I'm not being sarcastic, I am glad. I got years of enjoyment, and it was worth it. I wish all games went free after a time period, like say 5 years, when it's been replaced and outdated. At least I can now set it up for private LAN parties at work without buying extra copies.
In short he gets to pull Ballmer's strings, but not vice versa.
...
Orthogonal issue + rambling. You claimed Microsoft *pushed* Netflix to use Silverlight. How?
...
In short, you'll hear about it from Microsoft when they decide to discontinue support. And when you hear about it, you'll have 1 year to act, from that point. And you'll have paid support options past that date if you choose to use it. Suggest you stop spreading disinformation.
1. He pulls Ballmer's strings? Since when has anyone pulled Ballmer's strings? The CEO of Google was on Apple's board, did he pull Job's strings? If you think that, you are delusional.
2. Pushed, as in Microsoft had an inside man who had a conflict of interest. His "favor" was to MS over Adobe. The CEO made a choice that was against that of his customers (you can call it rambling, but when thousands of customers are simultaneously "rambling" it is usually a bad sign). The Netflix boards were filled with hate when this change came. But the CEO pulled the party line. He did so because, regardless of what happens with Netflix, the stock holders pull his strings at Microsoft (of which Gates, Ballmer, and others hold far more than him... which is why your strings analogy is completely wrong.) You aren't on the board of MS and a CEO at Netflix and say you're going to be impartial to your other master. Even an uneducated hobo understood the concept of not being able to serve two masters without screwing one of them over. The CEO of Google also understood this as well. Obviously, you do not.
2. You ignored, completely, the meaning of eat their own dog food. I pointed out, very clearly, that technical support is NOT (repeat: NOT) what I meant.
3. You can "suggest" all you want. You are the one that asked the questions. If you didn't want answers, then don't ask. And if you think you know the answers, present them.
Either way, makes no difference. You don't quite understand board/CEO relationships, since in this case the CEO is a figurehead + major stock holder, nor did you even bother to read what I meant by support.
What I said:
A better term may have been to say that they stopped eating their own dog food. They don't support it in the sense of lending it credibility, not in terms of "customer support", but more in the sense of moral support.
What you said in response:
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifean45 [microsoft.com] In short, you'll hear about it from Microsoft when they decide to discontinue support. And when you hear about it, you'll have 1 year to act, from that point. And you'll have paid support options past that date if you choose to use it. Suggest you stop spreading disinformation.
That makes you either ignorant, or a troll. I quite honestly would respect you more if it were the latter.
Windows is finally returning to a boring square box! I'm waiting for the Beige color before I get mine! Ha, iPhone white? Beige Windows box shaped phone, biatch!
As long as you have a shell with apt-get, you don't need anything gui, correct?
On one hand, I understand that they want to move forward. On the other, there are certain tools which you want to keep. Synaptic the most used system tool in my gui toolbag.
On the other hand, I don't want a fucking Mac, completely divorced from the OS. If I want a fucking Mac, I'll buy a fucking Mac. If I'm going to INSTALL a new OS on a computer, don't assume I'm a noob. If you are installing a 3rd party OS, sure, make the software center front and center. But assume I have a fucking clue how to burn an ISO, or netboot, setup my own wifi for updates, etc. Synaptic is one of the reasons I use Ubuntu! I found other systems to be lacking. And I honestly use Software Center. But I also like customizing, and build packages, and use synaptic to download dependencies quickly, without looking up a name or installing crap with a lib-* apt-get command.
And if you don't like customizing, WTF are you doing with Ubuntu in the first place? And if this is for OEM installs, WTF do you need to remove a package that they are perfectly capable of removing themselves? We're talking about a DOWNLOADED operating system. Make it as user friendly as you want, and quibble over LibreOffice, but don't start removing tools. Are you going to remap any request for nano or pico to gedit now?
Sorry, I just find this bullshit. Unlike Unity, which I understand, I don't understand this at all. It's not a space issue, and because of the new interface, if I type "Software", Software Center is already the number one choice, not Synaptic. And it adds an additional step for me on installs.
I already have stopped at 10.04 for corporate installs. Now I'll be stopping at 11.04 on personal installs. I'm sorry, but Software Center is NOT SUFFICIENT! It is a step BACKWARDS!
Small matter: You may want to use immigration rather than immigrant. One is a practice, the other is a human being. Politicians are hard on crime, not hard on criminals. It is a more defensible position... but I digress...
Saying that implies that they are pro-legal-immigrantion. Much like anti-abortion, where one could say, "No, I'm just anti-illegal-abortion," which does not state what pressures are acting on that position. In the abortion debate, most are pushing to make all abortion illegal. Similarly, I would suggest that many anti-illegal-immigration advocates are also on the side of shutting down the Mexican boarder to all new immigrants. Because I hear fewer people saying they are also pro-legal-immigration. The states themselves have not stepped up with as heavy of a hand to provide help to people who wish to be legal residents.
As such, I find anti-illegal-immigration as manipulative as saying one is saying one is anti-illegal-abortion without stating how they are pro-legal-abortion. Arizona is not pro-legal-immigration, therefore, it's absurd to think of them as anti-illegal-immigration is anything but double-speak to mean, "They're criminals! Kick their ass!"
They probably didn't add a canopy because it might be unsafe and less effecient. A canopy might cut resistance, but could be offset by having to move a larger vehicle mass. It could also make it top heavy, and far less safe. As Formula 1 racers go, I think most are finalized that proper body sculpting can do the same job as a canopy creating an air bubble around the driver's head, and there may be a safety concern there as well.
It's still an awesome advancement over the scooter (driven more and more in the US and is a crazy around the world) which gets about 100MPG. This could be converted into a bi- or tri-wheeled vehicle for personal (1 with maybe back seat passenger) vehicle. If it was cheap and was at least as fast (and had a weather canopy), I'd consider buying one. I'd love paying only 12 Gallons of gas per year. Hell, I'd pay at least $20,000 for a vehicle that'd let me do that! Well worth the investment then.
Exactly, just look at the MacBook Air and ChromeOS
on
Who Killed the Netbook?
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
I agree. I'll get to the MacBook Air in a minute. But first, I have the following: Droid X running Cyanogen, eMachine Netbook running Ubuntu 11.04, and a Dell desktop running Windows 7 (my newest edition).
The problem I see is that tablets are trying to replace the Netbook (not so much the notebook, which is more of a replacement for desktops). The tablet is not appealing to me, because there really is no gap to fill between my Droid X and my Netbook. My netbook, a 1Ghz Atom with a 250GB HDD (not SSD) is just as powerful as a notebook, just a tad slower (but not much unless you want to play games). But it far outdoes any tablet.
A tablets I've looked at as serious contenders, frankly suck. They are around $700, have low storage memory, must be tethered to a cellular plan, and cannot run anything better than what I already have on my very spacious 4.x" phone screen. My netbook, on the other hand, was $199, has more storage than I'll need in a portable situation, works with Wifi, Cisco VPN (which most phones/tablets don't), and is very compact with the same or larger screen size as most tablets (~10")
For me, an overpriced, underfeatured, cellular locked tablet makes no sense. Oooo, it has a touch screen... big freaking deal! Oooo, I have a keyboard with a netbook... now that's a real consideration for having something in the "gap" between my phone and a desktop. My battery is also much better than any tablet, because I don't need something equivalent to an OLED screen. It's backlit, and I can watch netflix just fine on it.
This same lack of gap is the reason your average power user who must choose between a MacBook Air and an iPad will automatically go with the MacBook (if you were to remove cost from the equation).
I'm not saying I'm against tablets, or necessarily for netbooks. They just make more sense to someone like me. Now, if I wanted to replace my smartphone with a simple feature phone, and also ditch my netbook, then a tablet may fill the new gap left. And besides early adopters, I think that's the real market.
The problem is this: more companies make more money from tablets. The market (after the initial waves of early adopters are saturated) is that group that has an older desktop, a feature phone, and no portable computers. That's the "sweet spot". But, tablet prices are so expensive, that only early adopters and those with large disposable incomes are really taking too them. The fact that only the iPad has had any real success is actually a bad sign for Apple. It is the exception that proves the rule. It shows that those who might go with a cheaper tablet just aren't, and are more apt to by a cheap smartphone. Why this is bad for Apple is that these are people speaking with their wallets saying, "It may be neat, but it's not something I can live without (like a phone), and not willing to shell out the extra money for (like a phone)." It puts the iPad in the position of the MacBook Air, which is to say that it will have a low market saturation, unlike the iPhone. And the iPhone was able to catch those users because A) people feel they need a phone, so they already need a contract and have to pay a significant amount for for anything decent, and B) they see real usability. The middle class, which has already slowed spending on televisions, computers, vacations, etc. see the tablet as a luxury item, and the phone as a necessity.
A netbook, too, is a luxury item. But it is easier for a parent to justify a $199 purchase for school, because it's better than a $2000 laptop or a $700 tablet... and parents (though maybe not cutting edge educators) see the tablet as a toy, not a tool. Netbooks also come with no contract, and that's a deal breaker for most people still struggling in this sluggish economy. And that, the economy, is the reason for Netbooks not being in the news, unless you consider ChromeOS... which might be a stroke of genius for Google to sneak in under the tight budget radar, assuming they can par down the contract costs a GREAT deal.
One merely needs to look at Wikileaks to show that, yes, credit card companies are in charge of currency, at least a large portion of it. Without a face to face, or trusting the mail service with cash (which no rational person would), you are reliant on non-governmental entities controlling the market.
If Visa and Mastercard don't like you, they can effectively cut you out of the currency market.
Other facts are false. You cannot use a Visa card anywhere just like you cannot use currency everywhere. A Canadian dollar won't buy you much of anything in Mexico, and try using a Peso in Minneapolis. You're statement #1 is only true for limit geographical areas. I find it strange as an American myself to state the reminder that, the US is not the world.
You're next statement is far from true. Currency is not stable at all. It's value fluctuates radically at times. All currency is in danger of hyper-inflation or hyper-deflation, and everything in between. Just look at the financial troubles in europe, and the high price of gold (which is seen as stable, but isn't that stable either in reality, or it wouldn't spike so radically).
But alas, I can find no fault in your third statement. Cash does smell good, or at least it did, until it went plastic.
You've hit at the heart of a dilemma. Developer driven change versus consumer driven change. The problem I have is that almost nothing that uses Silverlight is a consumer driven change. While I don't like Apple, I can say that they are a consumer driven change, to the point of being nearly hostile to developers.
Somewhere in the middle is better. But the problem with Microsoft Silverlight is the same problem with Windows 8. It's just pissing more and more developers off, rather than solving their problems. Sure, it's great for the kid fresh out of college who doesn't know his asp (sic) from his elbow, but not for your average coder. Your average coder would be happy with maybe a 1:100 ratio of time spent learning new languages versus actually using them.
Just as they become... I was going to say comfortable, but rather... proficient, they have to change language again. But I think MS has found this to be a profit source. If they didn't continually kill a language, they'd have no way of extracting more money from already underpaid developers.
So, this is lose-lose regardless of whether it is consumer or developer driven change. HTML is an incremental change, btw. An HTML 1.0 document still works as written. (Notice that I'm not saying CSS, but HTML.) Incremental change is developer friendly. What MS does is not incremental. They continually smash the wheel to re-invent it. Windows 8 is their latest "screw developers, we need a new wheel!"
1. They share a board member, if I remember correctly. They also did so to the ire of most users. Silverlight was initially not available on all platforms, such as linux. As a linux user myself, that meant the console I built for my TV no longer worked with Netflix. That support has been added, but is still not up to par (in my opinion) to Flash for in browser viewing. It was "pushed" because the it was NOT a user driven feature. In fact, the forums were filled with anger and hate. Whether it was DRM or not, MS pushed itself as a solution.
2. When they stop using it. A better term may have been to say that they stopped eating their own dog food. They don't support it in the sense of lending it credibility, not in terms of "customer support", but more in the sense of moral support. If Google employees stopped using Gmail and instead switched to Exchange, I'd consider that dropping internal support. They would no longer support Gmail as the best option, in that case.
Step 1 - Look at everything you hate about credit card companies... now do the reverse of all of that. Step 2 - Look at all the things you like about cash... now do all of that.
You now understand the goal of bitcoin. Even cash money systems have problems starting. Just look at confederate dollars.
Then again, you'd think the Secret Service would love a a counterfeit proof system and wish they could copy it somehow.
Apocalypse Now (napalm), Rambo (especially the scene where he is dipped into a vat of pig shit), Superstar (now we can all smell her pits), and The Big Labowski (for the contact buzz).
If it wasn't obvious, how did a movie use multi-touch gesturing 5 years before they release the @#$%ing phone?
And forget that, what about Star Trek TNG?
This was neither new, nor obvious, nor a technology (from what I'm hearing). If an idea missing any actual mechanism for how to achieve the idea is all you need for a patent, then the original Star Trek deserves a patent on cellphones more than Apple on this.
The prior art on this leads me to believe that them being able to defend this in court is near 0.001%. And only that high assuming that at least 1 in 100,000 judges are bat-shit insane.
I especially love the picture of "3 people like this" when he talks about scaring off the police with gun shots.
This is why Facebook needs a dislike button or something else, because it makes people look like animals for "Liking" bad news. Most of the time, people hit "Like" to vote up news, not to agree with it.
He's been saying this for years. 2029 = computers reach human intelligence, 2040 = Singularity, where we either merge with them, or we get left behind. It's all in the 2009 documentary Transcendent Man. So... why is this news?
How is this an example of "damned if they do, damned if they don't"? Microsoft made Silverlight, pushed a lot of sites to use it at the displeasure of many (Netflix), now they are dropping support?
This is rather an example of MS making crap, MS pushing crap, and MS not being able to support their own crap, but still wanting everyone to use it. That's not damned if you do or don't, that's just everyone saying "It sucks, stop pushing it when you can't even use it."
... Capt. Obvious. Without this story, the re-re's would never have thought of this.
As for those talking about "Aww, they'd never go after individuals!" Um, what universe did you come from? Before, they had to settle for little girls downloading Happy_Birthday.mp3. You think they'll ignore someone with a 50,000 mp3 collection given the chance? Hell no! Why? Because most people SETTLE. And they can hold you up and say, "See, see, here are the ones we've been talking about!"
So, are you, owner of 50,000 mp3's (for which you have no explination) going to settle for $100,000 fine and lose your home? Or, are you going to fight them knowing that you are not a 14 year old girl, the songs aren't Happy Birthday, and they still kicked her ass all over the place?
But hey, don't let me rain on any Apple fan-boy's parade (above comments), this same technique would work on Apple, Amazon, or Google cloud music solutions. There's no "safe" cloud storage for streaming pirated music. It's not Apple, it's the industry. They love cloud, and don't doubt it. Cloud is the new DRM. Most people just haven't realized it yet. Then again, I buy my music... now.;) And I'm fine with using cloud.
... if you want the damn code proprietary, then write the damn thing yourself. Why is this so hard to understand? People that whine about "Well, I wrote part X as a modification of GPL project Y, so why am I forced to use GPL on X!" The answer is simple, because you based your work on GPL! If you don't want to use GPL, then avoid GPL!
Yes, the issue can be made much more complex. But at the end of the day, this "problem" hasn't changed, and it's not that complicated. Microsoft figured it out and they also release some GPL code, yet nobody is going after the Windows codebase, now are they? NOT... THAT... HARD...
I hear that's also how many companies deal with the developpers of unpatched code... fire them, and forget about the code they wrote. I hear NASA even has that problem, often not even having the code or design of outdated systems. I wonder what the ratio of unpatched but fixable to unpatched and unknown is.
I hate on Linden dollars. They're "market" is a joke, because Linden repeatedly devastated it while running for cover to ban banks and gambling.
As for BTC, it's a "start", but it nowhere near mature enough to be used widely. A true distributed currency must allow users to define the rules, not the other way around. Though there is no "organization", the rules are the "system", and all systems have flaws.
Where I think BTC shines is in its proven method of transaction and triple record accounting. But the BTC currency itself is useless. The idea of mining is good, but to give the currency real value, it needs mining for data that itself is of real value, so that something of consequence is gained. Time is spent, but it's just digging one hole after another with no purpose.
The Linden took off because with the small subscription, everyone got Lindens. With BTC, you can't spend what you don't have. You have to toss around a few hundred thousand 0.01 BTC before you'll see people saying, "Hmmm, I wonder what I could buy with this?"
That's why Linden started working (that and real estate grabs).
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not being sarcastic, I am glad. I got years of enjoyment, and it was worth it. I wish all games went free after a time period, like say 5 years, when it's been replaced and outdated. At least I can now set it up for private LAN parties at work without buying extra copies.
In short he gets to pull Ballmer's strings, but not vice versa.
...
Orthogonal issue + rambling. You claimed Microsoft *pushed* Netflix to use Silverlight. How?
...
In short, you'll hear about it from Microsoft when they decide to discontinue support. And when you hear about it, you'll have 1 year to act, from that point. And you'll have paid support options past that date if you choose to use it. Suggest you stop spreading disinformation.
1. He pulls Ballmer's strings? Since when has anyone pulled Ballmer's strings? The CEO of Google was on Apple's board, did he pull Job's strings? If you think that, you are delusional.
2. Pushed, as in Microsoft had an inside man who had a conflict of interest. His "favor" was to MS over Adobe. The CEO made a choice that was against that of his customers (you can call it rambling, but when thousands of customers are simultaneously "rambling" it is usually a bad sign). The Netflix boards were filled with hate when this change came. But the CEO pulled the party line. He did so because, regardless of what happens with Netflix, the stock holders pull his strings at Microsoft (of which Gates, Ballmer, and others hold far more than him... which is why your strings analogy is completely wrong.) You aren't on the board of MS and a CEO at Netflix and say you're going to be impartial to your other master. Even an uneducated hobo understood the concept of not being able to serve two masters without screwing one of them over. The CEO of Google also understood this as well. Obviously, you do not.
2. You ignored, completely, the meaning of eat their own dog food. I pointed out, very clearly, that technical support is NOT (repeat: NOT) what I meant.
3. You can "suggest" all you want. You are the one that asked the questions. If you didn't want answers, then don't ask. And if you think you know the answers, present them.
Either way, makes no difference. You don't quite understand board/CEO relationships, since in this case the CEO is a figurehead + major stock holder, nor did you even bother to read what I meant by support.
What I said:
A better term may have been to say that they stopped eating their own dog food. They don't support it in the sense of lending it credibility, not in terms of "customer support", but more in the sense of moral support.
What you said in response:
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifean45 [microsoft.com] In short, you'll hear about it from Microsoft when they decide to discontinue support. And when you hear about it, you'll have 1 year to act, from that point. And you'll have paid support options past that date if you choose to use it. Suggest you stop spreading disinformation.
That makes you either ignorant, or a troll. I quite honestly would respect you more if it were the latter.
Windows is finally returning to a boring square box! I'm waiting for the Beige color before I get mine! Ha, iPhone white? Beige Windows box shaped phone, biatch!
I rather thought free software means they could abandon Windows altogether, forever.
As long as you have a shell with apt-get, you don't need anything gui, correct?
On one hand, I understand that they want to move forward. On the other, there are certain tools which you want to keep. Synaptic the most used system tool in my gui toolbag.
On the other hand, I don't want a fucking Mac, completely divorced from the OS. If I want a fucking Mac, I'll buy a fucking Mac. If I'm going to INSTALL a new OS on a computer, don't assume I'm a noob. If you are installing a 3rd party OS, sure, make the software center front and center. But assume I have a fucking clue how to burn an ISO, or netboot, setup my own wifi for updates, etc. Synaptic is one of the reasons I use Ubuntu! I found other systems to be lacking. And I honestly use Software Center. But I also like customizing, and build packages, and use synaptic to download dependencies quickly, without looking up a name or installing crap with a lib-* apt-get command.
And if you don't like customizing, WTF are you doing with Ubuntu in the first place? And if this is for OEM installs, WTF do you need to remove a package that they are perfectly capable of removing themselves? We're talking about a DOWNLOADED operating system. Make it as user friendly as you want, and quibble over LibreOffice, but don't start removing tools. Are you going to remap any request for nano or pico to gedit now?
Sorry, I just find this bullshit. Unlike Unity, which I understand, I don't understand this at all. It's not a space issue, and because of the new interface, if I type "Software", Software Center is already the number one choice, not Synaptic. And it adds an additional step for me on installs.
I already have stopped at 10.04 for corporate installs. Now I'll be stopping at 11.04 on personal installs. I'm sorry, but Software Center is NOT SUFFICIENT! It is a step BACKWARDS!
Small matter: You may want to use immigration rather than immigrant. One is a practice, the other is a human being. Politicians are hard on crime, not hard on criminals. It is a more defensible position... but I digress...
Saying that implies that they are pro-legal-immigrantion. Much like anti-abortion, where one could say, "No, I'm just anti-illegal-abortion," which does not state what pressures are acting on that position. In the abortion debate, most are pushing to make all abortion illegal. Similarly, I would suggest that many anti-illegal-immigration advocates are also on the side of shutting down the Mexican boarder to all new immigrants. Because I hear fewer people saying they are also pro-legal-immigration. The states themselves have not stepped up with as heavy of a hand to provide help to people who wish to be legal residents.
As such, I find anti-illegal-immigration as manipulative as saying one is saying one is anti-illegal-abortion without stating how they are pro-legal-abortion. Arizona is not pro-legal-immigration, therefore, it's absurd to think of them as anti-illegal-immigration is anything but double-speak to mean, "They're criminals! Kick their ass!"
They probably didn't add a canopy because it might be unsafe and less effecient. A canopy might cut resistance, but could be offset by having to move a larger vehicle mass. It could also make it top heavy, and far less safe. As Formula 1 racers go, I think most are finalized that proper body sculpting can do the same job as a canopy creating an air bubble around the driver's head, and there may be a safety concern there as well.
It's still an awesome advancement over the scooter (driven more and more in the US and is a crazy around the world) which gets about 100MPG. This could be converted into a bi- or tri-wheeled vehicle for personal (1 with maybe back seat passenger) vehicle. If it was cheap and was at least as fast (and had a weather canopy), I'd consider buying one. I'd love paying only 12 Gallons of gas per year. Hell, I'd pay at least $20,000 for a vehicle that'd let me do that! Well worth the investment then.
I agree. I'll get to the MacBook Air in a minute. But first, I have the following: Droid X running Cyanogen, eMachine Netbook running Ubuntu 11.04, and a Dell desktop running Windows 7 (my newest edition).
The problem I see is that tablets are trying to replace the Netbook (not so much the notebook, which is more of a replacement for desktops). The tablet is not appealing to me, because there really is no gap to fill between my Droid X and my Netbook. My netbook, a 1Ghz Atom with a 250GB HDD (not SSD) is just as powerful as a notebook, just a tad slower (but not much unless you want to play games). But it far outdoes any tablet.
A tablets I've looked at as serious contenders, frankly suck. They are around $700, have low storage memory, must be tethered to a cellular plan, and cannot run anything better than what I already have on my very spacious 4.x" phone screen. My netbook, on the other hand, was $199, has more storage than I'll need in a portable situation, works with Wifi, Cisco VPN (which most phones/tablets don't), and is very compact with the same or larger screen size as most tablets (~10")
For me, an overpriced, underfeatured, cellular locked tablet makes no sense. Oooo, it has a touch screen... big freaking deal! Oooo, I have a keyboard with a netbook... now that's a real consideration for having something in the "gap" between my phone and a desktop. My battery is also much better than any tablet, because I don't need something equivalent to an OLED screen. It's backlit, and I can watch netflix just fine on it.
This same lack of gap is the reason your average power user who must choose between a MacBook Air and an iPad will automatically go with the MacBook (if you were to remove cost from the equation).
I'm not saying I'm against tablets, or necessarily for netbooks. They just make more sense to someone like me. Now, if I wanted to replace my smartphone with a simple feature phone, and also ditch my netbook, then a tablet may fill the new gap left. And besides early adopters, I think that's the real market.
The problem is this: more companies make more money from tablets. The market (after the initial waves of early adopters are saturated) is that group that has an older desktop, a feature phone, and no portable computers. That's the "sweet spot". But, tablet prices are so expensive, that only early adopters and those with large disposable incomes are really taking too them. The fact that only the iPad has had any real success is actually a bad sign for Apple. It is the exception that proves the rule. It shows that those who might go with a cheaper tablet just aren't, and are more apt to by a cheap smartphone. Why this is bad for Apple is that these are people speaking with their wallets saying, "It may be neat, but it's not something I can live without (like a phone), and not willing to shell out the extra money for (like a phone)." It puts the iPad in the position of the MacBook Air, which is to say that it will have a low market saturation, unlike the iPhone. And the iPhone was able to catch those users because A) people feel they need a phone, so they already need a contract and have to pay a significant amount for for anything decent, and B) they see real usability. The middle class, which has already slowed spending on televisions, computers, vacations, etc. see the tablet as a luxury item, and the phone as a necessity.
A netbook, too, is a luxury item. But it is easier for a parent to justify a $199 purchase for school, because it's better than a $2000 laptop or a $700 tablet... and parents (though maybe not cutting edge educators) see the tablet as a toy, not a tool. Netbooks also come with no contract, and that's a deal breaker for most people still struggling in this sluggish economy. And that, the economy, is the reason for Netbooks not being in the news, unless you consider ChromeOS... which might be a stroke of genius for Google to sneak in under the tight budget radar, assuming they can par down the contract costs a GREAT deal.
One merely needs to look at Wikileaks to show that, yes, credit card companies are in charge of currency, at least a large portion of it. Without a face to face, or trusting the mail service with cash (which no rational person would), you are reliant on non-governmental entities controlling the market.
If Visa and Mastercard don't like you, they can effectively cut you out of the currency market.
Other facts are false. You cannot use a Visa card anywhere just like you cannot use currency everywhere. A Canadian dollar won't buy you much of anything in Mexico, and try using a Peso in Minneapolis. You're statement #1 is only true for limit geographical areas. I find it strange as an American myself to state the reminder that, the US is not the world.
You're next statement is far from true. Currency is not stable at all. It's value fluctuates radically at times. All currency is in danger of hyper-inflation or hyper-deflation, and everything in between. Just look at the financial troubles in europe, and the high price of gold (which is seen as stable, but isn't that stable either in reality, or it wouldn't spike so radically).
But alas, I can find no fault in your third statement. Cash does smell good, or at least it did, until it went plastic.
You've hit at the heart of a dilemma. Developer driven change versus consumer driven change. The problem I have is that almost nothing that uses Silverlight is a consumer driven change. While I don't like Apple, I can say that they are a consumer driven change, to the point of being nearly hostile to developers.
Somewhere in the middle is better. But the problem with Microsoft Silverlight is the same problem with Windows 8. It's just pissing more and more developers off, rather than solving their problems. Sure, it's great for the kid fresh out of college who doesn't know his asp (sic) from his elbow, but not for your average coder. Your average coder would be happy with maybe a 1:100 ratio of time spent learning new languages versus actually using them.
Just as they become... I was going to say comfortable, but rather... proficient, they have to change language again. But I think MS has found this to be a profit source. If they didn't continually kill a language, they'd have no way of extracting more money from already underpaid developers.
So, this is lose-lose regardless of whether it is consumer or developer driven change. HTML is an incremental change, btw. An HTML 1.0 document still works as written. (Notice that I'm not saying CSS, but HTML.) Incremental change is developer friendly. What MS does is not incremental. They continually smash the wheel to re-invent it. Windows 8 is their latest "screw developers, we need a new wheel!"
1. They share a board member, if I remember correctly. They also did so to the ire of most users. Silverlight was initially not available on all platforms, such as linux. As a linux user myself, that meant the console I built for my TV no longer worked with Netflix. That support has been added, but is still not up to par (in my opinion) to Flash for in browser viewing. It was "pushed" because the it was NOT a user driven feature. In fact, the forums were filled with anger and hate. Whether it was DRM or not, MS pushed itself as a solution.
2. When they stop using it. A better term may have been to say that they stopped eating their own dog food. They don't support it in the sense of lending it credibility, not in terms of "customer support", but more in the sense of moral support. If Google employees stopped using Gmail and instead switched to Exchange, I'd consider that dropping internal support. They would no longer support Gmail as the best option, in that case.
Step 1 - Look at everything you hate about credit card companies... now do the reverse of all of that.
Step 2 - Look at all the things you like about cash... now do all of that.
You now understand the goal of bitcoin. Even cash money systems have problems starting. Just look at confederate dollars.
Then again, you'd think the Secret Service would love a a counterfeit proof system and wish they could copy it somehow.
Apocalypse Now (napalm), Rambo (especially the scene where he is dipped into a vat of pig shit), Superstar (now we can all smell her pits), and The Big Labowski (for the contact buzz).
If it wasn't obvious, how did a movie use multi-touch gesturing 5 years before they release the @#$%ing phone?
And forget that, what about Star Trek TNG?
This was neither new, nor obvious, nor a technology (from what I'm hearing). If an idea missing any actual mechanism for how to achieve the idea is all you need for a patent, then the original Star Trek deserves a patent on cellphones more than Apple on this.
The prior art on this leads me to believe that them being able to defend this in court is near 0.001%. And only that high assuming that at least 1 in 100,000 judges are bat-shit insane.
I built a device totally controlled by the middle finger. The next version will include multi-touch Shocker gestures.
We can freely hate both.
I especially love the picture of "3 people like this" when he talks about scaring off the police with gun shots.
This is why Facebook needs a dislike button or something else, because it makes people look like animals for "Liking" bad news. Most of the time, people hit "Like" to vote up news, not to agree with it.
He's been saying this for years. 2029 = computers reach human intelligence, 2040 = Singularity, where we either merge with them, or we get left behind. It's all in the 2009 documentary Transcendent Man. So... why is this news?
How is this an example of "damned if they do, damned if they don't"? Microsoft made Silverlight, pushed a lot of sites to use it at the displeasure of many (Netflix), now they are dropping support?
This is rather an example of MS making crap, MS pushing crap, and MS not being able to support their own crap, but still wanting everyone to use it. That's not damned if you do or don't, that's just everyone saying "It sucks, stop pushing it when you can't even use it."
I.E. - Windows Vista
... Capt. Obvious. Without this story, the re-re's would never have thought of this.
As for those talking about "Aww, they'd never go after individuals!" Um, what universe did you come from? Before, they had to settle for little girls downloading Happy_Birthday.mp3. You think they'll ignore someone with a 50,000 mp3 collection given the chance? Hell no! Why? Because most people SETTLE. And they can hold you up and say, "See, see, here are the ones we've been talking about!"
So, are you, owner of 50,000 mp3's (for which you have no explination) going to settle for $100,000 fine and lose your home? Or, are you going to fight them knowing that you are not a 14 year old girl, the songs aren't Happy Birthday, and they still kicked her ass all over the place?
But hey, don't let me rain on any Apple fan-boy's parade (above comments), this same technique would work on Apple, Amazon, or Google cloud music solutions. There's no "safe" cloud storage for streaming pirated music. It's not Apple, it's the industry. They love cloud, and don't doubt it. Cloud is the new DRM. Most people just haven't realized it yet. Then again, I buy my music... now. ;) And I'm fine with using cloud.
... and I'm Skype.
Mac: Is there an app for that?
Skype: (Pulls out a gun.) Get on your knees pretty boy! You're taken my app... one way... or another...
Mac: Noooooo! Jobs! Help!
Jobs: (In dark corner chair, laughing. Softly...) Yes, you will take it. And more... so much more...
... if you want the damn code proprietary, then write the damn thing yourself. Why is this so hard to understand? People that whine about "Well, I wrote part X as a modification of GPL project Y, so why am I forced to use GPL on X!" The answer is simple, because you based your work on GPL! If you don't want to use GPL, then avoid GPL!
Yes, the issue can be made much more complex. But at the end of the day, this "problem" hasn't changed, and it's not that complicated. Microsoft figured it out and they also release some GPL code, yet nobody is going after the Windows codebase, now are they? NOT... THAT... HARD...
I hear that's also how many companies deal with the developpers of unpatched code... fire them, and forget about the code they wrote. I hear NASA even has that problem, often not even having the code or design of outdated systems. I wonder what the ratio of unpatched but fixable to unpatched and unknown is.
I hate on Linden dollars. They're "market" is a joke, because Linden repeatedly devastated it while running for cover to ban banks and gambling.
As for BTC, it's a "start", but it nowhere near mature enough to be used widely. A true distributed currency must allow users to define the rules, not the other way around. Though there is no "organization", the rules are the "system", and all systems have flaws.
Where I think BTC shines is in its proven method of transaction and triple record accounting. But the BTC currency itself is useless. The idea of mining is good, but to give the currency real value, it needs mining for data that itself is of real value, so that something of consequence is gained. Time is spent, but it's just digging one hole after another with no purpose.
The Linden took off because with the small subscription, everyone got Lindens. With BTC, you can't spend what you don't have. You have to toss around a few hundred thousand 0.01 BTC before you'll see people saying, "Hmmm, I wonder what I could buy with this?"
That's why Linden started working (that and real estate grabs).