It is a very socialistic approach to development. As some have pointed out to me here on slashdot, many of the things that make a piece of software great are missing in open source products.
They maintained that the things like self installation and good interface don't get done without "a big company forcing someone to do it" because they are not fun things to code.
Another way of saying that is those things don't get done because no one is paying for them to be done.
The big joke during the cold war was that the Soviet work ethic was no good. Same with open source.
I can't wait to see how this plays out on Slashdot.
If you admit that preferring Mac to a PC will bias how each is reported in the mainstream media what does that say about a political bias?
What are the political affiliations of the writers / editors of those publications and how does that affect their reporting? I would be willing to bet that they are more Liberal than Conservative.
My thought is that yes, the primary use of Mac's by the reporting outlet will bias their view. How can it not? Daily use of the tool promotes a deeper knowledge. Same with political affiliations. In reporting you must consider the source.
I understand that the technical aspect is more relevant to Slashdot but the political aspect is arguably more important to the larger population.
If you don't admit that preference creates bias how do you support your argument? Presumably, if you spent money to buy the thing you did research. Your research led you to the conclusion, a purchase, and that conclusion will color your reporting. IE " I can se the benefits of PC but..." Again how does this translate to the political aspect of reporting?
Also, does that mean that Mac's are primarily used by Liberals (media, education, marketing and design) and PC's by conservatives (business & industry)? Is the Mac vs. PC war a mirror of political life in America and what conclusions can you draw from it's current state?. Now I really ranting.
"it is too bad the field of stem cell research in the US has been badly damaged by policies the current Whitehouse administration have put into place."
Hold on. Let's take that one piece at a time shall we.
1 - Bush's policy says that you will not get federal government funding to do research on embryonic stem cells. Where does it say that the government must be the beginning and end of medical research? If there is money to be made in making people walk, and I dare say there is, then private industry can and will take up the charge. I don't think we should be counting on the government to make this happen.
2 - His decision is consistent with the belief that an embryo is a child. Whether you agree or not, he is at least being consistent. Given his line of belief, which I share, it is a dangerous thing to get into the habit of conceiving children for the sole purpose of using them as spare parts for other people.
Would you murder one so that another could live a better life? Be careful what you wish for.
I use a MythTV box that a friend programmed for me. I love it but it is essentially a black box to me (literally) because I am not a programmer.
I am trying to resolve what seems like a contradiction.
1 - open source software is constantly (on Slashdot) said to be the way to go.
2 - TiVo has an interface that appears to be an order of magnitude better than Myth
This seems like a contradiction in my mind.
If Myth is open source and so many people are improving it and making feature additions then how come the average fairly intelligent person (I am an engineer) can't, with a minimum of fuss, install the software, have it find the installed hardware and configure itself accordingly?
Myth is great because it's independent & free of restrictions. It does not seem up to par on some things you would expect to do easily (watch a DVD, Archive to DVD, program on screen, for which I use the mythweb function almost exclusively). This is my first experience with open source and it seems like it's not yet ready for prime time.
But maybe not for the reasons you think. Ayn Rand once wrote, "It's difficult to rule a society of honest men. So if there aren't enough criminals, we will simply write more laws."
Is this a law that is meant to stop you from downloading music or is it meant to be broken so that the people whom it "protects" can have some power over you?
The more I think about this, the more it seems akin to having an alarm system in your house.
I think it is just a little creepy the way they can remotely turn on a two way mic. Even with home alarms they call on the phone and you have to answer. Then if you don't they send the cops.
Tivo exec Ignatius Given announced that the company recently struck an agreement which will allow Tivo units to play back recorded programs only when those shows are actually airing on live television.
Mr. Given was quoted as likening this agreement to releasing a directors cut of a movie. "Now viewers can be certain that they are viewing content exactly during the timeslot intended by the shows creator."
This news followed the previous release stating that Tivo would be replacing the skipped commercials with 30 second banner ads.
"A friend of mine has a Toyota MR2. Recently he returned to his car from a walk and found that somebody had triggered the airbags (probably) by fiddling with an accelerometer"
I don't think that's what happened. I was at a demonstration on how air bags work. At GM oddly enough. There are multiple accelerometers in a car. Air bags are triggered only if there is a sudden change in momentum detected by more than one sensor. Simultaneously. That would be very difficult to accomplish on a parked car.
The multiple sensor idea is a safety feature designed to prevent the air bags going off accidently (pun intended) while you are driving.
Every time I see this on TV I cringe. Little kids telling me that if it wasn't for OnStar, no one would have helped them after the accident.
OnStar is yet another way to turn over responsibility to someone else. Responsibility for maintaining your car, keeping you safe, protecting the children. We've got to do it for the children. I know I rant, but still.
Also, no one seems interested in the fundamental question...
Who Owns The Information Collected?
Let me give you a hint. Not you. Use it in court. Need Insurance? Let's call OnStar and see if you are a safe driver. Storage memory is cheap. Store it all.
They might try varying the price of the ticket depending on the quality of the movie or on how much it cost to make. I just realized that regardless of movie cost or quality - the cost of the ticket is the same. It varies on the type of person (student / senior) attending, not the type of movie.
A romantic comedy with low production costs might be willing to accept a much lower price per ticket than a big summer blockbuster.
At least let the theater owner set the prices by movie. All movies are not created equally. Let the market determine the price of the ticket. That would also give Hollywood some much needed feedback on what a movie is worth.
I wonder if this might be a standard of the Turing test. From what I know of the test, a computer has passed when it can communicate with a person and the person cannot identify it as a computer.
When I play a FPS against a computer, I know it. So do you by the point you make. When a computer can strategize in such a way that I cannot tell it is a computer, that will be a successful Turing test, IMHO.
Perhaps I should start carrying more than one cell phone. That way, when the Precrimes Division arrests me I can argue that one of my phones may have generated a Minority Report.
Said in jest but all that this implies is not funny.
I bet they could make a pretty shrewed guess as to whom is watching a particular show if they know, in advance, who lives at your address. Which, of course, you would tell them as part of the program.
What if they paid you a small fee when you watched and rated a commercial? With the rising cost of cabel TV, it might be worth your while to watch a few.
The ad people get some good feedback on content as well as if you are interested and you earn credit toward your bill as well as better targeted ads.
This is not much different from grocery stores paying you in the form of discounts for access to your purchasing history.
Now put those two ideas together and you have a pretty powerful marketing tool.
Seriously, I get it. I agree. it is their park. Come and go on their terms. You keep trying to explain to me that they make it clear that those are the terms.
I think it is a bit extreem when they resort to taking my personal biological information as the price of admission.
For as infrequently as I go, it's not enough to get upset about. It's just, well strange.
Feel free though, in your response, to tell me the terms again. perhaps their website has a more detailed set of T's & c's.
Disney is not a basic life requirement, it is a luxury and they have the option to make the rules. Don't like them, don't go. It is really that simple.
I think that is exactly what I said...
The parks have limited resources, only so many people can get on a ride per-hour. Why should someone who did not pay to go into the park be allowed to use those resources?
If only a person with a ticket can be in the park at a time your whole "limited resource" argument makes no sense. Also, if i used the ticket in the morning and eat the food and buy toys and stuff - which costs extra, and then I leave and my friend uses the pass for the rest of the day, don't they make more $?
I have never done this but it seems like a lot to go thru just to keep me from sharing something I purchased.
I know the agreement says the ticket is for me alone. It just seems extreem.
No doubt the network goons will soon be kicking in my door for these public admissions. It won't matter that we watch MORE TV now, only that we've used BitTorrent in acts of "piracy"....
they don't care that you are watching more TV. Are you watching more commercials? I bet those BitTorrent DL's did not contain commercials. They don't make money if you watch great TV. They make money if you watch comercials.
How do you think TV is paid for? There are other business models that may be better, but this is the one they are currently using.
Slashdot Mirror
It is a very socialistic approach to development. As some have pointed out to me here on slashdot, many of the things that make a piece of software great are missing in open source products.
They maintained that the things like self installation and good interface don't get done without "a big company forcing someone to do it" because they are not fun things to code.
Another way of saying that is those things don't get done because no one is paying for them to be done.
The big joke during the cold war was that the Soviet work ethic was no good. Same with open source.
What's missing is capitalism.
I can't wait to see how this plays out on Slashdot.
If you admit that preferring Mac to a PC will bias how each is reported in the mainstream media what does that say about a political bias?
What are the political affiliations of the writers / editors of those publications and how does that affect their reporting? I would be willing to bet that they are more Liberal than Conservative.
My thought is that yes, the primary use of Mac's by the reporting outlet will bias their view. How can it not? Daily use of the tool promotes a deeper knowledge. Same with political affiliations. In reporting you must consider the source.
I understand that the technical aspect is more relevant to Slashdot but the political aspect is arguably more important to the larger population.
If you don't admit that preference creates bias how do you support your argument? Presumably, if you spent money to buy the thing you did research. Your research led you to the conclusion, a purchase, and that conclusion will color your reporting. IE " I can se the benefits of PC but..." Again how does this translate to the political aspect of reporting?
Also, does that mean that Mac's are primarily used by Liberals (media, education, marketing and design) and PC's by conservatives (business & industry)? Is the Mac vs. PC war a mirror of political life in America and what conclusions can you draw from it's current state?. Now I really ranting.
"it is too bad the field of stem cell research in the US has been badly damaged by policies the current Whitehouse administration have put into place."
Hold on. Let's take that one piece at a time shall we.
1 - Bush's policy says that you will not get federal government funding to do research on embryonic stem cells. Where does it say that the government must be the beginning and end of medical research? If there is money to be made in making people walk, and I dare say there is, then private industry can and will take up the charge. I don't think we should be counting on the government to make this happen.
2 - His decision is consistent with the belief that an embryo is a child. Whether you agree or not, he is at least being consistent. Given his line of belief, which I share, it is a dangerous thing to get into the habit of conceiving children for the sole purpose of using them as spare parts for other people.
Would you murder one so that another could live a better life? Be careful what you wish for.
The litigants will see it to know where they should plead their case & get the best results.
The residents of that area will see it also and decide if that is the court system they want. Then speak up accordingly.
More knowledge is ALWAYS good. The facts are the facts. Not knowing them does not make them untrue.
Actually both. Black box - I don't understand how it works and black box - it's actually black. I think you knew what I meant though...
Fair enough on the install stuff but the feature stuff sounds sexy & worth doing. Why no progress there?
I use a MythTV box that a friend programmed for me. I love it but it is essentially a black box to me (literally) because I am not a programmer.
I am trying to resolve what seems like a contradiction.
1 - open source software is constantly (on Slashdot) said to be the way to go.
2 - TiVo has an interface that appears to be an order of magnitude better than Myth
This seems like a contradiction in my mind.
If Myth is open source and so many people are improving it and making feature additions then how come the average fairly intelligent person (I am an engineer) can't, with a minimum of fuss, install the software, have it find the installed hardware and configure itself accordingly?
Myth is great because it's independent & free of restrictions. It does not seem up to par on some things you would expect to do easily (watch a DVD, Archive to DVD, program on screen, for which I use the mythweb function almost exclusively). This is my first experience with open source and it seems like it's not yet ready for prime time.
But maybe not for the reasons you think. Ayn Rand once wrote, "It's difficult to rule a society of honest men. So if there aren't enough criminals, we will simply write more laws."
Is this a law that is meant to stop you from downloading music or is it meant to be broken so that the people whom it "protects" can have some power over you?
You are right.
The more I think about this, the more it seems akin to having an alarm system in your house.
I think it is just a little creepy the way they can remotely turn on a two way mic. Even with home alarms they call on the phone and you have to answer. Then if you don't they send the cops.
"Somebody watched Fight Club and believed everything they saw."
Yeah, and his name was Robert Paulson.
Tivo exec Ignatius Given announced that the company recently struck an agreement which will allow Tivo units to play back recorded programs only when those shows are actually airing on live television.
Mr. Given was quoted as likening this agreement to releasing a directors cut of a movie. "Now viewers can be certain that they are viewing content exactly during the timeslot intended by the shows creator."
This news followed the previous release stating that Tivo would be replacing the skipped commercials with 30 second banner ads.
"A friend of mine has a Toyota MR2. Recently he returned to his car from a walk and found that somebody had triggered the airbags (probably) by fiddling with an accelerometer"
I don't think that's what happened. I was at a demonstration on how air bags work. At GM oddly enough. There are multiple accelerometers in a car. Air bags are triggered only if there is a sudden change in momentum detected by more than one sensor. Simultaneously. That would be very difficult to accomplish on a parked car.
The multiple sensor idea is a safety feature designed to prevent the air bags going off accidently (pun intended) while you are driving.
You make my point.
"This system is just a cell phone plugged into a computer that can send for help if needed"
Does she have a cell phone? Use that. You are already paying $ every month for a system that you can use to call for help. Cell Phone.
Except that your cell phone does not (yet, I suppose it's possible) come on by itself and ask you if you are in trouble.
For that matter, why not wear one of those necklaces that you can use to call for help?
"I've fallen and I can't get up!"
As for your other point...
"Several other car makers put a black box in their cars also. OnStar doesn't monitor your driving anyways."
Sure they do. Air bag goes off. OnStar calls. Drive erratically. OnStar calls. They are monitoring.
Here is the difference...
The price you pay for having a car seat is cash.
The price you pay for making them wear seatbelts is having to listen to them complain.
The price you pay for not leaving them alone is your time.
The price you pay for OnStar is privacy.
Wow.
You raise a good point. Forget spammers though. It will be GM pushing audio commercials over your OnStar.
It will start with commercials for OnStar upgrades and go from there.
Every time I see this on TV I cringe. Little kids telling me that if it wasn't for OnStar, no one would have helped them after the accident.
OnStar is yet another way to turn over responsibility to someone else. Responsibility for maintaining your car, keeping you safe, protecting the children. We've got to do it for the children. I know I rant, but still.
Also, no one seems interested in the fundamental question...
Who Owns The Information Collected?
Let me give you a hint. Not you. Use it in court. Need Insurance? Let's call OnStar and see if you are a safe driver. Storage memory is cheap. Store it all.
It just feels wrong.
They might try varying the price of the ticket depending on the quality of the movie or on how much it cost to make. I just realized that regardless of movie cost or quality - the cost of the ticket is the same. It varies on the type of person (student / senior) attending, not the type of movie.
A romantic comedy with low production costs might be willing to accept a much lower price per ticket than a big summer blockbuster.
At least let the theater owner set the prices by movie. All movies are not created equally. Let the market determine the price of the ticket. That would also give Hollywood some much needed feedback on what a movie is worth.
Yeah, acid flash backs are the worst.
Hey, when you lob it over the plate like that you gotta expect me to take a swing at it.
Good point.
I wonder if this might be a standard of the Turing test. From what I know of the test, a computer has passed when it can communicate with a person and the person cannot identify it as a computer.
When I play a FPS against a computer, I know it. So do you by the point you make. When a computer can strategize in such a way that I cannot tell it is a computer, that will be a successful Turing test, IMHO.
Perhaps I should start carrying more than one cell phone. That way, when the Precrimes Division arrests me I can argue that one of my phones may have generated a Minority Report.
Said in jest but all that this implies is not funny.
PS
I bet they could make a pretty shrewed guess as to whom is watching a particular show if they know, in advance, who lives at your address. Which, of course, you would tell them as part of the program.
I can think of one reason you might.
What if they paid you a small fee when you watched and rated a commercial? With the rising cost of cabel TV, it might be worth your while to watch a few.
The ad people get some good feedback on content as well as if you are interested and you earn credit toward your bill as well as better targeted ads.
This is not much different from grocery stores paying you in the form of discounts for access to your purchasing history.
Now put those two ideas together and you have a pretty powerful marketing tool.
Seriously, I get it. I agree. it is their park. Come and go on their terms. You keep trying to explain to me that they make it clear that those are the terms.
I think it is a bit extreem when they resort to taking my personal biological information as the price of admission.
For as infrequently as I go, it's not enough to get upset about. It's just, well strange.
Feel free though, in your response, to tell me the terms again. perhaps their website has a more detailed set of T's & c's.
Disney is not a basic life requirement, it is a luxury and they have the option to make the rules. Don't like them, don't go. It is really that simple.
I think that is exactly what I said...
The parks have limited resources, only so many people can get on a ride per-hour. Why should someone who did not pay to go into the park be allowed to use those resources?
If only a person with a ticket can be in the park at a time your whole "limited resource" argument makes no sense. Also, if i used the ticket in the morning and eat the food and buy toys and stuff - which costs extra, and then I leave and my friend uses the pass for the rest of the day, don't they make more $?
I have never done this but it seems like a lot to go thru just to keep me from sharing something I purchased.
I know the agreement says the ticket is for me alone. It just seems extreem.
No doubt the network goons will soon be kicking in my door for these public admissions. It won't matter that we watch MORE TV now, only that we've used BitTorrent in acts of "piracy"....
they don't care that you are watching more TV. Are you watching more commercials? I bet those BitTorrent DL's did not contain commercials. They don't make money if you watch great TV. They make money if you watch comercials.
How do you think TV is paid for? There are other business models that may be better, but this is the one they are currently using.