But after having done this since 1961, you'd think that we'd be at a point where getting "those brave souls" back to Earth in one piece was mundane.
Though it would be wonderful to have the space program re-examined and reformulated with realistic goals, unencumbered designs, and brave (not foolhardy) leadership, I doubt that we'll get anything more than another round of shuttle flights until the next one breaks up. Then we can expect more hand wringing, indecisiveness, and basically a whole lot more of nothing.
Space is the biggest challenge Mankind will ever embark upon. It's sad to see that almost 45 years has passed and we're still crossing our fingers hoping that things go okay.
Sometimes, when the lights goes out, you can really hear what it is like to be in total silence. The refrigerator stops running, the air conditioners stop running. The computer fans and drives stop spinning, and suddenly you're thrust into this silence that is eerily uncomfortable.
When the power comes on and all those once-dead appliances roar to life, it is like stepping back to reality.
I personally can't stand to be somewhere without sound. I can appreciate sound kept to a minimum, but there has to be some indication that things are running, in my opinion. So that when things do eventually expire, that it's not until days later when the CPU has melted itself into the motherboard that I find out the cooling system broke just as silently as it ran.
I admit I did take some license with the quotes you mentioned. Namely, I tried to understand what it meant.
If the first one says that bacteria (plural) "link their nanowires", and the second quote says that they "may...form minipower grid(s)", then yes, I would extrapolate that they are talking about interconnected meshes of these wires which carry "power".
Which, if you take a look at my original post (I'll quote it for you)
quote the bacteria seem to produce these tiny wires which then carry electrical signals across large meshes of bacteria-produced wires/quote
There is one jump in logic that I made and that is that I seem to claim that this is an actual behavior of the bacteria. However, to say that I made it up is a gross mischaracterization and misreading of my post.
According to the article, the bacteria seem to produce these tiny wires which then carry electrical signals across large meshes of bacteria-produced wires. It would be interesting to see what sort of emergent behavior, if any, would arise from very large meshes of these wires and bacteria.
quote When one of us is shopping we can take the camera, photograph various candidate items then return home & decide what's best - then you delete the shots & all it's cost is a bit of electricity and wear & tear./quote
Given a little leeway in bandwidth, and this is a situation perfectly suited to using a cell phone camera. You don't even have to go home to get your wife's opinion on the item.
There is the SLR and the P&S, not counting the medium format monsters which aren't flying off the shelf with digital backs.
Before digital came along, most people owned either a 35mm or an APS point and shoot pocket camera. SLRs were generally thought of (undeservedly in many cases) as "professional" cameras, so most people weren't interested.
Now digital offers the same convenience as the old film point and shoots but with virtually unlimited shot counts. Whereas you could only get 36 shots in your old pocket camera, now you can get upwards of a 100 on a single battery charge. And the loss in quality is pretty minimal because you are using a pretty small, substandard lens to begin with. It is no surprise that digital has essentially eliminated the film P&S market.
The SLR side of the coin is much more interesting. What we are seeing is a resurgence in popularity of the SLR in the form of cheap dSLRs like the Canon Rebel 350D and the Nikon D70. These are cheap, offer superior lens choices than the digital P&S class, and you don't need to swap out film every 24-36 shots. Add to this that digital sensors are quickly gaining ground on film technologies such that the quality of data from a digital sensor is equal to or better than the data off of a scanned negative.
There are many reasons why digital is gaining popularity, the first is simply that it is so much less hassle to plug the camera into the computer than it is to take roll after roll to the photo shop. Also, the boom in blogging has got everyone becoming a photographer with little to no effort. And the cost is coming into the range that mere mortals can afford it.
I've seen the presentations and am still apprehensive about the effort needed to adapt this.
If it is just a matter of writing another application which can be activated when an interrupt occurs, then it sounds pretty straightforward. As you say, hand it off to the DSP subsystem which TI will provide and let the application run until the user presses X. But during that time, what happens to HW interrupts? Can the CPU handle interrupts (which are likely running at maximum priority) without significantly harming the telephony application?
Or is it going to be like it is now, with a separate small OS handling the processing necessary on the DSP handling all events quickly and efficiently there while the A-CPU side can handle its work without severely impacting the DSP? In this case, I imagine that we are looking at some pretty serious OS modification to get both CPU and DSP up and running.
I'm definitely not an expert in this area. But I like the way the technology is going. I just wish I understood it better.
In dual-chip architectures, there are two chips: the (C)ommunications CPU and the (A)pplications CPU. C-CPU and A-CPU respectively. They typically communicate over a bus to pass data back and forth between the two chips, so there is a standard interface between the two.
It is pretty straightforward to program for this type of setup because you don't have to worry about what the other chip is doing. It's over there doing its thing while my program is over here doing its thing. The two don't talk so often. Typically, you'll even have two separate operating systems running on the separate chips, that's how far apart they are.
But what will it be like with only one chip, and presumably one memory block? Will the single OS running the chip have to handle all events and interrupts? How much more difficult will it be to write a multitasking phone operating system when such disparate things as mail applications and radio transmissions are handled on the same chip?
I'd love for cell phone prices to come down a little bit. Hopefully this brings the prices down, but if software gets more expensive, it may be a wash.
I only bring up the issue, not as an "anti-Apple fanboy", because there is a sense that Apple is somehow a better company when it comes to customer satisfaction than most other companies. Their large and vociferous customers are proof of this.
Yes, there are other companies that put out shoddy equipment and software. Microsoft, lest you think I am a "pro-Microsoft fanboy", is one of the worst violaters of releasing unpolished products that require "third time's the charm" service packs just to get them workable.
However, when it comes to Apple, for all their touted customer centricity, a lawsuit was required to get them to face the iPod battery issue. And when they finally faced the issue, they charged an outrageous $99 for the replacement. http://www.macobserver.com/article/2004/02/10.6.sh tml
Certainly you'd expect more from a company with a loyal customer following. Those customers are loyal because Apple does a lot of things right, like returning Canadian levies to the purchasers. But it is difficult to look at a small gesture like this and view it as anything other than a publicity stunt to improve their image when they are loath to face difficult and expensive customer problems like the battery issue (and the logic board issue, and the G4 iBook battery issue, etc).
I will reiterate, I have a great deal of respect for Apple. I think they have a very good idea of what computers should be like and how they should work. It just amazes me that many otherwise intelligent people are sucked into the "cult of Apple" and close their mind to anything that causes negative energy in their distorted field of reality.
Possibly so. I was confusing the machine with the maker. I originally planned on using Google instead of Amiga, but lately there seems to be quite a bit of anti-Google sentiment.
Apple is a master of customer relations. I don't think you can find any other computer company (maybe the now-defunct Amiga) that engenders the kind of appreciative customers that Apple does. Especially under Steve Jobs, they pull little stunts like this here and there that really bring in the herd.
But why, then, do they not focus more on also getting the technology right? Many Apple loyalists are happy to overlook some deficiencies in Apple products, but some things like the iPod battery issue are hardly ever resolved to satisfaction.
I really like Apple, and though I don't own any Apple products, I see them as a very significant counterweight to Microsoft hegemony. They keep Microsoft on its toes, which can only lead to improved products for everyone down the road.
I am fascinated that a nature documentary is garnering this much attention. I'm not sure if it is saying something about the audience, or if it is saying something about the quality of this season's Hollywood crop.
There is a meme in certain circles that G-rated films gross higher than R-rated films. Could this kind of flocking (hehe) to see a documentary about penguins be indicative of a trend towards a silent audience demand for wholesome, informative movies rather than violent and crass fare?
Manned space exploration I am of the opinion that sending humans into space is the most effective use of our "space dollars". It is fine to send up robots to collect data samples, but we also need to know the safest and cheapest way to package up live astronauts, drive them around the solar system, and bring them home safely. With the current shuttle tech, we are looking at neither the safest, nor the cheapest way of sending up live astronauts and bringing them home extra crispy. There are a lot of barriers to getting rid of the shuttle program, but discarding it for a more future-looking program (even the Apollo and Mercury missions were more forward-looking than the shuttles) would rejuvenate interest in science and physics in particular.
Kozmo.com Never heard of it.
Napster I don't see the attraction. A centralized database where your connections can be tracked and you are at the bandwidth mercy of a single uploading server. No thanks. I'll stick with BitTorrent.
The Concorde I am going to agree. Actually, any type of supersonic aircraft would be great for longhaul flights.
GM's EV1 That is possibly the ugliest car I've seen since the Pontiac Aztec. It is only out-uglied by the Honda hybrid.
The original Palm Pilot They like the stability, but I like the stability of my TV remote control. It just doesn't do very much except what was originally programmed in.
Good keyboards There are plenty of good keyboards, Microsoft even makes some good ones. What they are asking for are those loud IBM keyboards that feel like the clumsy typewriters they were adapted from.
Wires No. Make wireless faster.
LPs This will continue to be a niche format. CDs provide the same quality sound playback for the human-audible range of sound. I imagine that it might be useful if you were a dog and had to listen to ultrasonic music, otherwise... not useful.
The Newton They praise it because it failed? I don't understand what they want to say.
I didn't say that there was no benefit, only that the benefits do not outweigh the cost. There are benefits, as you've rightly mentioned.
But that aside, why would you have this implanted in your arm? Arms can be severed, crushed, shredded in combines, and otherwise destroyed. Wouldn't somewhere like the back of the neck be a better place to put the chip? If your neck becomes injured to the point that the chip is unreadable, then it's probably a safe bet that you won't make it.
There are many reasons why this is a bad idea, the first and foremost that it violates the 4th Amendment. Americans have the right to be secure in their person. It's the first right laid out in the amendment.
The second problem is that there is very little benefit compared to the cost. The cost being the pain and suffering involved in getting implanted in addition to the medical costs involved in having it inserted.
Add to this the amount of conspiracy talk that's bound to arise, and you're looking at a real lashback from the populace.
You'll find me in favor of the government doing a lot of things, but this is not one of them. It's a poorly thought-through idea and should be resisted as much as possible.
They researchers discuss using the method to generate vertigo and "centrifugal forces" for gamers. If it works in gaming, it will no doubt find a way into simulator training for military operations too. The applications aren't exactly endless, but there does seem to be a market for this.
I wonder if it is painless. Except for the falling over, I mean.
This seems like one of those grand opportunities, like the building of the U.S. highway system, where the government could step in and provide universal internet access. Such a move would make it possible for people out in the countryside to get broadband and access to high speed internet services.
The current problem is that the vastness of America means that private companies don't find it cost effective to hook up Ma and Pa Kent out in the sticks. But under a government system, those people would get the service.
A lot of people don't want to pay for that, I'm sure. However, if you consider that the reason you have your broadband is because it just happens that you are lucky enough to live in a densely populated area. People who run farms and are otherwise far away from the crowds of cities simply can't generate enough demand to make it worth the broadband companies' while to hook them up.
This deregulation is the opposite direction that the FCC should be taking. There are certain things that the government ought to provide, or ought to subsidize in large amounts, and one subset of those is basic utilities. The Internet is one of the utilities that will be key in the future of our country. It makes sense that we get a jump on it now and wire (figuratively speaking. Wireless would work as well) the whole country up.
Yes, absolutely it is wrong to love Microsoft. For that matter, it is wrong to love any company that you are not directly a part of, and even then loving a company is fraught with pitfalls. Love is something that must be reciprocated in order to have any meaning. It is a shame that English has evolved to the point where we "love" or "hate" things that we enjoy or dislike.
Microsoft has done a lot of things, some good, some bad, some neither. Businesses are just that way. Is Microsoft worthy of respect? Sure. They have done something that other computer companies only dream of: they own several of the markets that they are part of. But does that mean we should hate them? Does it mean we should love them? Of course not.
People who feel strong emotions towards companies that they have very little part in (having neither worked there nor been part of the founding and building of it) are misdirecting their emotions. Save your love for your neighbor, don't waste it on Microsoft.
Rackspace, in their desire to stay on the good side of the law went far overboard in their zeal to help the police. This is a common theme in many cases.
The law specifically protects people from incriminating themselves and also from unreasonable search and seizure. It does not protect them from turning themselves into the authorities, nor does it protect them from others doing it for them.
You would like to think that companies would consult with their lawyers that could advise them on their legal rights and responsibilities before they took drastic, unnecessary steps like turning a lot of personal/private documentation over to the police.
There was a story the other day about Baidu.com was being sued for providing easy search access to copyrighted materials. This on the eve of their IPO.
If a company can be sued over it in China, where copyright restrictions are very lax, how successful will Yahoo! be in implementing this here in a country where copyrights are taken much more seriously?
I used to own a Playstation years ago, and one of my favorite things about it was that the library of games for the system was incredibly vast. However, scratching the surface revealed that many of the games were cheap ripoffs of each other and that truly original games were few and far between.
Nintendo has always seemed to have a talent for coming up with a decent library of original games that keeps the devoted coming back. Sony, on the other hand, seems to push quantity over quality when it comes to their library. If they are going to take 2 years to fill out their launch library, I wonder how much of that will be really good games and how much of it will be cutscene movies (Final Fantasy), sequels (anything by Rockstar), and played out genres (the FPS comes to mind).
I really like Sony. I owned many of their walkmans years ago, and I enjoyed the gaming I did on the original Playstation. But both they and the audience must learn that just because you have many times the number of games as your competitor, it is not a very good metric because the number of good, original games in that library may be only a fraction of that amount.
Once, when I was little, I saw a stereoscopic spy photograph at the Smithsonian. They had a viewing port through which two images would be superimposed on each other giving the resulting image a 3 dimensional quality.
I don't know how well they can bring that sort of 3 dimensionality to a film without requiring strange and uncomfortable glasses (remember Jaws 3D?). The closest I've seen is in plays where the actors and props are all in three dimensions (naturally).
But the improvement in 3 dimensional rendering in digital filmmaking has been absolutely outstanding in recent years. Just compare old movies like Tron and Dungeons and Dragons with their blocky and obviously computer-rendered scenes to today's Toy Story 2, Incredibles, even Star Wars. The difference is night and day.
I hope that digital film making becomes more than just special effects, though. The medium allows for such a broad range of uses that it is virtually limitless. Take the anime film Grave of the Fireflies as an example of pushing a medium to its limits. Who could have thought a cartoon could have such an emotional impact? Now figure that whatever was done there is only scratching the surface in what can be done with digital films and a whole universe of possibilities opens up.
Slashdot Mirror
But after having done this since 1961, you'd think that we'd be at a point where getting "those brave souls" back to Earth in one piece was mundane.
Though it would be wonderful to have the space program re-examined and reformulated with realistic goals, unencumbered designs, and brave (not foolhardy) leadership, I doubt that we'll get anything more than another round of shuttle flights until the next one breaks up. Then we can expect more hand wringing, indecisiveness, and basically a whole lot more of nothing.
Space is the biggest challenge Mankind will ever embark upon. It's sad to see that almost 45 years has passed and we're still crossing our fingers hoping that things go okay.
Sometimes, when the lights goes out, you can really hear what it is like to be in total silence. The refrigerator stops running, the air conditioners stop running. The computer fans and drives stop spinning, and suddenly you're thrust into this silence that is eerily uncomfortable.
When the power comes on and all those once-dead appliances roar to life, it is like stepping back to reality.
I personally can't stand to be somewhere without sound. I can appreciate sound kept to a minimum, but there has to be some indication that things are running, in my opinion. So that when things do eventually expire, that it's not until days later when the CPU has melted itself into the motherboard that I find out the cooling system broke just as silently as it ran.
I admit I did take some license with the quotes you mentioned. Namely, I tried to understand what it meant.
/quote
If the first one says that bacteria (plural) "link their nanowires", and the second quote says that they "may...form minipower grid(s)", then yes, I would extrapolate that they are talking about interconnected meshes of these wires which carry "power".
Which, if you take a look at my original post (I'll quote it for you)
quote
the bacteria seem to produce these tiny wires which then carry electrical signals across large meshes of bacteria-produced wires
There is one jump in logic that I made and that is that I seem to claim that this is an actual behavior of the bacteria. However, to say that I made it up is a gross mischaracterization and misreading of my post.
Thank you for the expanded information.
/quote
The original basis for my post was this quote:
quote
Patrinos said the bacteria may organize to form minipower grids in the soil by linking up via the nanowires.
According to the article, the bacteria seem to produce these tiny wires which then carry electrical signals across large meshes of bacteria-produced wires. It would be interesting to see what sort of emergent behavior, if any, would arise from very large meshes of these wires and bacteria.
quote /quote
When one of us is shopping we can take the camera, photograph various candidate items then return home & decide what's best - then you delete the shots & all it's cost is a bit of electricity and wear & tear.
Given a little leeway in bandwidth, and this is a situation perfectly suited to using a cell phone camera. You don't even have to go home to get your wife's opinion on the item.
Take a look at the various kinds of camera.
There is the SLR and the P&S, not counting the medium format monsters which aren't flying off the shelf with digital backs.
Before digital came along, most people owned either a 35mm or an APS point and shoot pocket camera. SLRs were generally thought of (undeservedly in many cases) as "professional" cameras, so most people weren't interested.
Now digital offers the same convenience as the old film point and shoots but with virtually unlimited shot counts. Whereas you could only get 36 shots in your old pocket camera, now you can get upwards of a 100 on a single battery charge. And the loss in quality is pretty minimal because you are using a pretty small, substandard lens to begin with. It is no surprise that digital has essentially eliminated the film P&S market.
The SLR side of the coin is much more interesting. What we are seeing is a resurgence in popularity of the SLR in the form of cheap dSLRs like the Canon Rebel 350D and the Nikon D70. These are cheap, offer superior lens choices than the digital P&S class, and you don't need to swap out film every 24-36 shots. Add to this that digital sensors are quickly gaining ground on film technologies such that the quality of data from a digital sensor is equal to or better than the data off of a scanned negative.
There are many reasons why digital is gaining popularity, the first is simply that it is so much less hassle to plug the camera into the computer than it is to take roll after roll to the photo shop. Also, the boom in blogging has got everyone becoming a photographer with little to no effort. And the cost is coming into the range that mere mortals can afford it.
I've seen the presentations and am still apprehensive about the effort needed to adapt this.
If it is just a matter of writing another application which can be activated when an interrupt occurs, then it sounds pretty straightforward. As you say, hand it off to the DSP subsystem which TI will provide and let the application run until the user presses X. But during that time, what happens to HW interrupts? Can the CPU handle interrupts (which are likely running at maximum priority) without significantly harming the telephony application?
Or is it going to be like it is now, with a separate small OS handling the processing necessary on the DSP handling all events quickly and efficiently there while the A-CPU side can handle its work without severely impacting the DSP? In this case, I imagine that we are looking at some pretty serious OS modification to get both CPU and DSP up and running.
I'm definitely not an expert in this area. But I like the way the technology is going. I just wish I understood it better.
In dual-chip architectures, there are two chips: the (C)ommunications CPU and the (A)pplications CPU. C-CPU and A-CPU respectively. They typically communicate over a bus to pass data back and forth between the two chips, so there is a standard interface between the two.
It is pretty straightforward to program for this type of setup because you don't have to worry about what the other chip is doing. It's over there doing its thing while my program is over here doing its thing. The two don't talk so often. Typically, you'll even have two separate operating systems running on the separate chips, that's how far apart they are.
But what will it be like with only one chip, and presumably one memory block? Will the single OS running the chip have to handle all events and interrupts? How much more difficult will it be to write a multitasking phone operating system when such disparate things as mail applications and radio transmissions are handled on the same chip?
I'd love for cell phone prices to come down a little bit. Hopefully this brings the prices down, but if software gets more expensive, it may be a wash.
I only bring up the issue, not as an "anti-Apple fanboy", because there is a sense that Apple is somehow a better company when it comes to customer satisfaction than most other companies. Their large and vociferous customers are proof of this.
h tml
Yes, there are other companies that put out shoddy equipment and software. Microsoft, lest you think I am a "pro-Microsoft fanboy", is one of the worst violaters of releasing unpolished products that require "third time's the charm" service packs just to get them workable.
However, when it comes to Apple, for all their touted customer centricity, a lawsuit was required to get them to face the iPod battery issue. And when they finally faced the issue, they charged an outrageous $99 for the replacement.
http://www.macobserver.com/article/2004/02/10.6.s
Certainly you'd expect more from a company with a loyal customer following. Those customers are loyal because Apple does a lot of things right, like returning Canadian levies to the purchasers. But it is difficult to look at a small gesture like this and view it as anything other than a publicity stunt to improve their image when they are loath to face difficult and expensive customer problems like the battery issue (and the logic board issue, and the G4 iBook battery issue, etc).
I will reiterate, I have a great deal of respect for Apple. I think they have a very good idea of what computers should be like and how they should work. It just amazes me that many otherwise intelligent people are sucked into the "cult of Apple" and close their mind to anything that causes negative energy in their distorted field of reality.
James 2:14-26
The gist of it is that without works, faith is dead.
Possibly so. I was confusing the machine with the maker. I originally planned on using Google instead of Amiga, but lately there seems to be quite a bit of anti-Google sentiment.
Apple is a master of customer relations. I don't think you can find any other computer company (maybe the now-defunct Amiga) that engenders the kind of appreciative customers that Apple does. Especially under Steve Jobs, they pull little stunts like this here and there that really bring in the herd.
But why, then, do they not focus more on also getting the technology right? Many Apple loyalists are happy to overlook some deficiencies in Apple products, but some things like the iPod battery issue are hardly ever resolved to satisfaction.
I really like Apple, and though I don't own any Apple products, I see them as a very significant counterweight to Microsoft hegemony. They keep Microsoft on its toes, which can only lead to improved products for everyone down the road.
I am fascinated that a nature documentary is garnering this much attention. I'm not sure if it is saying something about the audience, or if it is saying something about the quality of this season's Hollywood crop.
There is a meme in certain circles that G-rated films gross higher than R-rated films. Could this kind of flocking (hehe) to see a documentary about penguins be indicative of a trend towards a silent audience demand for wholesome, informative movies rather than violent and crass fare?
Manned space exploration
I am of the opinion that sending humans into space is the most effective use of our "space dollars". It is fine to send up robots to collect data samples, but we also need to know the safest and cheapest way to package up live astronauts, drive them around the solar system, and bring them home safely. With the current shuttle tech, we are looking at neither the safest, nor the cheapest way of sending up live astronauts and bringing them home extra crispy. There are a lot of barriers to getting rid of the shuttle program, but discarding it for a more future-looking program (even the Apollo and Mercury missions were more forward-looking than the shuttles) would rejuvenate interest in science and physics in particular.
Kozmo.com
Never heard of it.
Napster
I don't see the attraction. A centralized database where your connections can be tracked and you are at the bandwidth mercy of a single uploading server. No thanks. I'll stick with BitTorrent.
The Concorde
I am going to agree. Actually, any type of supersonic aircraft would be great for longhaul flights.
GM's EV1
That is possibly the ugliest car I've seen since the Pontiac Aztec. It is only out-uglied by the Honda hybrid.
The original Palm Pilot
They like the stability, but I like the stability of my TV remote control. It just doesn't do very much except what was originally programmed in.
Good keyboards
There are plenty of good keyboards, Microsoft even makes some good ones. What they are asking for are those loud IBM keyboards that feel like the clumsy typewriters they were adapted from.
Wires
No. Make wireless faster.
LPs
This will continue to be a niche format. CDs provide the same quality sound playback for the human-audible range of sound. I imagine that it might be useful if you were a dog and had to listen to ultrasonic music, otherwise... not useful.
The Newton
They praise it because it failed? I don't understand what they want to say.
I didn't say that there was no benefit, only that the benefits do not outweigh the cost. There are benefits, as you've rightly mentioned.
But that aside, why would you have this implanted in your arm? Arms can be severed, crushed, shredded in combines, and otherwise destroyed. Wouldn't somewhere like the back of the neck be a better place to put the chip? If your neck becomes injured to the point that the chip is unreadable, then it's probably a safe bet that you won't make it.
There are many reasons why this is a bad idea, the first and foremost that it violates the 4th Amendment. Americans have the right to be secure in their person. It's the first right laid out in the amendment.
The second problem is that there is very little benefit compared to the cost. The cost being the pain and suffering involved in getting implanted in addition to the medical costs involved in having it inserted.
Add to this the amount of conspiracy talk that's bound to arise, and you're looking at a real lashback from the populace.
You'll find me in favor of the government doing a lot of things, but this is not one of them. It's a poorly thought-through idea and should be resisted as much as possible.
It's not the best alternative, but anything's got to be better than Real
They researchers discuss using the method to generate vertigo and "centrifugal forces" for gamers. If it works in gaming, it will no doubt find a way into simulator training for military operations too. The applications aren't exactly endless, but there does seem to be a market for this.
I wonder if it is painless. Except for the falling over, I mean.
This seems like one of those grand opportunities, like the building of the U.S. highway system, where the government could step in and provide universal internet access. Such a move would make it possible for people out in the countryside to get broadband and access to high speed internet services.
The current problem is that the vastness of America means that private companies don't find it cost effective to hook up Ma and Pa Kent out in the sticks. But under a government system, those people would get the service.
A lot of people don't want to pay for that, I'm sure. However, if you consider that the reason you have your broadband is because it just happens that you are lucky enough to live in a densely populated area. People who run farms and are otherwise far away from the crowds of cities simply can't generate enough demand to make it worth the broadband companies' while to hook them up.
This deregulation is the opposite direction that the FCC should be taking. There are certain things that the government ought to provide, or ought to subsidize in large amounts, and one subset of those is basic utilities. The Internet is one of the utilities that will be key in the future of our country. It makes sense that we get a jump on it now and wire (figuratively speaking. Wireless would work as well) the whole country up.
Yes, absolutely it is wrong to love Microsoft. For that matter, it is wrong to love any company that you are not directly a part of, and even then loving a company is fraught with pitfalls. Love is something that must be reciprocated in order to have any meaning. It is a shame that English has evolved to the point where we "love" or "hate" things that we enjoy or dislike.
Microsoft has done a lot of things, some good, some bad, some neither. Businesses are just that way. Is Microsoft worthy of respect? Sure. They have done something that other computer companies only dream of: they own several of the markets that they are part of. But does that mean we should hate them? Does it mean we should love them? Of course not.
People who feel strong emotions towards companies that they have very little part in (having neither worked there nor been part of the founding and building of it) are misdirecting their emotions. Save your love for your neighbor, don't waste it on Microsoft.
Rackspace, in their desire to stay on the good side of the law went far overboard in their zeal to help the police. This is a common theme in many cases.
The law specifically protects people from incriminating themselves and also from unreasonable search and seizure. It does not protect them from turning themselves into the authorities, nor does it protect them from others doing it for them.
You would like to think that companies would consult with their lawyers that could advise them on their legal rights and responsibilities before they took drastic, unnecessary steps like turning a lot of personal/private documentation over to the police.
There was a story the other day about Baidu.com was being sued for providing easy search access to copyrighted materials. This on the eve of their IPO.
If a company can be sued over it in China, where copyright restrictions are very lax, how successful will Yahoo! be in implementing this here in a country where copyrights are taken much more seriously?
Disclaimer: I do not own the Playstation 2.
I used to own a Playstation years ago, and one of my favorite things about it was that the library of games for the system was incredibly vast. However, scratching the surface revealed that many of the games were cheap ripoffs of each other and that truly original games were few and far between.
Nintendo has always seemed to have a talent for coming up with a decent library of original games that keeps the devoted coming back. Sony, on the other hand, seems to push quantity over quality when it comes to their library. If they are going to take 2 years to fill out their launch library, I wonder how much of that will be really good games and how much of it will be cutscene movies (Final Fantasy), sequels (anything by Rockstar), and played out genres (the FPS comes to mind).
I really like Sony. I owned many of their walkmans years ago, and I enjoyed the gaming I did on the original Playstation. But both they and the audience must learn that just because you have many times the number of games as your competitor, it is not a very good metric because the number of good, original games in that library may be only a fraction of that amount.
Once, when I was little, I saw a stereoscopic spy photograph at the Smithsonian. They had a viewing port through which two images would be superimposed on each other giving the resulting image a 3 dimensional quality.
I don't know how well they can bring that sort of 3 dimensionality to a film without requiring strange and uncomfortable glasses (remember Jaws 3D?). The closest I've seen is in plays where the actors and props are all in three dimensions (naturally).
But the improvement in 3 dimensional rendering in digital filmmaking has been absolutely outstanding in recent years. Just compare old movies like Tron and Dungeons and Dragons with their blocky and obviously computer-rendered scenes to today's Toy Story 2, Incredibles, even Star Wars. The difference is night and day.
I hope that digital film making becomes more than just special effects, though. The medium allows for such a broad range of uses that it is virtually limitless. Take the anime film Grave of the Fireflies as an example of pushing a medium to its limits. Who could have thought a cartoon could have such an emotional impact? Now figure that whatever was done there is only scratching the surface in what can be done with digital films and a whole universe of possibilities opens up.