"how to reduce my carbon footprint" --- "and not seem smug and think I actually make a difference" "why is the earth warming" --- "when the sun shines hotter and brighter" "Apple is the greatest" --- "manipulator of marketing towards stupid people" "when did the dinosaurs exist" --- "in the figment of a heathen's imagination" "what is evolution" --- "but a plot to educate Christians" "how to overthrow the US government" --- "and throw them a great party"
Also cool is the auto-complete will change based on whether you have a left wing or right wing (or right right wing) Congress.
"I am gay, where can I get married" --- "in a striking gorgeous taffeta suit" (Democrats) "I am gay, where can I get married" --- "to a woman" (Republicans) "I am gay, where can I get married" --- "and the authorities are already on their way to lock you freaks up, resistance is futile" (Tea Party)
The only difference between a Microsoft shill and an Apple shills is that Apple duped millions to be their shill and don't even pay them.
My [insert Apple product] is so fantastic and amazing because [ignores all reality and add excessive hyperbole to describe device an features]. That is why I buy one every 6 months!
BTW there are no Google shills because in spite of having the largest mobile platform nobody actually likes Android yet and only says they do to be alternative. It's like listening to Gotye and hiding your cringes while saying you love his music, just to seem cool.
I mean every message and statement on TPB is about freedom and such, but then they basically distribute access to copyrighted content. Freedom is not selective. People have a right to distribute content, but people also have a right to protect their content, period.
While you may not like copyright, its a law, and breaking the law is breaking the law.
I don't believe, however, that exposing links to protected material is the same as distributing copyright material. Going after TPB is the easy route, going after the millions of peers that actually have the protected content is impossible. Providing plans how to build a bomb is not the same as someone taking those plans and building a bomb with intent to use it, for instance.
However the the messaging of the TPB is watered down and idealistic. They want to be a mechanism to allow independents in music, video or other arts to have a mechanism to get content to the masses, which I wholeheartedly support, yet the primary and often only reason why people use TPB is to steal protected content. Why? Because its there.
TPB will not change the minds of billion dollar companies to remove copyright and freely distribute content, nor should they. If I spend $100 million to make a movie, and take the risk to release it, I expect a return on that investment and have the "freedom" to have the content protected. Just because its easy to steal digital content doesn't make it valid. If it was easy to steal cars it doesn't make it a valid argument that I should be allowed to steal cars then.
If TPB was serious about being a mechanism for content distribution for the "independent" then they should have changed their site long ago and blocked links to copyrighted content. I mean you can't be a champion for the independent when you don't respect people that also want to protect their investments.
The fight against DRM and copyright is NOT THE SAME as providing a resource for independent content distribution, nobody is blocking independent content distribution, just look at YouTube and Vimeo and Tumblr and Instagram and a slew of other social content channels.
TPB should switch to a streaming cloud service allowing independents to provide access to their content. Become the independent Netflix and Pandora and App or Game Store if they really believe in protecting the independent creator, but continuing to offer links to protected content and fighting for the rights of the independent is a mixed message and will only continue to cause them grief.
Sending someone to Mars is a complete waste of money in the short term. As is finding water or even signs of life on that planet.
And before you jump down my throat about bullshit such as Space R&D leads to beneficial offshoot technology, realize that we do not need to spend $100 Billion dollars to send someone to Mars with the offshoot of having a better memory foam for our mattresses, new flavor of Tang, or a more grippy version of Velcro.
We have real problems on Earth. We have an energy crisis. We are running out of fossil fuel and demand more electrical energy year over year. One could argue that sending someone to Mars could lead to a solution to Earth's energy crisis. However NASA could easily spend billions on R&D for energy for a space mission and find out the best solution is to tack a nuclear reactor to the end of the spaceship because you can just eject the spent core's into the void of space. A solution like this will not benefit Earth at all.
Instead, having a mandate to solve our energy crisis on Earth first, by finding real alternatives to using fossil fuel for energy and making technology use energy more efficiently, would lead to trivial solutions to generate and conserve energy on a mission to Mars. That is, NASA could operate on a cheaper budget and spend less time finding solutions for a Mars mission when we have real solutions to Earth problems.
Space R&D is limited in scope and we can only hope for there to be offshoot technology that could benefit Earth. NASA is not going to design solutions with a dual purpose, to work on Mars and provide solutions to Earth. Why create a limitation on R&D when it won't move the Mars mandate further, faster.
The problem, or course, is that a US presidency only lasts at most 8 years and its hard to hand over an easier Mars solution to the next president.
It's simply irresponsible to waste billions on Space R&D when we have significant economic, energy and climate issues on Earth. Three days after people see someone landing on Mars on YouTube nobody will give a shit and we will be stuck with the same problems on Earth, now just with even more repressive tax debt.
Fix Earth first, then lets see the planets and the stars. Why not have mandate to sustain life on this Planet?!
People complain about IE6 or Flash or Java, but every web developer I know ABHORS WordPress.
The moment a company decides to use Wordpress as their underlying site "technology", its game over. This was supposed to be a product that allowed people at home to set up a content site quickly, not an enterprise level technology.
So if this thing is causing significant security issues, it should be placed at the top of the Internet's most hated and avoided like the plague.
If you want to blog online, use Facebook or Twitter or any other established social platform, nobody sets up their own blog anymore, that is so early 21st century.
Google is trying to wrestle control away from the carriers after whoring out Android under their terms when it first came out. Obviously to get carriers interested in Android phones, Google had to ensure they gave power over feature set and update release to the carriers. This "control" caused a massive fragment in the market were phones today are still being sold with Android 2 to 3 versions behind the version of Android Google wants to ship.
While it may have ultimately made Android the top phone platform on the market today, it's cause a huge headache for Google to try and now release value added features like Play Music and Apps while supporting a wide assortment of random versions. Its also a nightmare platform to develop on unless you ignore everything before Android 4 and accept the limited scope of customers.
Not sure this is the best model for Ubuntu to follow because they don't even have the clout Google has that still struggles to get control back.
Carriers need to be told that they features of a phone is defined by the phone, if their networks can't support the feature then they don't get the premium top brands to sell to customers. For instance any carrier that does not support iPhone has seen significant decline in their customer base, this forces the carrier to support the features that Apple wants, not the other way around, to get back customers.
Also this goes completely against the openness of the Ubuntu platform as carriers are more interested in "locking down" rather then "opening up". Not sure open source and phone carriers are a good synergy, this product is doomed.
Maybe the first thing the patent office should ask is "why"?
Really, does putting a camera on a stick warrant protection from a patent?
Is there any real competitive advantage Google has owning this patent.
Is there absolutely no example of anybody ever doing this in the past. Absolutely nobody in history has ever put a camera on a stick?
The patent office is swamped with patent requests but there should be some fundamental litmus test that should be applied to even accept a patent.
Otherwise, charge $1 million dollars to file a patent, period. Its quite obvious that billion dollar corporations are exploiting the patent system because its cheap to do so. Maybe if there was a real monetary threat to filing bullshit patents then corporations might stop patenting rounded corners or cameras on sticks or glasses.
And, of course if something is not truly novel and beneficial to society tell the patent applicant to fuck off.
I mean nobody listens to music on the desktop, haven't for years. Could be a great little Phone app though.
Although don't be idiots and try to make an iOS music app. I mean really you think you can do better then iTunes on iPhone/iPod, the company that invented the modern music player.
Android has no decent music app, even Google's own Play Music. Part of the problem is that there is no uniform structure to music on Android, so everybody just dumps music all over the device and tries to associate them randomly to artwork and gracenote tags, etc. Its a mess. If Google even just tried to associated your music to artwork and information automatically then it wouldn't be half bad, but I am tired of seeing a bunch of generic icons and poorly named songs on my Android which is why I don't use it as a music player.
There is nothing "invented" here. Its not like she woke up and thought that algae could be used to make fuel.
Companies have been researching this for decades, and the issue comes back down to the effort to grow algae often consumer more energy then what they produce. The real challenge is not that algae can product hydrocarbons for fuel, its about how to do it at the same or better efficiency then getting oil out of the ground.
Its a nice puff piece, but ignorant "science" reporters think this kid is brilliant and did something nobody though of before, all she did was read about it and created a diorama or something. Using acid in fruit could power clocks, done. Wind power, done. Growing algae for bio-fuel, done.
That kids a phony!
But I can't really blame her; what is worse is when adults are amazed at her "inventions".
Feminists should find it more condescending that pretty women are lumped into a category of children, mentally handicapped, and animals that cannot protect themselves so they need protection by special interest groups. The assumption that E3 booth babes are too stupid to understand they are being exploited should be what feminists decry about E3, not the existence of the booth babes in the first place.
Yes, I remember the good ol' days when you can get a $100 CPU and make it work like a $800 one. I remember in particular the days of buying a cheap Celeron and having it perform like much more expensive Pentium II or even P3.
And I also remember days of headaches with stability issues, over heating and other stupid problems all to squeeze a few extra FPS out of Doom.
Nobody overclocks anymore, and if they do, it like getting a trophy for trolling a blog. Its completely unnecessary and doesn't really offer anything except a feel good, slap on the thy own back when you see your completely arbitrary and virtual benchmark numbers rise up while you ruin your CPU.
What needs the extra performance these days? You need to Tweet faster? Like on Facebook faster? Browse a website factions of milliseconds faster?
Games used to drive overclocking but GPU's are where game performance lies these days. Sure maybe overclocking your CPU by 50% might offer 1% more FPS, but who the fuck really cares, nobody with a life that is.
Intel realizes that the enthusiast market for PC's has nose dived and its obviously cheaper to produce CPU's where you don't have to worry about the kind of performance tolerances that are required for overclocking.
And I don't think "enterprise" level developers are buying cheap computers and then overclocking to get better VM performance. I mean really? If you consider yourself an "enterprise" developer then get the "enterprise" to buy you a decent workstation or VM server. I don't think your "enterprise" wants you to spend days trying to optimize performance on your workstation, I'd fire anybody that wastes any amount of time in a BIOS.
I would say Intel should focus on offering one "enthusiast" level CPU that is completely unlocked for overclocking. I mean if people want to burn out their CPU repeatedly its more money from a market segment that is drying up, but I think in general Intel or any CPU company should not have to worry about providing overclockable CPU's across their product line.
The bottom line is that benchmarks aside, if you ever looked at your Task Manager you'd probably realize that your CPU is idling at 1% usage 99% of the time, so you want to make the System Idle task run faster? I don't get it anymore.
yes, if you claim that tablets are "personal computers", you can lump them together, but I am tired of the rhetoric, especially from companies like Apple, that boast how it's the post PC era and claim how wildly successful their iPad's are in defining the post-PC era, but then lump iPads with Macs when they want to boast about how they are the #1 PC seller over Dell and HP.
Also why a tablet is not a PC is you still can't, for the most part, develop on it. While tablets like Surface Pro allow you to develop apps directly only it, tablets like the iPad are still woefully incapable of developing "true" apps for it. Sure it has a slew of Fisher Price paint-by-numbers like App dev kits you can get for the iPad. Developing an App these days still requires an "application" and "applications" run on PC's, not Tablets. It's why Apple has seen wild success in the Mac since the iPhone and iPad were released, Apple wants devs to buy "PCs" to support their "Post-PC" era.
I will put tablets into the PC category when they have all the features of a PC, including the ability to develop on it. But as long as there is a lack of some features on a tablet claiming it is a PC is like claiming your camera or Nest themostat is a PC just because it has a screen and a processor in it.
Slashdot Mirror
Other suggestions:
"how to reduce my carbon footprint" --- "and not seem smug and think I actually make a difference"
"why is the earth warming" --- "when the sun shines hotter and brighter"
"Apple is the greatest" --- "manipulator of marketing towards stupid people"
"when did the dinosaurs exist" --- "in the figment of a heathen's imagination"
"what is evolution" --- "but a plot to educate Christians"
"how to overthrow the US government" --- "and throw them a great party"
Also cool is the auto-complete will change based on whether you have a left wing or right wing (or right right wing) Congress.
"I am gay, where can I get married" --- "in a striking gorgeous taffeta suit" (Democrats)
"I am gay, where can I get married" --- "to a woman" (Republicans)
"I am gay, where can I get married" --- "and the authorities are already on their way to lock you freaks up, resistance is futile" (Tea Party)
If you are going to teach kids Maths, you have to teach them Codes as well, or at least Programs.
The only difference between a Microsoft shill and an Apple shills is that Apple duped millions to be their shill and don't even pay them.
My [insert Apple product] is so fantastic and amazing because [ignores all reality and add excessive hyperbole to describe device an features]. That is why I buy one every 6 months!
BTW there are no Google shills because in spite of having the largest mobile platform nobody actually likes Android yet and only says they do to be alternative. It's like listening to Gotye and hiding your cringes while saying you love his music, just to seem cool.
I mean every message and statement on TPB is about freedom and such, but then they basically distribute access to copyrighted content. Freedom is not selective. People have a right to distribute content, but people also have a right to protect their content, period.
While you may not like copyright, its a law, and breaking the law is breaking the law.
I don't believe, however, that exposing links to protected material is the same as distributing copyright material. Going after TPB is the easy route, going after the millions of peers that actually have the protected content is impossible. Providing plans how to build a bomb is not the same as someone taking those plans and building a bomb with intent to use it, for instance.
However the the messaging of the TPB is watered down and idealistic. They want to be a mechanism to allow independents in music, video or other arts to have a mechanism to get content to the masses, which I wholeheartedly support, yet the primary and often only reason why people use TPB is to steal protected content. Why? Because its there.
TPB will not change the minds of billion dollar companies to remove copyright and freely distribute content, nor should they. If I spend $100 million to make a movie, and take the risk to release it, I expect a return on that investment and have the "freedom" to have the content protected. Just because its easy to steal digital content doesn't make it valid. If it was easy to steal cars it doesn't make it a valid argument that I should be allowed to steal cars then.
If TPB was serious about being a mechanism for content distribution for the "independent" then they should have changed their site long ago and blocked links to copyrighted content. I mean you can't be a champion for the independent when you don't respect people that also want to protect their investments.
The fight against DRM and copyright is NOT THE SAME as providing a resource for independent content distribution, nobody is blocking independent content distribution, just look at YouTube and Vimeo and Tumblr and Instagram and a slew of other social content channels.
TPB should switch to a streaming cloud service allowing independents to provide access to their content. Become the independent Netflix and Pandora and App or Game Store if they really believe in protecting the independent creator, but continuing to offer links to protected content and fighting for the rights of the independent is a mixed message and will only continue to cause them grief.
Its how you applaud that matters...
Sending someone to Mars is a complete waste of money in the short term. As is finding water or even signs of life on that planet.
And before you jump down my throat about bullshit such as Space R&D leads to beneficial offshoot technology, realize that we do not need to spend $100 Billion dollars to send someone to Mars with the offshoot of having a better memory foam for our mattresses, new flavor of Tang, or a more grippy version of Velcro.
We have real problems on Earth. We have an energy crisis. We are running out of fossil fuel and demand more electrical energy year over year. One could argue that sending someone to Mars could lead to a solution to Earth's energy crisis. However NASA could easily spend billions on R&D for energy for a space mission and find out the best solution is to tack a nuclear reactor to the end of the spaceship because you can just eject the spent core's into the void of space. A solution like this will not benefit Earth at all.
Instead, having a mandate to solve our energy crisis on Earth first, by finding real alternatives to using fossil fuel for energy and making technology use energy more efficiently, would lead to trivial solutions to generate and conserve energy on a mission to Mars. That is, NASA could operate on a cheaper budget and spend less time finding solutions for a Mars mission when we have real solutions to Earth problems.
Space R&D is limited in scope and we can only hope for there to be offshoot technology that could benefit Earth. NASA is not going to design solutions with a dual purpose, to work on Mars and provide solutions to Earth. Why create a limitation on R&D when it won't move the Mars mandate further, faster.
The problem, or course, is that a US presidency only lasts at most 8 years and its hard to hand over an easier Mars solution to the next president.
It's simply irresponsible to waste billions on Space R&D when we have significant economic, energy and climate issues on Earth. Three days after people see someone landing on Mars on YouTube nobody will give a shit and we will be stuck with the same problems on Earth, now just with even more repressive tax debt.
Fix Earth first, then lets see the planets and the stars. Why not have mandate to sustain life on this Planet?!
People complain about IE6 or Flash or Java, but every web developer I know ABHORS WordPress.
The moment a company decides to use Wordpress as their underlying site "technology", its game over. This was supposed to be a product that allowed people at home to set up a content site quickly, not an enterprise level technology.
So if this thing is causing significant security issues, it should be placed at the top of the Internet's most hated and avoided like the plague.
If you want to blog online, use Facebook or Twitter or any other established social platform, nobody sets up their own blog anymore, that is so early 21st century.
Google is trying to wrestle control away from the carriers after whoring out Android under their terms when it first came out. Obviously to get carriers interested in Android phones, Google had to ensure they gave power over feature set and update release to the carriers. This "control" caused a massive fragment in the market were phones today are still being sold with Android 2 to 3 versions behind the version of Android Google wants to ship.
While it may have ultimately made Android the top phone platform on the market today, it's cause a huge headache for Google to try and now release value added features like Play Music and Apps while supporting a wide assortment of random versions. Its also a nightmare platform to develop on unless you ignore everything before Android 4 and accept the limited scope of customers.
Not sure this is the best model for Ubuntu to follow because they don't even have the clout Google has that still struggles to get control back.
Carriers need to be told that they features of a phone is defined by the phone, if their networks can't support the feature then they don't get the premium top brands to sell to customers. For instance any carrier that does not support iPhone has seen significant decline in their customer base, this forces the carrier to support the features that Apple wants, not the other way around, to get back customers.
Also this goes completely against the openness of the Ubuntu platform as carriers are more interested in "locking down" rather then "opening up". Not sure open source and phone carriers are a good synergy, this product is doomed.
Maybe the first thing the patent office should ask is "why"?
Really, does putting a camera on a stick warrant protection from a patent?
Is there any real competitive advantage Google has owning this patent.
Is there absolutely no example of anybody ever doing this in the past. Absolutely nobody in history has ever put a camera on a stick?
The patent office is swamped with patent requests but there should be some fundamental litmus test that should be applied to even accept a patent.
Otherwise, charge $1 million dollars to file a patent, period. Its quite obvious that billion dollar corporations are exploiting the patent system because its cheap to do so. Maybe if there was a real monetary threat to filing bullshit patents then corporations might stop patenting rounded corners or cameras on sticks or glasses.
And, of course if something is not truly novel and beneficial to society tell the patent applicant to fuck off.
I am sure that means something...
Ask again when your car comes back after dropping off a bunch of shit-faced frat pledges after a night of debauchery.
The problem with idealism is that is ignores reality.
As long as my car still gets 40 rods to the hogshead then that's the way I likes it.
I mean nobody listens to music on the desktop, haven't for years. Could be a great little Phone app though.
Although don't be idiots and try to make an iOS music app. I mean really you think you can do better then iTunes on iPhone/iPod, the company that invented the modern music player.
Android has no decent music app, even Google's own Play Music. Part of the problem is that there is no uniform structure to music on Android, so everybody just dumps music all over the device and tries to associate them randomly to artwork and gracenote tags, etc. Its a mess. If Google even just tried to associated your music to artwork and information automatically then it wouldn't be half bad, but I am tired of seeing a bunch of generic icons and poorly named songs on my Android which is why I don't use it as a music player.
I decry the validity of this new proposal because they could not even predict the Slashdot effect, in any language.
Just like Apple Maps!
There is nothing "invented" here. Its not like she woke up and thought that algae could be used to make fuel.
Companies have been researching this for decades, and the issue comes back down to the effort to grow algae often consumer more energy then what they produce. The real challenge is not that algae can product hydrocarbons for fuel, its about how to do it at the same or better efficiency then getting oil out of the ground.
Its a nice puff piece, but ignorant "science" reporters think this kid is brilliant and did something nobody though of before, all she did was read about it and created a diorama or something. Using acid in fruit could power clocks, done. Wind power, done. Growing algae for bio-fuel, done.
That kids a phony!
But I can't really blame her; what is worse is when adults are amazed at her "inventions".
Pretty much defines how Microsoft is operating these days.
Feminists should find it more condescending that pretty women are lumped into a category of children, mentally handicapped, and animals that cannot protect themselves so they need protection by special interest groups. The assumption that E3 booth babes are too stupid to understand they are being exploited should be what feminists decry about E3, not the existence of the booth babes in the first place.
Not if Carbon Dioxide has anything to say about it.
Unless your a civil servant, then anything under $200k means you haven't figured out how to go on strike effectively.
A $200K developer is $190K arrogance and $10k effectiveness.
Yes, I remember the good ol' days when you can get a $100 CPU and make it work like a $800 one. I remember in particular the days of buying a cheap Celeron and having it perform like much more expensive Pentium II or even P3.
And I also remember days of headaches with stability issues, over heating and other stupid problems all to squeeze a few extra FPS out of Doom.
Nobody overclocks anymore, and if they do, it like getting a trophy for trolling a blog. Its completely unnecessary and doesn't really offer anything except a feel good, slap on the thy own back when you see your completely arbitrary and virtual benchmark numbers rise up while you ruin your CPU.
What needs the extra performance these days? You need to Tweet faster? Like on Facebook faster? Browse a website factions of milliseconds faster?
Games used to drive overclocking but GPU's are where game performance lies these days. Sure maybe overclocking your CPU by 50% might offer 1% more FPS, but who the fuck really cares, nobody with a life that is.
Intel realizes that the enthusiast market for PC's has nose dived and its obviously cheaper to produce CPU's where you don't have to worry about the kind of performance tolerances that are required for overclocking.
And I don't think "enterprise" level developers are buying cheap computers and then overclocking to get better VM performance. I mean really? If you consider yourself an "enterprise" developer then get the "enterprise" to buy you a decent workstation or VM server. I don't think your "enterprise" wants you to spend days trying to optimize performance on your workstation, I'd fire anybody that wastes any amount of time in a BIOS.
I would say Intel should focus on offering one "enthusiast" level CPU that is completely unlocked for overclocking. I mean if people want to burn out their CPU repeatedly its more money from a market segment that is drying up, but I think in general Intel or any CPU company should not have to worry about providing overclockable CPU's across their product line.
The bottom line is that benchmarks aside, if you ever looked at your Task Manager you'd probably realize that your CPU is idling at 1% usage 99% of the time, so you want to make the System Idle task run faster? I don't get it anymore.
pesticides kill pests, herbicides kill herbs (plants). Pesticides do not kill herbs.
yes, if you claim that tablets are "personal computers", you can lump them together, but I am tired of the rhetoric, especially from companies like Apple, that boast how it's the post PC era and claim how wildly successful their iPad's are in defining the post-PC era, but then lump iPads with Macs when they want to boast about how they are the #1 PC seller over Dell and HP.
Also why a tablet is not a PC is you still can't, for the most part, develop on it. While tablets like Surface Pro allow you to develop apps directly only it, tablets like the iPad are still woefully incapable of developing "true" apps for it. Sure it has a slew of Fisher Price paint-by-numbers like App dev kits you can get for the iPad. Developing an App these days still requires an "application" and "applications" run on PC's, not Tablets. It's why Apple has seen wild success in the Mac since the iPhone and iPad were released, Apple wants devs to buy "PCs" to support their "Post-PC" era.
I will put tablets into the PC category when they have all the features of a PC, including the ability to develop on it. But as long as there is a lack of some features on a tablet claiming it is a PC is like claiming your camera or Nest themostat is a PC just because it has a screen and a processor in it.
um, run a company...