The decision to lock out the traction control toggle also seems a bit bizarre. I don't know of anybody (teenagers or adults) who have ever actually turned it off.
I'm pretty sure you have to turn traction control off to do "donuts" or drifting.
If bittorrent piracy is not the same as violating a person's privacy then they shouldn't necessarily be handled the same way.
Maybe in your city, people sneaking on the subway actually causes other people to be stuck without transportation. The situation is different in my city.
I can see how [the scenario of a woman exposing herself to trap people as peeping toms] could be considered funny, but it is relevant because the type of organizations we speak of are not above putting fake files out there for download to trap people, or downloading files from people to trap them. So if you are to compare a peeping tom to a file sharer then it is relevant to compare the tactics of the RIAA/MPAA to the tactics of the woman being viewed.
If you want something really funny, consider the fact that my letter P is not working so well on my keyboard, and during the course of typing this post and the last, I have typed "peeing tom" over and over.
Well, maybe the federal government should have a czar for people living in other people's homes, and a czar for people sneaking on subways and in movie theaters, and a czar for peeping toms. Maybe we should take the price for pirating one song and make the kid on the subway pay that too. Maybe I should leave my window open while I change clothes and see if I can spot somebody looking at me. Then I can personally make an estimate of how many times I that person has potentially done this in the past, and get a few thousand dollars for each time.
Or, maybe we should stop pretending bittorrent piracy is the same as violating a person's privacy, and stop pretending sneaking onto a subway is really hurting somebody.
I think it's also worth mentioning that the social networks themselves are profiling people. There's a reason they want you to enter your occupation, educational background, yearly income, and all other types of information.
What drives me the most crazy is Facebook actually creates search pages for search engines to index. I'm the kind of person who likes my words to be seen by everybody, but my pictures to be under my own control. So I searched for myself on Google and found that not only do they put my name and profile picture out there, but they also include a list of people on my friends list and all of their profile pictures, even though every single one of these is a "private" profile with pictures set to only be viewable by friends and "friends of friends". I realize there's a setting to disable the search page but I never enabled it in the first place, or even realized it existed until i searched for myself. I also get the part that if I want my pictures to be off the internet then I shouldn't put them on Facebook and MySpace. But it seems like they went out of their way to make them publicly available.
I vote for the dancing lights. Can you imagine how spectacular a high-energy person like Usain Bolt or Shelly-Ann Fraser would be, running at night? Or what this could do during sex? Just think about challenging your partner to make you go bright blue, and having a partner who likes challenges.
I was going to reply about how suddenly turning the land into beachfront property would probably make the property values go up, but then I started thinking about how this would be just in time for Africa's coast to be the setting for Duke Nukem Forever.
I wonder how many markets Google will get into. I can't wait until Google starts working on their female douche product line. hehe.
I definitely wouldn't want to use a beta version of that. I also think people are likely to read the instructions for such a product, and might get hung up when the EULA on the package says, "by opening this, you agree that whatever you use with this product can be used by google in any way it pleases." I also think they'll be puzzled when they learn that they have to set up a gmail account to use the product.
I also realize it's a joke. I hate when I respond to jokes and people reply to my comment with "whoosh" as if that's somehow insightful.
With many african states effectively landlocked and with poor or insecure infrastructure this could be the data boom that africa has been waiting for. That is if it isn't choked off by self serving governments.
What? The article isn't even about a real app, it is speaking theoretically.
And I was commenting on the theoretical application.
Even the theoretical app described uses "user-specified sources."
So, for every barcode the user scans, the user is expected to pick a website to associate with the barcode and then scan the barcode to go to the website? Or do they pick one website to handle every barcode and bring us back to my original comment?
It sounds to me like this device will scan a barcode in Google's database and then provide Google search results for the barcode's item. If "push scanning" is bad because you're forced to go the the website of the manufacturer's choosing then this will be a much worse, much more extreme version of push scanning. Every barcode will take you to the same website (Google search), regardless of what product the barcode represents.
What they should do right now is make MySpace like the old Facebook because the new Facebook is less enjoyable. I think taking what Facebook got right, at the same time that Facebook is abandoning it, is their only chance.
I'm sure the ISO can come up with a standard WTF. It's just that the definition will be so vague that every time we try to implement it, we'll say WTF? And then we'll have our implementation. Pure genius.
I don't think the cable companies are the ones who will benefit so much. I think this is mainly about making it difficult to record television shows and cut out the commercials. I think the broadcast flag will be used much more heavily when everyone's gotten comfortable with digital television.
Slashdot Mirror
It worked just fine.
The decision to lock out the traction control toggle also seems a bit bizarre. I don't know of anybody (teenagers or adults) who have ever actually turned it off.
I'm pretty sure you have to turn traction control off to do "donuts" or drifting.
If bittorrent piracy is not the same as violating a person's privacy then they shouldn't necessarily be handled the same way.
Maybe in your city, people sneaking on the subway actually causes other people to be stuck without transportation. The situation is different in my city.
I can see how [the scenario of a woman exposing herself to trap people as peeping toms] could be considered funny, but it is relevant because the type of organizations we speak of are not above putting fake files out there for download to trap people, or downloading files from people to trap them. So if you are to compare a peeping tom to a file sharer then it is relevant to compare the tactics of the RIAA/MPAA to the tactics of the woman being viewed.
If you want something really funny, consider the fact that my letter P is not working so well on my keyboard, and during the course of typing this post and the last, I have typed "peeing tom" over and over.
Well, maybe the federal government should have a czar for people living in other people's homes, and a czar for people sneaking on subways and in movie theaters, and a czar for peeping toms. Maybe we should take the price for pirating one song and make the kid on the subway pay that too. Maybe I should leave my window open while I change clothes and see if I can spot somebody looking at me. Then I can personally make an estimate of how many times I that person has potentially done this in the past, and get a few thousand dollars for each time.
Or, maybe we should stop pretending bittorrent piracy is the same as violating a person's privacy, and stop pretending sneaking onto a subway is really hurting somebody.
What happens if you buy the Sony one and your motorized face just falls off?
I think it's also worth mentioning that the social networks themselves are profiling people. There's a reason they want you to enter your occupation, educational background, yearly income, and all other types of information.
What drives me the most crazy is Facebook actually creates search pages for search engines to index. I'm the kind of person who likes my words to be seen by everybody, but my pictures to be under my own control. So I searched for myself on Google and found that not only do they put my name and profile picture out there, but they also include a list of people on my friends list and all of their profile pictures, even though every single one of these is a "private" profile with pictures set to only be viewable by friends and "friends of friends". I realize there's a setting to disable the search page but I never enabled it in the first place, or even realized it existed until i searched for myself. I also get the part that if I want my pictures to be off the internet then I shouldn't put them on Facebook and MySpace. But it seems like they went out of their way to make them publicly available.
I vote for the dancing lights. Can you imagine how spectacular a high-energy person like Usain Bolt or Shelly-Ann Fraser would be, running at night? Or what this could do during sex? Just think about challenging your partner to make you go bright blue, and having a partner who likes challenges.
Well there goes property values...
I was going to reply about how suddenly turning the land into beachfront property would probably make the property values go up, but then I started thinking about how this would be just in time for Africa's coast to be the setting for Duke Nukem Forever.
No sex for you!
Well it's not Interesting anymore. Now it's Insightful...
well i think it was supposed to imply that "this is like the matrix, but we can't say just say that"
That makes way more sense than the article summary.
They might also email you to say, "Happy Independence Day'.
I wonder how many markets Google will get into. I can't wait until Google starts working on their female douche product line. hehe.
I definitely wouldn't want to use a beta version of that. I also think people are likely to read the instructions for such a product, and might get hung up when the EULA on the package says, "by opening this, you agree that whatever you use with this product can be used by google in any way it pleases." I also think they'll be puzzled when they learn that they have to set up a gmail account to use the product.
I also realize it's a joke. I hate when I respond to jokes and people reply to my comment with "whoosh" as if that's somehow insightful.
I was with you all the way up to "the prevailing tribal mentality that cause them to kill each other on a regular basis".
With many african states effectively landlocked and with poor or insecure infrastructure this could be the data boom that africa has been waiting for. That is if it isn't choked off by self serving governments.
Or self-serving search/advertisement giants.
What? The article isn't even about a real app, it is speaking theoretically.
And I was commenting on the theoretical application.
Even the theoretical app described uses "user-specified sources."
So, for every barcode the user scans, the user is expected to pick a website to associate with the barcode and then scan the barcode to go to the website? Or do they pick one website to handle every barcode and bring us back to my original comment?
The next iPhone hate article will be titled, "iPhone is Farsighted".
It sounds to me like this device will scan a barcode in Google's database and then provide Google search results for the barcode's item. If "push scanning" is bad because you're forced to go the the website of the manufacturer's choosing then this will be a much worse, much more extreme version of push scanning. Every barcode will take you to the same website (Google search), regardless of what product the barcode represents.
"And the first thing they do after power on self test, is of course, load up Windows! I'm sure none of this surprises anyone."
"Like anyone uses any other operating system anyway... :)"
I wish they'd just call it virtual reality.
To make matters worse, the people who got the coupon won't qualify for the $0.20 they would get for the $5.00 Cracker Jack price-fixing fiasco.
What they should do right now is make MySpace like the old Facebook because the new Facebook is less enjoyable. I think taking what Facebook got right, at the same time that Facebook is abandoning it, is their only chance.
I'm sure the ISO can come up with a standard WTF. It's just that the definition will be so vague that every time we try to implement it, we'll say WTF? And then we'll have our implementation. Pure genius.
I don't think the cable companies are the ones who will benefit so much. I think this is mainly about making it difficult to record television shows and cut out the commercials. I think the broadcast flag will be used much more heavily when everyone's gotten comfortable with digital television.
If you have to compare them side-by-side to tell the difference then it doesn't matter.