Your meaning was lost completely. You seemed very much to be saying that "people who use her philosophy or find value in it are lazy assholes" not "lazy assholes use the idea to explain themselves."
Can you tell me something? Why is self interest bad? Why is it bad to gain from helping people? Why is it bad to feel good about working at a food bank? Why is it bad to say "I stacked can goods to help feed people" than it is to say "I stacked canned goods to make myself feel good." the end result is the same. And I bet most people who volunteer there only get to actually experience the second one. They don't actually go out and EXPERIENCE the relief of hunger. YOU CAN't experience that for other people.
You have decided that by making it clear that people have self interest in mind that she is intending to devalue the action the person takes. That was never the intent. She is not devalueing it, *YOU* are. Other people, such as yourself, are the ones who attach the stigma to self interest.
I take Ayn Rand's ideas to mean that recognizing our self interest in things can make use better at understanding all the things we can do for others. When you're out being noble a healthy recognition of what you stand to gain is good for you. For me it is an empowering idea that allows me to take control of my own actions, put personal purpose behind them, and *still* find reasons to help other people.
The seller in mapping right now benefits from the existing model of subscription services for the data. It is expensive. Currently though the ones I have used release data in full sets not diffs. An auto update of multiple gigs is sorta cumbersome. Tack the satellite imagery on top of that and it gets even larger. I don't know the specifcs of how they contain the map data now, but I imagine it is some form of equation. A road has a name and its curve points are stored. The satellite imagery has got to be enormous and updating that via auto update would get difficult. Consider that satellite surverys are not on demand, they will be done in large chunks.
Google could move to a per request pricing model or or chargge to host the overlay data for large data sets. They can recover the cost through other creative ways.
No. The meaning would be altered without the words I chose or require extra wording to arrive at the same meaning. If you can't tell the difference between buzzwords and important and real concepts then maybe you should go get a job. I was speaking in very general terms which is when words like "solution", "service" and "application architecture" hold as much specificity as is required. I could say "the thing we did for the thingy with that thing" or "that external application whatchamacalit that provides sumpthin" or "the way we did the whole dern thing". Would that be better?
I've implemented mapping solutions for large vendor applications and the business benefits for it are awesome when it is implemented properly. The major impediment was the multiple thousand dollar cost. Web solutions allow the data holder to centralize the data, update it more often and fix issues faster. Googles *and* Mircrosoft's work on allowing you to overlay custom data is brilliant when you consider that Google maps can now be a service within an application architecture.
Microsoft is not coopting or stealing Google's idea, far from it. This concept and its use in software is probably 20 years old and it has been becomeing more and more mainstream in applications. It is just being brought to the masses now.
Rarely does only a single person find these exploits. The moment some innocent person only playing for fun figures it out and does a "/t Johnny hey man check this out!!!!" Its over.
Well... the lock on your front door isn't to keep determined criminals out. It is there to keep the average Joe from just walking in on a whim and stealing your stuff. This is the same philosophy as a lot of security mechanisms, and I don't think DRM is much different.
In the sense of what he says, they are. If you consider a firewall as a packet filter, then a router can do just that. At its core, a firewall is a packet filtering router, with a management app to make it workable as a firewall.
You appear to be right. I think there was another instance of this in the news recently where the person had downloaded kiddie porn and tried to steal financial data from the person's computer. I must have mistook this article for that one.
In fact the man is not being accused of WarDriving. He peformed other illegal activites while on the network which he is being charged with, like trying to gain access to the residents computers, etc.
Well, China is till trying to have their cake and eat it to. They opened themselves up to trade but they are still messing with that process in order to put the advantage in their favor.
I think that making the leap from "Jobs didn't go cell and instead switched to Intel" to "Cell must not be that good." is an incredible, and incorrect, leap of logic. There is a vast array of other factors involved in that choice.
It has been clear all along to anyone really paying attention that cell architectures would have a niche market in the near future.
Read the summation again, the issue is how broadly this patent gets applied. In the case of cotton, the technique is patented, not picking cotton. So, if this patent is used to keep people from making 1 to 1 recommendations on a website then in my mind they have patented picking cotton, not a better mechanism of cotton picking.
It is still seems like a trivial re-application of the human logic applied by any reasonably savy store owner "Mrs. Smith I see you are buying eggs, people have really been raving about these sausages." or "Mrs. Smith I see you are buying that speciality cheese. Mrs. Jones was in here buying those and LOVES these olives." Any way you look at it, its obvious someone just said "Wouldn't it be great if we could make the same recommendations, but with COMPUTERS and on the WEB." Ding ding ding aren't we geniuses.
Now, that being said if this method was more complex and actually stated a single specific thing I could see a patent for it, however reading all 38 itmes its a bunch of self referencing garbage that says "We pay attention to the same things a human WISHES he could, but with a computer to do it so we can actually track it." And when I look at it that way you can definitely see it arising from a reasonably savvy grocery store owner who says "I wish I could pay more attention to my customers."
In the end we'll have to see what the courts allow amazon to persue with this, if they allow them to persue a very narrow set of things then I can see it. But item to item recommendations on a site based on viewing one item than another is way too broad.
1. Anti competitive can only be established in the court.
2. Extortion, or business arrangements as Intel might phrase it, are legal in business, so long as anti competition does not exist.
So really, your statements are pure drivel and completely incorrect till after the court case is finished. Anti-competitiveness is an empty concept in business, all business is anti their competition, till mononpoly is established and that can only be done in the courts.
If the products are really pretty similar, and they are, then price is what matters. AMD is having trouble competing because they sell the same damn thing as Intel, but Intel can afford to sell it cheaper. Now, imagine this, the market for PCs has a given size and growth is to be expected. When a manufacturer says "We're going to sell AMD too." It also means they will sell LESS Intel. If that is the case, Intel is not punishing them for buying AMD, they are being punished for buying less Intel. Yes, it is semantics, but if all aspects of a business arrangment are not up for discussion here then this is just more Politically Correct Era nonsense.
It sounds like they have some ideas on not just the hardwrae side but on the software and protocols for interoperability. If so, then maybe they are trying to say "Hey do it our way, and here is some hardware. But if you roll your own hardware, license our software." Could be a good strategy.
who thinks Microsoft's extension of RSS may be the attempted return of push technology?
Push never went away. Automatic updates in all your application are various incarnations of "push". Anything that gets some info without your explicitly asking for it essentially all that "push" ever was.
Slashdot Mirror
Your meaning was lost completely. You seemed very much to be saying that "people who use her philosophy or find value in it are lazy assholes" not "lazy assholes use the idea to explain themselves."
Can you tell me something? Why is self interest bad? Why is it bad to gain from helping people? Why is it bad to feel good about working at a food bank? Why is it bad to say "I stacked can goods to help feed people" than it is to say "I stacked canned goods to make myself feel good." the end result is the same. And I bet most people who volunteer there only get to actually experience the second one. They don't actually go out and EXPERIENCE the relief of hunger. YOU CAN't experience that for other people.
You have decided that by making it clear that people have self interest in mind that she is intending to devalue the action the person takes. That was never the intent. She is not devalueing it, *YOU* are. Other people, such as yourself, are the ones who attach the stigma to self interest.
I take Ayn Rand's ideas to mean that recognizing our self interest in things can make use better at understanding all the things we can do for others. When you're out being noble a healthy recognition of what you stand to gain is good for you. For me it is an empowering idea that allows me to take control of my own actions, put personal purpose behind them, and *still* find reasons to help other people.
Absolutely, the desktop apps for personal mapping have a fairly long life ahead of them.
The seller in mapping right now benefits from the existing model of subscription services for the data. It is expensive. Currently though the ones I have used release data in full sets not diffs. An auto update of multiple gigs is sorta cumbersome. Tack the satellite imagery on top of that and it gets even larger. I don't know the specifcs of how they contain the map data now, but I imagine it is some form of equation. A road has a name and its curve points are stored. The satellite imagery has got to be enormous and updating that via auto update would get difficult. Consider that satellite surverys are not on demand, they will be done in large chunks.
Google could move to a per request pricing model or or chargge to host the overlay data for large data sets. They can recover the cost through other creative ways.
No. The meaning would be altered without the words I chose or require extra wording to arrive at the same meaning. If you can't tell the difference between buzzwords and important and real concepts then maybe you should go get a job. I was speaking in very general terms which is when words like "solution", "service" and "application architecture" hold as much specificity as is required. I could say "the thing we did for the thingy with that thing" or "that external application whatchamacalit that provides sumpthin" or "the way we did the whole dern thing". Would that be better?
I've implemented mapping solutions for large vendor applications and the business benefits for it are awesome when it is implemented properly. The major impediment was the multiple thousand dollar cost. Web solutions allow the data holder to centralize the data, update it more often and fix issues faster. Googles *and* Mircrosoft's work on allowing you to overlay custom data is brilliant when you consider that Google maps can now be a service within an application architecture. Microsoft is not coopting or stealing Google's idea, far from it. This concept and its use in software is probably 20 years old and it has been becomeing more and more mainstream in applications. It is just being brought to the masses now.
*Hundreds* of people. GASP! It was an accident. Send out an apology and forget it.
Rarely does only a single person find these exploits. The moment some innocent person only playing for fun figures it out and does a "/t Johnny hey man check this out!!!!" Its over.
This guy could be on a test server, where doing this would not be frowned on as much. You never know, I know people who play ONLY on test servers.
Well... the lock on your front door isn't to keep determined criminals out. It is there to keep the average Joe from just walking in on a whim and stealing your stuff. This is the same philosophy as a lot of security mechanisms, and I don't think DRM is much different.
In the sense of what he says, they are. If you consider a firewall as a packet filter, then a router can do just that. At its core, a firewall is a packet filtering router, with a management app to make it workable as a firewall.
A company giving procurement people free stuff? Oh the horrors! I didn't realize Microsoft was so unabashadly evil. Oh deary me.
You appear to be right. I think there was another instance of this in the news recently where the person had downloaded kiddie porn and tried to steal financial data from the person's computer. I must have mistook this article for that one.
In fact the man is not being accused of WarDriving. He peformed other illegal activites while on the network which he is being charged with, like trying to gain access to the residents computers, etc.
Well, China is till trying to have their cake and eat it to. They opened themselves up to trade but they are still messing with that process in order to put the advantage in their favor.
I think that making the leap from "Jobs didn't go cell and instead switched to Intel" to "Cell must not be that good." is an incredible, and incorrect, leap of logic. There is a vast array of other factors involved in that choice.
It has been clear all along to anyone really paying attention that cell architectures would have a niche market in the near future.
Read the summation again, the issue is how broadly this patent gets applied. In the case of cotton, the technique is patented, not picking cotton. So, if this patent is used to keep people from making 1 to 1 recommendations on a website then in my mind they have patented picking cotton, not a better mechanism of cotton picking.
Here is my gut feelings on the issue.
It is still seems like a trivial re-application of the human logic applied by any reasonably savy store owner "Mrs. Smith I see you are buying eggs, people have really been raving about these sausages." or "Mrs. Smith I see you are buying that speciality cheese. Mrs. Jones was in here buying those and LOVES these olives." Any way you look at it, its obvious someone just said "Wouldn't it be great if we could make the same recommendations, but with COMPUTERS and on the WEB." Ding ding ding aren't we geniuses.
Now, that being said if this method was more complex and actually stated a single specific thing I could see a patent for it, however reading all 38 itmes its a bunch of self referencing garbage that says "We pay attention to the same things a human WISHES he could, but with a computer to do it so we can actually track it." And when I look at it that way you can definitely see it arising from a reasonably savvy grocery store owner who says "I wish I could pay more attention to my customers."
In the end we'll have to see what the courts allow amazon to persue with this, if they allow them to persue a very narrow set of things then I can see it. But item to item recommendations on a site based on viewing one item than another is way too broad.
Grammar, the morons counterpoint to every argument. Here is your sign.
Unfortunately, your wrong.
1. Anti competitive can only be established in the court.
2. Extortion, or business arrangements as Intel might phrase it, are legal in business, so long as anti competition does not exist.
So really, your statements are pure drivel and completely incorrect till after the court case is finished. Anti-competitiveness is an empty concept in business, all business is anti their competition, till mononpoly is established and that can only be done in the courts.
If the products are really pretty similar, and they are, then price is what matters. AMD is having trouble competing because they sell the same damn thing as Intel, but Intel can afford to sell it cheaper. Now, imagine this, the market for PCs has a given size and growth is to be expected. When a manufacturer says "We're going to sell AMD too." It also means they will sell LESS Intel. If that is the case, Intel is not punishing them for buying AMD, they are being punished for buying less Intel. Yes, it is semantics, but if all aspects of a business arrangment are not up for discussion here then this is just more Politically Correct Era nonsense.
"Your going to use AMD? We'll give you our stuff cheaper."
That is called BUSINESS, not CONSPIRACY. Sheesh.
It sounds like they have some ideas on not just the hardwrae side but on the software and protocols for interoperability. If so, then maybe they are trying to say "Hey do it our way, and here is some hardware. But if you roll your own hardware, license our software." Could be a good strategy.
It worked so well for the USSR, why not software and government communications.
who thinks Microsoft's extension of RSS may be the attempted return of push technology?
Push never went away. Automatic updates in all your application are various incarnations of "push". Anything that gets some info without your explicitly asking for it essentially all that "push" ever was.