Israel is not a people. It is a piece of land that is occasionally a nation and occasionally a province and occasionally a group of nations.
Jewish isn't a people either. It's a religion.... It is interesting to note that the Muslims are also descended from Heber through Ishmael, son of Abraham, and are therefore all Hebrews as well.
Um... Muslim is neither a race nor a people. It too is a religion.
(sorry, couldn't resist. Your post was informative)
"the temperature on its sun-facing side is around 4220 degrees Fahrenheit."
For anyone using the SI, this is about 2327 degrees Celsius
From where I sit, anything over 1000 is all the same to me... FRIGGIN HOT! To me, there is really no difference between 4220 Celsius and 4220 Fahrenheit. I'm sure there are differences when you have to consider the temps that rock melts or whatever, but once the temp gets high enough to kill me in less than a second, it's all the same to me.
Support for PCL in Brother printers tend to make these relatively trouble free.
They are also cheap and reliable.
Ditto for the Okidata LED printers. I had one last eight years on a Linux box that was recently replaced due to a drum issue. Sure, I could have simply replaced the drum but the new (new to me anyway) one was free.
The Nazis did not try to destroy Israel, because Israel didn't exist until after the second world war. This fact rather indicates that at least one of the attempts to 'wipe them off the face of the planet' since biblical times worked...
I think the post you were responding to meant Israel as a people (Jews), not a country.
Phew! I'm safe. All the strangers I've done the horizontal mambo with had names. I can't tell you what they were, but I know for certain that they had names.
The US also happens to have harbored terrorists inside its borders. Luis Posada Carilles bombed a Cuban airliner, and so far as I know, he still lives in the US, and he cannot be deported. Since we will not hand him over, Cuba has the right to invade our country and, in the process, kill thousands of innocents who have no connection to the government (intentional or not). Then, after the invasion, the Cuban government
First, I'd have to say to Cuba... good luck with that.
Next, do not target "thousands of innocents who have no connection to the government", unlike what they have done to us.
Then again, I'm starting to realize that you are big pussy who would be happy to see: (start music) Bush: "Hey Mr. Taliban, please hand over Osama." Taliban: "Daylight come and we put hide him in a hole" Bush: "Please Mr. Taliban, let us have Osama" Taliban: "Come and take him if you think you have the bolls" (end music) Bush: "Ok then, never mind. Sorry to bother you guys. If you need to kill another 3000 of us, please let us know ahead of time so we can put your guys in first class. It's closer to the cockpit."
I'm not sure he's advocating cutting off the soldiers from support. He just seems to be saying that the war is really stupid, and any and all investment in such a war is folly to the extreme. The rest of his post is just trolling.
But, that said, I am not sure if it would be betrayal. From my point of view, everyone who signed up to invade Afghanistan and Iraq betrayed me, betrayed the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, and betrayed the citizens of his respective nation. When it comes to randomly invading countries, I am a pacifist to the extreme.
You do realize that 9-11 was ordered by a guy living in Afghanistan, under the protection of the Taliban, right? You can say what you want about Iraq, but going to war in Afghanistan was IN RESPONSE to us being attacked. It was hardly random.
(by the way, I'm not a big fan of the "minors do not have rights or freedoms" ideology. And also this is definitely a slippery slope.)
Sorry, but 6-yr olds do NOT have freedoms or rights. They are not mature enough to handle them. Now if you put one of these on your 17-yr old, you have issues, but I don't think that this is what this thing was intended for.
Thank goodness that constant surveillance would have no detrimental effect on a child.
When I was 6, I don't think I would have cared.
Isn't there some saying about trading one thing for another, and not deserving either?
Sorry, genius, but granting freedom to a 3-yr old is not going to increase their security. Actually, it's quite the opposite. I would say that those who are stupid enough to allow any unmonitored freedom outside the back yard to a child under 5 is a moron. That said, even with this monitoring device, I still would not let a child have unfettered access to the outside world. I'm a parent and I have a hard time taking a shower or a dump when I'm watching my daughter by myself. I won't let her out of my sight without setting the alarm system.
The thing is - what sort of "purpose" could you ever you give a clever AI? Can you motivate through "rewards" like we do with "natural intelligence" (and I use that term loosely). How are you supposed to give AI a paycheck, a vacation, or a doggie treat?
I don't want my tools to have rights, I want them to do the jobs I set for them to do.
Not trying to be snarky - but statements along those lines are often made by slave holders in regards to rights for slaves.
But "slaves" are people. People have emotions and a desire to be free and independent. A machine will not. Even with AI, a machine will not have emotions or free will unless we program it to. If anything, a true AI based machine will probably consider hormonal based emotions and drive to be completely useless and simply go back to crunching numbers.
I think the whole point of AI is to create a machine that can handle random situations and stimulus as well as a human. Flying a plane, picking up your kids toys, vacuuming the floor around a sleeping dog or parking a car would be good examples. Emotions and drive are not necessary and could even hamper the purpose of the machine. You can't have drive without laziness. You can't like something without disliking something else (or liking everything else to a lesser extent). You can program values, but I don't see how or why you would bother with emotions or a sense of purpose.
If you just woke up from a coma, America went through 8 years of voodoo economics,
Not an official term, but I'll accept it since it was the elder Bush that coined it.
record deficit spending by a runaway congress,
Agree that congress spent like drunken sailors, both D's and R's. However, I don't think the deficits were record even though the spending was. I remember that the economy at one point was booming so well that the gov't did pull in record tax receipts. And this was after tax cuts. It's sad that after such an awesome economic boom that Democrats took over congress and ruined it all.
a jobless recovery
BZZZTTTT! Wrong. Unemployment was at the low 4's at one point. It was the first time I had heard the term "virtually full employment".
and an economy propped up with record low interest rates that lead to a housing bubble.
Partially, but not completely. It's not really a bubble until it bursts. Unfortunately, it was the Fannie/Freddie mess that caused the burst. Unfortunately, it COULD have been prevented. (Please read that whole article and tell me how it was the Republican's fault again)
Combine that with a failure to monitor the largest financial institutions because of an ideological aversion to regulation, and you have a perfect financial storm.
See the link above. It wasn't "ideological aversion to regulation". It was Chris Dodd and Barney Frank protecting their largest contributors. (read: Bribe Providers)
Now that you're up to date, we have a new American President who is not beholden to special interests, especially energy interests, who has some vision for a clean energy future.
You can't be serious!
All of that was sardonic. What do you not understand?
I tend to think of "RINOs" as those that can actually think for themselves. I'm more likely to back one of them or a Blue Dog Democrat over someone that walks the party line.
Sometimes I agree with that. I just brought it up because the GP used Snowe's name to show that this particular bill has bipartisan support because she has a (R) after her name. Saying this bill is bipartisan because Snowe voted for it is like saying that the opposition to health care is bipartisan because some (D)'s oppose it.... or Iraq war because some D's were on board... or anything else where one party was able to sway a fence sitter from the other side. It means little until the final vote is something like 95-5.
Yes, if when you say "boss", you mean "US Senate", where this bill was introduced.
In any case, supporting that sentiment that elected officials of opposing parties are not significantly distinguishable, note that this bill in its original form was a bipartisan bill, as one of the co-sponsors, Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [ME], is a member of the GOP.
Olympia Snowe is a Republican in name only (RINO). It's easier to get her to sign on to a Democrat bill than a Republican one.
A big issue with anything like this is that it could be used against our infrastructure almost as easily as it could be used to protect our infrastructure. Think about what would happen if a foreign power or other malicous agent gained control of this "ban" button - they could then cripple banking and other critical infrastructure in a pseudo-DOS attack; instead of disabling by pounding on a site, they could just disconnect it.
Simple! Take the BAN button off line. (Duh)
Or maybe install a big red Fix It button right next to it. Hell, we could just ask the Russians to push that Reset button we gave them.
It seems very alarmist. I don't see how dropping private computers off the net is an invasion of privacy either. This type of law is created for a "worst case" scenario. While people might not think it very possible, you DO need to plan for it - not unlike disaster recovery in IT. Say we get in a war with China and they attack our power stations in the US via a massive cyber attack - do you want there not to be guidelines at that time? There is a balance between freedom and national security, and the original poster seems to be much more of a sky-is-falling type in regards to this type of law.
Well, in your scenario, wouldn't it be easier, faster and less intrusive if they just took the power stations of the grid (Internet grid, not power grid... that'd just be stupid)?
If they were attacking banks, ask the banks to go offline (trust me, they'll do this gladly in a heartbeat) and/or take the Fed off line.
If an attack coming from China or wherever is attacking everything... then take down the routers at our borders.
If they are attacking the nuke silo's... well hell I hope those are not on the grid anyway!!!
and so on.
Seriously, I can think of no national emergency that would require the entire Web going off line that couldn't be solved by some simpler and much less drastic means. Well, except for something like the blogosphere and some unnamed news network with FOXxy reporters is saying bad things about the President. Something tells me that is the emergency that this bill is intended for.
The governments can close roads for security reasons. Same for airports and a myriad of other physical entities. However, when it comes to the internet, everyone get's their panties in a bunch. If this were a country like Iran or China, then yes, a proposal like this would be unsettling to say the least. However, I'm not as pessimistic about Uncle Sam's motivations and considering how incompetent corporate security is in many sectors, I don't see this as a bad thing. It just seems like this posting is a typical "angry american", knee-jerk reaction to a well-intentioned government proposal.
How would you feel if this bill stated that they could shut down the TV or radio networks? How about if it stated they could shut down the newspapers or other forms of "press"? Would it be so OK then? Remember, the Internet is about information. That is what the Freedom of the Press means.
Still, in an emergency, I see no reason why the government could NOT shut down the Internet. I don't know why they need a bill for this. That's the part that makes me nervous. Especially when you consider that if an emergency so severe that it requires the entire Internet to be shut down, would probably have already taken the Internet down anyway.
Does the president now have the option of disconnecting people when they disagree with his policies?
Perhaps he could have a big red button on his desk labelled "BAN", and could amuse himself by disconnecting people that make fun of him? The summary seems a little alarmist...
Or we could just cut the cable to the whitehouse and say that the Internet has been shut down.
The point of capitalism is not to lift up the employees. The point is to take their work and pay them less than the amount of money it generated for the business, do the same for yourself while investing the difference.
There, fixed that for you.
There'll be anomalies here and there, but it's never been normal for employees to be paid in proportion to the value they create.
Nope, never. Not even non-profits do that. Not even communist countries do that. No one, ever, ever, ever does that as a matter of practice and stays in business. You see, there are things other than the employee that must be paid for. Taxes for one. Social Security is mostly paid by your employer. If a company paid you exactly what you produce for the company, the company would be losing money in Soc. Sec. alone. Of course, there is the building you work in, your desk, your phone, your computer, the PC that you use to browse slashdot and so on that your company pays for so that you can do your job.
It's called overhead and everyone pays it. Even contractors that work for and pay themselves still have to take a chunk out for overhead.
Also, stop trying to bash capitalism and profit. First of all, profit is not a dirty word. It is the point of business. If a business doesn't make a profit, why bother? It would be just as good to stuff the money in your mattress. It would be better to buy CD's or government bonds.
And capitalism... you have a problem with capitalism? I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm sure you will be happy in your new job making rubber vomit in a factory in China. I'm sure those factory workers are so much more happy than those of us sitting in cushy chairs in our climate controlled buildings surfing the web here in the Capitalist West!
I believe I said, "something like a math coprocessor".
Not to worry as an another AC reminded me when he/she said, "it uses floating point arithmetics..." Most older mp3 players do not support this in hardware, making it nearly impossible to get them to play ogg files. I don't think this phone will have that problem.
Which would be answered if you read about the phone...
Unlike the google phones this will be based on a normal Linux distribution with all drivers open sourced - and first generation will be on GTK, but should be changed to QT soonish since Nokia happens to own that piece of.... code.
Being based on GTK code means nothing as far as being able to sync up with other GTK or even QT apps.
I read about the phone. It seems to be able to link up with exchange email, calendar and contacts with no problems so I know it will have software that runs on Windows (what phone doesn't?!!?). Will it sync up with my Kontact Calendar and contact list? If not Kontact, how about Evolution? Or will it have a proprietary, online calendar like Google's?
I ask because I've had a hell of a time getting my Centro to sync up with my Linux desktop. Seeing that this thing runs Linux itself, will syncing it with Linux be comparable with syncing it with Windows, if it syncs with Linux at all?
Most media devices with music playback abilities do not have the function to play ogg (or flac for that matter). I have always wondered why. Isn't ogg relatively free to implement because it's GPL?
I am no expert, but I believe that OGG requires some sort of hardware to be able to play. Nothing specific to OGG, but something like a math coprocessor or something that simply isn't needed in mp3 players.
That said, my Centro plays oggs just fine with Aero Player.
specs are better than the iphone and the interface looks nice. how much is it? I think the $299 price point is the most that most people are willing to pay
How are these specs better then the iPhone 3GS? The 3GS contains:
CPU: ARM Cortex-A8 running at 600 MHz (same as N900)
Memory: 256 MB (same as N900)
GPU: PowerVR SGX (same as N900
Max Internal flash: 32 GB (same as N900)
Aside from the hardware keyboard, I'm not seeing how it's better hardware-wise.
Up to 1 GB of application memory (256 MB RAM, 768 MB virtual memory) Data transfers over a cellular network 10/2Mbps Removable battery Wide aspect ratio 16:9 (WVGA) Video recording file format:.mp4; codec: MPEG-4 Video recording at up to 848x480 pixels (WVGA) and up to 25fps Removable battery Video playback file formats:.mp4,.avi,.wmv,.3gp; codecs: H.264, MPEG-4, Xvid, WMV, H.263 5 MP camera with Carl Zeiss lens and LED flash 3D graphics accelerator with OpenGL ES 2.0 support Removable battery 32 GB internal storage Expandable to up to 48 GB with external microSD card Removable battery 800x480 resolution screen Removable battery
There's more, but I'm tiered of copying and pasting. Don't get me wrong, the iPhone is nice, but these specs are better as far as I know (not sure about the widescreen). Oh, and there's a Removable battery
Slashdot Mirror
Israel is not a people. It is a piece of land that is occasionally a nation and occasionally a province and occasionally a group of nations.
Jewish isn't a people either. It's a religion. ...
It is interesting to note that the Muslims are also descended from Heber through Ishmael, son of Abraham, and are therefore all Hebrews as well.
Um... Muslim is neither a race nor a people. It too is a religion.
(sorry, couldn't resist. Your post was informative)
"the temperature on its sun-facing side is around 4220 degrees Fahrenheit."
For anyone using the SI, this is about 2327 degrees Celsius
From where I sit, anything over 1000 is all the same to me... FRIGGIN HOT! To me, there is really no difference between 4220 Celsius and 4220 Fahrenheit. I'm sure there are differences when you have to consider the temps that rock melts or whatever, but once the temp gets high enough to kill me in less than a second, it's all the same to me.
Yes... PCL (the name escaped me earlier).
Support for PCL in Brother printers tend to make these relatively trouble free.
They are also cheap and reliable.
Ditto for the Okidata LED printers. I had one last eight years on a Linux box that was recently replaced due to a drum issue. Sure, I could have simply replaced the drum but the new (new to me anyway) one was free.
The Nazis did not try to destroy Israel, because Israel didn't exist until after the second world war. This fact rather indicates that at least one of the attempts to 'wipe them off the face of the planet' since biblical times worked...
I think the post you were responding to meant Israel as a people (Jews), not a country.
...rather than just fucking nameless strangers??
Phew! I'm safe. All the strangers I've done the horizontal mambo with had names. I can't tell you what they were, but I know for certain that they had names.
The US also happens to have harbored terrorists inside its borders. Luis Posada Carilles bombed a Cuban airliner, and so far as I know, he still lives in the US, and he cannot be deported. Since we will not hand him over, Cuba has the right to invade our country and, in the process, kill thousands of innocents who have no connection to the government (intentional or not). Then, after the invasion, the Cuban government
First, I'd have to say to Cuba... good luck with that.
Next, do not target "thousands of innocents who have no connection to the government", unlike what they have done to us.
Then again, I'm starting to realize that you are big pussy who would be happy to see:
(start music)
Bush: "Hey Mr. Taliban, please hand over Osama."
Taliban: "Daylight come and we put hide him in a hole"
Bush: "Please Mr. Taliban, let us have Osama"
Taliban: "Come and take him if you think you have the bolls"
(end music)
Bush: "Ok then, never mind. Sorry to bother you guys. If you need to kill another 3000 of us, please let us know ahead of time so we can put your guys in first class. It's closer to the cockpit."
I'm not sure he's advocating cutting off the soldiers from support. He just seems to be saying that the war is really stupid, and any and all investment in such a war is folly to the extreme. The rest of his post is just trolling.
But, that said, I am not sure if it would be betrayal. From my point of view, everyone who signed up to invade Afghanistan and Iraq betrayed me, betrayed the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, and betrayed the citizens of his respective nation. When it comes to randomly invading countries, I am a pacifist to the extreme.
You do realize that 9-11 was ordered by a guy living in Afghanistan, under the protection of the Taliban, right? You can say what you want about Iraq, but going to war in Afghanistan was IN RESPONSE to us being attacked. It was hardly random.
(by the way, I'm not a big fan of the "minors do not have rights or freedoms" ideology. And also this is definitely a slippery slope.)
Sorry, but 6-yr olds do NOT have freedoms or rights. They are not mature enough to handle them. Now if you put one of these on your 17-yr old, you have issues, but I don't think that this is what this thing was intended for.
Thank goodness that constant surveillance would have no detrimental effect on a child.
When I was 6, I don't think I would have cared.
Isn't there some saying about trading one thing for another, and not deserving either?
Sorry, genius, but granting freedom to a 3-yr old is not going to increase their security. Actually, it's quite the opposite. I would say that those who are stupid enough to allow any unmonitored freedom outside the back yard to a child under 5 is a moron. That said, even with this monitoring device, I still would not let a child have unfettered access to the outside world. I'm a parent and I have a hard time taking a shower or a dump when I'm watching my daughter by myself. I won't let her out of my sight without setting the alarm system.
The thing is - what sort of "purpose" could you ever you give a clever AI? Can you motivate through "rewards" like we do with "natural intelligence" (and I use that term loosely). How are you supposed to give AI a paycheck, a vacation, or a doggie treat?
You install an orgasm button.
Not trying to be snarky - but statements along those lines are often made by slave holders in regards to rights for slaves.
But "slaves" are people. People have emotions and a desire to be free and independent. A machine will not. Even with AI, a machine will not have emotions or free will unless we program it to. If anything, a true AI based machine will probably consider hormonal based emotions and drive to be completely useless and simply go back to crunching numbers.
I think the whole point of AI is to create a machine that can handle random situations and stimulus as well as a human. Flying a plane, picking up your kids toys, vacuuming the floor around a sleeping dog or parking a car would be good examples. Emotions and drive are not necessary and could even hamper the purpose of the machine. You can't have drive without laziness. You can't like something without disliking something else (or liking everything else to a lesser extent). You can program values, but I don't see how or why you would bother with emotions or a sense of purpose.
If you just woke up from a coma, America went through 8 years of voodoo economics,
Not an official term, but I'll accept it since it was the elder Bush that coined it.
record deficit spending by a runaway congress,
Agree that congress spent like drunken sailors, both D's and R's. However, I don't think the deficits were record even though the spending was. I remember that the economy at one point was booming so well that the gov't did pull in record tax receipts. And this was after tax cuts. It's sad that after such an awesome economic boom that Democrats took over congress and ruined it all.
a jobless recovery
BZZZTTTT! Wrong. Unemployment was at the low 4's at one point. It was the first time I had heard the term "virtually full employment".
and an economy propped up with record low interest rates that lead to a housing bubble.
Partially, but not completely. It's not really a bubble until it bursts. Unfortunately, it was the Fannie/Freddie mess that caused the burst. Unfortunately, it COULD have been prevented. (Please read that whole article and tell me how it was the Republican's fault again)
Combine that with a failure to monitor the largest financial institutions because of an ideological aversion to regulation, and you have a perfect financial storm.
See the link above. It wasn't "ideological aversion to regulation". It was Chris Dodd and Barney Frank protecting their largest contributors. (read: Bribe Providers)
Now that you're up to date, we have a new American President who is not beholden to special interests, especially energy interests, who has some vision for a clean energy future.
You can't be serious!
All of that was sardonic. What do you not understand?
Crap!
That's true, although porn leads to head-flexing as well.
And dain bramage!
I tend to think of "RINOs" as those that can actually think for themselves. I'm more likely to back one of them or a Blue Dog Democrat over someone that walks the party line.
Sometimes I agree with that. I just brought it up because the GP used Snowe's name to show that this particular bill has bipartisan support because she has a (R) after her name. Saying this bill is bipartisan because Snowe voted for it is like saying that the opposition to health care is bipartisan because some (D)'s oppose it.... or Iraq war because some D's were on board... or anything else where one party was able to sway a fence sitter from the other side. It means little until the final vote is something like 95-5.
Yes, if when you say "boss", you mean "US Senate", where this bill was introduced.
In any case, supporting that sentiment that elected officials of opposing parties are not significantly distinguishable, note that this bill in its original form was a bipartisan bill, as one of the co-sponsors, Sen Snowe, Olympia J. [ME], is a member of the GOP.
Olympia Snowe is a Republican in name only (RINO). It's easier to get her to sign on to a Democrat bill than a Republican one.
amen
Are you asking God to mod that comment up?
A big issue with anything like this is that it could be used against our infrastructure almost as easily as it could be used to protect our infrastructure. Think about what would happen if a foreign power or other malicous agent gained control of this "ban" button - they could then cripple banking and other critical infrastructure in a pseudo-DOS attack; instead of disabling by pounding on a site, they could just disconnect it.
Simple! Take the BAN button off line. (Duh)
Or maybe install a big red Fix It button right next to it. Hell, we could just ask the Russians to push that Reset button we gave them.
It seems very alarmist. I don't see how dropping private computers off the net is an invasion of privacy either. This type of law is created for a "worst case" scenario. While people might not think it very possible, you DO need to plan for it - not unlike disaster recovery in IT. Say we get in a war with China and they attack our power stations in the US via a massive cyber attack - do you want there not to be guidelines at that time? There is a balance between freedom and national security, and the original poster seems to be much more of a sky-is-falling type in regards to this type of law.
Well, in your scenario, wouldn't it be easier, faster and less intrusive if they just took the power stations of the grid (Internet grid, not power grid... that'd just be stupid)?
If they were attacking banks, ask the banks to go offline (trust me, they'll do this gladly in a heartbeat) and/or take the Fed off line.
If an attack coming from China or wherever is attacking everything... then take down the routers at our borders.
If they are attacking the nuke silo's... well hell I hope those are not on the grid anyway!!!
and so on.
Seriously, I can think of no national emergency that would require the entire Web going off line that couldn't be solved by some simpler and much less drastic means. Well, except for something like the blogosphere and some unnamed news network with FOXxy reporters is saying bad things about the President. Something tells me that is the emergency that this bill is intended for.
The governments can close roads for security reasons. Same for airports and a myriad of other physical entities. However, when it comes to the internet, everyone get's their panties in a bunch. If this were a country like Iran or China, then yes, a proposal like this would be unsettling to say the least. However, I'm not as pessimistic about Uncle Sam's motivations and considering how incompetent corporate security is in many sectors, I don't see this as a bad thing. It just seems like this posting is a typical "angry american", knee-jerk reaction to a well-intentioned government proposal.
How would you feel if this bill stated that they could shut down the TV or radio networks? How about if it stated they could shut down the newspapers or other forms of "press"? Would it be so OK then? Remember, the Internet is about information. That is what the Freedom of the Press means.
Still, in an emergency, I see no reason why the government could NOT shut down the Internet. I don't know why they need a bill for this. That's the part that makes me nervous. Especially when you consider that if an emergency so severe that it requires the entire Internet to be shut down, would probably have already taken the Internet down anyway.
Does the president now have the option of disconnecting people when they disagree with his policies?
Perhaps he could have a big red button on his desk labelled "BAN", and could amuse himself by disconnecting people that make fun of him? The summary seems a little alarmist...
Or we could just cut the cable to the whitehouse and say that the Internet has been shut down.
The point of capitalism is not to lift up the employees. The point is to take their work and pay them less than the amount of money it generated for the business, do the same for yourself while investing the difference.
There, fixed that for you.
There'll be anomalies here and there, but it's never been normal for employees to be paid in proportion to the value they create.
Nope, never. Not even non-profits do that. Not even communist countries do that. No one, ever, ever, ever does that as a matter of practice and stays in business. You see, there are things other than the employee that must be paid for. Taxes for one. Social Security is mostly paid by your employer. If a company paid you exactly what you produce for the company, the company would be losing money in Soc. Sec. alone. Of course, there is the building you work in, your desk, your phone, your computer, the PC that you use to browse slashdot and so on that your company pays for so that you can do your job.
It's called overhead and everyone pays it. Even contractors that work for and pay themselves still have to take a chunk out for overhead.
Also, stop trying to bash capitalism and profit. First of all, profit is not a dirty word. It is the point of business. If a business doesn't make a profit, why bother? It would be just as good to stuff the money in your mattress. It would be better to buy CD's or government bonds.
And capitalism... you have a problem with capitalism? I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm sure you will be happy in your new job making rubber vomit in a factory in China. I'm sure those factory workers are so much more happy than those of us sitting in cushy chairs in our climate controlled buildings surfing the web here in the Capitalist West!
you are no expert. No extra processor is needed.
I believe I said, "something like a math coprocessor".
Not to worry as an another AC reminded me when he/she said, "it uses floating point arithmetics..." Most older mp3 players do not support this in hardware, making it nearly impossible to get them to play ogg files. I don't think this phone will have that problem.
Which would be answered if you read about the phone...
Unlike the google phones this will be based on a normal Linux distribution with all drivers open sourced - and first generation will be on GTK, but should be changed to QT soonish since Nokia happens to own that piece of .... code.
Being based on GTK code means nothing as far as being able to sync up with other GTK or even QT apps.
I read about the phone. It seems to be able to link up with exchange email, calendar and contacts with no problems so I know it will have software that runs on Windows (what phone doesn't?!!?). Will it sync up with my Kontact Calendar and contact list? If not Kontact, how about Evolution? Or will it have a proprietary, online calendar like Google's?
I ask because I've had a hell of a time getting my Centro to sync up with my Linux desktop. Seeing that this thing runs Linux itself, will syncing it with Linux be comparable with syncing it with Windows, if it syncs with Linux at all?
Most media devices with music playback abilities do not have the function to play ogg (or flac for that matter). I have always wondered why. Isn't ogg relatively free to implement because it's GPL?
I am no expert, but I believe that OGG requires some sort of hardware to be able to play. Nothing specific to OGG, but something like a math coprocessor or something that simply isn't needed in mp3 players.
That said, my Centro plays oggs just fine with Aero Player.
Sure, but does it run Lin... oh. Nevermind.
I was literally asking the same question. Sure, I know the phone is Linux based, but will I be able to sync it up with Ubuntu desktop?
specs are better than the iphone and the interface looks nice. how much is it? I think the $299 price point is the most that most people are willing to pay
How are these specs better then the iPhone 3GS? The 3GS contains:
Aside from the hardware keyboard, I'm not seeing how it's better hardware-wise.
Up to 1 GB of application memory (256 MB RAM, 768 MB virtual memory) .mp4; codec: MPEG-4 .mp4, .avi, .wmv, .3gp; codecs: H.264, MPEG-4, Xvid, WMV, H.263
Data transfers over a cellular network 10/2Mbps
Removable battery
Wide aspect ratio 16:9 (WVGA)
Video recording file format:
Video recording at up to 848x480 pixels (WVGA) and up to 25fps
Removable battery
Video playback file formats:
5 MP camera with Carl Zeiss lens and LED flash
3D graphics accelerator with OpenGL ES 2.0 support
Removable battery
32 GB internal storage
Expandable to up to 48 GB with external microSD card
Removable battery
800x480 resolution screen
Removable battery
There's more, but I'm tiered of copying and pasting. Don't get me wrong, the iPhone is nice, but these specs are better as far as I know (not sure about the widescreen). Oh, and there's a Removable battery