail he seemed when I met him. An old man in a wheelchair he may be, but he has a mind like a razor. Here's hoping he keeps going for a while longer.
Who invented the telephone? The electric light bulb? Launched the first manned flight? We all know, of course. We've been schooled from the age of five to know. The creators of some of the greatest American technology are legends, household words, patriotic icons and shamans, their homes and labs turned into historic landmarks and museums.
What a bletcherous load of crap! What is it with American's that you simply cannot accept that you are not the greatest technological nation in the world?
The Telephone was invented by a Scotsman, the electric lightbulb was co-invented by another Scotsman, the first manned flight was most probably made by some lunatic Chinaman strapped to a kite centuries before The Good Ol' US of A had even been thought of. The first heavier-than-air flight was not necessarily made by the Wright brothers, there is significant evidence to support the idea that there was a man (who's name escapes me currently) in New Zealand who made the first aeroplane flight.
The New Zealand government recently introduced a photo-id drivers liscence scheme here to replace the old paper ones we've had for years.
They're charging people $25(NZD) from memory to obtain one of these new liscences by the end of the month of their birthday or their liscence expires.
All of the information on these liscences is being forwarded to the NZ police dept and added to a central database.
Fortunately in NZ we have some (partially) sane privacy laws and they can't give the info out to people unless we've specifically given them permission to do so. Of course then there's the clause at the bottom of the form that says "We can give this to whomever the hell we like for whatever reason".
Sigh
I guess the US doesn't have a monopoly on idiocy after all.
That was a damn fine article. I must admit that I knew very little of BSD as and OS before, having gone from dos to os/2 to Linux and considered each step an upgrade. That article has prompted me to look more closely at BSD and now I'm thinking that moving to BSD might be a good choice for my next OS "upgrade"
Unless you want a really spiffy brand new kernel on your router (doesn't bother me) the Linux Router Project disk is a damn fine way to go.
I have mine set up on an old 486 in a pizzabox case and it works beautifully. All I did was tweak a few IP numbers, tell it to do transparent proxying and I haven't noticed any difference from being dialled up directly, apart from my flatmates sucking all the bandwidth that is:).
That said, I am currently in the process of designing a disk specifically for doing dialup router/firewall duties that will be somewhat more current and easier to configure than the LRP disk. mail me if you are interested.
The biggest problem with most game consoles these days (apart from a lack of keyboard) is that they plug into TVs and TV resolution sucks.
What I'd really like to see is something like a PS2 with an SVGA out port on the back so it can be plugged into a computer monitor so that games can be run at decent resolutions.
Stick an RF wireless keyboard on it and nobody would need a windtendo box anymore.
I can't help but picture the lego 8ball shaker vibrating madly and exploding in a shower of plastic blocks as the/. effect kicks in and queues up thousands of requests for wisdom.
Slashdot Mirror
I cannot count the number of times that I have been filling out a form on a web page and hit the backspace to edit only to discover that I had lost focus on the form and had the tab slammed shut and all information on the form lost.
To solve that problem, you need the Lazarus Form Recovery addon
http://getlazarus.com/download
"Previous recipients have included Florence Nightingale, Sir Winston Churchill, Bertrand Russell, Graham Greene, Sir Edward Elgar, Mother Teresa and Margaret Thatcher."
Damn, talk about the odd one out!
Whatever equipment you end up using, get the acoustics in the meeting room right. If you get that wrong, it doesn't matter what geek toys are in there, it'll still sound like shit.
In my work we have meeting rooms with large VC TVs, expensive polycom gear etc and voice conferences on them sound like complete and utter crap because they just got this gear and set it up in a room paying no attention to lighting or echo or anything.
From the review it doesn't sound like there's anything new or revolutionary in here at all. Go read Steven Segaller's Nerds 2.0 and Steven Levy's Hackers: Heroes of the Computer Revolution and dont' give John "I pretended to be so l33t writing crap about Kevin Mitnick" Markoff a dime of your money.
The scary part of this patent isn't the user settings stuff, it's this claim:
25. A method for asset management using the World Wide Web, comprising:
[...]
This seems to cover cases where every computer on a network (say in a corporate IT environment) uploads a bit of information about itself to a server, and then someone prepares a report based on that information
No, it doesn't quite cover that. Actually it doesn't cover that at all. The patent specifies "The World Wide Web". This is an important point. An http server on a lan is NOT "the World Wide Web" it is an http server on a lan. If you're going over a lan to an http server that doesn't face the Internet, they you are arguably not transferring anything over the World Wide Web at all.
This seems to be a recurrent point in a lot of employment contracts I've seen - that the company owns everything you come up with in perpetuity and you're not allowed to use it for anything else. Even when that 'thing' you have come up with is an idea. If I wake up at 3am with a 'eureka' solution to a problem I came across at work then who owns that solution?
How long is it going to be before a frontal lobotomy is an integral part of the exit procedures from an IT job, or are we going to end up with another dilbert-as-reality situation?
You really don't want to block all of 202/8 and 203/8 - that's almost all of Australia and New Zealand. I suspect you will incur the just wroth of a large number of admins in this part of the world if you were to do that.
No matter how 'intuitive' the GUI, or how simple the metaphor presented to the user there is always going to be a limit to how simple computers can be made. The fact is that computers are not simple machines. We may be able to present the user with a metaphor of a desktop with which they can relate to some extent but that covers approximately 1% of the filesystem space on most computers, particularly when a lot of software insists on hiding it's saved documents in it's own magic folder nestled away in the depths of the filesystem somewhere so that users don't even know where to start looking for it without opening it in that program again.
I think there is almost certainly a hard limit to the level of simplicity that computers can be reduced to and still remain a productive tool for people to actually get things done with. I don't know if this limit can be pushed down to the point where joe-average's grandma can pull a computer out of the box and start getting things done but at the same time I don't really see that as a worthwhile goal.
Almost every single thing we do in todays world requires some level of training, or some process or learning to become familiar with it. Ever seen bank staff trying to train people how to use an ATM properly? I see no reason whatsoever for computers to be exempt from this process.
What I see as needed is general training in the way computers work, not the way windows works, or the way MacOS works but the fundamental themes behind computers. Here's the disk, here's a directory, look inside and see the files...
Once people have a few basic concepts of the way computers do things it becomes a hell of a lot easier for them to realise that "Hey, this program has saved my file to a funny place on the disk" and either go find it, or reopen it using the original program and save it where they want.
It seems obvious to me that within a few years Linux will be the standard for operating systems just as TCP/IP is the standard for networking. We're not talking about a product but about a technology that so outstrips any of its rivals that the competition is moot.
Don't be so sure of this. Linux is good, hell yes I wouldn't have been using it for the past six years if it weren't but don't make the mistake of automatically assuming it's technologically superior to everything else out there just because it's free and reasonably popular.
It might turn out to be the best but right now there's still a ways to go before Linux can live up to the dream of technological OS perfection.
BeOS, *BSD, Solaris (maybe:) all have things going for them that Linux just doesn't do, and even in ISP server space which is generally considered it's strongest market, Linux is a long way off totally outstripping the competition. Why do you think places like yahoo and hotmail run BSD? Then there's the big iron like OS/3[6|9]0, sure there's a Linux port to the S360 but that's not enough to make up for the fact that it was never designed as a mainframe OS.
General technological excellence is all well and good but absolute technological superiority is a long long way away for any OS out there, if it's possible at all. Personally I don't think it is and that the requirements of OS-space are so varied that attempting to have one uber-kernel do it all just isn't viable. There are design decisions that you make for a desktop OS that are completely invalid on a mainframe and models you want in your mainframe OS that are utterly innapropriate for an ISP server
How can the open source development model obtain the necessary user feedback to development interfaces that the user will intuitively able to use?"
The only intuitive interface is the nipple. Everything after that is learned.
The problem is not making an intuitive interface it's getting over the magical force that takes an otherwise intelligent human being and turns them into a total moron the second they see a computer.
Part of the solution to this problem is good documentation. You don't need a gui that your grandmother can use. You need a manual your grandmother can understand.
Unix is no harder to use than Windows, it does need a GUI, there is no question about that but even GUIs need to be learned. Has anyone seen the manuals that come with macintoshes? They explain in great detail how to achieve things, using pictures and examples that even a moron could understand but helpdesks still get calls from macintosh users wanting to know how to create a new folder.
I remember a BBS I used to frequent in NZ called the Realms of Insanity. There was a definite community that developed around that BBS, made up mostly of univerity students from the local uni.
We used to have parties fairly regularly where you could meet 'in the meat' people you had met on the BBS and try and guess which person fitted which alias on the BBS.
That sort of community that developed around small local BBSes is largely nonexistent in todays web forums. Sure, they are much larger and have a far more diverse user base then the BBSes of old but unless you are lucky enough to live in the US and have a fair amount of money to travel to meeet people then most of them are just web pages with interestingly variable content.
I must say that I miss the BBSes I used to frequent. Almost all of the BBSes I used to know died with the explosion of net usage in this country in the early to mid 90s.
The problem with the net as more and more people get access is that places like usenet and irc are drowning in a sea of mindless crap, spam and ads for sex sites that it is becoming almost impossible to filter to the point of readability any more. That was another point in favour of BBSes, as relatively closed systems they didn't suffer the deluge of crap that accompanies large easily accessable public forums like the net.
Perhaps. There are more than a few problems with this idea.
Firstly there is the fact that nobody actually has much of an idea of how the brain works to produce the characteristics such as memory, (self) conciousness etc, that it does from the soggy substrate that it is. Simply having a neural net node for each neuron is worthless if you don't know how to connect them together. As someone (on comp.ai I think) once said "I have a computer capable of simulating every neuron in the brain of a fruit fly. If someone can tell me how the neurons in the brain of a fruit fly work, I'll simulate them." Needless to say nobody did, because nobody knows.
There are a lot of fundamental things about the workings of the mind and brain that congnitive science simply hasn't worked out yet. It is entirely possible that they will not be able to work them out at all. Consider: The more you know, the more (and more complex) the neural interconnections in your brain get, it is conceivable that the human brain will be simply too complex for a human brain to comprehend.
That said, I don't see that AI is an impossibility, simply that basing AI on human like brains and neural patterns is probably not the best way of going about it. Sadly I don't have any stunningly better ideas off the top of my head
It doesn't matter what browsers are avaliable for Linux, what I really want is decent plugin support for things like Realvideo, shockwave etc that actually work without crashing the browser every time. That and stable java support that actually works out of the box.
Noble though the ideal of universally accessible web pages may be the fact is that many many sites these days are unworkable unless you have javascript, java, and the latest set of wibbleforce2000 plugins enabled.
Until this sort of support is widely avaliable for browsers under linux it will remain a second rate platform for web browsing.If you doubt this go to netscape.com and have a look at the plugin list for netscape under windows, then go and have a look at the plugin list for netscape under linux. I'm not suggesting that all of the 200 or so plugins avaliable are needed but the core ones most certainly are.
If this ever happened (which I seriously doubt it would) you could just carry a small can of spray coolant with you. A 10 second squirt on the sensor and bingo! 10c coke :)
Hi, mostly a good reply, but remember you are talking to lawyers here and to paraphrase MIB "No m'am the legal profession do not have a sense of humor that we are aware of"
For the most part their initial letter seems to be a polite relatively non-threatening (aside from the fact that it came from a legal firm) request that you correct an apparent potential dilution of their highly valuable copyright.
They have notably failed to mention any proposed legal action they may take against you and their closing paragraph does indicate a wish to resolve the matter amicably "Therefore, we hope that this matter can be resolved quickly and amicably."
I would suggest that you alter the paragraph:
to read as follows: This has the double effect of acknowleging IDG as the holders of the TM and removing a potentially offensive reference to their lawyers.It would probably also be worthwhile to include an explanation of the nature of the archives and pointing out A) That you have no control of the contents of the archive and B) that the controversial material is part of a publicly archived message (and as such is protected under the 1st amendment) and is not listed in any way as a subject of the site itself.
Stating in closing that you are happy to enter into discussions with them regarding this problem would not only be polite but also demonstrate that you are also willing to find an amicable solution to the problem.
This strikes me as somewhat condescending, but that's just me The fact that they are fictional entities does not protect the real person behind them from legal action.I had the pleasure to meet Sir Aurthur in 1996 on a visit to Sri Lanka and was struck by how incredibly sharp this guy is, despite how frail he seemed when I met him. An old man in a wheelchair he may be, but he has a mind like a razor. Here's hoping he keeps going for a while longer.
I just asked my partner what she thought of me and clicked that one.
The worrying part is that her first suggestion was "who cares I'm gay!"
Who invented the telephone? The electric light bulb? Launched the first manned flight?
We all know, of course. We've been schooled from the age of five to know. The creators of some of the greatest American technology are legends, household words, patriotic icons and shamans, their homes and labs turned into historic landmarks and museums.
What a bletcherous load of crap! What is it with American's that you simply cannot accept that you are not the greatest technological nation in the world?
The Telephone was invented by a Scotsman, the electric lightbulb was co-invented by another Scotsman, the first manned flight was most probably made by some lunatic Chinaman strapped to a kite centuries before The Good Ol' US of A had even been thought of. The first heavier-than-air flight was not necessarily made by the Wright brothers, there is significant evidence to support the idea that there was a man (who's name escapes me currently) in New Zealand who made the first aeroplane flight.
The New Zealand government recently introduced a photo-id drivers liscence scheme here to replace the old paper ones we've had for years.
They're charging people $25(NZD) from memory to obtain one of these new liscences by the end of the month of their birthday or their liscence expires.
All of the information on these liscences is being forwarded to the NZ police dept and added to a central database.
Fortunately in NZ we have some (partially) sane privacy laws and they can't give the info out to people unless we've specifically given them permission to do so. Of course then there's the clause at the bottom of the form that says "We can give this to whomever the hell we like for whatever reason".
Sigh
I guess the US doesn't have a monopoly on idiocy after all.
That was a damn fine article. I must admit that I knew very little of BSD as and OS before, having gone from dos to os/2 to Linux and considered each step an upgrade. That article has prompted me to look more closely at BSD and now I'm thinking that moving to BSD might be a good choice for my next OS "upgrade"
How often (if ever) do you trim your beard?
Lets just say no. There's no way you could move that much water fast enough to stop your blast chamber blowing up. Trust me I know.
Even if you make the disc/piston slip really easily the inertia of the water will be too much.
Unless you want a really spiffy brand new kernel on your router (doesn't bother me) the Linux Router Project disk is a damn fine way to go.
I have mine set up on an old 486 in a pizzabox case and it works beautifully. All I did was tweak a few IP numbers, tell it to do transparent proxying and I haven't noticed any difference from being dialled up directly, apart from my flatmates sucking all the bandwidth that is :).
That said, I am currently in the process of designing a disk specifically for doing dialup router/firewall duties that will be somewhat more current and easier to configure than the LRP disk. mail me if you are interested.
The biggest problem with most game consoles these days (apart from a lack of keyboard) is that they plug into TVs and TV resolution sucks.
What I'd really like to see is something like a PS2 with an SVGA out port on the back so it can be plugged into a computer monitor so that games can be run at decent resolutions.
Stick an RF wireless keyboard on it and nobody would need a windtendo box anymore.
I can't help but picture the lego 8ball shaker vibrating madly and exploding in a shower of plastic blocks as the /. effect kicks in and queues up thousands of requests for wisdom.