Based on Google's public stance on information, I would guess that Verizon might be the first, but not the _only_ cell provider that provides Google-centered telephony. If you watch their lectures and listen to what their spokesmen say, you'll see that Google's interests are in having ubiquitous access to the 'cloud' (their term), meaning that the lines between being online and offline blur to invisibility.
Locking in w/ one carrier doesn't match that goal, especially when you consider their interest in the 700mhz band.
My guess is that if Google makes their break for ubiquity, it will be viral. They'll release a 'Killer setup' on, say, a Verizon phone. Then a few months later, it'll be on a GSM phone, and a few months later, maybe on Some New Thing that hasn't been revealed yet. It'll be a useful set of apps/tools that's "just too useful" for the cell providers to ignore, while so cheap that they can't rationalize building competitive software.
Does this mean that Nokia will no longer support subsidy locking in their products?
Of course not, they'll keep shipping phones that are locked, so this ad campaign means nothing, and might actually backfire if enough people stop and say "Now, waitaminute..."
I wonder if this will be the next iteration of the Taser problem, specifically, the fact that it leaves no marks and is designed not to permanently injure ends up lowering the threshold for using it.
With a gun, a trained operator understands that the person he's shooting at will probably die, so everything better be absolutely correct before employing it or he's going to jail.
With a Tazer, the trained operator will use it more casually than a gun because the price of being wrong is so much lower.
With the pain ray, it's even lower. Our current legal environment suggests that this will end up being used to break up unpopular demonstrations or groupings even more casually than tear gas, specifically because the physical evidence and chance of permanent injury is so much lower.
What effect will this have on the democratic process? Used in conjunction with modern artifacts like "designated free speech zones", this could be crippling. There's no way to prevent an advance, our duty as citizens is to be aware of the dangers and be ready to speak out against them if they transpire.
I wonder if this technology could be used to two-way displays? Instead of a discrete camera, just have the whole screen be an interferometry based "camera". Video phone where you're looking at each other instead of slightly off to one side...
This is a graph that's been floating around that tracks violent crime rates and maps them against the release dates of various "watershed" violent video games. While correlation does not equal causation, it's certainly intriguing.
It's unfortunate, this could have been a good test case to see how the repair materials/procedures work under realistic conditions.
Having firm, experimental data about:
* The process of applying the patch * How well the patch stands up to re-entry * How well the patch protects underlying systems
and more. Better to get this data on a 'non-critical' bit of damage than waiting until something is REALLY busted before finding the inadequecy.
They've done extensive testing on the ground, I'm sure, but a real-world test scenario can trump ten lab extrapolations. That's why we do external betas of software, the real world always has something up it's sleeve.
Check out their press room
on
SCO Loses
·
· Score: 1
With great interest I quickly visited their site to see what they had to say about this.
The latest story is from October 2006, entitled "What I Like About SCO". I guess the last 10 months have been pretty quiet. That, or they canned the poor schmuck who was updating the page to try and pay for their failing legal maneuvers.
While non-lethal technology has the potential to be fantastic, there's a downside to be considered too.
With a gun, there's a certain level of commitment before it's used. An officer of the law must make a determination that he or she is really certain about before shooting, because hitting an innocent person is absolutely unacceptable. As a result, the tendency is to, unless there's no option, NOT shoot someone if you can hold them at bay with the THREAT of shooting. A side effect of this is that an officer given a bad order to shoot is much more likely to abstain, because once he pulls the trigger, it's all over.
As a result, innocent folks are often held at gunpoint until their identity/non-criminalness is confirmed. While traumatic and stressful, this is better than an alternative that's growing increasingly common:
Enter, the taser. Potentially a wonderful tool for stopping an attacker without permanently injuring them, doctrine has instead developed in many police and security departments to 'Zap first, ask questions later'. The 'non-injurious' aspect of the tool means that the bar is that much lower on whether or not to shoot, because "after all, if they're innocent, then it's just a bit of discomfort".
The growing number of non-lethal tools is on the surface a good, even GREAT thing. The real danger though, is a long term one. With the bar set so low, more and more people will be subject to excruciating pain, and eventually, this technology may evolve into a tool of even greater oppression of liberty than anything we have now.
Imagine if a protest can be casually broken up by making everyone vomit or crap themselves uncontrollably. If the government has the ability to casually stop groups of people from coming together or otherwise detaining them while being able to argue "it's not fatal, it's just uncomfortable", then the bar on violating our rights as citizens drops too.
So I'm interested and optimistic about the technologies, but I desperately hope that better effort is invested in making them a net positive for all of humanity and not the boot that might otherwise grind our faces into the dirt.
This guy put a Mazda 20B into his Delorean, twice the power of the stock V6, plus it's smooooooth. Instead of the same underpowered old engine, put an engine in that the car deserves.
It's not a LAW-law, it was a prediction. It was an observation coupled with smart insight into the nature of the semi-conductor business, and deviations aren't news, the fact that his prediction has so consistently worked over the past decades is the real story.
Will it hold up forever? Probably not, it could speed up or slow down by an order of magnitude as semi-conductor technology is replaced by The Next Big Thing (Optics? Quantum? Duotronics?), and our measurement criteria might have to change with it.
So again, the real story is that Moore's observation has held up so spectacularly so long. Lulls in performance increases are natural. But how does it plot over time?
Maybe THIS is the original post, and a remnant of the iPhone reality distortion field threw a copy of it backwards in time. C'mon, folks, consider the nature of quantum entanglement as it related to Steve Jobs before complaining!
Prediction: Within a year, all Apple products with displays will have multi-touch. Laptops, external monitors, iPods, the whole shebang. Sure, most people won't use it all in the beginning. The UIs we have today aren't set up for it, neither are our office spaces. But Apple will bet the farm and just make is a Standard Feature on the bet that while the demand doesn't exist NOW, it'll appear out of whole cloth once it's so ubiquitous.
They did it w/ USB. They did it with mice.
"Blah blah greasy fingerprints on monitors" Yeah, anyone with half a brain can think of 10 reasons why this is dumb. But it's the crazy guy in the back of the auditorium who's going to figure out how to get rich off of it, and in doing so will make the standard transition from 'crazy wacked out goofball' to 'eccentric visionary'.
This seems like a perfectly rational precaution. For five every crazed conspiracy theory where random Joe Public runs around screaming that the NSA is decrypting his SSL'd eBay login information and/or listening for words like "bomb" and "president" on his phone calls to his mother, there's one very legitimate precaution like this.
The real news story would be any government organization, US or foreign, that _WAS_ entrusting valuable national secrets to a third party vendor anywhere. The US isn't the only country with ELINT, and unless you have a network that doesn't require external trust (eg, the encryption is done server side or via a proprietary program that could be compromised) there's every reason NOT to make it easy for someone to profit at your expense.
The minute God crapped out the third cave man, a conspiracy was hatched against one of them. You don't need to be a tin-foil wearing, taxi driving crazypants to know this.
Contrary to popular belief, water isn't the real danger to the keyboard here, it's soap. The soap is conductive, and if it isn't fully rinsed, could short out contacts and render the keyboard unusable.
So the modified checklist is: 1. Keyboard you can afford to lose. 2. No soap 3. Shake empty of water, then air dry.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure we're not allowed to talk about this without the express written consent of Major League Baseball.
Based on Google's public stance on information, I would guess that Verizon might be the first, but not the _only_ cell provider that provides Google-centered telephony. If you watch their lectures and listen to what their spokesmen say, you'll see that Google's interests are in having ubiquitous access to the 'cloud' (their term), meaning that the lines between being online and offline blur to invisibility.
Locking in w/ one carrier doesn't match that goal, especially when you consider their interest in the 700mhz band.
My guess is that if Google makes their break for ubiquity, it will be viral. They'll release a 'Killer setup' on, say, a Verizon phone. Then a few months later, it'll be on a GSM phone, and a few months later, maybe on Some New Thing that hasn't been revealed yet. It'll be a useful set of apps/tools that's "just too useful" for the cell providers to ignore, while so cheap that they can't rationalize building competitive software.
Also, it doesn't taste as good.
So what exactly does 'Hello world' look like in DNA?
AGTCA
TCGCT "WORLD"
?
Does this mean that Nokia will no longer support subsidy locking in their products?
Of course not, they'll keep shipping phones that are locked, so this ad campaign means nothing, and might actually backfire if enough people stop and say "Now, waitaminute..."
Woo hoo! Woo... Woo.... hoo?
Wait a minute....
I wonder if this will be the next iteration of the Taser problem, specifically, the fact that it leaves no marks and is designed not to permanently injure ends up lowering the threshold for using it.
With a gun, a trained operator understands that the person he's shooting at will probably die, so everything better be absolutely correct before employing it or he's going to jail.
With a Tazer, the trained operator will use it more casually than a gun because the price of being wrong is so much lower.
With the pain ray, it's even lower. Our current legal environment suggests that this will end up being used to break up unpopular demonstrations or groupings even more casually than tear gas, specifically because the physical evidence and chance of permanent injury is so much lower.
What effect will this have on the democratic process? Used in conjunction with modern artifacts like "designated free speech zones", this could be crippling. There's no way to prevent an advance, our duty as citizens is to be aware of the dangers and be ready to speak out against them if they transpire.
Now, do they launch with a bunch of people specifying parameters and running control equipment and whatnot?
Or do they just press the 'I'm feeling lucky' button?
I wonder if this technology could be used to two-way displays? Instead of a discrete camera, just have the whole screen be an interferometry based "camera". Video phone where you're looking at each other instead of slightly off to one side...
After navigating your somewhat tortuous text, much of which involves a series of unconnected programming metaphors, I'm left to ask the following:
Are you, perchance, a Perl programmer?
I've been meaning to write a 'Hello world' Nam-shub...
Shouldn't that be "Big Brother is watching Yu"?
http://hallert.net/images/crime-victims_games.jpg
This is a graph that's been floating around that tracks violent crime rates and maps them against the release dates of various "watershed" violent video games. While correlation does not equal causation, it's certainly intriguing.
It's unfortunate, this could have been a good test case to see how the repair materials/procedures work under realistic conditions.
Having firm, experimental data about:
* The process of applying the patch
* How well the patch stands up to re-entry
* How well the patch protects underlying systems
and more. Better to get this data on a 'non-critical' bit of damage than waiting until something is REALLY busted before finding the inadequecy.
They've done extensive testing on the ground, I'm sure, but a real-world test scenario can trump ten lab extrapolations. That's why we do external betas of software, the real world always has something up it's sleeve.
With great interest I quickly visited their site to see what they had to say about this.
Their pressroom:
http://www.sco.com/company/news/
The latest story is from October 2006, entitled "What I Like About SCO". I guess the last 10 months have been pretty quiet. That, or they canned the poor schmuck who was updating the page to try and pay for their failing legal maneuvers.
You forgot to add 'Lame.' for full Slashdot iWhatever meme-compliance.
C'mon, people, we have to work together.
While non-lethal technology has the potential to be fantastic, there's a downside to be considered too.
With a gun, there's a certain level of commitment before it's used. An officer of the law must make a determination that he or she is really certain about before shooting, because hitting an innocent person is absolutely unacceptable. As a result, the tendency is to, unless there's no option, NOT shoot someone if you can hold them at bay with the THREAT of shooting. A side effect of this is that an officer given a bad order to shoot is much more likely to abstain, because once he pulls the trigger, it's all over.
As a result, innocent folks are often held at gunpoint until their identity/non-criminalness is confirmed. While traumatic and stressful, this is better than an alternative that's growing increasingly common:
Enter, the taser. Potentially a wonderful tool for stopping an attacker without permanently injuring them, doctrine has instead developed in many police and security departments to 'Zap first, ask questions later'. The 'non-injurious' aspect of the tool means that the bar is that much lower on whether or not to shoot, because "after all, if they're innocent, then it's just a bit of discomfort".
The growing number of non-lethal tools is on the surface a good, even GREAT thing. The real danger though, is a long term one. With the bar set so low, more and more people will be subject to excruciating pain, and eventually, this technology may evolve into a tool of even greater oppression of liberty than anything we have now.
Imagine if a protest can be casually broken up by making everyone vomit or crap themselves uncontrollably. If the government has the ability to casually stop groups of people from coming together or otherwise detaining them while being able to argue "it's not fatal, it's just uncomfortable", then the bar on violating our rights as citizens drops too.
So I'm interested and optimistic about the technologies, but I desperately hope that better effort is invested in making them a net positive for all of humanity and not the boot that might otherwise grind our faces into the dirt.
http://www.eliseusa.com/rotary.htm
This guy put a Mazda 20B into his Delorean, twice the power of the stock V6, plus it's smooooooth. Instead of the same underpowered old engine, put an engine in that the car deserves.
It's not a LAW-law, it was a prediction. It was an observation coupled with smart insight into the nature of the semi-conductor business, and deviations aren't news, the fact that his prediction has so consistently worked over the past decades is the real story.
Will it hold up forever? Probably not, it could speed up or slow down by an order of magnitude as semi-conductor technology is replaced by The Next Big Thing (Optics? Quantum? Duotronics?), and our measurement criteria might have to change with it.
So again, the real story is that Moore's observation has held up so spectacularly so long. Lulls in performance increases are natural. But how does it plot over time?
Maybe THIS is the original post, and a remnant of the iPhone reality distortion field threw a copy of it backwards in time. C'mon, folks, consider the nature of quantum entanglement as it related to Steve Jobs before complaining!
Prediction: Within a year, all Apple products with displays will have multi-touch. Laptops, external monitors, iPods, the whole shebang. Sure, most people won't use it all in the beginning. The UIs we have today aren't set up for it, neither are our office spaces. But Apple will bet the farm and just make is a Standard Feature on the bet that while the demand doesn't exist NOW, it'll appear out of whole cloth once it's so ubiquitous.
They did it w/ USB. They did it with mice.
"Blah blah greasy fingerprints on monitors" Yeah, anyone with half a brain can think of 10 reasons why this is dumb. But it's the crazy guy in the back of the auditorium who's going to figure out how to get rich off of it, and in doing so will make the standard transition from 'crazy wacked out goofball' to 'eccentric visionary'.
Don't be cra)$(&*@#$
NO CARRIER
This seems like a perfectly rational precaution. For five every crazed conspiracy theory where random Joe Public runs around screaming that the NSA is decrypting his SSL'd eBay login information and/or listening for words like "bomb" and "president" on his phone calls to his mother, there's one very legitimate precaution like this.
The real news story would be any government organization, US or foreign, that _WAS_ entrusting valuable national secrets to a third party vendor anywhere. The US isn't the only country with ELINT, and unless you have a network that doesn't require external trust (eg, the encryption is done server side or via a proprietary program that could be compromised) there's every reason NOT to make it easy for someone to profit at your expense.
The minute God crapped out the third cave man, a conspiracy was hatched against one of them. You don't need to be a tin-foil wearing, taxi driving crazypants to know this.
What about the X-43A? It also ignited successfully and flew under power.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-43
This is cool, yes, but the emphasis on "first" seems a bit off.
Contrary to popular belief, water isn't the real danger to the keyboard here, it's soap. The soap is conductive, and if it isn't fully rinsed, could short out contacts and render the keyboard unusable.
So the modified checklist is:
1. Keyboard you can afford to lose.
2. No soap
3. Shake empty of water, then air dry.