Well, they do like to say that "There is not tablet market, there is an iPad market." Perhaps they are just confused about the fact that the rest of us are actually talking about tablets, and are not talking about a subset of Apple products.
I was just about to concede your point on the obscure chance of getting kidnapped and tortured into talking. Then it struck me that, even then it isn't better to not know. In a blackmail/torture situation, it isn't whether you know the information or not. It is whether the other person THINKS you know the information or not. If they are going to do bad things to you to extract the situation, lying about knowing the information will produce the same results as not knowing it at all. Yet, it removes your ability to give the information in exchange for keeping your fingers.
Thus, learning the information is not a liability.
True enough. Google has considered peripherals. The NexusOne has three little contacts on the bottom of the phone. When these are connected, the phone goes into "Car Dock" mode. This means that the OS is notified that the phone is docked, and gives contacts for charging. When the OS gets notified that it is docked, it makes a bluetooth connection to the dock, and your set to go.
It would be nice if Google would push this feature. If they moved the notification from physical contacts to NFC, the only connection necessary would be for power.
If that story is true, then your college sucked. I realize that CompSci is not "software development", but the crossover is large enough that there is no excuse what so ever for a professor to not already know that you could see his data. Your story would require that the professor be incompetent.
I'm not saying your story isn't true. I'm not even saying that it isn't likely. Just that if it is true, that college has bigger problems on it's hands than a professor that likes internet porn.
Being moral, and believing that there are things your better off not knowing are two totally unrelated issues. There is nothing that I am better off not knowing. At least there is nothing that I can imagine that I am better off not knowing. I find the modern worship of ignorance bizarre. I don't look at confidential information because I am moral. That means that even if I am better off knowing something, I don't do it if it is the wrong thing to do.
Sure, but how do we know that Bakarraas ( the creature that fills the ecological niche left after the extinction of the Giraffes ) tongues don't cure Ekeeber's syndrome? A dozen years ago, I remember watching a nature show where an environmentalist was bemoaning the "Damage" done to the ecology by the installation fo a hydroelectric dam. His evidence of damage was that the frogs below the dam were developing different traits than the frogs above the dam.
It would be far more efficient for them to verify the address than to have you try and give it to them. Particularly in cases where the caller doesn't know the specific address.
If their claim that the tracking is for 911 is true, then cell phone theft should be trivial for the police to act on.
A number of years ago, we were all told that the phone companies needed to track our phone for the 911 service. That way they could find us if we called, but didn't know where we were. We were assured that it wasn't so the government could track our location. As of today, I have not heard about a single case where the tracking was used for the phone owners benefit, and every time I have called 911 from my cell phone, the person on the other end needed me to give them my location.
It's simple. We already know that the phone companies know exactly where the phones are when they are used. Phone theft should not be a crime that can successfully be committed. If your phone is stolen, you should be able to call the police, and your cell carrier, and the next time that the phone comes on the grid, a police officer should be showing up to make an arrest. I realize that this would put a short term work increase on the police, but it would subside pretty quickly when it became clear that most every cell phone theft lead to an arrest.
Your sample is now in the minority. Depending on where you live, it is also a very expensive way to watch TV. Those CRT TVs eat electricity like there is no tomorrow, and replacing them with equivalent sized, brand new LCD TVs can have a ROI of only a year or two.
There is also the fact that if the phone could do that, there is no reason that Windows couldn't run on it. Even if that meant MS had to port it to another processor. If a phone could replace a desktop and sat on the desk with a monitor and keyboard, it would be a desktop. Just as if my desktop were shrunk down, a battery put in it, it had a touch interface and cellular modem, it would be a smart phone. The difference between a smartphone and a Desktop PC is a line drawn in shade a of gray. Much like a TV and monitor, there comes a point that distinguishing between them is pointless.
I doubt that cell phones will replace desktops. I suspect that they will converge. The only question will be whether the dominant players will come from the traditional phone maker side, the traditional PC side, or if it will be a mix of the two.
Which is why when you point out that there is not a single person on the planet that has not used information created by other people without their express permission, right down to the words they use to make their justifications, they will tell you that THEIR use of other peoples intellectual creations don't count as theft. Only yours does.
The cost of a PC + Console is pretty much the same as PC + PC. If they are going to stick the the family PC for gaming because they cannot afford a second device, then the console is already dead in their house. I use multiple controllers regularly on my HTPC.
I recently install a Wii remote on my HTPC running Windows 7. I connected it the same way has any other bluetooth device, and the drivers automatically downloaded. So, I would say that "jiggery-pokery" is no longer the case.
You will be hard pressed to find a new TV or a new computer that do not use HDMI. They are out there, but you would have to look for them at this point.
I am betting that letting the drug slip to Africa would lead to human testing that didn't create much more uproar than what is already happening there.
Of course, just because you have been married and monogamous for 30 years doesn't mean your wife has. It's not like she would tell you about banging the mechanic when she took the car in for an oil change.
Danny Bonaduce (Yeah, the kid from the partridge family) had a quote statement about that. When his therapist posed him with the question "If your wife was a perfect 10, and was eager to perform any sexual act you wanted, what would it take to get you to cheat on her?"
That was always one the ideas that I would chuckle to myself about. Heterosexual men should want as few homosexual women, and as many homosexual men in the world as possible. We should want lots and lots of bisexual women, but very few homosexual women.
Because broadband is a government mandated monopoly. The only reason some people can choose between two companies is because they both got their lines laid before the internet took off. The claims that phone/internet/cable are natural monopolies is tenuous. If municipalities would build conduit similar to our storm drains for pulling cables, you could see a dozen ISPs running through a city with far better bandwidth and lower prices than we have now.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, they do like to say that "There is not tablet market, there is an iPad market." Perhaps they are just confused about the fact that the rest of us are actually talking about tablets, and are not talking about a subset of Apple products.
The Playstation and 360 have been out long enough that the year lead is pretty much a non-issue at this point.
I was just about to concede your point on the obscure chance of getting kidnapped and tortured into talking. Then it struck me that, even then it isn't better to not know. In a blackmail/torture situation, it isn't whether you know the information or not. It is whether the other person THINKS you know the information or not. If they are going to do bad things to you to extract the situation, lying about knowing the information will produce the same results as not knowing it at all. Yet, it removes your ability to give the information in exchange for keeping your fingers.
Thus, learning the information is not a liability.
True enough. Google has considered peripherals. The NexusOne has three little contacts on the bottom of the phone. When these are connected, the phone goes into "Car Dock" mode. This means that the OS is notified that the phone is docked, and gives contacts for charging. When the OS gets notified that it is docked, it makes a bluetooth connection to the dock, and your set to go.
It would be nice if Google would push this feature. If they moved the notification from physical contacts to NFC, the only connection necessary would be for power.
You really think that there are more people using Chrome than Android?
If that story is true, then your college sucked. I realize that CompSci is not "software development", but the crossover is large enough that there is no excuse what so ever for a professor to not already know that you could see his data. Your story would require that the professor be incompetent.
I'm not saying your story isn't true. I'm not even saying that it isn't likely. Just that if it is true, that college has bigger problems on it's hands than a professor that likes internet porn.
Being moral, and believing that there are things your better off not knowing are two totally unrelated issues. There is nothing that I am better off not knowing. At least there is nothing that I can imagine that I am better off not knowing. I find the modern worship of ignorance bizarre. I don't look at confidential information because I am moral. That means that even if I am better off knowing something, I don't do it if it is the wrong thing to do.
They probably just assumed all of you guys were eating Apples.
Sure, but how do we know that Bakarraas ( the creature that fills the ecological niche left after the extinction of the Giraffes ) tongues don't cure Ekeeber's syndrome? A dozen years ago, I remember watching a nature show where an environmentalist was bemoaning the "Damage" done to the ecology by the installation fo a hydroelectric dam. His evidence of damage was that the frogs below the dam were developing different traits than the frogs above the dam.
It would be far more efficient for them to verify the address than to have you try and give it to them. Particularly in cases where the caller doesn't know the specific address.
If their claim that the tracking is for 911 is true, then cell phone theft should be trivial for the police to act on.
A number of years ago, we were all told that the phone companies needed to track our phone for the 911 service. That way they could find us if we called, but didn't know where we were. We were assured that it wasn't so the government could track our location. As of today, I have not heard about a single case where the tracking was used for the phone owners benefit, and every time I have called 911 from my cell phone, the person on the other end needed me to give them my location.
It's simple. We already know that the phone companies know exactly where the phones are when they are used. Phone theft should not be a crime that can successfully be committed. If your phone is stolen, you should be able to call the police, and your cell carrier, and the next time that the phone comes on the grid, a police officer should be showing up to make an arrest. I realize that this would put a short term work increase on the police, but it would subside pretty quickly when it became clear that most every cell phone theft lead to an arrest.
Your sample is now in the minority. Depending on where you live, it is also a very expensive way to watch TV. Those CRT TVs eat electricity like there is no tomorrow, and replacing them with equivalent sized, brand new LCD TVs can have a ROI of only a year or two.
There is also the fact that if the phone could do that, there is no reason that Windows couldn't run on it. Even if that meant MS had to port it to another processor. If a phone could replace a desktop and sat on the desk with a monitor and keyboard, it would be a desktop. Just as if my desktop were shrunk down, a battery put in it, it had a touch interface and cellular modem, it would be a smart phone. The difference between a smartphone and a Desktop PC is a line drawn in shade a of gray. Much like a TV and monitor, there comes a point that distinguishing between them is pointless.
I doubt that cell phones will replace desktops. I suspect that they will converge. The only question will be whether the dominant players will come from the traditional phone maker side, the traditional PC side, or if it will be a mix of the two.
Which is why when you point out that there is not a single person on the planet that has not used information created by other people without their express permission, right down to the words they use to make their justifications, they will tell you that THEIR use of other peoples intellectual creations don't count as theft. Only yours does.
They don't all need to be new. Just the one that they play games on, which is extremely common.
The cost of a PC + Console is pretty much the same as PC + PC. If they are going to stick the the family PC for gaming because they cannot afford a second device, then the console is already dead in their house. I use multiple controllers regularly on my HTPC.
I recently install a Wii remote on my HTPC running Windows 7. I connected it the same way has any other bluetooth device, and the drivers automatically downloaded. So, I would say that "jiggery-pokery" is no longer the case.
You will be hard pressed to find a new TV or a new computer that do not use HDMI. They are out there, but you would have to look for them at this point.
Most music has always been abolute crap.
I am betting that letting the drug slip to Africa would lead to human testing that didn't create much more uproar than what is already happening there.
Of course, just because you have been married and monogamous for 30 years doesn't mean your wife has. It's not like she would tell you about banging the mechanic when she took the car in for an oil change.
Danny Bonaduce (Yeah, the kid from the partridge family) had a quote statement about that. When his therapist posed him with the question "If your wife was a perfect 10, and was eager to perform any sexual act you wanted, what would it take to get you to cheat on her?"
His response: "A 6 I hadn't slept with yet."
That was always one the ideas that I would chuckle to myself about. Heterosexual men should want as few homosexual women, and as many homosexual men in the world as possible. We should want lots and lots of bisexual women, but very few homosexual women.
Exactly the opposite. LACK of redundant physical networks don't make sense.
Because broadband is a government mandated monopoly. The only reason some people can choose between two companies is because they both got their lines laid before the internet took off. The claims that phone/internet/cable are natural monopolies is tenuous. If municipalities would build conduit similar to our storm drains for pulling cables, you could see a dozen ISPs running through a city with far better bandwidth and lower prices than we have now.