Tablets don't deliver novel features. They are the following: slightly less complicated to use for simple applications, and still a novelty. They are pretty much doomed in the middle term.
There isn't a "killer app" because they're basically more limited multipurpose computing devices. Every app a tablet could run, a PC could already run, and the good ones are already invented and quite refined for existing UI paradigms.
My point is that most times dealing with stolen property doesn't NEED involve police. If you KNOW where your iPad is, what kind of person are you not to get it back yourself?
I thought the approach I mentioned and Zeromous vindicated was a perfectly normal masculine response to stolen property. Damn it's like I was the only person here to goto a public high school and to think defending myself and my property is normal.
If I lived in an area where people carried guns around while stealing *bicycles*... well I would probably be in a different line of work, I doubt I'd be a slashdot reader or programmer; and those kinds of people wouldn't be stealing bicycles, they'd be stealing cars and mugging people. Also, mods, I wasn't trolling. To state as a fact how some people reclaim property is not trolling, grow up.
Have you seen the retarded education apps demo'd in iPad and iPhone advertisements? Shit that I would sure never use, shit that makes me embarassed for THEM. Maybe since WIn8 apps are HTML5 + JS, MS just wants to get some thing to demo as well in upcoming adverts?
when someone steals our shit and we KNOW they stole it, we confront them ourselves without police involvement. If they don't give it back we smash their teeth in with a baseball bat. That's how I got my bicycle back,.. as the dude was in the middle of painting it over... I walked up, bat in hand, and dude gave it right back claiming someone sold it to him (yea? then why paint it over?)
So if I could pinpoint the location of my iPad... i wouldn't need the police to recover it...
MS Techfest research projects received vitriolic criticism and near universal scorn from Slashdot users the instant it was posted despite some pretty cool demonstrations of upcoming tools but this "Timeline Tool" so far has received some shrugs and some praise. WTF?? To me this tool is worthless and a waste of time and a waste of Slashdot headline space. My take is at best, this supplementary feature to normal education (FTFA: "ChronoZoom will not only be useful for students learning history"), at worst it is a mere novelty data mash-up that will NOT replace my normal history references, and anyways it's not a quality demonstration of HTML5 as a platform nor the web as a medium. Since it's got nothing to do with tech or utility, why are we reading about this?
1) I am not a console gamer, nor even a casual gamer of any kind. I have an othello app and that's it.
2) Just because grandma or non-gamers can get some fun out of a $1 game app or $5 app pack on their droid doesn't mean the average gamer is going to abandon its focus on PC and console games to play shitty racing games on the ipad.
3) "statistics can be used to prove anything"... doesn't mean what they "prove" is true, it means literally a lot of people who use the statistics aren't understanding the big picture.
I know reply to my own post but this quote from Whittaker,
When I search for “London pub walks” I want better than the sponsored suggestion to “Buy a London pub walk at Wal-Mart.”
This is the single reason I almost never use Google anymore. Ten pages of links like THAT before something relevant comes along. Yahoo used to find exact quote matches in pages from 2002. Google is under the impression that if it's not RECENT and it's not visited by 1 million web crawlers or 1 billion naive people who don't realize a search result is an ad until after they clicked it, well then it shouldn't be returned as a search result at all. I was "researching" the effects of amphetamines on DNA/RNA mutations (want to have a kid, don't want to have an autisitic kid, nevermind the details) and I found nothing but links to paywalls on Google. Why did google give me a direct exerpt from the page which, once I click, does not contain that exerpt without a fee?? Fuck that! I used Yahoo and then Bing and I have a veritable library of PDF's on the subject, scientific peer reviewed publications from 1984 through 2011, and I'm still sifting through (then I found out my local university has all this stuff in its Reserved books section, oh welll...) (and I realize now my 2 years on Adderall won't likely be a deterrant to my choice to try to have a kid)
Google. Sucks. It hasn't been useful to me since 2009 or so. If ads are its business, it's not getting it from me, and that's because it isn't offering me anything in return.
The CNet reply was immature, scarcely germane to the highlighted quotes to which Cooper was trying to respond, and very repetetive. I can't believe I read the entire thing. There's nothing wrong with lamenting a company for losing its character and transforming into something not resembling its former self. We all do this every day, almost every hour. "Things just aren't as good as they once were". Unless you're 15 years old, that sentiment rings true for most aspects of our lives. Let's face it, guy is just ticked this ex-Googler went to MS. So sick of this anti-MS bullshit. I use it and I get along just fine. You don't use it, you get a long just fine. It's not a fucking religious war here people, for God's sake we're supposed to be more intelligent and civil than the rest of the school, but we spend all our time in rant wars about god damn software we don't even use??
Teaching programming to children isn't even about teaching PC's or teaching a particular language, it's about imparting the ideas behind turning "what we want the computer to do" in our imagination (the kids will later call this algorithms) into instructions for the computer. BASIC and others are languages were designed as introductory because they can be used without much regard for external environment, allowing a natural focus on the fundamentals of all programming in general.
The child then develops an intuitive understanding of what s/he will later describe as algorithms, data structures, and programming languages, or platforms, in general; they develop the theoretical foundations subconsciously via exercise, habit and practice, (and for the gifted, introspection and critical thinking), so they can be taught these concepts formally with ease later on. At that time, the choice of programming language isn't much of an issue.
But this? JavaScript requires the teaching of an environment and pre-existing objects like DOM that have nothing to do with the above goals and will certainly diminish the natural intuitive development of the appropriate concepts involved with programming. They are not learning how to translate their imagination into instructions as a general practice; they are learning how to manipulate specific pre-determined objects outside the scope of theoretical concerns. This is bad for them. This will limit them.
As an aside, let's face it, this is motivated by business. 1) JavaScript will be a heavily used language in the immediate future, 2) Khan prepares students to use JavaScript, 3) Khan's students are equipped with business-world skills and succeed, 4) Khan claims statistics reflect it competes well in the education market place, 5) Khan gets money.
Meanwhile Khan's students have to learn the basics of programming the hard way. Like a GED student picking up calculus at age 35 struggles with it, so will those students.
I don't know what kind of Constitution they have in Japan, but at least here, this doesn't appear too useful except in private capacity (i.e. non government sanctioned, also including organizations receiving government funds such as public libraries, can't employ this device...) I find it interesting the article references U.S. in its contemplation of application of the device.
How and when our government can restrict speech has already been covered by a host of legal precedent, and while the government can punish and (sometimes even prohibit) limited types of communication exempt from First Amendment protection (like obscenity, etc. which is considered either not to be speech or to be outside the domain of protection afforded by the First Amendment), it also is prohibited usually from engaging in prior restraint against protected speech, i.e. taking measures to censor forms of protected speech before it has occurred - and such a "speech silencer" is easily construed as prior restraint.
As it stands right now, for restricted speech in the U.S., the government can only impose civil or criminal sanctions AFTER the speech has occurred. That is why civilian audiences in a court room are not ever duct taped at the mouth, though it can be illegal to disrupt the court proceedings by undue vocal utterance.
So in the U.S. public schools, public libraries, unlicensed peaceful assembly on public square (demonstrations with or without permits), etc. and any institutions operating off government money, these are examples where such a device cannot legally be employed. Perhaps the government might TRY but there is overwhelming precedent making that unconstitutional and I'm confident upon judicial review it would summarily be found to have limited legal use.
So relax, paranoid citizen. The government will not silence your speech much with this. Where you MIGHT see this though, private use, such as in movie theaters, air lines, ideological/political "demonstrations" on private property,
This isn't a victory for computer geeks or video games. It's just an obvious corrolary of existing law and precedent. Read the ruling. If CA chose to ban violent content across all medium to children, then ruling probably would be different... They would be hard pressed to over turn it. I.e. since kids can buy violent comics, they can buy violent video games. If the video game incited violence, fx. via a directive sentence "Kill your class mates!" (Not as a character script or game play device but as a directive external to the game), well, then CA could restrict sale of such games.
As usual, blame the owners and operators of the target, not the hacker. Because if I don't lock my front door, it's totally OK for you to come in and run up my utility bill and eat out of my fridge, help yourself to my stereo and tv while you're at it... and if I have a spare key under my hood that you find on my car, by all means, how could anyone be held accountable if they take it for a joy ride and/or steal it?
We all share in this catastrophe, but I'm sure many people will find a way to blame it on Republicans/Christians/Creationists/Big Oil/etc. Looking over this thread I see that's already happened somehow.
But why worry about it. It's getting hot outside; I can't do a thing to stop it, neither can you... so Ima just do whatever I must do to be part of this modern world. If you say it's my fault, then please, show me how we can stop it, and stfu with all the blame. Otherwise, get on with your life and let me get on with mine... That's where I stand.
/Bicycle user here. //Would use a car if mine ever worked...
Right. Because Coyne's "win for science" advanced it so much in so many valuable ways for mankind. What a hallmark in human civilization development this was! AND - AND the best part has to be the repeatable experiments he demonstrated for the audience to prove his points.
Nothing Coyne said had anything to do with science, reason or argument. He just made a big rant online with zero intellectual content whatsoever. He even cites the fact Slashdot featured his retarded rant as evidence he "won" the argument. Won the debate? So being featured on slashdot proves God doesn't exist? Seriously editors, what is this stupidity you're posting?
My TV still only receives broadcast networks. I get a long just fine with the 5 english speaking network channels I can watch (there are more if I switch the box to digital only, but then the screen dimensions are all messed up). That's NBC, Fox, ABC and CBS and WB. Free. I don't have to spend hundred+ dollars a year to get the same stuff you see on Hulu's front page. And I have zero stress levels about my media consumption, which I cannot say for just about everyone else here who insists on media on their computing device. I don't have to worry about which cable/adapter goes into which input/output and whether my laptop/smart phone has this or that enabled, or what expensive software "ecosystem" I need, or how do I hook up the speakers across the room? or I don't have to worry about which streaming service I use or which data package or 3G coverage I'm getting.... It's nice.
Everyone I know that has a Windows phone bought it second-hand to root and install Android on.
In that case, I'd say you know people who are more advanced than the average user. Quite a lot of people get a phone and just go with whatever is on there by default. Most people, actually. Those acquaintances of yours are probably not a good sample population to judge the adequacy of Windows or Android to the end user's wants and needs.
The only reason I couldn't figure out how to use my Droid 2 Global was because Android lacks the functionality to do what I wanted it to do. At first I thought it was a matter of being complicated and burying functionality with obscure settings and what-not. I wanted Android to behave like a full OS, I wanted to treat my smart phone essentially like a computer that is just really small. But, no, that kind of functionality just isn't there. And that's why I had a frustrating time accepting it's not complicated, it's actually overly limited. Don't even get me started on what a nightmare it's been to manage media on the damn thing.
/Android user. //waiting for Windows desktop on my mobile phone ///Will pay for a device and OS that puts computing into my palm
If you're still looking for stimulating music in 2011, then it doesn't exist, or you are under 15, or you don't know how to use the internet to find obscure music.
Wow there are so many psychological factors overlooked, there's no way this ranks with scientific rigor as universally relaxing.
1) I did not like the song at all. It annoyed me. If it is proven relaxing, then how could there be exceptions?
2) Placebo effect.
3) It's not a song so much as a collection of sounds. They layered a soundscape, they didn't compose music... IMO.
4) There are about a million similar songs made since ambient became huge in 1997, and people still compose stuff I consider more relaxing.
5) After about 5 sincere attempts I guess the ending minutes starting at 5:13 are kind of addictive... but has made me feel sad rather than relaxed.... the beginning sequence still makes me want to punch somebody.
6) I wonder what other psychological/physiological components and factors the research ignored.
7) sounds like the scientists are just fans of this music or these bands and wanted to prove a point. the research might help us create more relaxing music, but it's a subjective test - not an emperical or objective one - whether it one song created this way is superior in comparison to another song someone else finds superior
8) Most relaxing song to me? For the last 6 months I've fallen to sleep listening to any handful of emoviolence songs. Circle Takes the Square's Our Need to Bleed gets nightly play before and during sleep.
Slashdot Mirror
Tablets don't deliver novel features. They are the following: slightly less complicated to use for simple applications, and still a novelty. They are pretty much doomed in the middle term.
There isn't a "killer app" because they're basically more limited multipurpose computing devices. Every app a tablet could run, a PC could already run, and the good ones are already invented and quite refined for existing UI paradigms.
Came here to say this.
none of the above, asshole.
My point is that most times dealing with stolen property doesn't NEED involve police. If you KNOW where your iPad is, what kind of person are you not to get it back yourself?
I thought the approach I mentioned and Zeromous vindicated was a perfectly normal masculine response to stolen property. Damn it's like I was the only person here to goto a public high school and to think defending myself and my property is normal.
If I lived in an area where people carried guns around while stealing *bicycles* ... well I would probably be in a different line of work, I doubt I'd be a slashdot reader or programmer; and those kinds of people wouldn't be stealing bicycles, they'd be stealing cars and mugging people. Also, mods, I wasn't trolling. To state as a fact how some people reclaim property is not trolling, grow up.
Have you seen the retarded education apps demo'd in iPad and iPhone advertisements? Shit that I would sure never use, shit that makes me embarassed for THEM. Maybe since WIn8 apps are HTML5 + JS, MS just wants to get some thing to demo as well in upcoming adverts?
when someone steals our shit and we KNOW they stole it, we confront them ourselves without police involvement. If they don't give it back we smash their teeth in with a baseball bat. That's how I got my bicycle back,.. as the dude was in the middle of painting it over ... I walked up, bat in hand, and dude gave it right back claiming someone sold it to him (yea? then why paint it over?)
So if I could pinpoint the location of my iPad... i wouldn't need the police to recover it...
MS Techfest research projects received vitriolic criticism and near universal scorn from Slashdot users the instant it was posted despite some pretty cool demonstrations of upcoming tools but this "Timeline Tool" so far has received some shrugs and some praise. WTF?? To me this tool is worthless and a waste of time and a waste of Slashdot headline space. My take is at best, this supplementary feature to normal education (FTFA: "ChronoZoom will not only be useful for students learning history"), at worst it is a mere novelty data mash-up that will NOT replace my normal history references, and anyways it's not a quality demonstration of HTML5 as a platform nor the web as a medium. Since it's got nothing to do with tech or utility, why are we reading about this?
1) I am not a console gamer, nor even a casual gamer of any kind. I have an othello app and that's it. 2) Just because grandma or non-gamers can get some fun out of a $1 game app or $5 app pack on their droid doesn't mean the average gamer is going to abandon its focus on PC and console games to play shitty racing games on the ipad. 3) "statistics can be used to prove anything" ... doesn't mean what they "prove" is true, it means literally a lot of people who use the statistics aren't understanding the big picture.
I know reply to my own post but this quote from Whittaker,
When I search for “London pub walks” I want better than the sponsored suggestion to “Buy a London pub walk at Wal-Mart.”
This is the single reason I almost never use Google anymore. Ten pages of links like THAT before something relevant comes along. Yahoo used to find exact quote matches in pages from 2002. Google is under the impression that if it's not RECENT and it's not visited by 1 million web crawlers or 1 billion naive people who don't realize a search result is an ad until after they clicked it, well then it shouldn't be returned as a search result at all. I was "researching" the effects of amphetamines on DNA/RNA mutations (want to have a kid, don't want to have an autisitic kid, nevermind the details) and I found nothing but links to paywalls on Google. Why did google give me a direct exerpt from the page which, once I click, does not contain that exerpt without a fee?? Fuck that! I used Yahoo and then Bing and I have a veritable library of PDF's on the subject, scientific peer reviewed publications from 1984 through 2011, and I'm still sifting through (then I found out my local university has all this stuff in its Reserved books section, oh welll...) (and I realize now my 2 years on Adderall won't likely be a deterrant to my choice to try to have a kid)
Google. Sucks. It hasn't been useful to me since 2009 or so. If ads are its business, it's not getting it from me, and that's because it isn't offering me anything in return.
The CNet reply was immature, scarcely germane to the highlighted quotes to which Cooper was trying to respond, and very repetetive. I can't believe I read the entire thing. There's nothing wrong with lamenting a company for losing its character and transforming into something not resembling its former self. We all do this every day, almost every hour. "Things just aren't as good as they once were". Unless you're 15 years old, that sentiment rings true for most aspects of our lives. Let's face it, guy is just ticked this ex-Googler went to MS. So sick of this anti-MS bullshit. I use it and I get along just fine. You don't use it, you get a long just fine. It's not a fucking religious war here people, for God's sake we're supposed to be more intelligent and civil than the rest of the school, but we spend all our time in rant wars about god damn software we don't even use??
Teaching programming to children isn't even about teaching PC's or teaching a particular language, it's about imparting the ideas behind turning "what we want the computer to do" in our imagination (the kids will later call this algorithms) into instructions for the computer. BASIC and others are languages were designed as introductory because they can be used without much regard for external environment, allowing a natural focus on the fundamentals of all programming in general.
The child then develops an intuitive understanding of what s/he will later describe as algorithms, data structures, and programming languages, or platforms, in general; they develop the theoretical foundations subconsciously via exercise, habit and practice, (and for the gifted, introspection and critical thinking), so they can be taught these concepts formally with ease later on. At that time, the choice of programming language isn't much of an issue.
But this? JavaScript requires the teaching of an environment and pre-existing objects like DOM that have nothing to do with the above goals and will certainly diminish the natural intuitive development of the appropriate concepts involved with programming. They are not learning how to translate their imagination into instructions as a general practice; they are learning how to manipulate specific pre-determined objects outside the scope of theoretical concerns. This is bad for them. This will limit them.
As an aside, let's face it, this is motivated by business. 1) JavaScript will be a heavily used language in the immediate future, 2) Khan prepares students to use JavaScript, 3) Khan's students are equipped with business-world skills and succeed, 4) Khan claims statistics reflect it competes well in the education market place, 5) Khan gets money.
Meanwhile Khan's students have to learn the basics of programming the hard way. Like a GED student picking up calculus at age 35 struggles with it, so will those students.
I don't know what kind of Constitution they have in Japan, but at least here, this doesn't appear too useful except in private capacity (i.e. non government sanctioned, also including organizations receiving government funds such as public libraries, can't employ this device ...) I find it interesting the article references U.S. in its contemplation of application of the device.
How and when our government can restrict speech has already been covered by a host of legal precedent, and while the government can punish and (sometimes even prohibit) limited types of communication exempt from First Amendment protection (like obscenity, etc. which is considered either not to be speech or to be outside the domain of protection afforded by the First Amendment), it also is prohibited usually from engaging in prior restraint against protected speech, i.e. taking measures to censor forms of protected speech before it has occurred - and such a "speech silencer" is easily construed as prior restraint.
As it stands right now, for restricted speech in the U.S., the government can only impose civil or criminal sanctions AFTER the speech has occurred. That is why civilian audiences in a court room are not ever duct taped at the mouth, though it can be illegal to disrupt the court proceedings by undue vocal utterance.
So in the U.S. public schools, public libraries, unlicensed peaceful assembly on public square (demonstrations with or without permits), etc. and any institutions operating off government money, these are examples where such a device cannot legally be employed. Perhaps the government might TRY but there is overwhelming precedent making that unconstitutional and I'm confident upon judicial review it would summarily be found to have limited legal use.
So relax, paranoid citizen. The government will not silence your speech much with this. Where you MIGHT see this though, private use, such as in movie theaters, air lines, ideological/political "demonstrations" on private property,
This isn't a victory for computer geeks or video games. It's just an obvious corrolary of existing law and precedent. Read the ruling. If CA chose to ban violent content across all medium to children, then ruling probably would be different... They would be hard pressed to over turn it. I.e. since kids can buy violent comics, they can buy violent video games. If the video game incited violence, fx. via a directive sentence "Kill your class mates!" (Not as a character script or game play device but as a directive external to the game), well, then CA could restrict sale of such games.
As usual, blame the owners and operators of the target, not the hacker. Because if I don't lock my front door, it's totally OK for you to come in and run up my utility bill and eat out of my fridge, help yourself to my stereo and tv while you're at it... and if I have a spare key under my hood that you find on my car, by all means, how could anyone be held accountable if they take it for a joy ride and/or steal it?
We all share in this catastrophe, but I'm sure many people will find a way to blame it on Republicans/Christians/Creationists/Big Oil/etc. Looking over this thread I see that's already happened somehow.
/Bicycle user here.
//Would use a car if mine ever worked...
But why worry about it. It's getting hot outside; I can't do a thing to stop it, neither can you... so Ima just do whatever I must do to be part of this modern world. If you say it's my fault, then please, show me how we can stop it, and stfu with all the blame. Otherwise, get on with your life and let me get on with mine... That's where I stand.
..and one giant win for science.
Right. Because Coyne's "win for science" advanced it so much in so many valuable ways for mankind. What a hallmark in human civilization development this was! AND - AND the best part has to be the repeatable experiments he demonstrated for the audience to prove his points.
Nothing Coyne said had anything to do with science, reason or argument. He just made a big rant online with zero intellectual content whatsoever. He even cites the fact Slashdot featured his retarded rant as evidence he "won" the argument. Won the debate? So being featured on slashdot proves God doesn't exist? Seriously editors, what is this stupidity you're posting?
Odd thing to be focused on.
My TV still only receives broadcast networks. I get a long just fine with the 5 english speaking network channels I can watch (there are more if I switch the box to digital only, but then the screen dimensions are all messed up). That's NBC, Fox, ABC and CBS and WB. Free. I don't have to spend hundred+ dollars a year to get the same stuff you see on Hulu's front page. And I have zero stress levels about my media consumption, which I cannot say for just about everyone else here who insists on media on their computing device. I don't have to worry about which cable/adapter goes into which input/output and whether my laptop/smart phone has this or that enabled, or what expensive software "ecosystem" I need, or how do I hook up the speakers across the room? or I don't have to worry about which streaming service I use or which data package or 3G coverage I'm getting.... It's nice.
Came here to say this. Leaving satisfied, props to poster.
Everyone I know that has a Windows phone bought it second-hand to root and install Android on.
In that case, I'd say you know people who are more advanced than the average user. Quite a lot of people get a phone and just go with whatever is on there by default. Most people, actually. Those acquaintances of yours are probably not a good sample population to judge the adequacy of Windows or Android to the end user's wants and needs.
The only reason I couldn't figure out how to use my Droid 2 Global was because Android lacks the functionality to do what I wanted it to do. At first I thought it was a matter of being complicated and burying functionality with obscure settings and what-not. I wanted Android to behave like a full OS, I wanted to treat my smart phone essentially like a computer that is just really small. But, no, that kind of functionality just isn't there. And that's why I had a frustrating time accepting it's not complicated, it's actually overly limited. Don't even get me started on what a nightmare it's been to manage media on the damn thing.
/Android user.
//waiting for Windows desktop on my mobile phone
///Will pay for a device and OS that puts computing into my palm
If you're still looking for stimulating music in 2011, then it doesn't exist, or you are under 15, or you don't know how to use the internet to find obscure music.
Wow there are so many psychological factors overlooked, there's no way this ranks with scientific rigor as universally relaxing.
... IMO.
1) I did not like the song at all. It annoyed me. If it is proven relaxing, then how could there be exceptions?
2) Placebo effect.
3) It's not a song so much as a collection of sounds. They layered a soundscape, they didn't compose music
4) There are about a million similar songs made since ambient became huge in 1997, and people still compose stuff I consider more relaxing.
5) After about 5 sincere attempts I guess the ending minutes starting at 5:13 are kind of addictive... but has made me feel sad rather than relaxed.... the beginning sequence still makes me want to punch somebody.
6) I wonder what other psychological/physiological components and factors the research ignored.
7) sounds like the scientists are just fans of this music or these bands and wanted to prove a point. the research might help us create more relaxing music, but it's a subjective test - not an emperical or objective one - whether it one song created this way is superior in comparison to another song someone else finds superior
8) Most relaxing song to me? For the last 6 months I've fallen to sleep listening to any handful of emoviolence songs. Circle Takes the Square's Our Need to Bleed gets nightly play before and during sleep.