Haha, nice. So you're claiming to have gotten a PSP, a wii, and PS3 for free? I mean, I know it's slashdot, but maintain SOME credibility!!
This is slashdot. I claim I got a bunch of tech toys for free, and you think I'm making it up. I also mention I'm married, and that you accept?
On a slightly more serious note:
* PSP - won in an office competition. Two weeks after I bought the thing for the competition.
* PS2 - Upgraded a cellphone contract and got a R1000 gift card, which I used to buy the PS2
* WII - Bought 5 for the office competition, supplier gave me one for free
* PS3 - Got a tax refund on my birthday, my wife used it to get me a PS3 (technically still for free).
But there are many other things I've gotten for free in the past, when I was more actively involved in hardware acquisition. When you spend large amounts of money with large organisations they tend to give you "incentives". When it happens through my company I have to declare it (one of the reasons most companies have policies governing this is because it happens so often). When it happens to me personally (or through the company I own to buy computer equipment), I just accept it. Currently, the office prizes are a good source of free things. Over the past year + we've given away 2 x PSP, 1 x XBox, 5 x PS3, 5 x WII, and an assortment of LCD monitors, GPS units, you name it. We even gave away a 7 night holiday to Mauritius for 2, all expenses included, including spending money.
Jus on this note. I'm not sure about anywhere else, but in South Africa it pays to negotiate EVERYTHNG (and I would tend to believe this applies everywhere). I've gotten free samoosas from an indian curry shop (owner wouldn't drop the price on what I was buying, so I persuaded him to give me some free (inexpensive) food). I often get an additional item thrown in for free if I buy enough of something (do your monthly shopping in bulk!). Sometimes vendors will give you something for free if you just ask for it. I once had a terrible experience at a hardware vendor, which they tried hard to resolve. Afterwards the guy apologised, and I asked if he'd give me a free 40GB HDD to make up for it. I was joking, he said yes (obviously I hadn't been a screaming banshee mad customer during the problem). My brother-in-law (who's a golf pro on the Sunshine tour) has gotten:
* Satelite decoder
* 2 TVs
* 3 Lounge suites (one pretty tacky)
* Seemingly limitless free services on all his cars
* Seemingly limitless free medical and dental checkups (and one set of free braces)
* and more
So, look around and you will find many opportunities to get free stuff.
They don't need to be worth $100 million. If they have a small number of subtly placed and cleverly targeted ads (through multiple ad brokers to avoid problems with conflict of interest), it shuld bring in all themoney they need without detracting from the experience too much. In fact, it could actually make for a more useful experience.
Of course, a system where customers provide feedback on services clicked through from wikipedia would be great,and would really add a new dimension to the site, but there are a number of really tough social and technical (not to mention legal) problems to overcome before this becomes viable.
Another option is to turn the search bar into a combination search wikipedia OR search the Internet search, with Internet search generating revenue in much the same manner as with Firefox. As a matter of fact, how about ONLY showing ads when the search function is used? That could make everyone happy.
So what you're saying is that you're more than willing to sink a lot of money in multiple consoles (and presumably all the extra equipment that goes with them) and console video games--owning three consoles is more than most people.
Spending money is for people who don't know how to get things for free. I also have 2 PSPs. I paid for one PSP, the rest of the equipment I got for free, either via competitions, or other deals where gift vouchers or equipment were thrown in as incentives.
So you're definitely a "gamer."
Actually, no I'm not. The only console I actually had a real "choice" about getting was the PS3, and I got that to mess with Linux on it. It's almost ready to replace my PC as the home media center. And thererin lies my point.
But then you say you're not one and that it's because Linux users are superior (which is how "we prefer creating games to playing them" comes across)
Deducing that I believe Linux users to be superior is a jump of logic that would win an olympic award, if awards were given for such things. I never said that Linux users were superior, merely that we're different in how we look for our fun. A few hours spent getting linux installed on the PS3 was more fun (for me) than the equivalent time playing a game.
[it's because Linux users are superior] that more linux video games don't sell?
Not at all. Once again, you missed the point (and nowhere did I even allude to sales). But Ill give my viewson that now. I think the Linux games don't sell because most Linux users who are also gamers tend to have a Windows partition they boot to to play. I know I did that. For me, the reason was kind of simple - as much as I enjoy using Linux, I tend to use the tool I thinkdoes the job best (as any qualified artisan / technician should, IMO). If you have access to Windows, gaming is (at least was a few years back when I stopped) easier to get games on, and play on.
I really feel you kind of missed the point I was trying to make.
I think that, on the whole, we prefer creating games to playing them, that's not that we don't enjoy playing games, though. Speaking for myself, when I first start playing a game I enjoy it. But unless the game is really brilliant (and there really aren't too many of those for me), I soon start looking for ways to "game" the system, make it do things it wasn't meant to, preferably benefiting me in the process.
I honestly don't think a lack of games on the Linux platform inhibits me, considering I own a PS2, PS3 and a WII. I actually haven't played many PC games in quite some time.
But who the hell would want to do that for a job? Honestly....
Actually, it's not all that bad. There are parts that can get repetitive, but w find that our best testers are creative and intelligent. I suppose it depends on how you treat your testers. Most of our guys get to try to break software for a living, and then get bonus points if they suggest a fix that works. They work closely with the developers making sure stuff works properly first time out the door. Eventually the devs get the picture that they are looking better because they have fewer defects found in the wild. It's also less stressful fixing a bug in the lab than in the wild.
I think that being a tester could actually be a lot of fun. Some of our guys are are going to get to work on automated testing in a virtual environment, where regression testing (the usually repetitive stuff) is scripted and run automatically, with results being automatically logged into the defect tracking tool. You get to script AND break software, and you're paid to do it:-)
The real irony here is the most expertise I've seen out of the Microsoft side of things is the guys that can understand Redmond's insane licensing system.
Well, send them out this way. Or better yet, send them to Microsoft South Africa. One of the big reason's we haven't migrated to MS Exchange yet is because for the last year and a half every time I have to get clarification on licensing issues I get a different response. Once, I got an email where the (really helpful) lady contradicted herself twice in the body, and included a document that contradicted everything the body said.
I'm also busy building a virtual test lab. It's the forst in the Southern Hemisphere, and one of the first in the world, so I expected to be pretty much on my own getting it up and running. What I didn't expect is that Microsoft seems to have no clue how to license software to us.
The bastards!! I'd better warn my associates in South Africa.
I think you mean Nigeria. In South Africa the worst they will do is rape you, then murder you, then steal everything you have. They haven't moved on to the serious stuff like masquerading as legitimate business agencies yet.
I can't speak for the US, but I can state that in South Africa we have a fair number of IT workers, a handful of which are actually worth anything, but on the whole not a shortage. The area of the market that DOES have a shortage, however, and a really massive one at that, is the Tester and Test Analyst side. We are struggling to get even halfway decent people.
And even with this shortage, the IT academies and schools out there are churning out MCSE's by the truckfull - rather than getting useful skills, they are giving some poor schmuck a certification that means really little in the real world, and which doesn't really have a descent career path anymore..
Testers, on the other hand, have a great job, good money, and a really flexible career. They also develop a lot of really useful business skills to augment their technical skills, and have no problems finding work.
A friend and I enjoy occasionally looking at terrorist "threats" and seeing if we can do better ourselves. With all the knives and stuff being confiscated at airports these days, we concluded that you would have a good chance of actually hijacking a plane by simply taking the underwire out of a bra, sharpening it to razor sharpness, and using that as a knife.
(Those slashdotters that have never seen a bra up close, it was an "underwire" that goes under each of the cups (the part where the breast goes) to provide support. In some bras this is plastic, in most it's an actual wire, and strong enough to be used as a weapon if sharpened.)
Now, lets hope Fomeland Security doesn't read slashdot, or women passengers could be in for a few more unpleasant surprises when they go flying.
Something that just occurred to me is a different use for this technology (assuming it's safe, and depending on the range).
What about using it in military outposts (especially in areas where suicide bombers are prevalent) to check people approaching. Much less of a privacy concern there, and much more useful too. Possibly create a vehicle mounted system that could go out to investigate suspicious people loitering around the area or even approaching the gates.
European space agency? Then I'm terribly concerned over privacy.
Just what we don't need, a satellite based T-Ray camera. Just when you thought it was safe to go outdoors (without wearing your tinfoil hat, vest and undies).
Of course, on the flip side, the CIA will be able to check out hot chicks^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H terrorists for weapons during covert operations.
Any deice that attempts to see things you have decided to conceal is a threat to privacy. Just because I choose to conceal something doesn't make me a terrorist, I could be concealing an external bladder bag (or any other kind of medical device), women (and guys, I suppose) may have given themselves some non-surgical "enhancements". There are all sorts of things I may be concealing that are no threat to anyone, but could embarrass me if they were made known to others.
No, the question here isn't whether this is a threat to privacy or not - it is. The question here should be is it a threat we're prepared to accept. How much of our privacy are we going to give up for a sense of security?
I think the more interesting subject to explore, is the psychology of why people are so eager to believe the improbable, and far more likely to accept an outrageous exaggeration, a halftruth, or an outright lie, merely to spite the establishment.
Not having explored this more than looking at my own willingness to believe some things, what I've found is that in many instances the establishment (or more specifically, doctors and scientists) are responsible for pushing people down this road.
That above statement needs some qualification, so here's what I've come up with (for myself). People who work in the scientific field (for convenience I'll refer to them as scientists, even through I'm referring to doctors, dentists,...) often (and I'm going to generalise because it's been something I've noticed in general. Tihs does not apply to everyone) seem to be very scared of saying "I don't know", or admitting that another (alternative) field of study may have got it right, or at least more right than mainstream science. This leads to a situation where the scientists (doctors, physicists, etc...) will slam things they don't believe in as being wrong simply because they don't like the field of study that produced the result.
Add to that the fact that science is not absolute, and,especially in medicine, breakthroughs happen fairly frequently that move the field forward and at the same time prove previous theories to be untrue (or at least substantially imcomplete). When scientists (who slam people who disagree with them) claim this week that X=2Y, and then next week that X=2Y + 1/Z, the lay person loses confidence in them.
It's this lack of confidence that leads people to trust pretty much anytihng that is fed to them, as long as it fits the following criteria:
1) Sounds believable
2) The person presenting the evidence seems trustworthy
3) The evidence being presented is convincing enough to the lay person
4) The new theory ("fact") is something they want to believe
Additionally, scientists often see themselves (or at least, well known members of their community) as being infallible (to a degree), and expect the average lay person to believe everything they say without proof (and here I mean proof that the lay person understands). This is an unrealistic expectation. Scientists themselves will not believe experts in other conflicting areas of study (who often are hucksters and frauds, but not always) because they don't understand the evidence presented. What I'm saying here is that people in general don't like being forced to accept as proof something they don't understand, whether ot not it is true.
Exacerbating the problem is the entire issue of religion and faith. I believe in God. I also believe in science (and believe those who hide behind religion are idiots). The two are not mutually exclusive, in fact, to me they compliment each other perfectly. Yet many scientists (and here I'm talking less about doctors and other "soft" scientists, and perhaps only a vocal minority of the rest) are critical of me and others like me who believe in God. This adds to the lack of credibility in their eyes. (Please bear in mind that we are talking perspectives here, perhaps helping to explain a perception. This is not a war of God Vs. Science).
I think the only solution here is for scientists to be more open about what they do and don't know, as well as developing a more measured approach to dealing with things they are unfamiliar with. It definitely won't make the problem go away, but it will help.
And finally, don't forget that there are many, many thousands and millions of idiots out there.
That sounds like a feature, unless you're one of those people who grows desperately frantic at the notion that you might be unreachable at any single point in your life.
You missed option (c). One of those people who's BOSS grows desperately frantic at the notion that I might be unreachable at any single point in my life. In those days (a full 2 years back:-) I was a technical contractor, and if my boss didn't know where I was for 30 minutes he'd phone and ask.
It would be even worse these days, though. As IS manager I'm responsible for everything that goes wrong at the office (a part of the job description I missed during the interview stage), and I would rather have my techs contact me when there's a problem, than walk into an ambush the next morning when I didn't know something had happenned. It may sound inane, but a simple problem like "Director X' home ADSL stopped working" can get escalated to "all Internet traffic, including traffic to that new and important project, dropped for half the day yesterday and no-one knew what to do about it" if I'm no able to babysit the problem, smooth the egos and make sure that no one over reacts.
Anyone know of a senior position in the IS industry where that isn't the case and I'll be glad to submit my CV. It's actually situations like that one that have made we consider giving up computers and taking up farming. The hours are easier and it's more predictable.
(That last comment was humour. It's funny, laugh. But don't mod me +1 funny, choose something else, I need the karma;-)
Most of the PDA phones available these days (or at least the ones available in South Africa) come with a built in GPS unit, or at least a GPS extension module. Touchy-feely isn't that great an idea when you're driving, so voice becomes an important issue here.
I've never seen one crash. Then again, I haven't had much exposure to Windows Mobile.
As the proud owner of an iMate JAM, an iMate K-JAM and a Mio P550, as well as having a number of friends with older HTCs and other iMates, I can assure you that yes, they do crash. And more annoying than when they crash is when bluetooth, or WiFi suddenly stops working, or when the addressbook suddenly appears empty until you reboot. My presonal favourite is when the handwriting recognition goes for a loop (that's a memory problem, I eventually found out).
But what REALLY gets to me is when the device just quetly hangs once it's gone into standby mode. With the phones, it meant I silently dissapeared off the cell network until I realised there was a problem, which is usuazlly when I try to use the device.
I have some friends with the newer HTC phones, and they report that WM6 seems to be more stable, but a few of them have reported serious problems with battery life.
I think there are a lot of things we need to sort out with mobile devices before we look at redoing the interface.
You are underestimating the practice that years of running Windows has given to the average user. That *crash* will not come as a surprise. There could be a market for a technology that turns the windscreen blue just before the actual crash. Finally BSOD will have a more... real... meaning.
Radical as in "thoroughgoing or extreme, esp. as regards change from accepted or traditional forms: a radical change in the policy of a company.; favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms: radical ideas; radical and anarchistic ideologues.
If you don't like radical, substitute drastic or extreme. Fromwhat he's said he's prepared to take actions that no other US president hasa publicly considered before.
Like Obama, Lessig is still relatively young. I think this will actually work to his advantage if Obama wins. Obama and Lessig are both young, intelligent and have pretty radical ideas on fixing the US.
For those who recognise the name but don't know where from, Lessig is the "founder and CEO of the Creative Commons and a board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and of the Software Freedom Law Center, launched in February 2005. He is best known as a proponent of reduced legal restrictions on copyright, trademark and radio frequency spectrum, particularly in technology applications." (From his wikipedia entry)
Wow. That has so many caveats in it as to be completely meaningless. The US may be losing its ability to be become unstoppable. WTF does that mean anyway?
Yeah, you REALLY need to read my other post. Let's look at two prolems with your post:
1. What does caveat mean? Let's see, definition for caveat is "Latin for 'beware'. A warning; a note of caution.". So your post read:
Wow. That has so many warnings in it as to be completely meaningless
2. I said Apple (I.E. the company that prodices iMacs, iPhones, iPods and iTunes), not the US (Either the United States, or you and your group). Your statement only makes contectual sense if you work for Apple, in which case I'd like to point out that your grammar is REALLY terrible. In stead of "The US" you should have written "We". And of course, the later "it's" should become "our". Of course, if you were referrinf to the United States then you've lost the plot somewhere along the line. Go find it.
Mapquest, as I recall, has something like 50% of the online maps and directions market. Google Maps is somewhere around 25%.
Hmm. See, now I can't comment on the US, never been there. But in Africa, Mapquest doesn't exist. Google, on the other hand, is here. On radio, talking about getting google maps updated for all areas in South Africa, then moving on to the rest of Africa. They want any South African (and people in other parts in Africa) to be able to go to google earth and see a picture of their house that is less than 2 days old. I can report (and it's pretty darned easy to check) that Google Maps for South Africa is getting more detail, almost daily.
Where is Mapquest? The do not exist. Not in my world. The US is a large country, but unlike an embarrasingly large portion of the population (you apparently included in that) think, it's not anywhere close to the entire world. In summary, in my world Mapquest doesn't exist.
It's pretty clear to me that you don't really know anything and are just sticking up for Google based on raw emotions. Well, good for you, I guess. Me, I'll wait to pass judgement on how awesome an Android phone is until one actually, you know, exists.
All that I see as being pretty clear is that you seem to be baised against anything that doesn't fit into your little (tiny might be more accurate) view of the world. I actually feel sad for you.
My mistake was defending any part of Google against you. My post was never really about Google, and getting into a fight defending Goole was stupid of me. My original point was that Apple may be losing an opportunity to build so much momentum that they cannot be stopped by anything. Do you disagree with that? Android was brought in as something to compare that statement against, a measure. Below is the original quote in case you've forgotten what this was all about.
Lost chance to build up Juggernaut momentum
Apple may be about to drop the ball on this one. With Android looking like a (potentially future) winner, Apple are losing the chance to build up momentum as an open mobile platform for developers to experiment on.
Now, I'm going to go out on a limb here and blame this on an incomplete understanding of the English language. I have a theory, so bear with me for a few moments.
I'm in roughly the same timezone as the UK and Europe. When I originally posted my comment, it's score quickly jumped to 5, and stayed at around that level for quite some time. Then the US woke up, and before you could snap your fingers my score had been reduced to 0. Not to mention Karma lower than a Ferari's suspension.
My theory is that the UK / Europe readers, who understand words like "Juggernaut", "may" (as in maybe, possibly), "potential", and phrases like "drop the ball" (Although by heavens you should get that one. If not, a quick explanation. It's an idiom based on sports like Rugby (think of American Football without the sissy pads and rules) where if the ball is dropped there is a chance that the opposing team will pick it up and gain control of the game).
Back to my hypothesis. The UK / Europe readers understood me as saying "Apple may be losing an opportunity to gain so much support for their product that nothing really stands any chance of standing against them, not even Android (Google's new Phone OS that sounds really hot and promises wonderful things), assuming Android lives up to the marketing." They read it and 30% thought to themselve "Hmmm, that's an interesting thought", another 20% thinking "Wow, that made me think! I hadn't
If you write a good enough app, why shouldn't everyone who uses it pay for it?
In an ideal world they should. Even if it's a rubbish app, if they use it they should pay for it. My point was this:
What would you prefer, thousands using it, hundreds payin, or 20 - 30 using and paying? Once you have thousands of users it's easier to monetise the app's popularity.
Piracy tends to help the smaller developers inasmuch as it gives them free advertising.
Yahoo! actually deserves a lot of eyeballs from around here
Yahoo! isn't a bad company. They have done great things. I prefer Google - I see them as being more innovative and creative.
Picassa? Not search related
Google is on a big drive to get people to tag pictures. Their own and other peoples. Picasa gets you to add captions to pictures that are kept in albums. The public ones are searchable via google, and when a picture is properly tagged you can more effectively serve ads.
Google Code? It's been around for years and hasn't made a dent in the sourceforge/freshmeat
Is it competing with Sourceforge, or is it a place for google to maintain their own code? Quick searches didn't show too much about it.
GOOG-411
Don't know much about this either, but I'm betting it's something to do with a combination of data mining as well as pushing online search to the mobile market. They DO want the mobile market. This is wild supposition.
Google Docs? No market share
Doesn't need market share to be successful. Google docs is linked to my google signon. Google indexes my documents. What they find there gets added to everything else Google knows about me and is used to target ads more effectively.
Google isn't as Good as they get credit for.
Anyone who thinks Google is out to do anything more than make money is mistaken. I just happen to like how Google is doing it. Apparently, so do millions of others. But it's difficult not to see as good an organisation that annoys Microsoft as much as Google does. I've spent enough time on phones getting transferred from person to person who give conflicting advice on licensing, support and other things that I do admit to getting a bit of a kick seeing some of the pain being returned.
How many wildly popular commercial apps availabel today didn't benefit from viral piracy in their infancy? If you write a good enough app, enough people will use it, and a large portion of them will pay for it.
Slashdot Mirror
On a slightly more serious note:
* PSP - won in an office competition. Two weeks after I bought the thing for the competition.
* PS2 - Upgraded a cellphone contract and got a R1000 gift card, which I used to buy the PS2
* WII - Bought 5 for the office competition, supplier gave me one for free
* PS3 - Got a tax refund on my birthday, my wife used it to get me a PS3 (technically still for free).
But there are many other things I've gotten for free in the past, when I was more actively involved in hardware acquisition. When you spend large amounts of money with large organisations they tend to give you "incentives". When it happens through my company I have to declare it (one of the reasons most companies have policies governing this is because it happens so often). When it happens to me personally (or through the company I own to buy computer equipment), I just accept it. Currently, the office prizes are a good source of free things. Over the past year + we've given away 2 x PSP, 1 x XBox, 5 x PS3, 5 x WII, and an assortment of LCD monitors, GPS units, you name it. We even gave away a 7 night holiday to Mauritius for 2, all expenses included, including spending money.
Jus on this note. I'm not sure about anywhere else, but in South Africa it pays to negotiate EVERYTHNG (and I would tend to believe this applies everywhere). I've gotten free samoosas from an indian curry shop (owner wouldn't drop the price on what I was buying, so I persuaded him to give me some free (inexpensive) food). I often get an additional item thrown in for free if I buy enough of something (do your monthly shopping in bulk!). Sometimes vendors will give you something for free if you just ask for it. I once had a terrible experience at a hardware vendor, which they tried hard to resolve. Afterwards the guy apologised, and I asked if he'd give me a free 40GB HDD to make up for it. I was joking, he said yes (obviously I hadn't been a screaming banshee mad customer during the problem). My brother-in-law (who's a golf pro on the Sunshine tour) has gotten:
* Satelite decoder
* 2 TVs
* 3 Lounge suites (one pretty tacky)
* Seemingly limitless free services on all his cars
* Seemingly limitless free medical and dental checkups (and one set of free braces)
* and more
So, look around and you will find many opportunities to get free stuff.
They don't need to be worth $100 million. If they have a small number of subtly placed and cleverly targeted ads (through multiple ad brokers to avoid problems with conflict of interest), it shuld bring in all themoney they need without detracting from the experience too much. In fact, it could actually make for a more useful experience.
Of course, a system where customers provide feedback on services clicked through from wikipedia would be great,and would really add a new dimension to the site, but there are a number of really tough social and technical (not to mention legal) problems to overcome before this becomes viable.
Another option is to turn the search bar into a combination search wikipedia OR search the Internet search, with Internet search generating revenue in much the same manner as with Firefox. As a matter of fact, how about ONLY showing ads when the search function is used? That could make everyone happy.
I really feel you kind of missed the point I was trying to make.
I think that, on the whole, we prefer creating games to playing them, that's not that we don't enjoy playing games, though. Speaking for myself, when I first start playing a game I enjoy it. But unless the game is really brilliant (and there really aren't too many of those for me), I soon start looking for ways to "game" the system, make it do things it wasn't meant to, preferably benefiting me in the process.
I honestly don't think a lack of games on the Linux platform inhibits me, considering I own a PS2, PS3 and a WII. I actually haven't played many PC games in quite some time.
I think that being a tester could actually be a lot of fun. Some of our guys are are going to get to work on automated testing in a virtual environment, where regression testing (the usually repetitive stuff) is scripted and run automatically, with results being automatically logged into the defect tracking tool. You get to script AND break software, and you're paid to do it
I'm also busy building a virtual test lab. It's the forst in the Southern Hemisphere, and one of the first in the world, so I expected to be pretty much on my own getting it up and running. What I didn't expect is that Microsoft seems to have no clue how to license software to us.
It's also recently been reported that users are becoming more idiotic.
I can't speak for the US, but I can state that in South Africa we have a fair number of IT workers, a handful of which are actually worth anything, but on the whole not a shortage. The area of the market that DOES have a shortage, however, and a really massive one at that, is the Tester and Test Analyst side. We are struggling to get even halfway decent people.
And even with this shortage, the IT academies and schools out there are churning out MCSE's by the truckfull - rather than getting useful skills, they are giving some poor schmuck a certification that means really little in the real world, and which doesn't really have a descent career path anymore..
Testers, on the other hand, have a great job, good money, and a really flexible career. They also develop a lot of really useful business skills to augment their technical skills, and have no problems finding work.
A friend and I enjoy occasionally looking at terrorist "threats" and seeing if we can do better ourselves. With all the knives and stuff being confiscated at airports these days, we concluded that you would have a good chance of actually hijacking a plane by simply taking the underwire out of a bra, sharpening it to razor sharpness, and using that as a knife.
(Those slashdotters that have never seen a bra up close, it was an "underwire" that goes under each of the cups (the part where the breast goes) to provide support. In some bras this is plastic, in most it's an actual wire, and strong enough to be used as a weapon if sharpened.)
Now, lets hope Fomeland Security doesn't read slashdot, or women passengers could be in for a few more unpleasant surprises when they go flying.
Something that just occurred to me is a different use for this technology (assuming it's safe, and depending on the range).
What about using it in military outposts (especially in areas where suicide bombers are prevalent) to check people approaching. Much less of a privacy concern there, and much more useful too. Possibly create a vehicle mounted system that could go out to investigate suspicious people loitering around the area or even approaching the gates.
European space agency? Then I'm terribly concerned over privacy.
Just what we don't need, a satellite based T-Ray camera. Just when you thought it was safe to go outdoors (without wearing your tinfoil hat, vest and undies).
Of course, on the flip side, the CIA will be able to check out hot chicks^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H terrorists for weapons during covert operations.
Any deice that attempts to see things you have decided to conceal is a threat to privacy. Just because I choose to conceal something doesn't make me a terrorist, I could be concealing an external bladder bag (or any other kind of medical device), women (and guys, I suppose) may have given themselves some non-surgical "enhancements". There are all sorts of things I may be concealing that are no threat to anyone, but could embarrass me if they were made known to others.
No, the question here isn't whether this is a threat to privacy or not - it is. The question here should be is it a threat we're prepared to accept. How much of our privacy are we going to give up for a sense of security?
That above statement needs some qualification, so here's what I've come up with (for myself). People who work in the scientific field (for convenience I'll refer to them as scientists, even through I'm referring to doctors, dentists,
Add to that the fact that science is not absolute, and
It's this lack of confidence that leads people to trust pretty much anytihng that is fed to them, as long as it fits the following criteria:
1) Sounds believable
2) The person presenting the evidence seems trustworthy
3) The evidence being presented is convincing enough to the lay person
4) The new theory ("fact") is something they want to believe
Additionally, scientists often see themselves (or at least, well known members of their community) as being infallible (to a degree), and expect the average lay person to believe everything they say without proof (and here I mean proof that the lay person understands). This is an unrealistic expectation. Scientists themselves will not believe experts in other conflicting areas of study (who often are hucksters and frauds, but not always) because they don't understand the evidence presented. What I'm saying here is that people in general don't like being forced to accept as proof something they don't understand, whether ot not it is true.
Exacerbating the problem is the entire issue of religion and faith. I believe in God. I also believe in science (and believe those who hide behind religion are idiots). The two are not mutually exclusive, in fact, to me they compliment each other perfectly. Yet many scientists (and here I'm talking less about doctors and other "soft" scientists, and perhaps only a vocal minority of the rest) are critical of me and others like me who believe in God. This adds to the lack of credibility in their eyes. (Please bear in mind that we are talking perspectives here, perhaps helping to explain a perception. This is not a war of God Vs. Science).
I think the only solution here is for scientists to be more open about what they do and don't know, as well as developing a more measured approach to dealing with things they are unfamiliar with. It definitely won't make the problem go away, but it will help.
And finally, don't forget that there are many, many thousands and millions of idiots out there.
It would be even worse these days, though. As IS manager I'm responsible for everything that goes wrong at the office (a part of the job description I missed during the interview stage), and I would rather have my techs contact me when there's a problem, than walk into an ambush the next morning when I didn't know something had happenned. It may sound inane, but a simple problem like "Director X' home ADSL stopped working" can get escalated to "all Internet traffic, including traffic to that new and important project, dropped for half the day yesterday and no-one knew what to do about it" if I'm no able to babysit the problem, smooth the egos and make sure that no one over reacts.
Anyone know of a senior position in the IS industry where that isn't the case and I'll be glad to submit my CV. It's actually situations like that one that have made we consider giving up computers and taking up farming. The hours are easier and it's more predictable.
(That last comment was humour. It's funny, laugh. But don't mod me +1 funny, choose something else, I need the karma
But what REALLY gets to me is when the device just quetly hangs once it's gone into standby mode. With the phones, it meant I silently dissapeared off the cell network until I realised there was a problem, which is usuazlly when I try to use the device.
I have some friends with the newer HTC phones, and they report that WM6 seems to be more stable, but a few of them have reported serious problems with battery life.
I think there are a lot of things we need to sort out with mobile devices before we look at redoing the interface.
You are underestimating the practice that years of running Windows has given to the average user. That *crash* will not come as a surprise. There could be a market for a technology that turns the windscreen blue just before the actual crash. Finally BSOD will have a more ... real ... meaning.
Radical as in "thoroughgoing or extreme, esp. as regards change from accepted or traditional forms: a radical change in the policy of a company.; favoring drastic political, economic, or social reforms: radical ideas; radical and anarchistic ideologues.
If you don't like radical, substitute drastic or extreme. Fromwhat he's said he's prepared to take actions that no other US president hasa publicly considered before.
Like Obama, Lessig is still relatively young. I think this will actually work to his advantage if Obama wins. Obama and Lessig are both young, intelligent and have pretty radical ideas on fixing the US.
For those who recognise the name but don't know where from, Lessig is the "founder and CEO of the Creative Commons and a board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation and of the Software Freedom Law Center, launched in February 2005. He is best known as a proponent of reduced legal restrictions on copyright, trademark and radio frequency spectrum, particularly in technology applications." (From his wikipedia entry)
1. What does caveat mean? Let's see, definition for caveat is "Latin for 'beware'. A warning; a note of caution.". So your post read:
2. I said Apple (I.E. the company that prodices iMacs, iPhones, iPods and iTunes), not the US (Either the United States, or you and your group). Your statement only makes contectual sense if you work for Apple, in which case I'd like to point out that your grammar is REALLY terrible. In stead of "The US" you should have written "We". And of course, the later "it's" should become "our". Of course, if you were referrinf to the United States then you've lost the plot somewhere along the line. Go find it.
Hmm. See, now I can't comment on the US, never been there. But in Africa, Mapquest doesn't exist. Google, on the other hand, is here. On radio, talking about getting google maps updated for all areas in South Africa, then moving on to the rest of Africa. They want any South African (and people in other parts in Africa) to be able to go to google earth and see a picture of their house that is less than 2 days old. I can report (and it's pretty darned easy to check) that Google Maps for South Africa is getting more detail, almost daily.
Where is Mapquest? The do not exist. Not in my world. The US is a large country, but unlike an embarrasingly large portion of the population (you apparently included in that) think, it's not anywhere close to the entire world. In summary, in my world Mapquest doesn't exist.
All that I see as being pretty clear is that you seem to be baised against anything that doesn't fit into your little (tiny might be more accurate) view of the world. I actually feel sad for you.
My mistake was defending any part of Google against you. My post was never really about Google, and getting into a fight defending Goole was stupid of me. My original point was that Apple may be losing an opportunity to build so much momentum that they cannot be stopped by anything. Do you disagree with that? Android was brought in as something to compare that statement against, a measure. Below is the original quote in case you've forgotten what this was all about.
Now, I'm going to go out on a limb here and blame this on an incomplete understanding of the English language. I have a theory, so bear with me for a few moments.
I'm in roughly the same timezone as the UK and Europe. When I originally posted my comment, it's score quickly jumped to 5, and stayed at around that level for quite some time. Then the US woke up, and before you could snap your fingers my score had been reduced to 0. Not to mention Karma lower than a Ferari's suspension.
My theory is that the UK / Europe readers, who understand words like "Juggernaut", "may" (as in maybe, possibly), "potential", and phrases like "drop the ball" (Although by heavens you should get that one. If not, a quick explanation. It's an idiom based on sports like Rugby (think of American Football without the sissy pads and rules) where if the ball is dropped there is a chance that the opposing team will pick it up and gain control of the game).
Back to my hypothesis. The UK / Europe readers understood me as saying "Apple may be losing an opportunity to gain so much support for their product that nothing really stands any chance of standing against them, not even Android (Google's new Phone OS that sounds really hot and promises wonderful things), assuming Android lives up to the marketing." They read it and 30% thought to themselve "Hmmm, that's an interesting thought", another 20% thinking "Wow, that made me think! I hadn't
What would you prefer, thousands using it, hundreds payin, or 20 - 30 using and paying? Once you have thousands of users it's easier to monetise the app's popularity.
Piracy tends to help the smaller developers inasmuch as it gives them free advertising.
How many wildly popular commercial apps availabel today didn't benefit from viral piracy in their infancy? If you write a good enough app, enough people will use it, and a large portion of them will pay for it.