And MacOS X is very accomodating of "fat" applications. The.app files (which are just folders) can contain subfolders for different architectures. This is, of course, inherited from NextStep, and was supposed to be exploited by Yellow Box for Windows.
But it seems that Apple (read, "The Steve) has decided against Yellow Box for Windows. So I was wondering the other day, why not take advantage of the incredibly flexible format of.app files on other platforms? The internals are very well documented. And it shouldn't even be necessary to "emulate" Cocoa -- there's nothing that says the architecture-specific binaries have to use the same API. I can see this being exploited to create create a single executable that runs appropriately in Gnome/KDE/console/whatever.
Do you want appliances that are smarter than you? Of course not. Your appliances should be DUMBER than you, just like your furniture, your pets and your representatives in Congress.
I love technology and gadgets and machines that if they don't make life easier, are at least fun to use. But I also love camping without all those gadgets and machines, because it reminds me that humans have gotten along just fine for millenia without all that crap. So whenever I hear these stories about the wonderful new machines that will be making our lives better, my question is "things weren't good enough already?"
Sure, computers, touch-tone phones, cable television, programmable climate control, quartz watches... all wonderful and useful inventions that have, for the most part, been beneficial to our lives. But how many people in the world would be able to live without these? How many people know how to find clean water without it being in a plastic bottle with a Safe-T-Seal to guarantee freshness? Or cook a meal that hasn't been freeze-dried? Because those are the kinds of things you need to be able to do when you don't have the benefit of all those toys. And in the end, all they are are toys, and toys can (and will) break.
So to answer the previous question, "So what? They could be better!" There's no reason to halt the march of progress just 'cause a bunch of corporate types are throwing useless techno-hype in our faces. But we should be sure that we don't become too dependant on all these gadgets. Or else we'll end up like the Roman citizens who, having been bathed in luxury all their lives, were lost when all the comforts of society were gone.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to microwave my dinner, and I'm afraid I lost the remote...
Tudor Parfitt researched an African tribe called the Lemba, who claimed to be of Jewish decent. As well as the anthropological evidence, DNA was used to link the Lemba with Jews, specifically the Cohen modal haplotype. (Cohanim being the Jewish priests.)
So I'm thinking DNA could also tell us who Kennewick Man is, and trace the history of American indians. Where in Asia did they come from? Were there any migrations from Europe? And are they related to the Ainu?
I kinda see Amiga as the Libertarian Party. Back in the highly entrenched days of the 80s, the voice of an alternative that could stand up to the establisment was heralded as revolutionary. Eventually everyone else caught up with some of the things that had been said. So now the establisment has adopted some of the things that they were doing back then. And the alternative, even though it still holds some minor attraction, we're noticing its eccentricities, and maybe they're not so great as we once imagined. So any hope that they may unseat the status-quo has been dismissed, and we just mention them every once in a while partly to remind people that there are alternatives, but mostly for the entertainment value.
I've always wondered when we'd start seeing geek unionization. The recent engineers strike at Boeing shows that knowledge-workers are not immune to labor disputes.
It seems to me that there hasn't been much demand for unionization in the computer field because of some combination of high wages, high demand for workers, the promise of exorbitant benefits, and the youth of the workforce. I always figured we'd see organizing when people realise stock options aren't the best way to be paid.
But I had overlooked the lobbying potential of unions, and I can very well see the political front being the catalyst for an organized labor force. So, without necessarily demanding labor contracts from employees, perhaps it is nearing the time to create an IT union to carry out lobbying.
PS. Labor unions can be a controversial topic, so flame gently. And before someone tries calling me a commie pinko, I live in a free-to-work state and would probably be hesitant to join any union.
2.5. Promoting Open-Source and Open-Content Documentation Projects 2.6. Providing an Open-Source Documentation News and Announcements Resource
It's inarguably that Linux needs a lot of good PR these days, especially when you continually see articles such as the recent one in Silicon.com. And while the public is starting to hear more positive stories about Linux, most of these are from the for-profit entities such as RedHat or VA Linux. And those are, naturally, oriented to highlight their latest endeavour or product.
How much effort does OSWG spend on press releases, seeding news stories, and offering rebuttals to erronous reports? Has the group ever been solicited for an opinion by a news agency?
don't take seriously anything with an all-powerful "root" or "administrator" account.
So have you whipped up a version of Linux with root excised? See, that's the third beauty of Linux (after disclosure and accessibility), if you need some particular feature, you don't have to wait for the grace of some god-like corporate entity to bestow upon you the privilege of having it. If you really need something, like a root-less system, you can just code it yourself.
For instance, there's this Linux-based web server called BrickHouse that uses process-based security. While I haven't had much chance to really put their setup under the microscope, I consider it a prime example of the utility of linux. Anyone know where I can get an IIS server with process-based security?
Haven't patents been discussed enough on/. that we all realise how long it takes for them to move through the system? This particular patent was filed in 1995, while Newton was still somewhat alive. Why the patent writer decided to use a notebook in the diagrams, I've no idea. But the technology was used in the MP2k which, IIRC, had the Go-To buttons in software, instead of being printed over the screen. This patent obviously refers to the method used to do that. As for doing this on a notebook; if it was even Apple's original intention, I'd think they would have tried it out in some form before now. And any speculation on if they are is just that, pure speculation. Ever since The Steve took over, Apple has been playing their hand close to the chest. Hardly any news that has been supposedly leaked out of Apple has either been dead wrong or nothing that wasn't in a press release issued the next day. So these days it's best practice to treat any so-called news from Apple with suspicion. Incidentally, has anyone else noticed that Apple has received a patent for icon badges?
unsolicited commercial snail mail is a problem I would like to see addressed. Especially AOL CD-ROMs and other similar non paper things.
Don't take away my AOL cds! What would I use for drink coasters? Or small mirrors? Or putty scrapers? Or wind chimes? Or...
Back when they could still fit all that bloat on a floppy, I saw it as a public service so we'd never have to buy blank disks. Then they changed to CDs (which happened to coincide with when they began including MSIE) and I just figured I had to adapt to the new resource.
Well now I've almost become dependant on regular shipments of AOL CDs. I've got wobbly tables that were fixed by slipping a disc under one leg. The filter in my air conditioning was broken until I jammed one of those CDs in there. And that's not to mention how much AOL has done to promote the arts!
So please, whatever you do, don't make AOL stop sending me those CDs!
If you measure value only by the dollar amount, then you might have a point. But while Wal-Mart may be able to offer things at a lower dollar amount, hardly anyone goes to Wal-Mart to buy things that have any real value. And while this is abhorant, and causes many people to dislike Wal-Mart, I agree in part with you that it's not cause for a crusade.
Rallying the townsfolk to march on the local Wal-Mart with torches and pitchforks isn't going to do all that much. It's like saying a racoon is bad for scattering your garbage across your yard. They're not really bad, that's just what they do to survive. And selling cheap crap is what Wal-Mart does to survive.
But do we have to let them get away with it? We discourage racoons from getting into our garbage by chaining the cans and building a fence. So if you're fed up with Wal-Mart, you should build the economic equivalent of a fence. That is, don't shop there. Even though Wal-Mart may be able to undercut everyone else's prices, there's no rule that says you have to always buy at the lowest price (unless you're a cheapskate). The law of the free market only says that a merchant will sell an item at the highest price that people will pay. (Idealistically; but with taxes and regulation and other wierd crap it doesn't quite work out that way.) Most people, if they stop blindly leaping towards the lowest dollar amount, will probably find they can easily pay a bit more. Once you allow for that, then you can make buying decisions based on more than just price; in other words, value.
And that's when you start buying from local, independant retailers. You buy value from them. The value may not always be tangible, it may only be the self-satisfaction of not supporting a heartless megastore like Wal-Mart. This is similar to when some people choose a computer platform. I gain a personal value from not using Microsoft products, even if it means giving up the advantages that Word may have over its competition.
So Wal-Mart (or MS or B&N or whoever) can go on selling the cheap crap they do and I won't have a problem with it. When I tell people how much I dislike Wal-Mart (or MS or B&N or whoever) it's not so much because I want to force them to change their business practices, it's more so I can appear like some kind of inteligencia elite to whoever I'm talking to. But aside from that, it's the complacent, simple-minded, price-is-everything attitude of the populace that allows mega-companies to flourish. The evil isn't the business practice of selling cheap crap at low prices, it's the consumer practice of buying cheap crap just because it's a low price.
Of course, the ultimate result of getting people to change their buying habits will be Wal-Mart having to adjust to the new attitudes. So in a manner of speaking, I am trying to get Wal-Mart to change. But like a good little libertarian, I want the change to occur through the market naturally.
Quasi-related: did anyone notice that Amazon's sales for February dropped below 1 million for the first time since last August? It can only be assumed that the boycott had a considerable part in this. Making a value-based buying decision can and does have an effect.
Don't forget Greg Bear's Moving Mars, and a few other books he's written that go with it. (Heads is the only one that comes to mind, but that's on the moon.) Those books are more socio-political than anything else, though.
Then there's Bruce Sterling's short story Sunken Gardens about a terraforming contest on Mars. (SimPlanet?) It can be found in the Crystal Express collection.
And finally, if you can dig it up, Edmond Hamilton wrote a story in 1952 titled What's It Like Out There?
What you say is right on target regarding MP3s, but Napster very much promotes piracy. It is a means for people to copy copyrighted music from one person's computer to another -- what part of that is not blatant piracy? Sure, you can trade public domain music or only download songs you already own legally. But the former is a huge minority, and the later is rather pointless since you may as well rip your own music, and actually have control over the quality.
The Napster community is like a video or music store where anyone could walk in with a blank tape (or buy one at the store) and make copies of the music/movie right there, then walk out of the store with their own copy and the original remaining at the store for anyone else to copy. This is quite obviously lawsuit-bait, but should Napster be the one to bear the brunt of it? I don't think so, it's just a tool that's oblivious to copyright. But the actual network, and those computers being used to do the copying of copyrighted material, yeah they're gonna get burned.
when companies like Apple and Lotus turned to lawsuits rather than engineering to beat their competition, they were losing their edge
What is there to convince us that the same is not now true about Amazon? Jeff uses the word "protection" a lot, when he really means "competition". Yeah, sure, it may give defensive ammunition for aggressive competitors, but don't believe anything about "protecting" against some other "bully" applying for the patent and using it against other retailers. That's the wolf guarding the hen-house there.
And is Amazon really the ultimate in internet retailers that we couldn't do just as well with someone else? Isn't the point of competition that the best product that people will buy will naturally rise to a place of dominance? Where does securing intellectual property enter into that process? It doesn't.
I wouldn't have too much faith that Amazon will formally allow use of their patents without fear of legal action. Doing that would undermine the effectiveness of any suits they do pursue. The defense could claim that, since they're allowing all these other uses of the patent, it implies permission for anyone to use it. Not to mention, Amazon may say they'll let you use it now, but what about when you grow too big for their tastes. Just ask OS/2 users how far cooperation will get you.
Amazon has made countless other innovations in Web commerce that it didn't patent... the way that they publish sales rankings.
Then what? Sue the New York Times for their best-seller list?
Amazon has already become the reference site of record for the publishing industry, the site that everyone uses to search for information about books.
This is something I'm not so thrilled about. Amazon has just one goal: to make money buy selling things to visitors of their web site. Before the internet, where did you go to find out information about something? Sears-Roebuck? Macys? No, you went to a library, not some store. Sure, you can become informed at a store, but that's not what the owners of the store want you to do there; they want you to spend money. So when you go to Amazon.com, even if you can find out lots of information about books or movies or whatever, the site's primary, and for the most part only function is to get you to spend money. The effective result is the site will only provide service to you so much as it is profitable for Amazon. Just take a look at how Apple's iReview is coming about. Everything presented there has a pro-Apple slant. May I point out a critical review of Real.com? (Real, makers of RealPlayer, a competitor to Apple's Quicktime. hrmmm)
The point is, Amazon exists to make money (for them). If they act nice and try to be friendly to consumers, it's because they expect it to increase their sales (as well they should). Anything beyond that should be treated with scepticism.
Which begs the question, Would it be feasible to set up an authenticator that also ensures the signed applet won't do anything annoying, unexpected, or subversive to your computer? I imagine companies wishing to benefit from the negative press of others would line up for the chance to say "WE don't invade your privacy like this, and here's the signature that guarantees it."
I'm reserving comment about whether eyestrain will or won't exist with these screens. On the one hand, the light emitted is of a lower intensity, not to mention the lack of x-rays. But it's still emitted light, and our eyes evolved around looking at reflected light. And then there's the matter of refresh. I've never seen an OLED of any variety or incarnation, so I'm obviously talking out of my ass. But while the article mentions that these new hybrid OLEDs are faster than some older types, that still says nothing about how fast they are compared to LCDs or CRTs. So until I actually see one actually working, I have to wonder how practical they will be for computer applications without any kind of flicker or persistance.
Now, how about a sheet-sized OLED acting as a backlight to a LCD screen.
Display size (1600x1024) is not resolution. Resolution is dots-per-inch. And while Windows handles dpi deplorably, it is does handle it.
Display Properties->Settings->Advanced->General
The setting is labeled "Font Size", but it just adjusts the screen's dpi setting (which is shown below the control). Fonts are most obviously affected, but the size of the window widgets will also scale. (Because they're just glyphs themselves: try removing Marlett from your font folder.) And, theoretically, WYSIWYG-aware apps will also scale properly.
<RANT>At least, that's how it's supposed to work in theory. In practice, I've found that most Windows apps are blissfully unaware of what the real screen resolution is. This is what happens when you implement a feature half-assed and provide barely adequate support, much less drawing attention to it or requiring adherence to the standard.
And it's not even that difficult to do. Wasn't the whole point of DDC to allow monitors to report their physical configuration back to the OS? But no! Most el-cheapo monitors can barely be asked to report non-generic information, much less resolution, gamma and phosphor characteristics necessary to create adequate WYSIWYG. So Windows is made to rely too much on INF files, encouraging the hardware manufacturers to put less effort into DDC. And as for your LCD, well WYSIWYG should be nothing more than trivial since LCDs have discrete pixels. So we always know the exact size of the screen, the size of the pixels, and therefore the exact resolution for any display size. How hard is it to divide 12.7" by 1600? But apparently, that kind of math is too complicated for Windows, and you have to tell Windows what the dpi is yourself, and in a dialog that takes no less than 5 clicks to access.</RANT>
ObOn-topic: So would it be possible to make an organic laser-emitting diode based on this process?
I wouldn't say that nothing will happen. In fact, if I were an astronomer or geologist or in any field remotely related, I'd be sorely disappointed if nothing happened.
But in the sense that there will be no catastrophic or long-term effects, then yeah, there's nothing to worry about.
(Standard disclaimers apply, I'm not an expert and have no idea what I'm talking about.) These events have previously caused power grids to fail in Canada, England and Scandinavia. And the obvious failures of satellites. If these problems were handled without inconveniencing the populace before, it's because 11 years ago you didn't see everyone on the street with a cellular phone on their ear and satellite dishes hanging out of every building, home, and port-a-potty. So while the damage caused this time around won't likely be any worse than before, we will be much more aware of it. And when the mindless masses suddenly can't conference call from the 47th street cafe, I doubt they'd be patient enough to listen to a bunch of eggheads talking about coronal mass ejections. (Which sounds like something you'd hear a doctor say before he puts on the elbow-length glove.)
So, as this season of solar activity goes on, while we shouldn't be expecting massive failures of electronic systems, we should definitely expect massive failures of cognitive systems. And lots of ex-Y2K doomsayers suddenly popping up as solar flare doomsayers.
Idiocy is never out of season.
PS. I'm reading an article about how the US power grid is supposed to be much more at risk because of deregulation and the increased sharing of power. But really, I think this makes it less susceptible. The grid should be stronger now since power companies would be paranoid about a rogue neighbor taking them down. Not to mention the things they did in the name of Y2K.
Microsoft, in their infinite ineptitude, "fixed" their JS implementation in IE by making getYear() start returning "2000", causing Netscape's home page to display the year as "3900", and making some poor NS tech to have to change the page. (Take a look at the source.) And so far, that's the only page I've seen that actually used it correctly.
Slashdot Mirror
And MacOS X is very accomodating of "fat" applications. The .app files (which are just folders) can contain subfolders for different architectures. This is, of course, inherited from NextStep, and was supposed to be exploited by Yellow Box for Windows.
.app files on other platforms? The internals are very well documented. And it shouldn't even be necessary to "emulate" Cocoa -- there's nothing that says the architecture-specific binaries have to use the same API. I can see this being exploited to create create a single executable that runs appropriately in Gnome/KDE/console/whatever.
But it seems that Apple (read, "The Steve) has decided against Yellow Box for Windows. So I was wondering the other day, why not take advantage of the incredibly flexible format of
As Dave Barry said...
I love technology and gadgets and machines that if they don't make life easier, are at least fun to use. But I also love camping without all those gadgets and machines, because it reminds me that humans have gotten along just fine for millenia without all that crap. So whenever I hear these stories about the wonderful new machines that will be making our lives better, my question is "things weren't good enough already?"
Sure, computers, touch-tone phones, cable television, programmable climate control, quartz watches... all wonderful and useful inventions that have, for the most part, been beneficial to our lives. But how many people in the world would be able to live without these? How many people know how to find clean water without it being in a plastic bottle with a Safe-T-Seal to guarantee freshness? Or cook a meal that hasn't been freeze-dried? Because those are the kinds of things you need to be able to do when you don't have the benefit of all those toys. And in the end, all they are are toys, and toys can (and will) break.
So to answer the previous question, "So what? They could be better!" There's no reason to halt the march of progress just 'cause a bunch of corporate types are throwing useless techno-hype in our faces. But we should be sure that we don't become too dependant on all these gadgets. Or else we'll end up like the Roman citizens who, having been bathed in luxury all their lives, were lost when all the comforts of society were gone.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have to microwave my dinner, and I'm afraid I lost the remote...
schroedinger:~$ cat >box /bin/cat /usr/man/man1/cat.1.gz g ames /bin/cat /usr/man/man1/cat.1.gz
bash: cat: command not found
schroedinger:~$ whereis cat
cat:
schroedinger:~$ echo $PATH
/usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin:/usr/bin/X11:/usr/
schroedinger:~$ cat >box
bash: cat: command not found
schroedinger:~$ ls
GNUstep News
Mail box
schroedinger:~$ cat >box
bash: cat: command not found
schroedinger:~$ whereis cat
cat:
schroedinger:~$ AAAARRRRRRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!!!
Tudor Parfitt researched an African tribe called the Lemba, who claimed to be of Jewish decent. As well as the anthropological evidence, DNA was used to link the Lemba with Jews, specifically the Cohen modal haplotype. (Cohanim being the Jewish priests.)
So I'm thinking DNA could also tell us who Kennewick Man is, and trace the history of American indians. Where in Asia did they come from? Were there any migrations from Europe? And are they related to the Ainu?
And can you imagine what would happen if you put on the wrong exoskeleton. ( or.. )
aren't you glad this isn't another anime/alien/heinlein comment?
Check the stats for Team IBM
Dunno if this cluster is being used in the effort, though.
I kinda see Amiga as the Libertarian Party. Back in the highly entrenched days of the 80s, the voice of an alternative that could stand up to the establisment was heralded as revolutionary. Eventually everyone else caught up with some of the things that had been said. So now the establisment has adopted some of the things that they were doing back then. And the alternative, even though it still holds some minor attraction, we're noticing its eccentricities, and maybe they're not so great as we once imagined. So any hope that they may unseat the status-quo has been dismissed, and we just mention them every once in a while partly to remind people that there are alternatives, but mostly for the entertainment value.
And then there's the BeOS-Reform Party....
I've always wondered when we'd start seeing geek unionization. The recent engineers strike at Boeing shows that knowledge-workers are not immune to labor disputes.
It seems to me that there hasn't been much demand for unionization in the computer field because of some combination of high wages, high demand for workers, the promise of exorbitant benefits, and the youth of the workforce. I always figured we'd see organizing when people realise stock options aren't the best way to be paid.
But I had overlooked the lobbying potential of unions, and I can very well see the political front being the catalyst for an organized labor force. So, without necessarily demanding labor contracts from employees, perhaps it is nearing the time to create an IT union to carry out lobbying.
PS. Labor unions can be a controversial topic, so flame gently. And before someone tries calling me a commie pinko, I live in a free-to-work state and would probably be hesitant to join any union.
Oh, sure, then we'll just evoke images of a "skull and cross-bones" pirate flag. Gee, thanks.
X-bone, X Window system, MacOS X, X-box. This has got to be some kind of Xist plot!
From the OSWG Mission Statement:
It's inarguably that Linux needs a lot of good PR these days, especially when you continually see articles such as the recent one in Silicon.com. And while the public is starting to hear more positive stories about Linux, most of these are from the for-profit entities such as RedHat or VA Linux. And those are, naturally, oriented to highlight their latest endeavour or product.
How much effort does OSWG spend on press releases, seeding news stories, and offering rebuttals to erronous reports? Has the group ever been solicited for an opinion by a news agency?
So have you whipped up a version of Linux with root excised? See, that's the third beauty of Linux (after disclosure and accessibility), if you need some particular feature, you don't have to wait for the grace of some god-like corporate entity to bestow upon you the privilege of having it. If you really need something, like a root-less system, you can just code it yourself.
For instance, there's this Linux-based web server called BrickHouse that uses process-based security. While I haven't had much chance to really put their setup under the microscope, I consider it a prime example of the utility of linux. Anyone know where I can get an IIS server with process-based security?
Haven't patents been discussed enough on /. that we all realise how long it takes for them to move through the system? This particular patent was filed in 1995, while Newton was still somewhat alive. Why the patent writer decided to use a notebook in the diagrams, I've no idea. But the technology was used in the MP2k which, IIRC, had the Go-To buttons in software, instead of being printed over the screen. This patent obviously refers to the method used to do that.
As for doing this on a notebook; if it was even Apple's original intention, I'd think they would have tried it out in some form before now. And any speculation on if they are is just that, pure speculation. Ever since The Steve took over, Apple has been playing their hand close to the chest. Hardly any news that has been supposedly leaked out of Apple has either been dead wrong or nothing that wasn't in a press release issued the next day. So these days it's best practice to treat any so-called news from Apple with suspicion.
Incidentally, has anyone else noticed that Apple has received a patent for icon badges?
Don't take away my AOL cds! What would I use for drink coasters? Or small mirrors? Or putty scrapers? Or wind chimes? Or...
Back when they could still fit all that bloat on a floppy, I saw it as a public service so we'd never have to buy blank disks. Then they changed to CDs (which happened to coincide with when they began including MSIE) and I just figured I had to adapt to the new resource.
Well now I've almost become dependant on regular shipments of AOL CDs. I've got wobbly tables that were fixed by slipping a disc under one leg. The filter in my air conditioning was broken until I jammed one of those CDs in there. And that's not to mention how much AOL has done to promote the arts!
So please, whatever you do, don't make AOL stop sending me those CDs!
If you measure value only by the dollar amount, then you might have a point. But while Wal-Mart may be able to offer things at a lower dollar amount, hardly anyone goes to Wal-Mart to buy things that have any real value. And while this is abhorant, and causes many people to dislike Wal-Mart, I agree in part with you that it's not cause for a crusade.
Rallying the townsfolk to march on the local Wal-Mart with torches and pitchforks isn't going to do all that much. It's like saying a racoon is bad for scattering your garbage across your yard. They're not really bad, that's just what they do to survive. And selling cheap crap is what Wal-Mart does to survive.
But do we have to let them get away with it? We discourage racoons from getting into our garbage by chaining the cans and building a fence. So if you're fed up with Wal-Mart, you should build the economic equivalent of a fence. That is, don't shop there. Even though Wal-Mart may be able to undercut everyone else's prices, there's no rule that says you have to always buy at the lowest price (unless you're a cheapskate). The law of the free market only says that a merchant will sell an item at the highest price that people will pay. (Idealistically; but with taxes and regulation and other wierd crap it doesn't quite work out that way.) Most people, if they stop blindly leaping towards the lowest dollar amount, will probably find they can easily pay a bit more. Once you allow for that, then you can make buying decisions based on more than just price; in other words, value.
And that's when you start buying from local, independant retailers. You buy value from them. The value may not always be tangible, it may only be the self-satisfaction of not supporting a heartless megastore like Wal-Mart. This is similar to when some people choose a computer platform. I gain a personal value from not using Microsoft products, even if it means giving up the advantages that Word may have over its competition.
So Wal-Mart (or MS or B&N or whoever) can go on selling the cheap crap they do and I won't have a problem with it. When I tell people how much I dislike Wal-Mart (or MS or B&N or whoever) it's not so much because I want to force them to change their business practices, it's more so I can appear like some kind of inteligencia elite to whoever I'm talking to. But aside from that, it's the complacent, simple-minded, price-is-everything attitude of the populace that allows mega-companies to flourish. The evil isn't the business practice of selling cheap crap at low prices, it's the consumer practice of buying cheap crap just because it's a low price.
Of course, the ultimate result of getting people to change their buying habits will be Wal-Mart having to adjust to the new attitudes. So in a manner of speaking, I am trying to get Wal-Mart to change. But like a good little libertarian, I want the change to occur through the market naturally.
Quasi-related: did anyone notice that Amazon's sales for February dropped below 1 million for the first time since last August? It can only be assumed that the boycott had a considerable part in this. Making a value-based buying decision can and does have an effect.
Don't forget Greg Bear's Moving Mars, and a few other books he's written that go with it. (Heads is the only one that comes to mind, but that's on the moon.) Those books are more socio-political than anything else, though.
Then there's Bruce Sterling's short story Sunken Gardens about a terraforming contest on Mars. (SimPlanet?) It can be found in the Crystal Express collection.
And finally, if you can dig it up, Edmond Hamilton wrote a story in 1952 titled What's It Like Out There?
What you say is right on target regarding MP3s, but Napster very much promotes piracy. It is a means for people to copy copyrighted music from one person's computer to another -- what part of that is not blatant piracy? Sure, you can trade public domain music or only download songs you already own legally. But the former is a huge minority, and the later is rather pointless since you may as well rip your own music, and actually have control over the quality.
The Napster community is like a video or music store where anyone could walk in with a blank tape (or buy one at the store) and make copies of the music/movie right there, then walk out of the store with their own copy and the original remaining at the store for anyone else to copy. This is quite obviously lawsuit-bait, but should Napster be the one to bear the brunt of it? I don't think so, it's just a tool that's oblivious to copyright. But the actual network, and those computers being used to do the copying of copyrighted material, yeah they're gonna get burned.
What is there to convince us that the same is not now true about Amazon? Jeff uses the word "protection" a lot, when he really means "competition". Yeah, sure, it may give defensive ammunition for aggressive competitors, but don't believe anything about "protecting" against some other "bully" applying for the patent and using it against other retailers. That's the wolf guarding the hen-house there.
And is Amazon really the ultimate in internet retailers that we couldn't do just as well with someone else? Isn't the point of competition that the best product that people will buy will naturally rise to a place of dominance? Where does securing intellectual property enter into that process? It doesn't.
I wouldn't have too much faith that Amazon will formally allow use of their patents without fear of legal action. Doing that would undermine the effectiveness of any suits they do pursue. The defense could claim that, since they're allowing all these other uses of the patent, it implies permission for anyone to use it. Not to mention, Amazon may say they'll let you use it now, but what about when you grow too big for their tastes. Just ask OS/2 users how far cooperation will get you.
Then what? Sue the New York Times for their best-seller list?
This is something I'm not so thrilled about. Amazon has just one goal: to make money buy selling things to visitors of their web site. Before the internet, where did you go to find out information about something? Sears-Roebuck? Macys? No, you went to a library, not some store. Sure, you can become informed at a store, but that's not what the owners of the store want you to do there; they want you to spend money. So when you go to Amazon.com, even if you can find out lots of information about books or movies or whatever, the site's primary, and for the most part only function is to get you to spend money. The effective result is the site will only provide service to you so much as it is profitable for Amazon. Just take a look at how Apple's iReview is coming about. Everything presented there has a pro-Apple slant. May I point out a critical review of Real.com? (Real, makers of RealPlayer, a competitor to Apple's Quicktime. hrmmm)
The point is, Amazon exists to make money (for them). If they act nice and try to be friendly to consumers, it's because they expect it to increase their sales (as well they should). Anything beyond that should be treated with scepticism.
Which begs the question, Would it be feasible to set up an authenticator that also ensures the signed applet won't do anything annoying, unexpected, or subversive to your computer? I imagine companies wishing to benefit from the negative press of others would line up for the chance to say "WE don't invade your privacy like this, and here's the signature that guarantees it."
I'm reserving comment about whether eyestrain will or won't exist with these screens. On the one hand, the light emitted is of a lower intensity, not to mention the lack of x-rays. But it's still emitted light, and our eyes evolved around looking at reflected light. And then there's the matter of refresh. I've never seen an OLED of any variety or incarnation, so I'm obviously talking out of my ass. But while the article mentions that these new hybrid OLEDs are faster than some older types, that still says nothing about how fast they are compared to LCDs or CRTs. So until I actually see one actually working, I have to wonder how practical they will be for computer applications without any kind of flicker or persistance.
Now, how about a sheet-sized OLED acting as a backlight to a LCD screen.
Display size (1600x1024) is not resolution. Resolution is dots-per-inch. And while Windows handles dpi deplorably, it is does handle it.
Display Properties->Settings->Advanced->General
The setting is labeled "Font Size", but it just adjusts the screen's dpi setting (which is shown below the control). Fonts are most obviously affected, but the size of the window widgets will also scale. (Because they're just glyphs themselves: try removing Marlett from your font folder.) And, theoretically, WYSIWYG-aware apps will also scale properly.
<RANT>At least, that's how it's supposed to work in theory. In practice, I've found that most Windows apps are blissfully unaware of what the real screen resolution is. This is what happens when you implement a feature half-assed and provide barely adequate support, much less drawing attention to it or requiring adherence to the standard.
And it's not even that difficult to do. Wasn't the whole point of DDC to allow monitors to report their physical configuration back to the OS? But no! Most el-cheapo monitors can barely be asked to report non-generic information, much less resolution, gamma and phosphor characteristics necessary to create adequate WYSIWYG. So Windows is made to rely too much on INF files, encouraging the hardware manufacturers to put less effort into DDC. And as for your LCD, well WYSIWYG should be nothing more than trivial since LCDs have discrete pixels. So we always know the exact size of the screen, the size of the pixels, and therefore the exact resolution for any display size. How hard is it to divide 12.7" by 1600? But apparently, that kind of math is too complicated for Windows, and you have to tell Windows what the dpi is yourself, and in a dialog that takes no less than 5 clicks to access.</RANT>
ObOn-topic:
So would it be possible to make an organic laser-emitting diode based on this process?
Isn't everything done in VB "basic"?
*ducks* Sorry, couldn't resist.
I wouldn't say that nothing will happen. In fact, if I were an astronomer or geologist or in any field remotely related, I'd be sorely disappointed if nothing happened.
But in the sense that there will be no catastrophic or long-term effects, then yeah, there's nothing to worry about.
(Standard disclaimers apply, I'm not an expert and have no idea what I'm talking about.)
These events have previously caused power grids to fail in Canada, England and Scandinavia. And the obvious failures of satellites. If these problems were handled without inconveniencing the populace before, it's because 11 years ago you didn't see everyone on the street with a cellular phone on their ear and satellite dishes hanging out of every building, home, and port-a-potty. So while the damage caused this time around won't likely be any worse than before, we will be much more aware of it. And when the mindless masses suddenly can't conference call from the 47th street cafe, I doubt they'd be patient enough to listen to a bunch of eggheads talking about coronal mass ejections. (Which sounds like something you'd hear a doctor say before he puts on the elbow-length glove.)
So, as this season of solar activity goes on, while we shouldn't be expecting massive failures of electronic systems, we should definitely expect massive failures of cognitive systems. And lots of ex-Y2K doomsayers suddenly popping up as solar flare doomsayers.
Idiocy is never out of season.
PS. I'm reading an article about how the US power grid is supposed to be much more at risk because of deregulation and the increased sharing of power. But really, I think this makes it less susceptible. The grid should be stronger now since power companies would be paranoid about a rogue neighbor taking them down. Not to mention the things they did in the name of Y2K.
Microsoft, in their infinite ineptitude, "fixed" their JS implementation in IE by making getYear() start returning "2000", causing Netscape's home page to display the year as "3900", and making some poor NS tech to have to change the page. (Take a look at the source.) And so far, that's the only page I've seen that actually used it correctly.
So how long until Linux gets used on a shuttle mission? It'll be the first Open Source operating system in orbit.
(I wonder how a penguin would react to zero-g)