You're assuming that the artist knocks out a few tunes over the weekend, and have no other costs. Mostly music takes a lot more effort, time and money to produce than that -- the stuff you want to listen to at least.
I think he was imagining that musicians get a good fixed monthly salary that is related to the quality of their work (like I do), and on top of that get thousands and thousands every year after that for doing nothing (unlike me).
And that's wrong on two accounts: One, they don't get a fixed amount of money for their work. And second, if someone creates music this year and next year so many people buy it that he makes $5,000, then his music must have been bloody good in the first place, so he fully deserves it. You can try to compare him to a plumber who doesn't get money forever for work he's done once, but the reason he gets that money is because he did a much better job and deserves it.
It's impossible to eliminate guns in the US short of turning it into N. Korea.on steroids and locking pretty much everyone up in camps. As long as the US Government has guns and large, ridiculously-porous borders, the criminals will be armed and they will be the only civilians with guns.
Since we were talking about SF, I have one book where a strategy for removing guns is described. Quite simple: Gun ownership is made illegal with death penalty. One weekend 200 people are executed in 50 cities each for gun ownership. The second weekend, another 10,000 executions. Suddenly the police is totally overwhelmed in guns that are returned.
Most people who claim they'd die defending their right to own a gun actually don't want to die. Criminals don't want to die either.
In all seriousness though, I'd pay $2k to $3k extra for a button in a car that you could push to make it cruise exactly at the posted limit, as well as never exceed the limit going down hills, and it logs sensor data that can be used in court. It won't happen however, these fine only violations are what law enforcement calls their bread and butter.
From a practical point of view: When there is a speed limit restricting the driving speed, a small number of drivers will go under the speed limit, most will go a little bit above, and a few will go a lot above the limit. Assuming the speed limit is there to keep things safe, the police or whoever puts up the speed limit, would know that, and set the limit so with this mixture of speeds the street would be safe. So in a perfect world, this button would allow you to exceed the limit within a safe margin (and with no speeding ticket). Which may be safer than everyone going exactly the same speed.
If you read TFA you'll see there's no contract. The word "contractor" implies it but really they were just handed to a guy who crossed his heart and promised to do it before putting them on eBay.
It is the suite of tools, not just the processor. If intel offers a better processor/compiler package than is available for arm why shouldn't they tout it? I'm not saying they are presenting it in the correct way, but I do think they have a valid point they want to make. That with Intel you get more than a CPU, you get a heck of a lot of tool expertise. And for some people that is worth something.
Absolute correct, you should judge the combination of processor + commonly used compiler. For example, if Apple built an iPad with an Intel processor, then any iPad app would be built with Clang for ARMv7, Clang for ARMv7s, and Clang for x86_64, and you could directly compare all three versions.
However, you must be careful. You need to check real-life code. If you run identical code 32 times and an opimising compiler figures out you need to do it only once, that's not real-life. If this is what your benchmark does, then your benchmark runs 32 times faster, but nobody cares how fast benchmarks run. People care about real applications, and the benchmark's now fails at its purpose which is given an indication how real applications will behave.
This looks like it might be a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the part about "exceeds authorized access". File a criminal complaint with the FBI.
You installed that plugin, it said beforehand what it's doing, so it's authorized.
And don't want to work 80 hour weeks including weekends. You can take newly graduated college kids and work them like slaves. They even like it and think its cool. If you give them food at work they will live at the office for you
You can do that, but you would be an idiot. First, a quote from a top Microsoft developer: "You can make people stay at the office for 80 hrs/week, but you can't make them work for 80 hrs". Second, it has been shown that a developer working 60 hours a week for six week, and a developer working 40 hours a week for six week, have exactly the same productivity - not productivity per hour, but per week. But after six weeks you have one developer who is exhausted and one who is fresh, so guess who beats the other one over the next six weeks?
Couldn't agree more. The only thing they should be trying to decide is what sort of medal to give him for having the courage to defend himself against an assailant.
I'd love to hear both sides of the story. But I can't. Because one side shot and killed the other side.
Having a single executable file that runs on several platforms. So e.g. in an Appstore you just go to the thing you want and download it and it runs on your platform without knowing which kind of processor etc. you have on that platform (motorola 68k, power pc, intel or arm).
Apple does that already, right now, for iPhone and iPad apps. At least if vector performance is important for you, you build for armv7 and armv7s.
That's never stopped Apple before. "Oh, just a recompile away is a glorious land of milk and honey, here are the tools to do it, you have two months."
This time it _is_ just a recompile. From a portability point of view, any C / C++ / Objective C code written for ARM will run absolutely unchanged on x86 / 32bit. Every developer uses the iPhone / iPad simulator, which does actually compile to x86 32-bit code and uses a library to support all the iOS APIs.
You can see it a lot better at 1600. I pay my devs an average of $80k/year. Buying a better monitor makes sense even if they are only 0.1% more productive.
You can RELOAD the device's OS with custom ROMs that don't do this crap. If it was discovered Apple does this (and who's to say they don't) what choice have you? And Windows phone? Don't even start.
So there is a massive _actual_ privacy violation by Google (who owns Motorola and is 100% responsible for anything that happens under the name Motorola), and you complain about what-ifs with Apple and Microsoft?
Remember that Google's customers are the advertisers. Apple's customers are people buying Apple devices. I expect both Google and Apple to do what is good for their customers, even if it hurts others (like _you_ in the case of Google, and advertisers in the case of Apple).
The competition winner doesn't compile for me, not the way my compiler is set up. It warns that the initializer doesn't have enough data, and stops compiling because no warnings are allowed.
Well if you compare it with OSX, iOS and Ubuntu's Unity, metro is not THAT bad. It's when you compare it with a proper desktop environment like Xfce or Windows 7's Aero that Metro is terrible.
Obvious that your snarky remark had to be voted up as "insightful". The reality is that Microsoft couldn't have possibly made Apple a bigger present. There were all these rumours that Apple was going to merge MacOS X and iOS (supported by both clueless fanboys and Apple haters and denigrated by anyone with common sense), and guess what: Microsoft "copied" what Apple was too clever to do.
You are forgetting users like my step mother who can't figure out why her new laptop acts like someone's phone instead like her computer at work. If she wanted something that acted like a smart phone she would have bought a smart phone.
Years ago my daughter bought a laptop which came with the then brand new Windows Vista. She called me and asked if I could put Windows on it for her...
Wasn't "high volume purchase" meant to work the other way, originally?
They don't pay $1,000 for each iPad. They pay $678 for an iPad with five your warranty AND insurance, with tons of educational software. And then there is other cost related to this purchases, like training and so on, probably charging stations, something to look the iPads away when not used and so on. TCO is more than purchase price.
That'd still only cost 300K, 1% of the cost here. Order 5K additional units for replacements and you still have tens of millions left over for software and warranty.
Maybe they can use these iPads in math education as well. Would be worthwhile.
Let me say that clearly: You are moaning in public about how schools spend money, while you prove being a fucking idiot by getting the answer of a simple maths problem wrong by a factor 10.
Exactly how is this different from USB 3.0? Or even the Nook Color and Nook Tablet's 12-pin 1.9 amp micro-USB connector that optionally charges at 1.9 amps with the appropriate connector, but regular USB with a 5-pin connector?
There's lots of prior art.
It's different in that you can't plug an SD card into these connectors.
It's trivial and non-novel. Those a both very good reasons to reject it.
Apart from the fact that Apple is applying for it, what makes it trivial and non-novel? If it's trivial and non-novel, where is the laptop that already has a combined USB and SD-card connector?
As to the merits, it seems to me like there is probably prior art, and it may also fail the obviousness test. I'm not sure this is an idea that deserves patent protection.
I think it is a very, very obvious idea that you would want a port where you can plug in either a USB connector or an SD card. What I don't know is how difficult it is to make this very obvious idea work. Consider this: It is a very, very obvious idea that it would nice if my car could fly. Does it fly? No. Because it's hard to implement.
That's actually something that makes it more patent worthy: If there is an obvious need for it, and similar things have already been developed and well accepted, but this particular combination isn't available yet, then it seems reasonable that actually making it work requires something entirely non-obvious.
Slashdot Mirror
You're assuming that the artist knocks out a few tunes over the weekend, and have no other costs. Mostly music takes a lot more effort, time and money to produce than that -- the stuff you want to listen to at least.
I think he was imagining that musicians get a good fixed monthly salary that is related to the quality of their work (like I do), and on top of that get thousands and thousands every year after that for doing nothing (unlike me).
And that's wrong on two accounts: One, they don't get a fixed amount of money for their work. And second, if someone creates music this year and next year so many people buy it that he makes $5,000, then his music must have been bloody good in the first place, so he fully deserves it. You can try to compare him to a plumber who doesn't get money forever for work he's done once, but the reason he gets that money is because he did a much better job and deserves it.
It's impossible to eliminate guns in the US short of turning it into N. Korea.on steroids and locking pretty much everyone up in camps. As long as the US Government has guns and large, ridiculously-porous borders, the criminals will be armed and they will be the only civilians with guns.
Since we were talking about SF, I have one book where a strategy for removing guns is described. Quite simple: Gun ownership is made illegal with death penalty. One weekend 200 people are executed in 50 cities each for gun ownership. The second weekend, another 10,000 executions. Suddenly the police is totally overwhelmed in guns that are returned.
Most people who claim they'd die defending their right to own a gun actually don't want to die. Criminals don't want to die either.
In all seriousness though, I'd pay $2k to $3k extra for a button in a car that you could push to make it cruise exactly at the posted limit, as well as never exceed the limit going down hills, and it logs sensor data that can be used in court. It won't happen however, these fine only violations are what law enforcement calls their bread and butter.
From a practical point of view: When there is a speed limit restricting the driving speed, a small number of drivers will go under the speed limit, most will go a little bit above, and a few will go a lot above the limit. Assuming the speed limit is there to keep things safe, the police or whoever puts up the speed limit, would know that, and set the limit so with this mixture of speeds the street would be safe. So in a perfect world, this button would allow you to exceed the limit within a safe margin (and with no speeding ticket). Which may be safer than everyone going exactly the same speed.
is not aware that phone size is anything worth fighting about. (I still think they should build phone capability into the iPad Mini).
Yes, usually said by people to cant afford a big phone.
So you are saying that unlike an iPhone, which people buy for its usability, Samsung phones are sold to show-offs as status symbols?
If you read TFA you'll see there's no contract. The word "contractor" implies it but really they were just handed to a guy who crossed his heart and promised to do it before putting them on eBay.
Which means there is a contract.
It is the suite of tools, not just the processor. If intel offers a better processor/compiler package than is available for arm why shouldn't they tout it? I'm not saying they are presenting it in the correct way, but I do think they have a valid point they want to make. That with Intel you get more than a CPU, you get a heck of a lot of tool expertise. And for some people that is worth something.
Absolute correct, you should judge the combination of processor + commonly used compiler. For example, if Apple built an iPad with an Intel processor, then any iPad app would be built with Clang for ARMv7, Clang for ARMv7s, and Clang for x86_64, and you could directly compare all three versions.
However, you must be careful. You need to check real-life code. If you run identical code 32 times and an opimising compiler figures out you need to do it only once, that's not real-life. If this is what your benchmark does, then your benchmark runs 32 times faster, but nobody cares how fast benchmarks run. People care about real applications, and the benchmark's now fails at its purpose which is given an indication how real applications will behave.
This looks like it might be a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the part about "exceeds authorized access". File a criminal complaint with the FBI.
You installed that plugin, it said beforehand what it's doing, so it's authorized.
And don't want to work 80 hour weeks including weekends. You can take newly graduated college kids and work them like slaves. They even like it and think its cool. If you give them food at work they will live at the office for you
You can do that, but you would be an idiot. First, a quote from a top Microsoft developer: "You can make people stay at the office for 80 hrs/week, but you can't make them work for 80 hrs". Second, it has been shown that a developer working 60 hours a week for six week, and a developer working 40 hours a week for six week, have exactly the same productivity - not productivity per hour, but per week. But after six weeks you have one developer who is exhausted and one who is fresh, so guess who beats the other one over the next six weeks?
Couldn't agree more. The only thing they should be trying to decide is what sort of medal to give him for having the courage to defend himself against an assailant.
I'd love to hear both sides of the story. But I can't. Because one side shot and killed the other side.
Having a single executable file that runs on several platforms. So e.g. in an Appstore you just go to the thing you want and download it and it runs on your platform without knowing which kind of processor etc. you have on that platform (motorola 68k, power pc, intel or arm).
Apple does that already, right now, for iPhone and iPad apps. At least if vector performance is important for you, you build for armv7 and armv7s.
That's never stopped Apple before. "Oh, just a recompile away is a glorious land of milk and honey, here are the tools to do it, you have two months."
This time it _is_ just a recompile. From a portability point of view, any C / C++ / Objective C code written for ARM will run absolutely unchanged on x86 / 32bit. Every developer uses the iPhone / iPad simulator, which does actually compile to x86 32-bit code and uses a library to support all the iOS APIs.
Rounded to the nearest whole number, I think its absolutely safe to say 0% of programmers understand how to write multithreaded code properly.
Go to developer.apple.com, get the documentation about GCD.
You can see it a lot better at 1600. I pay my devs an average of $80k/year. Buying a better monitor makes sense even if they are only 0.1% more productive.
It doesn't. One percent, yes. 0.1%, no.
You can RELOAD the device's OS with custom ROMs that don't do this crap. If it was discovered Apple does this (and who's to say they don't) what choice have you? And Windows phone? Don't even start.
So there is a massive _actual_ privacy violation by Google (who owns Motorola and is 100% responsible for anything that happens under the name Motorola), and you complain about what-ifs with Apple and Microsoft?
Remember that Google's customers are the advertisers. Apple's customers are people buying Apple devices. I expect both Google and Apple to do what is good for their customers, even if it hurts others (like _you_ in the case of Google, and advertisers in the case of Apple).
The competition winner doesn't compile for me, not the way my compiler is set up. It warns that the initializer doesn't have enough data, and stops compiling because no warnings are allowed.
Intentional obfuscation is no problem, because code that is obfuscated can and should just be rejected.
Well if you compare it with OSX, iOS and Ubuntu's Unity, metro is not THAT bad. It's when you compare it with a proper desktop environment like Xfce or Windows 7's Aero that Metro is terrible.
Obvious that your snarky remark had to be voted up as "insightful". The reality is that Microsoft couldn't have possibly made Apple a bigger present. There were all these rumours that Apple was going to merge MacOS X and iOS (supported by both clueless fanboys and Apple haters and denigrated by anyone with common sense), and guess what: Microsoft "copied" what Apple was too clever to do.
You are forgetting users like my step mother who can't figure out why her new laptop acts like someone's phone instead like her computer at work. If she wanted something that acted like a smart phone she would have bought a smart phone.
Years ago my daughter bought a laptop which came with the then brand new Windows Vista. She called me and asked if I could put Windows on it for her...
Is this an NSA only product?
Absolutely. Unlike Samsung's new sWatch, which sends all your data to the NSA, Google, and Samsung headquarters.
That's a refreshing $1,000 a pop.
Wasn't "high volume purchase" meant to work the other way, originally?
They don't pay $1,000 for each iPad. They pay $678 for an iPad with five your warranty AND insurance, with tons of educational software. And then there is other cost related to this purchases, like training and so on, probably charging stations, something to look the iPads away when not used and so on. TCO is more than purchase price.
That'd still only cost 300K, 1% of the cost here. Order 5K additional units for replacements and you still have tens of millions left over for software and warranty.
Maybe they can use these iPads in math education as well. Would be worthwhile.
Let me say that clearly: You are moaning in public about how schools spend money, while you prove being a fucking idiot by getting the answer of a simple maths problem wrong by a factor 10.
Exactly how is this different from USB 3.0? Or even the Nook Color and Nook Tablet's 12-pin 1.9 amp micro-USB connector that optionally charges at 1.9 amps with the appropriate connector, but regular USB with a 5-pin connector?
There's lots of prior art.
It's different in that you can't plug an SD card into these connectors.
It's trivial and non-novel. Those a both very good reasons to reject it.
Apart from the fact that Apple is applying for it, what makes it trivial and non-novel? If it's trivial and non-novel, where is the laptop that already has a combined USB and SD-card connector?
As to the merits, it seems to me like there is probably prior art, and it may also fail the obviousness test. I'm not sure this is an idea that deserves patent protection.
I think it is a very, very obvious idea that you would want a port where you can plug in either a USB connector or an SD card. What I don't know is how difficult it is to make this very obvious idea work. Consider this: It is a very, very obvious idea that it would nice if my car could fly. Does it fly? No. Because it's hard to implement.
That's actually something that makes it more patent worthy: If there is an obvious need for it, and similar things have already been developed and well accepted, but this particular combination isn't available yet, then it seems reasonable that actually making it work requires something entirely non-obvious.