you mean like our socialist road and highway system?
besides, i never said to nationalize all ISPs. the current internet is a public network and it isn't government run--it's not even entirely American-run. regardless of whether ISPs are government-run or privatized, using current TV/radio/cellular spectrums for rolling out WiMAX broadband infrastructure would still be better.
it's simply more efficient to have one generalized digital communications network rather than several redundant networks making less efficient use of the radio spectrum. if people want to watch NBC or Cartoon Network, they can just stream it off of the internet over the wireless broadband infrastructure, just as they would for internet radio, and VoIP. plus your phone bill will be much cheaper, and cellular service providers could no longer charge extortionate rates for mobile data plans.
i happen to be ethnically Chinese (1.5th generation immigrant from Taiwan), and i can tell you that you're still missing the point--and making a complete ass of yourself.
the U.S. has nothing in common with China?
let's see, China has a market economy, and so does the U.S. China has an army, navy, air force, police force and fire fighters, as does the U.S. China has McDonalds--hrmm... i think the U.S. has that too. China has hosted the Olympics, and what a coincidence, so has the U.S. China exports tons of weapons, just as the U.S. does. China has ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and so has--oh wait, nope, you're right about that one. but neither China nor the U.S. recognize Taiwan as an independent country.* China imports a shit ton of oil each year, so does the U.S. Chinese government leaders are corrupt, so are U.S. leaders. China has nationalists and dissidents, so does the U.S. China has a privileged elite and a disenfranchised poor, so does the U.S. China has membership in the IMF, just as the U.S. does. China has a stock market, just as the U.S. does....
and you're accusing other people of being deluded?
*-being Taiwanese and my Dad being very pro-Taiwanese independence, i was raised to despise China. but even i wouldn't make such blatant hyperboles and blanket generalizations about China.
as i said, grow up. and learn to stop viewing the world in black & whites.
well, i didn't mean that about wireless mics. i meant radio frequencies licensed to TV and radio networks, as well as cellular networks.
we will always have white spaces that equipment like wireless mics, wireless phones, etc. can be used on. those applications don't need to be licensed dedicated frequency ranges.
but applications like communications networks do require licensed spectrums. and since we only have a limited spectrum to use, it should be put to the best use, which would broad internet. with the proper wi-fi infrastructure set up, broadband internet could replace TV/radio/cellular networks, and also improve on current technologies.
as it stands, very little of the radio spectrum (that's actually useful for communications networks) is available for public use, with the majority of it being taken up by commercial corporations. in the past this wasn't such a problem since these spectrums were of little inherent value to the public aside from being used as TV/radio frequencies. but that is no longer so.
the radio spectrum is a very valuable and limited public resource, and shouldn't just be dominated by a handful of corporations. reserving a range of frequencies for broadband access would be a step in the right direction.
what do card tricks have to do with server performance?
and google's hardware strategy has always been to buy lots of cheap commodity hardware and to use lots of redundancy. in a one to one comparison, there'd be no match between one of google's cheap linux servers verus one of the Sun's SPARC+Solaris servers.
the key is in the volume of cheap servers they deploy. google simply builds massive server farms using off-the-shelf components. their software is written based on the premise that hardware will fail (they admit to having high disk failure rates), they just code their applications to anticipate that failure and write reliable software to overcome unreliable hardware.
their "cheap and fast" mantra refers to using simple hardware that is cheap and quick/easy to deploy, and likewise to replace. but without the redundancy of massive clusters, the performance would be very poor.
it's spelled Tiananmen, or Tian An Men if broken into its morphemes. and yes a lot of people found out about it, seeing as international journalists & cameramen caught the whole thing (it was broadcast live on the BBC and CNN, and a CBS cameraman also caught footage of the event), and it was witnessed by millions of people.
and how exactly would you cover up a failed rocket launch?
"hey, good news everyone! the launch was a huge success, and the mission went off without a hitch."
"oh, where are the astronauts? um.... they liked space so much they decided to stay up there... forever."
this test was designed to see if allowing broadband internet applications unlicensed use of white spaces would interfere with current hardware, such as wireless microphones.
how can such a test be conducted when there's already other sources of interference on those frequencies? unless they rule out the interference being caused by local TV broadcasts, then they can't use the test results as an acceptable metric.
frankly, i think the public would receive more benefit from broadband internet being given this dedicated spectrum rather than TV stations or wireless microphones. especially if it's used for public/municipal wi-fi deployment via WiMAX or other last mile solutions.
the internet is a public generalized data network. that means it can be used by anyone, and anyone can develop new applications for it. cellular networks, TV, radio, etc. are all closed proprietary networks which are controlled by a handful of corporations. no one is allowed to develop new applications for these networks, and thus little innovation or technological progress has occured in these networks compared to the public internet.
if we can establish a national wireless broadband infrastructure, it could be used to deliver/broadcast text, video, audio, or any other form of digital data. not only would it be a major infrastructure upgrade, but it would be a democratization of the media by decentralizing media distribution. we would just have wi-fi appliances for streaming internet radio stations rather than AM/FM radios, giving indie artists as much exposure as mainstream artists who currently dominate traditional media.
i mean, why should a few media corporations have exclusive usage rights over such a large range of the radio spectrum when the public would receive so much more benefit from those frequency ranges being used for broadband internet access?
i happen to be using a dell right now. i wouldn't say it runs flawlessly. i'm at the 4 to 5 year mark and the CPU fan (or perhaps vibrations in the plastic cooling funnel) often makes my room sound like an airport--that is when it even spins. sometimes the fan gets stuck and the computer will shut itself down due to overheating.
oh, and even though i paid the Microsoft tax and bought a desktop with XP, i don't have an XP setup disc, just a custom Dell restore disc. that's not a problem by itself... until you need to reformat. not wanting to re-install the cruftware i'd spent months removing when i first got the computer, i tried to re-install XP using a borrowed setup disc. naturally, the S/N glued to the case doesn't work with anything but the restore disc (which i'd lost by now anyway).
so now i get to be reminded every 15 minutes that my copy of Windows XP isn't genuine. not to mention that both the original DVD burner and DVD-ROM drive have crapped out on me. so now i have a new DVD burner and a dead DVD-ROM drive sitting in the drive bay. i've also had to replace the hard drive because it was thrashing and a lot of data was becoming corrupted.
granted, i use this system pretty heavily, i don't turn it off very often, and i've moved it several times (shipped it from California to Illinois and back). but still, it's not exactly the definition of reliability.
as a matter of fact, yes. at least in terms of consumer grade equipment. of course, i'm not going to get an $8000 SGI workstation or run a $1000 Matrox RT.X2 that's used for industrial design, but i also have no need for a low/mid-range consumer desktop. i will be dropping at least $3000 on my next workstation regardless of whether it's a Mac or PC. i mostly use my computer for graphic design and programming, so it would be a career investment.
to be perfectly honest, if i wanted to get a Mac, i'd want to get a G5 that is well-suited to my professional needs (Photoshop, Illustrator, Freehand, QuarkXpress, and possibly some video and audio editing tools). and even though i don't mind spending a lot of money on a good workstation, i don't have money to waste on a laptop or desktop that i can't use (not even $400).
so for me personally, i'd much rather try out OSX with a hackintosh than to waste money on a mini/ibook. and it's because i like to purchase systems with long lifespans, which i will also use for as long as i can, that i'm willing to shell out for high-end hardware.
it just seems more economically sound to spend $3-4k on a new top-of-the-line system that will help me do my job for 5-6 years than to spend $1000-2000 on a used low-end system that won't serve me as well, and that i'll have to replace in 2-3 years.
even though i think China crossed the line here, i have to point out that comparing similar incidences/practices is not delusional at all. Chinese media writing the news before it happens can be compared with US media writing the news before it happens.
besides, the whole purpose of the comparison is to show people like yourself and the GP that China and the U.S. aren't as different as you think. the U.S. isn't as morally righteous and incorruptible as most nationalistic Americans claim. no society is perfect, just as no society is completely bad.
believe it or not, Chinese people are human beings too, just as we are. because of that, we share many of the same flaws and make many of the same mistakes. you two act like we're talking about a different species or something. what, you don't think America could ever have anything in common with China?
no, he makes a good point, though in a circuitous manner.
patent laws were originally meant, as most laws should be, for public good.
the patent system gives inventors exclusive rights to patented concepts for a limited time, after which the patent would expire and the invention would be released into public domain. this gives inventors a financial incentive to contribute to the body of human knowledge and encourages innovation. patent holders get to extract profit from their inventions, and society also benefits when the invention becomes public domain.
the patent office isn't just there to enforce existing patents. it's also an archive of expired patents that are now available in the public domain for anyone to use freely.
but copyright and patent law have become so corrupted by industry lobbies that they no longer serve their original purpose. now the only purpose of patents is for corporations to extract profits from patents indefinitely, while keeping patented ideas from ever being released into public domain, and also stifling innovation by anyone who comes up with an idea that is even remotely similar to an existing patent.
the sad thing is, this deception was so unnecessary. i mean, obviously they didn't mean to post the article until after the launch. and in all likelihood the launch will probably be success, and even if the launch weren't people would eventually find out.
so why go through the trouble to write fake news about a space mission that you're planning on carrying out anyway? that defeats the purpose doesn't it?
well, i was speaking from my personal perspective. i'm a graphic designer, and if i were going to get a mac, it would likely be a workstation.
i already have a mid-end machine ($2500 when it was new). and even if i were going to get a new PC i would expect to spend at least $2500-$3000 on it, maybe more including a new monitor.
the point is, a hackintosh would be a way for me to try out OSX without investing in Apple hardware. yes, i could get a MacBook or a mini, but those are not the models for me. and even if they were, it would still be preferable to just try out the OS before spending the extra grand on hardware.
don't get me wrong, i think lynx is a great program. like i said earlier, it has its merits. but it's not a full-featured browser. and implying that it simply lacks the "frills" of standard browsers is ignoring a large part of the media and non-text components of the web.
if all browsers were text-only, imagine how limited the web would be. the web probably wouldn't have evolved to be as advanced or useful as it is today. you may as well just stick with a BBS or the Gopher protocol.
i think most people would find lynx very lacking if they tried to use it as primary browser. and that's not because its interface is cleaner or because it lacks frills.
i wouldn't exactly call the ability to render images "frills." i can understand if this were 1990 and the web was still mostly text-based. but the idea of a hypertext network and hypertext documents is to go beyond what normal text documents/interfaces could provide.
lynx has its merits, but calling all standard browsers too complicated or excessive is stretching it a bit. if lynx were just a basic browser that didn't have plugins, tabs, adblock, RSS readers, bookmarks, search tools, etc. then you could claim that other browsers have too many frills.
but lynx is a text-only browser. that's like saying a radio is a TV without the frills. stripping out core features does not make something have a cleaner interface or mean that the removed features are unnecessary.
i know not all mac users are fanatics/snobs. that's why i've always been annoyed with people on/. persecuting mac users. but that comment just came off very douche-like.
actually my boss recently got a MacBook Pro with a Pro Tools bundle from Guitar Center. it sounds like a pretty sweet deal. the laptop came free with portable recording equipment in a travel cabinet for recording gigs while on tour and such.
i may invest in a laptop or workstation for graphic design work in the future, but for now i'm content with my PC. though if Apple made a tablet PC, then i just might try one out tomorrow.
well, i can't say what most hackintosh users do, but from what i've read here it seems like there are definitely some people who don't pirate OS X for building their own hackintoshes.
i'd also note that it seems like the fact hackintosh users have to obtain a hacked OS X setup disc to have a decent chance of getting their hackintosh to work that promotes piracy in this case. if they could get help from more experienced OS X users on how to do it legally, then that might reduce piracy, wouldn't you say? and seeing as this dongle lets you use any old OS X disc, the original incentive of simply downloading a hacked disc image is no longer relevant.
regarding the hackintosh vs mac mini argument, i have to point out that a smaller price tag isn't the only issue. it does no good for the consumer to buy a cheap mini if he really needs a more powerful machine. so, yes, he could buy a cheap mac mini or get the dongle and OS, but with the dongle + OS he can use that on a system that actually fits his needs. then if he likes the OS, he could invest in a $3000 Apple workstation--or whatever model happens to be appropriate.
it's sorta like saying, "well you can can a BMW motorcycle for under $10k" when they might be looking for a sedan. some people don't have the need for a mini-type system, regardless of what OS it runs or manufacturer it's by.
that's interesting, i've never used a USB dongle before, though i've come across certain video-editing programs that support special hardware dongles that are supposed to enable advanced features.
how exactly does a USB dongle work? is it just a software program that is executed from a USB key fob? certainly it can't be so simple as to just copying the data from the dongle and putting it onto another generic USB drive can it?
i would imagine that the USB dongle would have to have special hardware with the program saved on some kind of firmware. i'm not too familiar with the capabilities of the USB interface, so i don't know if that might be a vital part of how this dongle works. but if you can reverse engineer the dongle and boot up the image from any old USB key, then you could just as easily make bootable DVDs.
you know, i never really understood people's prejudice against mac users until now. but, wow, you're a douche.
helping people set up their hackintoshes would be a great way to expose some PC users to the benefits or advantages of OS X. someone who doesn't want to take the plunge and invest in a $3000 machine could use this dongle to try out the OS before they commit to a full Apple setup.
assuming that any hackintosh users must be pirating OS X is a rather condescending attitude towards PC users, and particular PC users who are interested in OS X.
yea, it's a co-branded product, but unless they're just taking HP servers and slapping an Oracle logo on it, it's still an Oracle machine. i mean, they say they've been working on this product for a while now. unless they just mean business negotiations rather than R&D, then that would imply that this is a new line of hardware distinct from what HP has been selling.
i guess there really aren't enough details out right now to confirm it either way. the article states that it will fetch data from Oracle databases faster than competing hardware, but that could just be marketing BS. it would be disappointing to find out that you just paid extra for an added Oracle logo on your HP server.
i completely agree with you. i don't mind having a camera that i don't use built into my camera, but it's incredibly annoying when you have to go to court or something and aren't allowed to have a camera-phone--especially when they don't provide lockers where you can leave your handset.
but i mean, there are still plenty of low-end, and high-end, phones that come without cameras. you just have to decide whether you want to get a phone without a camera just because once in a while you may need to go somewhere where cameras aren't allowed.
i think the ideal solution would be to make the camera removable or, say, allow you to remove the lens, thus disabling the camera. or perhaps handset makers can build a feature into all handsets so that when a certain radio signal is received the camera will simply be disabled via software. then military bases and courtrooms could just broadcast this signal and disable all camera-phones that are present. so you could still walk into the courthouse with your camera phone, as long as it supports this feature.
yes, we should be living in Stalinist Russia instead. that'll show those lazy bums sending personal e-mails at work!
if everyone worked as secretaries, burger flippers, or other entry-level positions/menial jobs, then i would agree with you. but some of us do more challenging and intellectually demanding work. as a web developer and graphic designer, i couldn't imagine doing work on a computer that has an internet whitelist.
even if there was a whitelist that contained all work-related sites that i could potentially need to access (stock image libraries, font stores, language reference sites, web software vendors, etc.), it would still decrease my performance and productivity if i didn't have unfettered access to the web.
as a graphic designer, i spend a lot of time perusing design blogs or random websites looking for inspiration. and even though i've been doing web development for quite some time, i still benefit from reading online guides/tutorials or other articles on the applications and programming languages i use. yes, in theory i could do this only at home, and then just spend 100% of my time at work writing code and working in photoshop/illustrator/quark/etc., but that's just not how it works.
i find that i'm actually most productive and produce the best work at home (usually late at night) when i'm able to set my own pace and can establish a good rhythm for working. it's also less stressful and much more enjoyable--which is partly why i produce my best work this way.
granted, i don't use instant messenger when i work (whether at home or at the office) or play games online, etc. but occasionally having a diversion like reading a/. article does make work more relaxing and helps to keep my mind fluid and alert.
also, sometimes it's hard to draw the line between work and personal research. i may be taking some time off the current project that i'm working on to do a little "personal" research into database software, and that may lead me to choose a better database to build the next web application for work around. similarly, i might read an article/guide on a particular web toolkit that might end up helping me with my current project.
personally, i enjoy my work, and when i don't i don't do quite as well. i imagine if all companies took your attitude it would just result in more employees feeling miserable and getting less fulfillment from their jobs, resulting in less productivity. Google probably wouldn't be as successful as they are today if they took your approach, and a lot of great products/services would probably not exist.
Slashdot Mirror
you mean like our socialist road and highway system?
besides, i never said to nationalize all ISPs. the current internet is a public network and it isn't government run--it's not even entirely American-run. regardless of whether ISPs are government-run or privatized, using current TV/radio/cellular spectrums for rolling out WiMAX broadband infrastructure would still be better.
it's simply more efficient to have one generalized digital communications network rather than several redundant networks making less efficient use of the radio spectrum. if people want to watch NBC or Cartoon Network, they can just stream it off of the internet over the wireless broadband infrastructure, just as they would for internet radio, and VoIP. plus your phone bill will be much cheaper, and cellular service providers could no longer charge extortionate rates for mobile data plans.
i happen to be ethnically Chinese (1.5th generation immigrant from Taiwan), and i can tell you that you're still missing the point--and making a complete ass of yourself.
the U.S. has nothing in common with China?
let's see, China has a market economy, and so does the U.S. ...
China has an army, navy, air force, police force and fire fighters, as does the U.S.
China has McDonalds--hrmm... i think the U.S. has that too.
China has hosted the Olympics, and what a coincidence, so has the U.S.
China exports tons of weapons, just as the U.S. does.
China has ratified the Kyoto Protocol, and so has--oh wait, nope, you're right about that one.
but neither China nor the U.S. recognize Taiwan as an independent country.*
China imports a shit ton of oil each year, so does the U.S.
Chinese government leaders are corrupt, so are U.S. leaders.
China has nationalists and dissidents, so does the U.S.
China has a privileged elite and a disenfranchised poor, so does the U.S.
China has membership in the IMF, just as the U.S. does.
China has a stock market, just as the U.S. does.
and you're accusing other people of being deluded?
*-being Taiwanese and my Dad being very pro-Taiwanese independence, i was raised to despise China. but even i wouldn't make such blatant hyperboles and blanket generalizations about China.
as i said, grow up. and learn to stop viewing the world in black & whites.
well, i didn't mean that about wireless mics. i meant radio frequencies licensed to TV and radio networks, as well as cellular networks.
we will always have white spaces that equipment like wireless mics, wireless phones, etc. can be used on. those applications don't need to be licensed dedicated frequency ranges.
but applications like communications networks do require licensed spectrums. and since we only have a limited spectrum to use, it should be put to the best use, which would broad internet. with the proper wi-fi infrastructure set up, broadband internet could replace TV/radio/cellular networks, and also improve on current technologies.
as it stands, very little of the radio spectrum (that's actually useful for communications networks) is available for public use, with the majority of it being taken up by commercial corporations. in the past this wasn't such a problem since these spectrums were of little inherent value to the public aside from being used as TV/radio frequencies. but that is no longer so.
the radio spectrum is a very valuable and limited public resource, and shouldn't just be dominated by a handful of corporations. reserving a range of frequencies for broadband access would be a step in the right direction.
what do card tricks have to do with server performance?
and google's hardware strategy has always been to buy lots of cheap commodity hardware and to use lots of redundancy. in a one to one comparison, there'd be no match between one of google's cheap linux servers verus one of the Sun's SPARC+Solaris servers.
the key is in the volume of cheap servers they deploy. google simply builds massive server farms using off-the-shelf components. their software is written based on the premise that hardware will fail (they admit to having high disk failure rates), they just code their applications to anticipate that failure and write reliable software to overcome unreliable hardware.
their "cheap and fast" mantra refers to using simple hardware that is cheap and quick/easy to deploy, and likewise to replace. but without the redundancy of massive clusters, the performance would be very poor.
it's spelled Tiananmen, or Tian An Men if broken into its morphemes. and yes a lot of people found out about it, seeing as international journalists & cameramen caught the whole thing (it was broadcast live on the BBC and CNN, and a CBS cameraman also caught footage of the event), and it was witnessed by millions of people.
and how exactly would you cover up a failed rocket launch?
"hey, good news everyone! the launch was a huge success, and the mission went off without a hitch."
"oh, where are the astronauts? um.... they liked space so much they decided to stay up there... forever."
who the hell modded this insightful?
this test was designed to see if allowing broadband internet applications unlicensed use of white spaces would interfere with current hardware, such as wireless microphones.
how can such a test be conducted when there's already other sources of interference on those frequencies? unless they rule out the interference being caused by local TV broadcasts, then they can't use the test results as an acceptable metric.
frankly, i think the public would receive more benefit from broadband internet being given this dedicated spectrum rather than TV stations or wireless microphones. especially if it's used for public/municipal wi-fi deployment via WiMAX or other last mile solutions.
the internet is a public generalized data network. that means it can be used by anyone, and anyone can develop new applications for it. cellular networks, TV, radio, etc. are all closed proprietary networks which are controlled by a handful of corporations. no one is allowed to develop new applications for these networks, and thus little innovation or technological progress has occured in these networks compared to the public internet.
if we can establish a national wireless broadband infrastructure, it could be used to deliver/broadcast text, video, audio, or any other form of digital data. not only would it be a major infrastructure upgrade, but it would be a democratization of the media by decentralizing media distribution. we would just have wi-fi appliances for streaming internet radio stations rather than AM/FM radios, giving indie artists as much exposure as mainstream artists who currently dominate traditional media.
i mean, why should a few media corporations have exclusive usage rights over such a large range of the radio spectrum when the public would receive so much more benefit from those frequency ranges being used for broadband internet access?
what's ADC? i'm assuming it's a special membership program from Apple?
i apologize for my ignorance, but acronymfinder.com only comes up with 'Apple Display Connector'.
i happen to be using a dell right now. i wouldn't say it runs flawlessly. i'm at the 4 to 5 year mark and the CPU fan (or perhaps vibrations in the plastic cooling funnel) often makes my room sound like an airport--that is when it even spins. sometimes the fan gets stuck and the computer will shut itself down due to overheating.
oh, and even though i paid the Microsoft tax and bought a desktop with XP, i don't have an XP setup disc, just a custom Dell restore disc. that's not a problem by itself... until you need to reformat. not wanting to re-install the cruftware i'd spent months removing when i first got the computer, i tried to re-install XP using a borrowed setup disc. naturally, the S/N glued to the case doesn't work with anything but the restore disc (which i'd lost by now anyway).
so now i get to be reminded every 15 minutes that my copy of Windows XP isn't genuine. not to mention that both the original DVD burner and DVD-ROM drive have crapped out on me. so now i have a new DVD burner and a dead DVD-ROM drive sitting in the drive bay. i've also had to replace the hard drive because it was thrashing and a lot of data was becoming corrupted.
granted, i use this system pretty heavily, i don't turn it off very often, and i've moved it several times (shipped it from California to Illinois and back). but still, it's not exactly the definition of reliability.
as a matter of fact, yes. at least in terms of consumer grade equipment. of course, i'm not going to get an $8000 SGI workstation or run a $1000 Matrox RT.X2 that's used for industrial design, but i also have no need for a low/mid-range consumer desktop. i will be dropping at least $3000 on my next workstation regardless of whether it's a Mac or PC. i mostly use my computer for graphic design and programming, so it would be a career investment.
to be perfectly honest, if i wanted to get a Mac, i'd want to get a G5 that is well-suited to my professional needs (Photoshop, Illustrator, Freehand, QuarkXpress, and possibly some video and audio editing tools). and even though i don't mind spending a lot of money on a good workstation, i don't have money to waste on a laptop or desktop that i can't use (not even $400).
so for me personally, i'd much rather try out OSX with a hackintosh than to waste money on a mini/ibook. and it's because i like to purchase systems with long lifespans, which i will also use for as long as i can, that i'm willing to shell out for high-end hardware.
it just seems more economically sound to spend $3-4k on a new top-of-the-line system that will help me do my job for 5-6 years than to spend $1000-2000 on a used low-end system that won't serve me as well, and that i'll have to replace in 2-3 years.
even though i think China crossed the line here, i have to point out that comparing similar incidences/practices is not delusional at all. Chinese media writing the news before it happens can be compared with US media writing the news before it happens.
besides, the whole purpose of the comparison is to show people like yourself and the GP that China and the U.S. aren't as different as you think. the U.S. isn't as morally righteous and incorruptible as most nationalistic Americans claim. no society is perfect, just as no society is completely bad.
believe it or not, Chinese people are human beings too, just as we are. because of that, we share many of the same flaws and make many of the same mistakes. you two act like we're talking about a different species or something. what, you don't think America could ever have anything in common with China?
the Cold War is over buddy. grow up.
no, he makes a good point, though in a circuitous manner.
patent laws were originally meant, as most laws should be, for public good.
the patent system gives inventors exclusive rights to patented concepts for a limited time, after which the patent would expire and the invention would be released into public domain. this gives inventors a financial incentive to contribute to the body of human knowledge and encourages innovation. patent holders get to extract profit from their inventions, and society also benefits when the invention becomes public domain.
the patent office isn't just there to enforce existing patents. it's also an archive of expired patents that are now available in the public domain for anyone to use freely.
but copyright and patent law have become so corrupted by industry lobbies that they no longer serve their original purpose. now the only purpose of patents is for corporations to extract profits from patents indefinitely, while keeping patented ideas from ever being released into public domain, and also stifling innovation by anyone who comes up with an idea that is even remotely similar to an existing patent.
well, at least now the astronauts know what to say when they get into space.
the sad thing is, this deception was so unnecessary. i mean, obviously they didn't mean to post the article until after the launch. and in all likelihood the launch will probably be success, and even if the launch weren't people would eventually find out.
so why go through the trouble to write fake news about a space mission that you're planning on carrying out anyway? that defeats the purpose doesn't it?
well, i was speaking from my personal perspective. i'm a graphic designer, and if i were going to get a mac, it would likely be a workstation.
i already have a mid-end machine ($2500 when it was new). and even if i were going to get a new PC i would expect to spend at least $2500-$3000 on it, maybe more including a new monitor.
the point is, a hackintosh would be a way for me to try out OSX without investing in Apple hardware. yes, i could get a MacBook or a mini, but those are not the models for me. and even if they were, it would still be preferable to just try out the OS before spending the extra grand on hardware.
don't get me wrong, i think lynx is a great program. like i said earlier, it has its merits. but it's not a full-featured browser. and implying that it simply lacks the "frills" of standard browsers is ignoring a large part of the media and non-text components of the web.
if all browsers were text-only, imagine how limited the web would be. the web probably wouldn't have evolved to be as advanced or useful as it is today. you may as well just stick with a BBS or the Gopher protocol.
i think most people would find lynx very lacking if they tried to use it as primary browser. and that's not because its interface is cleaner or because it lacks frills.
i still don't get it. could you give an analogy involving cars?
i wouldn't exactly call the ability to render images "frills." i can understand if this were 1990 and the web was still mostly text-based. but the idea of a hypertext network and hypertext documents is to go beyond what normal text documents/interfaces could provide.
lynx has its merits, but calling all standard browsers too complicated or excessive is stretching it a bit. if lynx were just a basic browser that didn't have plugins, tabs, adblock, RSS readers, bookmarks, search tools, etc. then you could claim that other browsers have too many frills.
but lynx is a text-only browser. that's like saying a radio is a TV without the frills. stripping out core features does not make something have a cleaner interface or mean that the removed features are unnecessary.
i know not all mac users are fanatics/snobs. that's why i've always been annoyed with people on /. persecuting mac users. but that comment just came off very douche-like.
actually my boss recently got a MacBook Pro with a Pro Tools bundle from Guitar Center. it sounds like a pretty sweet deal. the laptop came free with portable recording equipment in a travel cabinet for recording gigs while on tour and such.
i may invest in a laptop or workstation for graphic design work in the future, but for now i'm content with my PC. though if Apple made a tablet PC, then i just might try one out tomorrow.
well, i can't say what most hackintosh users do, but from what i've read here it seems like there are definitely some people who don't pirate OS X for building their own hackintoshes.
i'd also note that it seems like the fact hackintosh users have to obtain a hacked OS X setup disc to have a decent chance of getting their hackintosh to work that promotes piracy in this case. if they could get help from more experienced OS X users on how to do it legally, then that might reduce piracy, wouldn't you say? and seeing as this dongle lets you use any old OS X disc, the original incentive of simply downloading a hacked disc image is no longer relevant.
regarding the hackintosh vs mac mini argument, i have to point out that a smaller price tag isn't the only issue. it does no good for the consumer to buy a cheap mini if he really needs a more powerful machine. so, yes, he could buy a cheap mac mini or get the dongle and OS, but with the dongle + OS he can use that on a system that actually fits his needs. then if he likes the OS, he could invest in a $3000 Apple workstation--or whatever model happens to be appropriate.
it's sorta like saying, "well you can can a BMW motorcycle for under $10k" when they might be looking for a sedan. some people don't have the need for a mini-type system, regardless of what OS it runs or manufacturer it's by.
that's interesting, i've never used a USB dongle before, though i've come across certain video-editing programs that support special hardware dongles that are supposed to enable advanced features.
how exactly does a USB dongle work? is it just a software program that is executed from a USB key fob? certainly it can't be so simple as to just copying the data from the dongle and putting it onto another generic USB drive can it?
i would imagine that the USB dongle would have to have special hardware with the program saved on some kind of firmware. i'm not too familiar with the capabilities of the USB interface, so i don't know if that might be a vital part of how this dongle works. but if you can reverse engineer the dongle and boot up the image from any old USB key, then you could just as easily make bootable DVDs.
that says Dongle--with an "LE."
you know, i never really understood people's prejudice against mac users until now. but, wow, you're a douche.
helping people set up their hackintoshes would be a great way to expose some PC users to the benefits or advantages of OS X. someone who doesn't want to take the plunge and invest in a $3000 machine could use this dongle to try out the OS before they commit to a full Apple setup.
assuming that any hackintosh users must be pirating OS X is a rather condescending attitude towards PC users, and particular PC users who are interested in OS X.
yea, it's a co-branded product, but unless they're just taking HP servers and slapping an Oracle logo on it, it's still an Oracle machine. i mean, they say they've been working on this product for a while now. unless they just mean business negotiations rather than R&D, then that would imply that this is a new line of hardware distinct from what HP has been selling.
i guess there really aren't enough details out right now to confirm it either way. the article states that it will fetch data from Oracle databases faster than competing hardware, but that could just be marketing BS. it would be disappointing to find out that you just paid extra for an added Oracle logo on your HP server.
i completely agree with you. i don't mind having a camera that i don't use built into my camera, but it's incredibly annoying when you have to go to court or something and aren't allowed to have a camera-phone--especially when they don't provide lockers where you can leave your handset.
but i mean, there are still plenty of low-end, and high-end, phones that come without cameras. you just have to decide whether you want to get a phone without a camera just because once in a while you may need to go somewhere where cameras aren't allowed.
i think the ideal solution would be to make the camera removable or, say, allow you to remove the lens, thus disabling the camera. or perhaps handset makers can build a feature into all handsets so that when a certain radio signal is received the camera will simply be disabled via software. then military bases and courtrooms could just broadcast this signal and disable all camera-phones that are present. so you could still walk into the courthouse with your camera phone, as long as it supports this feature.
yes, we should be living in Stalinist Russia instead. that'll show those lazy bums sending personal e-mails at work!
if everyone worked as secretaries, burger flippers, or other entry-level positions/menial jobs, then i would agree with you. but some of us do more challenging and intellectually demanding work. as a web developer and graphic designer, i couldn't imagine doing work on a computer that has an internet whitelist.
even if there was a whitelist that contained all work-related sites that i could potentially need to access (stock image libraries, font stores, language reference sites, web software vendors, etc.), it would still decrease my performance and productivity if i didn't have unfettered access to the web.
as a graphic designer, i spend a lot of time perusing design blogs or random websites looking for inspiration. and even though i've been doing web development for quite some time, i still benefit from reading online guides/tutorials or other articles on the applications and programming languages i use. yes, in theory i could do this only at home, and then just spend 100% of my time at work writing code and working in photoshop/illustrator/quark/etc., but that's just not how it works.
i find that i'm actually most productive and produce the best work at home (usually late at night) when i'm able to set my own pace and can establish a good rhythm for working. it's also less stressful and much more enjoyable--which is partly why i produce my best work this way.
granted, i don't use instant messenger when i work (whether at home or at the office) or play games online, etc. but occasionally having a diversion like reading a /. article does make work more relaxing and helps to keep my mind fluid and alert.
also, sometimes it's hard to draw the line between work and personal research. i may be taking some time off the current project that i'm working on to do a little "personal" research into database software, and that may lead me to choose a better database to build the next web application for work around. similarly, i might read an article/guide on a particular web toolkit that might end up helping me with my current project.
personally, i enjoy my work, and when i don't i don't do quite as well. i imagine if all companies took your attitude it would just result in more employees feeling miserable and getting less fulfillment from their jobs, resulting in less productivity. Google probably wouldn't be as successful as they are today if they took your approach, and a lot of great products/services would probably not exist.