if this were any company other than Apple (maybe MS) there wouldn't have been 7 stories on the front page in a week (so far.)
And if this were any company other than Apple, there wouldn't have been 7 stories on the front page about them releasing a phone that's identical to their current phone except that it's white. Being a publicity whore is a double-edged sword, it cuts both ways.
Do-gooder: Let's develop a cheap laptop so people in developing countries can educate themselves.
Critic: Those people are starving. Worry about feeding them first before you waste money on toys.
Do-gooder: Let's develop cheap agricultural technology so people in developing countries can feed themselves.
Critic: Those people are trapped in despotic regimes. Worry about freeing them first before you waste money on agriculture.
Do-gooder: Let's send peace-keeping forces in to stabilize those developing countries.
Critic: Those people are uneducated, they wouldn't know what to do with political freedom. Worry about educating them first before we waste money on regime change.
Stop worrying about what to do first and just do something. Anything.
I like the show personally, but I have to agree that the repetition is a bit ridiculous. You can start watching the show half-way in and not feel that you've missed anything. I'm not sure if the reason for that is that they feel the typical audience member is so uninformed about science that they must repeat everything multiple times so they don't get lost, or if it is simple economics (the show is relatively expensive to produce and needs to be padded out to one hour to be viable).
Looking at windows phone 7 & the x-box (kinect), the company can execute well, but they really need some vision for future markets to get ahead of the curve.
That might be true in some (even most) areas, but not tablet PCs. Microsoft has been trying to create a market for tablet PCs for over a decade, with out any luck. These were real PCs with a real desktop operating system, but no one bought them. Apple comes late to the party, sticks their toy OS on an over-sized smartphone and everyone loves it. If I was Microsoft, I'd be pissed too.
OS/2 suffered the same problem with it's Windows compatibility. No-one actually wrote anything for it as they just targetted Windows instead knowing that it running on OS/2 was an addition benefit.
That is the frequently cited reason for OS/2 having few native apps, but I don't believe it. Windows95 ran DOS apps. OSX ran MacOS apps. Playstation1 compatibility didn't stop developers from writing games for PS2. Being able to keep their old apps after making the transition helped all those platforms immensely. In my opinion the reason developers didn't write native apps for OS/2 is simply because it had a very small installed base compared to DOS or Windows 3.0/3.1. IBM could have fixed that by lowering the price and doing bundling deals with computer manufactures like Microsoft did. Hell, even most genuine IBM PCs didn't come with OS/2 unless you paid a lot extra; you'd think IBM could at least cut itself a good deal. Eventually IBM started wising up, but by that time Windows95 was entrenched and OS/2 was no longer compatible with current Windows apps. At that point they couldn't even give it away (I have a free copy of OS/2 Warp somewhere in my basement that I never installed).
Would you go to your employer and say "Hey, I've figured out how to save money on my bills at home, could you cut down my salary by 10% to compensate for that please?"
Maybe not, but if your employer found out there's someone who's willing to do you job just as well as you for 10% less than you make, guess what happens?
Ceteris paribus lowercase letters are more readable.
By humans or OCR? I would have thought uppercase was more readable because they don't tend not to run together like lowercase (i.e. a "nn" or "rn" that reads as "m"). BTW, lowercase also has easily confused pairs, especially 1 & l which are difficult to distinguish even when not handwritten.
Because it has to be a direct copy of the original public domain item, not a derivative work (and you have to be able to prove that it's a direct copy of a public domain item). It's more straightforward for literary works. For example, some early Tarzan stories by Edgar Rice Burroughs are in the public domain but later stories are not. I can reprint the older stories, but I cannot reprint the later ones or create new Tarzan stories (or even slightly modified versions of the older stories). When Project Gutenberg is scanning old books, they are very careful to scan books that were printed close to the copyright date, since later editions/reprintings might have subtle changes/additions that could create copyright issues.
So according to one article Avela licensed the images, according to another they were public domain. According to one, the images are OK because they're not claimed to be "official," according to the other the images are OK because Betty Boop is public domain. What's the real story? Is it about public domain? Is it about the relationship between copyright and trademark? I have no idea. Neither the reporters or the submitter bothered to explain, or apparently, even to find out.
Here's the deal. The Betty Boop movies started in 1930 so they are still under copyright (as are most things copyrighted prior to 1924). Movie posters of that era were typically printed without a copyright notice and prior to 1976 a copyright notice was required to claim a copyright, so the posters are technically in the public domain and always have been (though the character and movies are not). If a company owns a copy of an original movie poster (not a reproduction), they can make exact reproductions of that public domain image (or license others to do so), though it's never been entirely clear how much leeway they have to make derivative works. This ruling would seem to indicate that handbags and t-shirts based on the movie posters are OK.
You failed to understand that these are not necessarily the primary costs involved with publishing a book. Writing, editing, laying out, and marketing the book are all labor costs -- and labor is usually the biggest line-item for any business.
...and you failed to understand that physical books ALSO require writing, editing, layout out and marketing (in ADDITION to the printing, shipping, storing and retailing that ebooks DON'T require). Even if the labor is the biggest cost of producing a book as you claim, there is still a reduced cost to produce an ebook versus a physical book and that savings is not being passed along to ebook consumers.
What you're buying is the temporary allowance to read that collection of words in that order, as the authour, or perhaps later editors, intended. You aren't buying a hardcover book or a mass-market paperback. What you're buying is your share of the time it took for the authour to write that book.
If that's true, then the cost of an eBook should be far less than the cost of a physical book, since I'm not buying a stack of paper and cost of printing/shipping/storing/retailing that paper. My share of the author's time (assuming he sells millions of books) should be a pittance.
Clearly this wobble is of a global nature and is having negative affects (it's probably anthropogenic as well). I think we should spend trillions of dollars to find a way stop global wobbling and return the earth to the way it was in the past.
Consider the farmer. He owns his land, the equipment he uses to harvest his crops, the truck he uses to drive that product to the farmers’ market where he sells it directly to the consumer. Is that not vertical integration? 1:32 PM. Mark the time, ladies and gentlemen, that congress put a bullet in the head of the American farmer.
2D Boy co-founder Ron Carmel told Ars. 'The negative is that if I'm willing to pay $5 but not $20, I probably don't want to play that game very much, so maybe I'm not as excited about it after I play it and maybe I drive down the average appreciation of the game.'"
I expect to hear this kind of argument from the music industry ("iTunes is devaluing my music by selling for only $0.49 per song!") but I would have hoped that programmers would have a better grasp on reality. Price has little or nothing to do with the value that people place on things. There are lots of free programs/apps/web services that I value a lot more than the shrink-wrapped crap I paid a lot of money for. Since the copy cost for downloadable games is damn-near zero, the price-point that produces the most sales should be all the developer should worry about. The success of $0.99 games on Apples app store should be proof of that.
The irony is that television screen size and resolution have finally reached the level where split screen games provide a reasonable gaming experience.
Slashdot Mirror
And if this were any company other than Apple, there wouldn't have been 7 stories on the front page about them releasing a phone that's identical to their current phone except that it's white. Being a publicity whore is a double-edged sword, it cuts both ways.
It would be nice if the study was a little more inclusive.
Unfortunately, they must be counting Arts degrees as education.
Farmville says I am.
Do-gooder: Let's develop a cheap laptop so people in developing countries can educate themselves.
Critic: Those people are starving. Worry about feeding them first before you waste money on toys.
Do-gooder: Let's develop cheap agricultural technology so people in developing countries can feed themselves.
Critic: Those people are trapped in despotic regimes. Worry about freeing them first before you waste money on agriculture.
Do-gooder: Let's send peace-keeping forces in to stabilize those developing countries.
Critic: Those people are uneducated, they wouldn't know what to do with political freedom. Worry about educating them first before we waste money on regime change.
Stop worrying about what to do first and just do something. Anything.
I like the show personally, but I have to agree that the repetition is a bit ridiculous. You can start watching the show half-way in and not feel that you've missed anything. I'm not sure if the reason for that is that they feel the typical audience member is so uninformed about science that they must repeat everything multiple times so they don't get lost, or if it is simple economics (the show is relatively expensive to produce and needs to be padded out to one hour to be viable).
Not to mention a tax write-off.
That might be true in some (even most) areas, but not tablet PCs. Microsoft has been trying to create a market for tablet PCs for over a decade, with out any luck. These were real PCs with a real desktop operating system, but no one bought them. Apple comes late to the party, sticks their toy OS on an over-sized smartphone and everyone loves it. If I was Microsoft, I'd be pissed too.
That is the frequently cited reason for OS/2 having few native apps, but I don't believe it. Windows95 ran DOS apps. OSX ran MacOS apps. Playstation1 compatibility didn't stop developers from writing games for PS2. Being able to keep their old apps after making the transition helped all those platforms immensely. In my opinion the reason developers didn't write native apps for OS/2 is simply because it had a very small installed base compared to DOS or Windows 3.0/3.1. IBM could have fixed that by lowering the price and doing bundling deals with computer manufactures like Microsoft did. Hell, even most genuine IBM PCs didn't come with OS/2 unless you paid a lot extra; you'd think IBM could at least cut itself a good deal. Eventually IBM started wising up, but by that time Windows95 was entrenched and OS/2 was no longer compatible with current Windows apps. At that point they couldn't even give it away (I have a free copy of OS/2 Warp somewhere in my basement that I never installed).
Prepaid data plans are available, however most are not any cheaper than contract plans, so all you gain is not being locked-in for three years.
Maybe not, but if your employer found out there's someone who's willing to do you job just as well as you for 10% less than you make, guess what happens?
Only sometimes. I'd much rather take the criminal penalty for shoplifting a CD than the millions of dollars in civil penalties for file-sharing it.
By humans or OCR? I would have thought uppercase was more readable because they don't tend not to run together like lowercase (i.e. a "nn" or "rn" that reads as "m"). BTW, lowercase also has easily confused pairs, especially 1 & l which are difficult to distinguish even when not handwritten.
Because it has to be a direct copy of the original public domain item, not a derivative work (and you have to be able to prove that it's a direct copy of a public domain item). It's more straightforward for literary works. For example, some early Tarzan stories by Edgar Rice Burroughs are in the public domain but later stories are not. I can reprint the older stories, but I cannot reprint the later ones or create new Tarzan stories (or even slightly modified versions of the older stories). When Project Gutenberg is scanning old books, they are very careful to scan books that were printed close to the copyright date, since later editions/reprintings might have subtle changes/additions that could create copyright issues.
Here's the deal. The Betty Boop movies started in 1930 so they are still under copyright (as are most things copyrighted prior to 1924). Movie posters of that era were typically printed without a copyright notice and prior to 1976 a copyright notice was required to claim a copyright, so the posters are technically in the public domain and always have been (though the character and movies are not). If a company owns a copy of an original movie poster (not a reproduction), they can make exact reproductions of that public domain image (or license others to do so), though it's never been entirely clear how much leeway they have to make derivative works. This ruling would seem to indicate that handbags and t-shirts based on the movie posters are OK.
You failed to understand that these are not necessarily the primary costs involved with publishing a book. Writing, editing, laying out, and marketing the book are all labor costs -- and labor is usually the biggest line-item for any business.
...and you failed to understand that physical books ALSO require writing, editing, layout out and marketing (in ADDITION to the printing, shipping, storing and retailing that ebooks DON'T require). Even if the labor is the biggest cost of producing a book as you claim, there is still a reduced cost to produce an ebook versus a physical book and that savings is not being passed along to ebook consumers.
What the hell, even malmare is vaporware now? Can I put in a pre-order for it to infect my computer sometime next year?
If that's true, then the cost of an eBook should be far less than the cost of a physical book, since I'm not buying a stack of paper and cost of printing/shipping/storing/retailing that paper. My share of the author's time (assuming he sells millions of books) should be a pittance.
Clearly this wobble is of a global nature and is having negative affects (it's probably anthropogenic as well). I think we should spend trillions of dollars to find a way stop global wobbling and return the earth to the way it was in the past.
Consider the farmer. He owns his land, the equipment he uses to harvest his crops, the truck he uses to drive that product to the farmers’ market where he sells it directly to the consumer. Is that not vertical integration? 1:32 PM. Mark the time, ladies and gentlemen, that congress put a bullet in the head of the American farmer.
I expect to hear this kind of argument from the music industry ("iTunes is devaluing my music by selling for only $0.49 per song!") but I would have hoped that programmers would have a better grasp on reality. Price has little or nothing to do with the value that people place on things. There are lots of free programs/apps/web services that I value a lot more than the shrink-wrapped crap I paid a lot of money for. Since the copy cost for downloadable games is damn-near zero, the price-point that produces the most sales should be all the developer should worry about. The success of $0.99 games on Apples app store should be proof of that.
It looks like his finger might be touching the negative (black) probe, but on the positive (red) probe his fingers are all above the plastic ridge.
The irony is that television screen size and resolution have finally reached the level where split screen games provide a reasonable gaming experience.
Seeing the graphs of word popularity over time reminds me of that old Saturday Night Live skit with Phil Hartman giving word investing tips.
Stop peppering him with bad puns. It's thyme for serious discussion.