When Simjian initially came up with the idea of creating a hole-in-the-wall machine that would allow customers to make financial transactions, the idea was met with a great deal of skepticism. Starting in 1939, Simjian registered 20 patents related to the device and persuaded what is now Citicorp to give it a trial. After six months, the bank reported that there was little demand.
In a way, I agree -- but more about people blocking *all* ads in general.
However, while I don't mind people mentioning Adblock, I do mind people mentioning Filterset.g.
For me, though, it's because ads are what make the internet run: if it weren't for ads, we wouldn't have near the amount of free sites that we do. Heck, Google would probably not even exist anymore.
The reason that I *do* like Adblock is that it allows you to get rid of the ads that should have never existed in the first place: Shaking/blinking ads, video ads that eat up all your bandwidth, and ads with blaring auto-starting sound.
What I generally do... is leave most ads on, then block the ones that are especially irritating. This allows places to continue to have revenue, but only stunts the growth of the companies that produce ads that are more obtrusive/use more resources than an ad should.
It's a little hypocritical, perhaps, but I think that when choosing an ad provider, a site should think about the users' comfort at their site as well as about ad revenue.
The article mentions that his purpose was to create a personal generator, which sounds a bit more feasable than hundreds of them in an array...
From the Article:
The millimeter size turbine engine project in MIT started in the middle of the 1990's when Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Alan H. Epstein considered the possibility of creating a personal turbine which will be able to meet all the demands of a modern person's electrical needs...
The carriers won't lock you out of a device that they carry which is about the only way you will get your hands on this since Seagate won't be selling them directly. Of course that means that the retail price will include a big fat carrier markup.
We may not have to worry about that -- what's interesting is this (from Engadget: http://www.engadget.com/2007/01/30/seagate-unveils -d-a-v-e-drive-with-bluetooth-and-wifi):
"Seagate is planning on getting this thing out in May or early June, but instead of self-branding the unit, it will be licensing the product to phone manufacturers and service providers such as Verizon, Cingular, Nokia and Motorola."
Because not only carriers are selling these, but also OEMs (as you stated), it's possible that we'll see a few pop up as "Accessories" to Motorola and Nokia phones. Since Motorola already sells some accessories that bluetooth/usable with any phone (i.e. their bluetooth headsets), it's possible that they'll sell a version that's compatible with "general phones."
Three points:
First of all, I very much agree with AC here. While I'd call myself a Christian, I can expect no respect from anyone I try to talk to regarding it unless I can actually explain what I believe. However, I can "agree to disagree" more easily with those who can also explain their point of view (loosely, "worldview").
Second, I think there's another side to this, however, and that's tolerance in general. What I've (and the parent have) just described I'll call loosely, "conditional tolerance." I.e. I'll tolerate you if you know what you're talking about.
I'll submit that what we really want is "complete tolerance," which would be one person being tolerant of another person's beliefs whether or not they know what they're talking about.
Lastly we come to the kicker:
What if the other person's beliefs include that they must kill everyone who does not believe what they do? (note, I'd like this to be seen as a general comment, and not a comment on any current religion) If so, then even being "tolerant" of the other person's beliefs, and/or knowing what you believe is not going to change that they believe you should be dead. I think this is the biggest problem here: For the aggressor, tolerance would mean changing their beliefs, not just knowing them (and/or knowing yours). Whether or not you are tolerant (i.e. agree to disagree peacefully) of them, their beliefs still say that you should be dead.
I think this could be an excellent idea, if only to allow for third-party JVMs.
I, for one, have always seen Sun's JVM as bulky and slow on Windows PCs, and this is a large reason that I don't advocate its usage.
I use this every time I do my Ubuntu Install.
It not only installs the DVD/MP3 codecs, but can install much of the other "non-gpl" (but free to download) software that a lot of people use, including Opera and Skype.
Slashdot Mirror
http://web.mit.edu/invent/iow/simjian.html
Personally, I think "GooClick" is much more "hype friendly," but that's good too ;)
Hmm, I find this interesting ...
... but one slightly positive thing about MSIE, and it's all over ...
If anyone says something good about Firefox, the World sings
In a way, I agree -- but more about people blocking *all* ads in general.
... is leave most ads on, then block the ones that are especially irritating. This allows places to continue to have revenue, but only stunts the growth of the companies that produce ads that are more obtrusive/use more resources than an ad should.
However, while I don't mind people mentioning Adblock, I do mind people mentioning Filterset.g. For me, though, it's because ads are what make the internet run: if it weren't for ads, we wouldn't have near the amount of free sites that we do. Heck, Google would probably not even exist anymore.
The reason that I *do* like Adblock is that it allows you to get rid of the ads that should have never existed in the first place: Shaking/blinking ads, video ads that eat up all your bandwidth, and ads with blaring auto-starting sound.
What I generally do
It's a little hypocritical, perhaps, but I think that when choosing an ad provider, a site should think about the users' comfort at their site as well as about ad revenue.
Seems to me that any money for independent game makers is good.
What's particularly interesting to me about this is that they're offering a "non-exclusive" distribution deal.
Perhaps this is similar to what they're doing with Sam & Max?
From the Article:
Well, if you were going to generate power with ammonia and other natural gases ...
"Seagate is planning on getting this thing out in May or early June, but instead of self-branding the unit, it will be licensing the product to phone manufacturers and service providers such as Verizon, Cingular, Nokia and Motorola."
Because not only carriers are selling these, but also OEMs (as you stated), it's possible that we'll see a few pop up as "Accessories" to Motorola and Nokia phones. Since Motorola already sells some accessories that bluetooth/usable with any phone (i.e. their bluetooth headsets), it's possible that they'll sell a version that's compatible with "general phones."
GS
This is $30/year, not $30/month ... so it's a bit of a better deal than it would have been otherwise. =)
Could you suggest a few "good" non-signature based AV softwares?
Thanks!
Three points:
First of all, I very much agree with AC here. While I'd call myself a Christian, I can expect no respect from anyone I try to talk to regarding it unless I can actually explain what I believe. However, I can "agree to disagree" more easily with those who can also explain their point of view (loosely, "worldview").
Second, I think there's another side to this, however, and that's tolerance in general. What I've (and the parent have) just described I'll call loosely, "conditional tolerance." I.e. I'll tolerate you if you know what you're talking about.
I'll submit that what we really want is "complete tolerance," which would be one person being tolerant of another person's beliefs whether or not they know what they're talking about.
Lastly we come to the kicker:
What if the other person's beliefs include that they must kill everyone who does not believe what they do? (note, I'd like this to be seen as a general comment, and not a comment on any current religion) If so, then even being "tolerant" of the other person's beliefs, and/or knowing what you believe is not going to change that they believe you should be dead. I think this is the biggest problem here: For the aggressor, tolerance would mean changing their beliefs, not just knowing them (and/or knowing yours). Whether or not you are tolerant (i.e. agree to disagree peacefully) of them, their beliefs still say that you should be dead.
I think this could be an excellent idea, if only to allow for third-party JVMs.
I, for one, have always seen Sun's JVM as bulky and slow on Windows PCs, and this is a large reason that I don't advocate its usage.
I use this every time I do my Ubuntu Install. It not only installs the DVD/MP3 codecs, but can install much of the other "non-gpl" (but free to download) software that a lot of people use, including Opera and Skype.