Quick math at the moment, if everything in my house that could concievably use IP addressing does so, then that's (In whatever order they spring to mind)
That's 88 IPs needed for a family of four, or 22 IPs per person. Obviously if you lived on your own/single partner this would vary. That is a lot of addresses, and I quite like the idea of being able to individually address my bedroom lightbulb from the other side of the planet.
This kinda falls back to the fact that cell networks are not packet data networks by design. Adding data routing capacity took quite a lot of working out, because instead of only assigning you a cell address (your SIM card provides this bit) the system also had to pair you to an IP address and then route that with another layer to abstract your IP from the towers to ensure packets actually reached the tower your phone was paired with at the time.
At the moment I want to have with me at all times:
Phone/text functionality Web browsing functionality Portable hard disk/flash memory Music player Contacts list Calendar Task list Email functionality Note-keeping functionality.
Plus everything needs to be able to sync with my PC quickly and easily, along with sharing information like contact details. There is nothing which does all these to the quality I need. Yes, my phone happens to have a calendar and some music functionality. Yes, my iPod can store my tasks. If I push it my PDA can make phone calls. But all I want is one item, with one battery, and all those functions.
Only when something does all that in a single form (It can be as big as a 60gb iPod for all I care) will I accept other features, such as automatic song lookup. If it could grab net access from open hotspots and use that to send/retrieve emails and connect to my Skype account when possible, so much the better.
No. You cannot trademark a common noun, such as "windows" or "chairs". Microsoft holds a trademark on "Microsoft Windows", not "Windows". However, they do have rights to protect their name if another product is infringing on their industry. For example, I could not release "jacksonj04 Windows" as an operating system because that would be infringing. "jacksonj04 Windows" as a shatterproof glass technology, however, is perfectly permissible.
Actually, the Microsoft crypto keys *are* kept on generator+battery backup powered servers in a single shielded room, with 24 hour security, and multiple person access required. On two seperate sites, with two different keys so if one goes tits up they still have a backup key.
I'd say in front-line medical situations. Need something for transplant *now*? You could print one a lot faster than getting lab equipment or a pig in to grow one from scratch. Yes, it will still take time to fully develop but will be a lot faster than trying to get one shipped in.
I disagree - IIRC CDs with data tracks should carry the CD-ROM mark in place of the CDDA mark, since CDDA basically means "I adhere to the CD audio specification". Some older (Yet still very much spec-meeting) players would balk at data tracks. But then again, IANAL.
No, because despite business regulations (In the EU at least) for recycling machines, if the average home user doesn't know of someone who is likely to take old PCs then they will just be scrapped. This is bad, not only is it a waste of perfectly good hardware but it also adds heavy metals (in older machines) to the soil in higher concentrations than normal.
But the fact still remains, CDs which have the "Compact Disc Digital Audio" mark on them cannot include DRM as it is against the CD spec. I agree that not showing software may be installed is a bad idea if not actually illegal (I haven't seen a CD in question so I don't know if it has a "This CD may install software" notice), but if you buy a "Compact Disc Digital Audio" marked CD which then installs something it is in fact false advertising, and IIRC the CD mark is quite strictly enforced.
Decent streaming. You can stream faster than you can watch, so just let it stream what you want to watch and when you're not watching it start filling in the blanks.
I've always wondered about this, perhaps a particle physicist can explain further.
If you can have fractional quantum numbers, doesn't that mean the entire theory that energy can only exist in quanta is a load of bollocks? I have no problem with photons having wavelengths, but I have been taught that it is impossible to split down the energy in a rest-state photon without breaking quantum theory.
Actually... you know how in glasses of beer there seems to be an infinate number of bubbles from the same spot on the glass? Can't we harness that? </energy_crackpot_theory>
It depends how good the heuristics are. If all it does is analyse your searching, the chances are it will be crap. If it analyses your searching and matches your patterns to other users, it's likely to be very accurate. If you search for seemingly random things then the chances are it will come back with the 'normal' results because you have no trends to base them on.
On the other hand, if you search for "wine" and have a large history of searching for computer terms but no recipies then it should (if it's a decent algorithm, which Google is renowned for creating) realise that most other people who search lots of computer terms and no recipies only clicked results for WINE (The Windows API one). Even better, it will realise that the "wine" you are looking for is what other people searched for as "wine linux" or even "windows applications linux".
Google has more than enough data to be mining to start with, and I have noticed my searches finding what I want more often first time since I turned on search history.
I think that's the idea. By offering free meals, a comfortable work environment, and impressive stock options (You seen GOOG's selling price lately?) they can afford not to pay vast amounts in salary, since employees are going to stay at Google simply because it's such a nice place to work, with lots of perks in addition to a not-exactly-minimum wage.
Not to mention most employees are the academic type, who will work just for the joy of getting an algorithm to work.
There is a point where it gets too far though. Cars for driving around in, by all means fit with airbags, steering compensators, adaptive braking, dynamic suspension and everything else. If you hit something the chances are you didn't intend to and you want the car to keep you safe.
Racing, especially at 100+ mph, is not a safe activity. Yes, you can do things to reduce the risk like wearing helmets, but it is simply not a safe activity and there is no reason to try make it so. If you want the buzz of winning without the risks, go play on a good simulator. I've been in ones accurate enough so that if you clip another car you can actually feel it, but when you hit another car at 140mph it doesn't cause you both to spin/flip/run into barriers/explode in flames. You race in real life because the risk is what makes it different from a good simulator.
I've been dragged down grade 3 rapids in a kayak backwards and upside down and was only spared serious head injuries because I was wearing a helmet. That is a sensible precaution to take, but taking the rocks out of that stretch of river just defeats the object, I may as well go capsize in a swimming pool.
I personally find the risk of serious consequences to be important in learning when to call it a day. I wouldn't take a kayak down a large waterfall because I know that is way above my skill level, but if all I've ever done is kayaked in a safe environment then where is the natural instinct for "That is going to hurt, and I know I can't deal with it". If racing is made perfectly safe, racers will get into the habit of "I can go 120 on public roads with nothing going wrong because I can do it on the racetrack".
What I don't understand is how talk of building flying cars and defying Newton's laws makes someone eligible for college. I was talking about building flying cars and defying gravity when I was eight, and no amount of intellectual knowledge will make up for the fact that college education is not designed for 8 year olds.
Self-teaching, working with peers, and generally being a lot more adult about the whole thing are an important part of college life. I don't think an 8 year old has enough life experience to make it through without serious support, but just my $0.02.
Because if they made it available for Linux then it doesn't have the same gradual takeover effect.
Eventually, with all the Microsoft-only apps Google are releasing, they will be in a position to go "We basically run all the data on your system anyway, and it's all managed through one Google account, so click this button here and we'll migrate everything to our online service and mail you a free GoogleOS CD".
Linux is the next step. Once the world's MS users are all migrated to GoogleOS, with Google storing and searching their data, *then* Linux can be targeted.
Apple is dependable, a solid platform for development, has powerful scripting built in, and doesn't look out of place somewhere medical.
I cannot think of a niche, apart from servers and gaming, where Apple and OS X cannot fit. And even servers are coming damn close; OS X Server is incredibly powerful and scales in a heartbeat, with network management tools above and beyond most Linux offerings.
The trouble is, as you develop your skills you look over your old stuff and go "What the hell was I thinking of?" or "Damn that's a long way around..."
Slashdot Mirror
Always thinking for the future...
Quick math at the moment, if everything in my house that could concievably use IP addressing does so, then that's (In whatever order they spring to mind)
6 PCs, 3 Laptops, 4 TVs, 2 Fridges, 1 Microwave, 2 Kettles, 1 Espresso Machine, 2 Toilets, 1 Shower, 1 Bath, 1 Boiler, 9 Light fittings, 10 Light switches, 2 DVD players, 1 DVR, 1 Video player, 2 CD players, 2 Radios, 4 Speaker systems, 1 Cooker, 1 Dishwasher, 1 Washing machine, 2 Outdoor lights, 1 Fishtank, 4 Mobile phones, 2 PDAs, 1 Pager, 5 Landline phone handsets, 4 Printers, 8 Clocks, 1 Burgler alarm and 2 Smoke detectors. And I've probably forgotten something.
That's 88 IPs needed for a family of four, or 22 IPs per person. Obviously if you lived on your own/single partner this would vary. That is a lot of addresses, and I quite like the idea of being able to individually address my bedroom lightbulb from the other side of the planet.
This kinda falls back to the fact that cell networks are not packet data networks by design. Adding data routing capacity took quite a lot of working out, because instead of only assigning you a cell address (your SIM card provides this bit) the system also had to pair you to an IP address and then route that with another layer to abstract your IP from the towers to ensure packets actually reached the tower your phone was paired with at the time.
At the moment I want to have with me at all times:
Phone/text functionality
Web browsing functionality
Portable hard disk/flash memory
Music player
Contacts list
Calendar
Task list
Email functionality
Note-keeping functionality.
Plus everything needs to be able to sync with my PC quickly and easily, along with sharing information like contact details. There is nothing which does all these to the quality I need. Yes, my phone happens to have a calendar and some music functionality. Yes, my iPod can store my tasks. If I push it my PDA can make phone calls. But all I want is one item, with one battery, and all those functions.
Only when something does all that in a single form (It can be as big as a 60gb iPod for all I care) will I accept other features, such as automatic song lookup. If it could grab net access from open hotspots and use that to send/retrieve emails and connect to my Skype account when possible, so much the better.
Formic acid is not your friend.
No. You cannot trademark a common noun, such as "windows" or "chairs". Microsoft holds a trademark on "Microsoft Windows", not "Windows". However, they do have rights to protect their name if another product is infringing on their industry. For example, I could not release "jacksonj04 Windows" as an operating system because that would be infringing. "jacksonj04 Windows" as a shatterproof glass technology, however, is perfectly permissible.
Actually, the Microsoft crypto keys *are* kept on generator+battery backup powered servers in a single shielded room, with 24 hour security, and multiple person access required. On two seperate sites, with two different keys so if one goes tits up they still have a backup key.
I'd say in front-line medical situations. Need something for transplant *now*? You could print one a lot faster than getting lab equipment or a pig in to grow one from scratch. Yes, it will still take time to fully develop but will be a lot faster than trying to get one shipped in.
I disagree - IIRC CDs with data tracks should carry the CD-ROM mark in place of the CDDA mark, since CDDA basically means "I adhere to the CD audio specification". Some older (Yet still very much spec-meeting) players would balk at data tracks. But then again, IANAL.
No, because despite business regulations (In the EU at least) for recycling machines, if the average home user doesn't know of someone who is likely to take old PCs then they will just be scrapped. This is bad, not only is it a waste of perfectly good hardware but it also adds heavy metals (in older machines) to the soil in higher concentrations than normal.
But the fact still remains, CDs which have the "Compact Disc Digital Audio" mark on them cannot include DRM as it is against the CD spec. I agree that not showing software may be installed is a bad idea if not actually illegal (I haven't seen a CD in question so I don't know if it has a "This CD may install software" notice), but if you buy a "Compact Disc Digital Audio" marked CD which then installs something it is in fact false advertising, and IIRC the CD mark is quite strictly enforced.
Decent streaming. You can stream faster than you can watch, so just let it stream what you want to watch and when you're not watching it start filling in the blanks.
I've always wondered about this, perhaps a particle physicist can explain further.
If you can have fractional quantum numbers, doesn't that mean the entire theory that energy can only exist in quanta is a load of bollocks? I have no problem with photons having wavelengths, but I have been taught that it is impossible to split down the energy in a rest-state photon without breaking quantum theory.
Actually... you know how in glasses of beer there seems to be an infinate number of bubbles from the same spot on the glass? Can't we harness that? </energy_crackpot_theory>
It depends how good the heuristics are. If all it does is analyse your searching, the chances are it will be crap. If it analyses your searching and matches your patterns to other users, it's likely to be very accurate. If you search for seemingly random things then the chances are it will come back with the 'normal' results because you have no trends to base them on.
On the other hand, if you search for "wine" and have a large history of searching for computer terms but no recipies then it should (if it's a decent algorithm, which Google is renowned for creating) realise that most other people who search lots of computer terms and no recipies only clicked results for WINE (The Windows API one). Even better, it will realise that the "wine" you are looking for is what other people searched for as "wine linux" or even "windows applications linux".
Google has more than enough data to be mining to start with, and I have noticed my searches finding what I want more often first time since I turned on search history.
I think that's the idea. By offering free meals, a comfortable work environment, and impressive stock options (You seen GOOG's selling price lately?) they can afford not to pay vast amounts in salary, since employees are going to stay at Google simply because it's such a nice place to work, with lots of perks in addition to a not-exactly-minimum wage.
Not to mention most employees are the academic type, who will work just for the joy of getting an algorithm to work.
There is a point where it gets too far though. Cars for driving around in, by all means fit with airbags, steering compensators, adaptive braking, dynamic suspension and everything else. If you hit something the chances are you didn't intend to and you want the car to keep you safe.
Racing, especially at 100+ mph, is not a safe activity. Yes, you can do things to reduce the risk like wearing helmets, but it is simply not a safe activity and there is no reason to try make it so. If you want the buzz of winning without the risks, go play on a good simulator. I've been in ones accurate enough so that if you clip another car you can actually feel it, but when you hit another car at 140mph it doesn't cause you both to spin/flip/run into barriers/explode in flames. You race in real life because the risk is what makes it different from a good simulator.
I've been dragged down grade 3 rapids in a kayak backwards and upside down and was only spared serious head injuries because I was wearing a helmet. That is a sensible precaution to take, but taking the rocks out of that stretch of river just defeats the object, I may as well go capsize in a swimming pool.
I personally find the risk of serious consequences to be important in learning when to call it a day. I wouldn't take a kayak down a large waterfall because I know that is way above my skill level, but if all I've ever done is kayaked in a safe environment then where is the natural instinct for "That is going to hurt, and I know I can't deal with it". If racing is made perfectly safe, racers will get into the habit of "I can go 120 on public roads with nothing going wrong because I can do it on the racetrack".
I second that motion.
What I don't understand is how talk of building flying cars and defying Newton's laws makes someone eligible for college. I was talking about building flying cars and defying gravity when I was eight, and no amount of intellectual knowledge will make up for the fact that college education is not designed for 8 year olds.
Self-teaching, working with peers, and generally being a lot more adult about the whole thing are an important part of college life. I don't think an 8 year old has enough life experience to make it through without serious support, but just my $0.02.
Because if they made it available for Linux then it doesn't have the same gradual takeover effect.
Eventually, with all the Microsoft-only apps Google are releasing, they will be in a position to go "We basically run all the data on your system anyway, and it's all managed through one Google account, so click this button here and we'll migrate everything to our online service and mail you a free GoogleOS CD".
Linux is the next step. Once the world's MS users are all migrated to GoogleOS, with Google storing and searching their data, *then* Linux can be targeted.
Apple is dependable, a solid platform for development, has powerful scripting built in, and doesn't look out of place somewhere medical.
I cannot think of a niche, apart from servers and gaming, where Apple and OS X cannot fit. And even servers are coming damn close; OS X Server is incredibly powerful and scales in a heartbeat, with network management tools above and beyond most Linux offerings.
If they no longer expose photographic film, they aren't gonna fry an RFID chip.
I've always found Notepad to be efficient...
</snide_remark>
The trouble is, as you develop your skills you look over your old stuff and go "What the hell was I thinking of?" or "Damn that's a long way around..."
Until the software can prototype *perfectly*, even down to interference components cause each other, there will still need to be hard-prototypes.
Where else holds a World Series for a game only played in one country?
TLD is Top Level Domain, regardless of if it's country or not.