You're just one of those stupid Entitlement Generation persons, who thinks he should be able to steal service from others without payment. "I want it free therefore I should have it!" Reminds me of my 8 year old.
I hate to say this, but your 8 year old has a better grasp of economic realities than you do.
Given the choice of equal products and services (and advertising), the market (aka the consumers) will always choose the cheaper product.
If the product is free, then you simply have an edge over anything that costs anything at all.
This is possibly human nature and companies who want to stay competitive need to be aware of this fact.
In the digital age of piracy, anyone who wishes to charge for a service must do something better than the pirate offer:
Ease of use and quality.
You may take the moral high ground on this, but morality and ethics often has little to do with reality of macro-economics (if we really had a moral economy we'd outlaw usury and leveraging of the banking system and stock market after all;)
Anyways... Its a hard cold fact that last.fm is competing with free services and free is often what the market demands and you can't beat the market.
So their only recourse is to better well damn offer something better than free. I'm personally fond of Pandora because of its ease of use and compatibility on the iPhone.
If they started to charge for their service, I'd simply start listening to iCast free internet radio stations simply because market conditions have put limitations on my own money supply and I could always listen to my *gasp* own music which I pay for and own a copy.
It just happens to be more convenient for me to use Pandora now (iCast has connection issues with 3g somedays). Its not something I'm entitled to, no, but I'm an educated consumer and I can do as I see fit.
How does cloud computing solve the CPU-GPU bandwidth issues of modern games? Gamers still want to see the game, and at ultra high rez & IQ.
I can't seem to Google the article, but I remember an interview with John Carmack about the future of gaming in 25 years (or maybe how would you truly stop online cheating if given unlimited resources... can't remember at this point) from now and he basically said that it would be basically a mainframe feeding a video feed to a client which basically sends keyboard and mouse commands back to the server.
So basically I think even though this is a bit early in terms of our bandwidth, its probably the future of gaming if you think about it.
I know one of the guys who helped debunk the thing way back when, and there's so much disgust for the original guys that it seems to be a foregone conclusion that cold fusion can never work.
Historically, sometimes people in the field tend to have bias towards terminology especially if was related to pseudo science.
It was first consciously applied to modern physics by Frederick Soddy when he, along with Ernest Rutherford, discovered that radioactive thorium was converting itself into radium in 1901. At the moment of realization, Soddy later recalled, he shouted out: "Rutherford, this is transmutation!" Rutherford snapped back, "For Christ's sake, Soddy, don't call it transmutation. They'll have our heads off as alchemists."[citation needed]
Alchemists always talked about transmuting lead into gold you see and people of the day always wanted to distance themselves from the quacks of old. Maybe these new guys should call it "room temperature non-fission nuclear reaction";)
Re:Rather obvious examples don't you think?
on
The Age of Speed
·
· Score: 1
Who exactly has guilt at getting things done quickly? Most people I know get things done too quickly, because they are lazy, and don't do it right the first time. The one or two people who take too long and don't use shortcuts are people who are either too lazy to change their routine, or are overthinking the problem. But now more than ever we are all about quick.
You sir have never worked for or had to deal with government.
Ever had to fill out a form to get permission to fill out a form?
Well, I think that is what he is talking about when he was talking about shortcuts.
And the most common I can think of in IT is when a user asks you in a person to help them with a 60 second task and you have to have them call in a log a ticket first even though you are nearby their desk for another problem.
Actually come to think of it I've known people to call in to say "'John Doe' told me to call in a ticket cause he worked on my computer."
Sure he bypassed protocol, but he probably did the best shortcut to give the best service.
Before reading more about how to cope with the age of speed, I'd prefer to see something explaining just what it is. Otherwise I'm sure not going to spend my valuable time reading it. Right now it just sounds like a buzz phrase.
Otherwise to answer your question more directly and to misuse a quote of a good movie:
You may not believe in "Speed", but "Speed" believes in you.
People could still read the newspaper to get their stock quotes, but that's a horribly inefficient way to do things. Anyone who uses the internet would be at a greater advantage of you in locking in the best price for buying and selling.
Re:Age of Speed on Wall St.
on
The Age of Speed
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Would the financial disaster we're in right now have been better off without so much speed?
No. Probably a lot far worse for small time investors just trying to save something for their retirement.
I was thinking of how it was back in the day at least when my dad was introducing me to stocks in the late 80's early 90's. Basically, in the morning you would pick up newspaper with yesterday's closing quote and then call your broker at the end of the day ($50 commissions were cheap back then) and placed your order.
Well by the time that happened a lot of stuff could have happened on wall street and you the small time investor don't have a computer with a dial up connection to the NYSE stock exchange like your broker does.
Well I suppose you could have called your Broker every 5 minutes to see what was going on, but they generally frown on that unless you do $10,000+ trades.
Anyways... The internet has basically imported the little guy (albeit a lot of little guys) to be able to trade like the big dogs. Last year I have actually bailed on stocks I otherwise would have held on to and lost a lot of money on simply because I had net access.
That said, this could be a bad thing when people panic and personal investors tend to be a lot more emotional than the professionals. So your more likely to do dumb things when you should have held on like you would have in the old days.
I would argue that the problem that happened with Wall Street was over leveraging (borrowing of money to invest) of certain big time million/billion dollar funds rather than the fault of a a slew of small time investors who panicked en masse. Yes they did panic, but surprisingly not as bad as you would have though of 1929.
Yes, its a different market these days but its easier to be informed about your investment decisions and able to act on them in a more timely manner.
According to this, a Javascript program that talks to a closed source AJAX backend is Not Free
Um... Yeah. If your data is on the AJAX backend and the person that owns that server closes shop or starts charging for connection, then no matter how much free java code you write, you are SOL.
Yes, Stallman is a bit overzealous about free and non-free, but his point of having OSS client talk with non-OSS server still results in the fundemental problem of being able to work with your own data.
There is not enough scientific eveidence to back up your statement. "Probably" is a strong word. Overpopulation could be the real danger. Humanity might receed, the climate will go on.
To be fair he specifically said "civilization" and not "life on earth" or even "all the humans".
Civilization isn't that hard to destroy if you look at the last few civilization that went kaput (Mayans, Romans, Egyptians etc).
Climate change could do that to ours, but it is pointless to say "we can't do anything" regardless of its man made or not.
We could spary Gobi and Sara with white reflective paint with B52 bombers. We could drop a few nuclear bombs into an active volcano. We could genetically engeer a new algae that sequesters all the CO2 it can and then sinks to the bottom of the ocean.
But to say mankind can't do anything is short sited.
We may be involved in climate change or we may not. (several billion humans, cows, and cars making CO2 obviously does something, but how much? In past times when there were lots of plants there were high oxygen content atmosphere followed by an ice age, followed by an increase in animal life which also happened to coincide with CO2 with increase of temperature which resulted in more plants and then more animals etc. Might be related. Might not.)
Anyways... My point is not that global warming is man made or not. My point is that either way we should do something about it if we want to keep our civilization.
Either that means adapting the environment or adapting ourselves.
We can put some intelligence and technology into this or just let natural selection work its thing.
Personally, I'd rather not be around when natural selection works it thing.
But the rest of us, all critters included, are single-threaded, just as you mentioned yourself. Logically thinking, any single thought can't be easily parallelized, but why couldn't we think two thoughts at the same time? I wonder why is that
Um.... I don't know about you, but I see, hear, feel, smell, and taste all at the same time and can form perfectly logical thoughts from the experience.
Also, human thought it relational and contextual. You maybe thinking about one particular topic at a time (personally I find myself doing 2 to 8 but anymore than think makes me go home early) but those thoughts often latch onto other things such as your periphial vision or other thoughts that pop in or out of your head.
That is how you remember things by seeing other things and how you can drive and talk on the cell phone at the same time (well you aren't supposed to but you can).
Since we didn't have stuff back then like "Program Files" or "Application Data" the game installed to c:\gamename and all data it generated was kept in that directory, because back then it made sense to do so. It still makes sense now.
Heh heh heh.
But we had boot disks, config.sys, autoexec.bat, and EMM386... HELL!
Nostalgia maybe nice, but I remember all the hell I went through to get games to run and back then we didn't have the internet. I remember a helpful guy at Babbages that taught me (a 12 year old) how to get Doom to run on 4mb of ram while the sound card was running.
Boy those were the days but they were a pain when you had to make a boot disk for each game. Some wanted Himem and some wanted EMM386 and some wanted pure 640K when no TRS programs running.
Oh lord. Just because it worked back then doesn't mean it makes sense to keep doing it now.
In reality, sometimes we share computers these days with other house hold members... And sometimes I personally have had falling out with someone over a file save over write *coughs*.
And I'm sure there are plenty of families out there that have kids that play the same game but don't want to mess with each other saves.
In the new multi-user environment it makes sense to me.
But who will handle cyber security, which is in fact a large and growing problem.
Really? Maybe there should be a single agency to handle government cyber security problems on government networks, but why does the federal government need to handle cyber security for businesses and citizens?
If someone breaks the law then the FBI can go after them, but no one should be in your computers from the feds telling you what or what you can do with your security setup.
Kamikaze scout runs into enemy flag rooms, disc-launcher jumping with jetpack to get insane height and speed, across the map in seconds rather than the minutes it would take on foot.:)
Oh those were the days. I remember, using the scout to run people over in a mad fireball of glory.
Of course, I also remember how people would take the transport and drive team mates to their doom;)
No. Not use, but slower the more you write to it. You can read all the time and it doesn't speeds.
The article goes into detail why writing does cause problems. The author does conclude even at the slowest possible speed the Intel model (he said he did a simulation where by writing to all the blocks at least once) that its still beats HDD.
The other versions he tested shows wasn't at great.
Apparently it depends on the controller version which affects the speed. Intel put a good one in and the other brands no so good.
I saw this article earlier today off a comment from Engadget and read the whole thing (no printer friendly version).
Out of curiosity, I searched Amazon.com for current offers of that Intel X25-M and in both offerings (80gb and 160gb) the reviews are that this thing is the greatest thing next to sliced bread.
The only complaints are the price but people are claiming its worth the price.
Except that according to many Church's teachings, you already messed up as soon as you are born.
It still makes no sense to extend life as long as possible if it does not determine the outcome in the afterlife for the person in question (especially a comatose one).
Actually, I'd expect it to be the reverse. If I expected my eternal destiny to be judged upon death, I'd be pretty anxious to postpone my trial.
I always have thought this to be the most illogical parts of humans of modern mainstream religion.
The longer you live, the more time you have to mess things up and do bad things.
So if you die an early death, then chances are you are more likely to have not messed things up.
In this, the past religions (and some modern extremists) the argument of martyrdom actually makes sense. Not only do you die sooner than later so you can't mess things up along the way, but you are guaranteed a positive afterlife.
Since most modern Churches groups frown on that ancient practice these days, it is quite conflicting to expect humans to "tough it out" ( like saying that it is immoral to assistant the suicides of terminally ill patients and keep comma victims on life support as long as possible), when they die and they are going to heaven anyways.
The problem with self-driving cars is that they ALL have to be self-driving for it to work properly. I suppose you could designate certain roads as automated only, but how do you enforce it if you do?
I dunno. I guess write them a ticket like they do for every other traffic infraction.
Most extremophiles are so adapted to their environment that they can survive but have a hard time reproducing in more conventional environments.
I think people tend to think simple organism (like single cell bacteria) can evolve to grow into organisms that are immune to everything, but in reality they have limited DNA to work with until they evolve into a more complex organism which tend to not be able to adapt as easy.
Case in point, bacteria that live in the gas vents in pitch black almost boiling temperatures will not live if you brought it the surface area where it is cooler and has more sunlight.
If by the small chance you brought the bacteria to the surface waters (and by small, lets say 100 millions years using a sampling of more than trillions of trillions of bacteria) and found some that didn't die because of random mutations allowed them to live there, you still can't take that mutated bacteria and take it back to the bottom of the ocean and expect it to survive in such a location without going through the same process of 100 millions of years of evolution.
Sure, a bacteria that doesn't die in UV can live fine up there, but can it live in an environment of different temperatures, chemical compositions, other bacteria, and almost of infinite things that might just make it die.
And if by the off chance it does evolve to where it survives in our environment, who is to say that it won't loose its mutation of the UV resistance. There aren't any UV rays down here, and that is just wasted DNA and natural selection won't kill off any bacteria that mutated and lost its resistance so they'll continue to multiply.
As an aside, this is one of the key reasons I argue that hand sanitizers don't actually make "super bugs". Your insides aren't made of soap and alcohol and you don't drink purell when you are sick. So if a bacteria got immune to a hand sanitizer, then it really doesn't make a difference if it is inside of you.
What you should be concerned about is the over use of anti-biotics since that is what you take when you are already infected in which would be a common environment that doesn't have a major evolutionary hurdle to jump.
would never buy anything of considerable expense (TV, laptop, etc) without looking at a placeholder model. Is the keyboard too crunched, is the screen shitty? What's it look like sitting next to another model you were thinking about? Stuff like that you can't tell online via reviews. I was deciding between a 901 and 1000HE eeePC, had the dimensions drawn out on a piece of paper, but couldn't decide which I liked more. Physically seeing both models helped me pick.
You don't have to buy it right then and there. You don't want to be that "impulse shopper". Remember back in the day how people used to pinch pennies with shopping around?
The way my grandparents and parents shopped is they would go to one store and then go to the competitor store and if they liked the price at the previous store, they'd drive back.
Of course it took up all of my Sunday afternoon as a child in the backseat but back then you didn't have the internet or anything else to do.
The days we have the advantage of using the internet instead of driving around, but the same concept applies.
Yes, I'll go to Best Buy and look at hardware in person, but it doesn't mean I'll buy it right then and there. I might go home and order it online or go to another store.
Slashdot Mirror
You're just one of those stupid Entitlement Generation persons, who thinks he should be able to steal service from others without payment. "I want it free therefore I should have it!" Reminds me of my 8 year old.
I hate to say this, but your 8 year old has a better grasp of economic realities than you do.
Given the choice of equal products and services (and advertising), the market (aka the consumers) will always choose the cheaper product.
If the product is free, then you simply have an edge over anything that costs anything at all.
This is possibly human nature and companies who want to stay competitive need to be aware of this fact.
In the digital age of piracy, anyone who wishes to charge for a service must do something better than the pirate offer:
Ease of use and quality.
You may take the moral high ground on this, but morality and ethics often has little to do with reality of macro-economics (if we really had a moral economy we'd outlaw usury and leveraging of the banking system and stock market after all ;)
Anyways... Its a hard cold fact that last.fm is competing with free services and free is often what the market demands and you can't beat the market.
So their only recourse is to better well damn offer something better than free. I'm personally fond of Pandora because of its ease of use and compatibility on the iPhone.
If they started to charge for their service, I'd simply start listening to iCast free internet radio stations simply because market conditions have put limitations on my own money supply and I could always listen to my *gasp* own music which I pay for and own a copy.
It just happens to be more convenient for me to use Pandora now (iCast has connection issues with 3g somedays). Its not something I'm entitled to, no, but I'm an educated consumer and I can do as I see fit.
How does cloud computing solve the CPU-GPU bandwidth issues of modern games? Gamers still want to see the game, and at ultra high rez & IQ.
I can't seem to Google the article, but I remember an interview with John Carmack about the future of gaming in 25 years (or maybe how would you truly stop online cheating if given unlimited resources... can't remember at this point) from now and he basically said that it would be basically a mainframe feeding a video feed to a client which basically sends keyboard and mouse commands back to the server.
So basically I think even though this is a bit early in terms of our bandwidth, its probably the future of gaming if you think about it.
Look, the whole world culture is becoming more violent when compared to - say - the 1950s.
You mean popular culture.
Otherwise, violent crime is down worldwide recently from a peak in the 1970's.
I know one of the guys who helped debunk the thing way back when, and there's so much disgust for the original guys that it seems to be a foregone conclusion that cold fusion can never work.
Historically, sometimes people in the field tend to have bias towards terminology especially if was related to pseudo science.
On the topic of nuclear transmustation.
Alchemists always talked about transmuting lead into gold you see and people of the day always wanted to distance themselves from the quacks of old. Maybe these new guys should call it "room temperature non-fission nuclear reaction" ;)
Who exactly has guilt at getting things done quickly? Most people I know get things done too quickly, because they are lazy, and don't do it right the first time. The one or two people who take too long and don't use shortcuts are people who are either too lazy to change their routine, or are overthinking the problem. But now more than ever we are all about quick.
You sir have never worked for or had to deal with government.
Ever had to fill out a form to get permission to fill out a form?
Well, I think that is what he is talking about when he was talking about shortcuts.
And the most common I can think of in IT is when a user asks you in a person to help them with a 60 second task and you have to have them call in a log a ticket first even though you are nearby their desk for another problem.
Actually come to think of it I've known people to call in to say "'John Doe' told me to call in a ticket cause he worked on my computer."
Sure he bypassed protocol, but he probably did the best shortcut to give the best service.
Before reading more about how to cope with the age of speed, I'd prefer to see something explaining just what it is. Otherwise I'm sure not going to spend my valuable time reading it. Right now it just sounds like a buzz phrase.
Otherwise to answer your question more directly and to misuse a quote of a good movie:
You may not believe in "Speed", but "Speed" believes in you.
People could still read the newspaper to get their stock quotes, but that's a horribly inefficient way to do things. Anyone who uses the internet would be at a greater advantage of you in locking in the best price for buying and selling.
Would the financial disaster we're in right now have been better off without so much speed?
No. Probably a lot far worse for small time investors just trying to save something for their retirement.
I was thinking of how it was back in the day at least when my dad was introducing me to stocks in the late 80's early 90's. Basically, in the morning you would pick up newspaper with yesterday's closing quote and then call your broker at the end of the day ($50 commissions were cheap back then) and placed your order.
Well by the time that happened a lot of stuff could have happened on wall street and you the small time investor don't have a computer with a dial up connection to the NYSE stock exchange like your broker does.
Well I suppose you could have called your Broker every 5 minutes to see what was going on, but they generally frown on that unless you do $10,000+ trades.
Anyways... The internet has basically imported the little guy (albeit a lot of little guys) to be able to trade like the big dogs. Last year I have actually bailed on stocks I otherwise would have held on to and lost a lot of money on simply because I had net access.
That said, this could be a bad thing when people panic and personal investors tend to be a lot more emotional than the professionals. So your more likely to do dumb things when you should have held on like you would have in the old days.
I would argue that the problem that happened with Wall Street was over leveraging (borrowing of money to invest) of certain big time million/billion dollar funds rather than the fault of a a slew of small time investors who panicked en masse. Yes they did panic, but surprisingly not as bad as you would have though of 1929.
Yes, its a different market these days but its easier to be informed about your investment decisions and able to act on them in a more timely manner.
Still doesn't keep people from doing dumb things.
According to this, a Javascript program that talks to a closed source AJAX backend is Not Free
Um... Yeah. If your data is on the AJAX backend and the person that owns that server closes shop or starts charging for connection, then no matter how much free java code you write, you are SOL.
Yes, Stallman is a bit overzealous about free and non-free, but his point of having OSS client talk with non-OSS server still results in the fundemental problem of being able to work with your own data.
There is not enough scientific eveidence to back up your statement. "Probably" is a strong word. Overpopulation could be the real danger. Humanity might receed, the climate will go on.
To be fair he specifically said "civilization" and not "life on earth" or even "all the humans".
Civilization isn't that hard to destroy if you look at the last few civilization that went kaput (Mayans, Romans, Egyptians etc).
Climate change could do that to ours, but it is pointless to say "we can't do anything" regardless of its man made or not.
We could spary Gobi and Sara with white reflective paint with B52 bombers. We could drop a few nuclear bombs into an active volcano. We could genetically engeer a new algae that sequesters all the CO2 it can and then sinks to the bottom of the ocean.
But to say mankind can't do anything is short sited.
We may be involved in climate change or we may not. (several billion humans, cows, and cars making CO2 obviously does something, but how much? In past times when there were lots of plants there were high oxygen content atmosphere followed by an ice age, followed by an increase in animal life which also happened to coincide with CO2 with increase of temperature which resulted in more plants and then more animals etc. Might be related. Might not.)
Anyways... My point is not that global warming is man made or not. My point is that either way we should do something about it if we want to keep our civilization.
Either that means adapting the environment or adapting ourselves.
We can put some intelligence and technology into this or just let natural selection work its thing.
Personally, I'd rather not be around when natural selection works it thing.
But the rest of us, all critters included, are single-threaded, just as you mentioned yourself. Logically thinking, any single thought can't be easily parallelized, but why couldn't we think two thoughts at the same time? I wonder why is that
Um.... I don't know about you, but I see, hear, feel, smell, and taste all at the same time and can form perfectly logical thoughts from the experience.
Also, human thought it relational and contextual. You maybe thinking about one particular topic at a time (personally I find myself doing 2 to 8 but anymore than think makes me go home early) but those thoughts often latch onto other things such as your periphial vision or other thoughts that pop in or out of your head.
That is how you remember things by seeing other things and how you can drive and talk on the cell phone at the same time (well you aren't supposed to but you can).
Since we didn't have stuff back then like "Program Files" or "Application Data" the game installed to c:\gamename and all data it generated was kept in that directory, because back then it made sense to do so. It still makes sense now.
Heh heh heh.
But we had boot disks, config.sys, autoexec.bat, and EMM386... HELL!
Nostalgia maybe nice, but I remember all the hell I went through to get games to run and back then we didn't have the internet. I remember a helpful guy at Babbages that taught me (a 12 year old) how to get Doom to run on 4mb of ram while the sound card was running.
Boy those were the days but they were a pain when you had to make a boot disk for each game. Some wanted Himem and some wanted EMM386 and some wanted pure 640K when no TRS programs running.
Oh lord. Just because it worked back then doesn't mean it makes sense to keep doing it now.
In reality, sometimes we share computers these days with other house hold members... And sometimes I personally have had falling out with someone over a file save over write *coughs*.
And I'm sure there are plenty of families out there that have kids that play the same game but don't want to mess with each other saves.
In the new multi-user environment it makes sense to me.
But who will handle cyber security, which is in fact a large and growing problem.
Really? Maybe there should be a single agency to handle government cyber security problems on government networks, but why does the federal government need to handle cyber security for businesses and citizens?
If someone breaks the law then the FBI can go after them, but no one should be in your computers from the feds telling you what or what you can do with your security setup.
Kamikaze scout runs into enemy flag rooms, disc-launcher jumping with jetpack to get insane height and speed, across the map in seconds rather than the minutes it would take on foot. :)
Oh those were the days. I remember, using the scout to run people over in a mad fireball of glory.
Of course, I also remember how people would take the transport and drive team mates to their doom ;)
I didn't know that. And it sucks.
No. Not use, but slower the more you write to it. You can read all the time and it doesn't speeds.
The article goes into detail why writing does cause problems. The author does conclude even at the slowest possible speed the Intel model (he said he did a simulation where by writing to all the blocks at least once) that its still beats HDD.
The other versions he tested shows wasn't at great.
Apparently it depends on the controller version which affects the speed. Intel put a good one in and the other brands no so good.
He said its still noticeable though sometimes.
I saw this article earlier today off a comment from Engadget and read the whole thing (no printer friendly version).
Out of curiosity, I searched Amazon.com for current offers of that Intel X25-M and in both offerings (80gb and 160gb) the reviews are that this thing is the greatest thing next to sliced bread.
The only complaints are the price but people are claiming its worth the price.
I did come across a detractor that shows you can't use XP/Vista on bootcamp with the drive because of partition issues with OS X.
Supposedly Windows 7 will have true blue SSD support so I'll wager by the time it comes out, SSD will be standard in all machines.
Except that according to many Church's teachings, you already messed up as soon as you are born.
It still makes no sense to extend life as long as possible if it does not determine the outcome in the afterlife for the person in question (especially a comatose one).
Actually, I'd expect it to be the reverse. If I expected my eternal destiny to be judged upon death, I'd be pretty anxious to postpone my trial.
I always have thought this to be the most illogical parts of humans of modern mainstream religion.
The longer you live, the more time you have to mess things up and do bad things.
So if you die an early death, then chances are you are more likely to have not messed things up.
In this, the past religions (and some modern extremists) the argument of martyrdom actually makes sense. Not only do you die sooner than later so you can't mess things up along the way, but you are guaranteed a positive afterlife.
Since most modern Churches groups frown on that ancient practice these days, it is quite conflicting to expect humans to "tough it out" ( like saying that it is immoral to assistant the suicides of terminally ill patients and keep comma victims on life support as long as possible), when they die and they are going to heaven anyways.
Because they don't really believe and haven't had time to consider and come to terms with their own mortality.
I dunno. Maybe the truly pious people don't wear it on their shoulder or are so humble that they play down their amount of piety religious when asked.
That or people who fear death are more likely to have embraced religion, not that religion makes people more fearful of death.
The problem with self-driving cars is that they ALL have to be self-driving for it to work properly. I suppose you could designate certain roads as automated only, but how do you enforce it if you do?
I dunno. I guess write them a ticket like they do for every other traffic infraction.
True. But it would be kind of lame to have to open a single text edit program to type in with the keyboard just to copy and paste into mail app...
Unless you can automate that.
I'm wondering if this means we get that bluetooth keyboard with core apps or do we need to use 3rd party apps?
I'm not sure why I bothered responding, though. It's pretty obvious you just wanted to get a quick bash in.
Holy s****? You say? I've had my iPhone for several months and never realized it had this feature.
I mean, its not like anyone hear on Slashdot reads the iPhone manual. Why should you need to?
Most extremophiles are so adapted to their environment that they can survive but have a hard time reproducing in more conventional environments.
I think people tend to think simple organism (like single cell bacteria) can evolve to grow into organisms that are immune to everything, but in reality they have limited DNA to work with until they evolve into a more complex organism which tend to not be able to adapt as easy.
Case in point, bacteria that live in the gas vents in pitch black almost boiling temperatures will not live if you brought it the surface area where it is cooler and has more sunlight.
If by the small chance you brought the bacteria to the surface waters (and by small, lets say 100 millions years using a sampling of more than trillions of trillions of bacteria) and found some that didn't die because of random mutations allowed them to live there, you still can't take that mutated bacteria and take it back to the bottom of the ocean and expect it to survive in such a location without going through the same process of 100 millions of years of evolution.
Sure, a bacteria that doesn't die in UV can live fine up there, but can it live in an environment of different temperatures, chemical compositions, other bacteria, and almost of infinite things that might just make it die.
And if by the off chance it does evolve to where it survives in our environment, who is to say that it won't loose its mutation of the UV resistance. There aren't any UV rays down here, and that is just wasted DNA and natural selection won't kill off any bacteria that mutated and lost its resistance so they'll continue to multiply.
As an aside, this is one of the key reasons I argue that hand sanitizers don't actually make "super bugs". Your insides aren't made of soap and alcohol and you don't drink purell when you are sick. So if a bacteria got immune to a hand sanitizer, then it really doesn't make a difference if it is inside of you.
What you should be concerned about is the over use of anti-biotics since that is what you take when you are already infected in which would be a common environment that doesn't have a major evolutionary hurdle to jump.
You know what really killed VR's prospects as a game interface? You look like a total tosser wearing any kind of VR goggles.
No. I think the fact that VR goggles hurts your eyes and your neck after an hour of gameplay.
That and the cost.
That said, I've heard good things about EMagin's goggles, but you still have to pony up $1000 some for it and your eyes still hurt.
would never buy anything of considerable expense (TV, laptop, etc) without looking at a placeholder model. Is the keyboard too crunched, is the screen shitty? What's it look like sitting next to another model you were thinking about? Stuff like that you can't tell online via reviews. I was deciding between a 901 and 1000HE eeePC, had the dimensions drawn out on a piece of paper, but couldn't decide which I liked more. Physically seeing both models helped me pick.
You don't have to buy it right then and there. You don't want to be that "impulse shopper". Remember back in the day how people used to pinch pennies with shopping around?
The way my grandparents and parents shopped is they would go to one store and then go to the competitor store and if they liked the price at the previous store, they'd drive back.
Of course it took up all of my Sunday afternoon as a child in the backseat but back then you didn't have the internet or anything else to do.
The days we have the advantage of using the internet instead of driving around, but the same concept applies.
Yes, I'll go to Best Buy and look at hardware in person, but it doesn't mean I'll buy it right then and there. I might go home and order it online or go to another store.