If this type of tracking is enacted, how long before the government decides to start tracking others for various purposes (for example, pedophiles who are released from prison)?
Based on that definition, every time I touch the keyboard I'm in an ARG. My wife would give several examples of "reaching out" into my life as a result of games: not taking trash out, ignoring kids, not paying bills, etc etc.
THE buzzwords for the 2006 technology outlook fly thick and fast in nerd circles: high-definition DVD. À la carte TV shows from the Internet. Windows Vista.
Most of these goodies will take time to reach the masses. One, however, has already arrived, six months ahead of schedule: Apple's switch to Intel chips for its Macintosh computers.
The first such retrofitted model, the iMac, went on sale last week. Like the existing iMac model, which remains available, the new one is a sleek, thin, snow-white flat-panel screen with no actual computer box; the guts of the computer are hidden inside. The new iMac, like the old, is virus-free, spyware-free and gorgeous to behold. It still has a built-in camera for live Internet videoconferences, still can record DVD's, still comes with a remote for controlling music, photo slideshows and DVD playback from across the room, and still has built-in Bluetooth and Wi-Fi wireless networking. Even the price is the same: $1,300 for the 17-inch model, $1,700 for the 20-incher.
But now there's Intel inside.
Why on earth would Apple abandon the I.B.M.-Freescale processors that have served Mac fans so well for so many years? The official reasons are speed and heat; Intel's newest chip, the Core Duo, offers more of the first with less of the second. That's a big deal, especially in laptops; Apple's existing PowerBook laptops already get so hot, the smell of barbecued meat practically wafts from your thighs.
The switch is also good for Apple because it puts to death the Megahertz Myth. For years, Apple was at a public-perception disadvantage because consumers mistakenly believed you could rate a computer's speed by its chip. "That 3-gigahertz PC must be faster than a 2-gigahertz Mac," they would say. But megahertz comparisons are valid only between two chips of the same family - say, two Pentium 4's.
Now, though, many Macs and PC's will indeed contain the same processor, Intel's new Core Duo chip. As a computer-speed measurement, the chip-speed rating is still bogus - memory, operating system, circuitry, hard drive and other factors also determine a computer's speed - but less bogus than before.
Now, you can't just drop a new chip into a computer and expect it to work. Tens of thousands of software programs run on the Mac - and every one of them expects to find, at the other end, a PowerPC chip (the old Mac kind). Each one, not to mention the operating system itself, must be rewritten in the Intel language.
That's a nightmarish mountain of work, but Apple has pulled it off almost flawlessly. The operating system, Mac OS X 10.4.4, has indeed been rejiggered to speak Intellese, while otherwise remaining 100 percent identical in look, feel and features. The armada of Mac OS X ancillary programs has also been rewritten: Safari (Web browser), Mail (e-mail), Address Book, iCal (calendar), iTunes (music playback), Calculator, Chess, Dictionary, DVD Player and on and on. Even Apple's new iLife '06 suite has also been converted, and is included on all new Macs: iPhoto (for photos), iMovie (for editing your home videos), GarageBand (for podcasting and music composition) and iWeb (a new supersimple Web site-creation program).
For some real fun some Saturday afternoon, set up an Intel iMac and its identical-looking predecessor side by side. Sit there with a stopwatch, perform the same software timing tests on each one, and keep score in a notebook. Invite some friends over to share in the excitement.
What you'll discover is that the new iMac is deliciously fast when it's running Intel-ready software. Just turning the machine on is a joy, because starting up now takes 20 seconds instead of 60, like the previous model; you'll want to do it again and again. Programs open up a lot faster, too: GarageBand, for example, is ready for your musical inspiration in only 9 seconds, rather than 20. Web pages appear startlingly quickly: nytimes.com pops open in about 1 second (versus 2), Ama
By the mid-1970's, Belgian biochemist Marcel Florkin was declaring that the concept behind Miller's theory of the early atmosphere "has been abandoned". Two of the leading origin-of-life researchers, Klaus Does and Sidney Fox, confirmed that Miller had used the wrong gas mixture.
Textbooks still present the Miller experiment as though it reflected the earth's early environment, when most geochemists since the 1960's would say it is totally unlike Millers. When the experiment is replayed using an accurate atmosphere by today's science, you do not get amino acids. Instead you get toxic chemicals, Formaldehyde and Cyanide.
I never said anything about being smarted than Geology PHDs. I'm simply asking the question. Are they basing their "millions" based on what the Earth does? That seems like a completely legitimate question to me. If you think it's not, tell us why and keep the personal attacks to yourself.
Why assume anything when you're exploring a planet you know very little about? Maybe erosion occurs must faster (or slower) than it does on Earth. Basing scientific conclusions on huge assumptions like this just tell me that some scientist is looking to get a gov't grant for some theory he's concocted.
You didn't answer the question. The *water* "vanished millions of years ago". How do they know it wasn't 1000 years ago or for that matter 10 years ago?
Just because there's water there means there must be life? Tell that to the scientists who have tried to create life using water + electricty + chemicals + etc, etc.
I married a teacher almost 9 years ago and we have 2 boys. Go figure! Shouldn't I have had 1 of each according to this?
Or, perhaps I should have had some form of mutant!
The NetFlix/Tivo partnership will put NF back in the driver's seat IMO. Imagine being able to avoid the mail altogether. I have yet to hear anything from BB about such things. Hopefully NF is smart enough to not ONLY deliver to Tivo boxes. It ought to be able to deliver to any DVR. Better yet, just send it to an IP address.
Slashdot Mirror
He could always try hosting a game show.
Thanks for the Troll rating. I guess I don't fall into step with the /. mainstream crowd. Apparently if you disagree you get modded down.
Yeah, we wouldn't want people to care about something as stupid as flag burning.
If this type of tracking is enacted, how long before the government decides to start tracking others for various purposes (for example, pedophiles who are released from prison)?
And the problem with tracking pedophiles is...?Duke Nuk'em Forever
Based on that definition, every time I touch the keyboard I'm in an ARG. My wife would give several examples of "reaching out" into my life as a result of games: not taking trash out, ignoring kids, not paying bills, etc etc.
Thanks OP. Glad to see some acknowledgment that evolution is something that has to be believed just like creationism/ID.
January 25, 2006
David Pogue
Intel Inside. Huh?!
THE buzzwords for the 2006 technology outlook fly thick and fast in nerd circles: high-definition DVD. À la carte TV shows from the Internet. Windows Vista.
Most of these goodies will take time to reach the masses. One, however, has already arrived, six months ahead of schedule: Apple's switch to Intel chips for its Macintosh computers.
The first such retrofitted model, the iMac, went on sale last week. Like the existing iMac model, which remains available, the new one is a sleek, thin, snow-white flat-panel screen with no actual computer box; the guts of the computer are hidden inside. The new iMac, like the old, is virus-free, spyware-free and gorgeous to behold. It still has a built-in camera for live Internet videoconferences, still can record DVD's, still comes with a remote for controlling music, photo slideshows and DVD playback from across the room, and still has built-in Bluetooth and Wi-Fi wireless networking. Even the price is the same: $1,300 for the 17-inch model, $1,700 for the 20-incher.
But now there's Intel inside.
Why on earth would Apple abandon the I.B.M.-Freescale processors that have served Mac fans so well for so many years? The official reasons are speed and heat; Intel's newest chip, the Core Duo, offers more of the first with less of the second. That's a big deal, especially in laptops; Apple's existing PowerBook laptops already get so hot, the smell of barbecued meat practically wafts from your thighs.
The switch is also good for Apple because it puts to death the Megahertz Myth. For years, Apple was at a public-perception disadvantage because consumers mistakenly believed you could rate a computer's speed by its chip. "That 3-gigahertz PC must be faster than a 2-gigahertz Mac," they would say. But megahertz comparisons are valid only between two chips of the same family - say, two Pentium 4's.
Now, though, many Macs and PC's will indeed contain the same processor, Intel's new Core Duo chip. As a computer-speed measurement, the chip-speed rating is still bogus - memory, operating system, circuitry, hard drive and other factors also determine a computer's speed - but less bogus than before.
Now, you can't just drop a new chip into a computer and expect it to work. Tens of thousands of software programs run on the Mac - and every one of them expects to find, at the other end, a PowerPC chip (the old Mac kind). Each one, not to mention the operating system itself, must be rewritten in the Intel language.
That's a nightmarish mountain of work, but Apple has pulled it off almost flawlessly. The operating system, Mac OS X 10.4.4, has indeed been rejiggered to speak Intellese, while otherwise remaining 100 percent identical in look, feel and features. The armada of Mac OS X ancillary programs has also been rewritten: Safari (Web browser), Mail (e-mail), Address Book, iCal (calendar), iTunes (music playback), Calculator, Chess, Dictionary, DVD Player and on and on. Even Apple's new iLife '06 suite has also been converted, and is included on all new Macs: iPhoto (for photos), iMovie (for editing your home videos), GarageBand (for podcasting and music composition) and iWeb (a new supersimple Web site-creation program).
For some real fun some Saturday afternoon, set up an Intel iMac and its identical-looking predecessor side by side. Sit there with a stopwatch, perform the same software timing tests on each one, and keep score in a notebook. Invite some friends over to share in the excitement.
What you'll discover is that the new iMac is deliciously fast when it's running Intel-ready software. Just turning the machine on is a joy, because starting up now takes 20 seconds instead of 60, like the previous model; you'll want to do it again and again. Programs open up a lot faster, too: GarageBand, for example, is ready for your musical inspiration in only 9 seconds, rather than 20. Web pages appear startlingly quickly: nytimes.com pops open in about 1 second (versus 2), Ama
"...material that formed the planets and other bodies some 4.6 billion years ago."
I kind of thought we were standing on it....are dupes! Please remove!
By the mid-1970's, Belgian biochemist Marcel Florkin was declaring that the concept behind Miller's theory of the early atmosphere "has been abandoned". Two of the leading origin-of-life researchers, Klaus Does and Sidney Fox, confirmed that Miller had used the wrong gas mixture.
Textbooks still present the Miller experiment as though it reflected the earth's early environment, when most geochemists since the 1960's would say it is totally unlike Millers. When the experiment is replayed using an accurate atmosphere by today's science, you do not get amino acids. Instead you get toxic chemicals, Formaldehyde and Cyanide.
I never said anything about being smarted than Geology PHDs. I'm simply asking the question. Are they basing their "millions" based on what the Earth does? That seems like a completely legitimate question to me. If you think it's not, tell us why and keep the personal attacks to yourself.
Why assume anything when you're exploring a planet you know very little about? Maybe erosion occurs must faster (or slower) than it does on Earth. Basing scientific conclusions on huge assumptions like this just tell me that some scientist is looking to get a gov't grant for some theory he's concocted.
You didn't answer the question. The *water* "vanished millions of years ago". How do they know it wasn't 1000 years ago or for that matter 10 years ago?
"most of the water vanished millions of years ago"
And they know this how?
Just because there's water there means there must be life? Tell that to the scientists who have tried to create life using water + electricty + chemicals + etc, etc.
I want to see him do The Hobbit so pay the guy and let him do what he ought to be doing -- making movies. Not padding lawyer pockets.
...can you mix politics, nanotech, and naked bodies in a single story!
I married a teacher almost 9 years ago and we have 2 boys. Go figure! Shouldn't I have had 1 of each according to this? Or, perhaps I should have had some form of mutant!
Good info at http://www.icr.org/.
The NetFlix/Tivo partnership will put NF back in the driver's seat IMO. Imagine being able to avoid the mail altogether. I have yet to hear anything from BB about such things. Hopefully NF is smart enough to not ONLY deliver to Tivo boxes. It ought to be able to deliver to any DVR. Better yet, just send it to an IP address.
Ok, so if I decide to steal CherryOS and market it as GrapeOS, can CherryOS sue me? I can change some of the code to not look like theirs...