I don't think that's a fair comparison to make. The main reason why coverage is better now than it was in the 80s and early 90s is because technology has advanced that much and there are more towers, there's absolutely no reason why we couldn't have a dozen or more cell phone carriers all jacked into the same network, that's managed either collectively or by another company that bids to provide the service on a regular basis for whatever region.
You overestimate the masses. Clearly Geohot is guilty, otherwise Sony wouldn't be suing him. Plus, he admitted cracking the protection scheme which could lead to losses of jobs after everybody stops buying games and just pirates them./sarcasm
It's definitely not the next step in human evolution. Saying it's not a disease is plausible, but if all or most people had autism, society would implode pretty quickly.
That's the thing, there's a lot of ideas that I've personally got that are unlikely to ever see the light of day, because I haven't got facilities to do the research. Getting a PhD would help, but even there it's not really enough to guarantee you get funding. Once you've got funding you then have to worry about actually conducting the research which isn't always easy, especially for cases like when Einstein was working on Relativity.
That's the thing, I'd wager that every genius is different. The way that lateralization happens or doesn't has a huge impact on what you get. I've often times grown frustrated with people for failing to grasp even the most simple concepts and the reason why is that my brain didn't ever finish lateralization. Even at age 30, I can learn as I did when I was a child, and develop completely knew talents that I never was capable of before.
More than that, it's how a person uses the faculties they've got and the ability of the person to re-purpose areas for other uses.
I'm going to have to call bullshit on that. Genius is a lot more work than you give it credit for. Even without accomplishing anything it just takes more work to do just about any task, because not only are you having to deal with the task, but you're also having to manage the things which are tangentially related to the task. And probably having to process everything else that's going on in the room, plus whatever else you've got on the back burner.
Beyond that you're assuming that his knowledge is superficial, but given the access that even the most mediocre of intellect have to information these days, I doubt very much that you can assume that the knowledge is superficial.
But beyond that, just the act of creating takes a lot more work for geniuses. I know that when I was teaching myself to count cards from scratch that while the period of time it took was exceedingly brief, the amount of actual work that was going on was both intense and strenuous. But, from outward appearances you would never have known it. Likewise, when I'm learning just about anything else, it appears like the abilities are just appearing in my repertoire, but in fact there's a huge amount of work going on at a very low level to make it work, and more than that to make sure that the information is integrated. I can't just learn something, I have to also learn how it's related to everything else I know. And that is where most of the work invariably is.
Unless something has changed recently, that's not entirely true. An OEM disc which comes bundled with a computer frequently has 2 keys available, one is on the disc and is valid for any number of computers as a part of the OEM computers and the one which is stuck to the side for that particular computer.
I've used OEM discs on upgraded computers many times and as long as you use the computer specific one on only one computer at a time you're fine. From time to time if you upgrade too quickly it will refuse to activate, but if you let it set for a period of time it'll install just fine. Otherwise you have to call MS for them to clear the previous install.
Um, you do realize that LCDs only do one resolution, right? Anything lower than that is the result of pixel doubling and the resolution that's listed is typically the native resolution.
Not to mention that Apple laptops have that stupid track pad with only one button. Meaning that it's not going to work correctly in Windows without extra work.
That's essentially illegal in most of the world. There's all sorts of bureaucratic stuff you have to go through if you want to drive on public roads. Not to mention the hassle of getting the thing licensed and probably emission tested as well.
That's really not that big of a deal. B&N opted to go with what was intended to be the standard for ebooks, as in epub, they knew that people would be buying from other stores. It's mostly Amazon's short sightedness that this isn't already possible.
OTOH, rooting Nook and removing the links to their store would hurt B&N, but I doubt that it's going to be common enough for them to worry about.
Nook has been going that way for a while. Shortly after I got mine they upgraded the web browser to release status rather than beta. They included a chess program and audio player with the release as well. I've been wondering how long it was going to take them to include at least basic programs like a to do list or calendar program.
Mind you that's the Nook WiFi without the fancy color screen, the one with a color screen seems even more of a no brainer.
I suspect what's going on here is that Barnes & Noble figured out that allowing this is good for their sales, and that as long as the devices still can read the books they sell that there isn't really much to worry about.
Shocking I know, that a major corporation would be that open minded to people using the devices they buy as they like.
The problem is that it's expensive and time consuming somebody has to go through those emails and determine which ones are subject to disclosure and which ones aren't. The students themselves are not in a position to be able to defend themselves if the determination is made to release them and unless they can charge the person requesting the records for the legal review, it ends up serving as a significant disincentive to engage in free speech practices.
And as has been mentioned already, this is a professor, not an administrator, he's not supposed to be subject to FOIA requests.
Proposition 8 is hardly a valid example. The people have a pretty clear right to know who it is that's funding an unconstitutional measure to rescind rights. It also turned out that the Mormons were abusing their tax exempt status to tinker directly in the election process in a way which normally requires the funds not be tax exempt giving them an unfair advantage over the opposition.
Here in WA we've had the same argument going on over referendum 71 because they decided that they didn't want to actually be accountable for trying to revoke the civil rights of a minority group.
In practice, the claims of intimidation have been greatly exaggerated, and represented far less actual intimidation than the groups claiming to be targeted have meted out to others over the years.
That's easy, the politicians and courts let them get away with it. It's not that different from in the US when the RIAA studios sue single mothers and the dead for infringement which they know perfectly well was likely committed by somebody else. But would impinge on their ability to collect law suit money if they had to actually investigate thoroughly.
I think it's more a problem of them getting dependent upon payola and not being able to come up with an alternate business plan. The record industry was never about promoting quality music, it was always about control and telling people what they liked. They'd much rather spend a few hundred grand recording an album and a few million promoting some worthless group than to spend lesser sums of money hoping that one will make it big.
Under the old system they could just get an artist enough playtime that people were essentially brain washed into thinking that crap was good and people would then buy the album. But now that there are other means of getting heard it's getting harder and harder to trick people into listening to whatever crap they're pushing.
So, you use Intel? Or you don't use a graphics card at all? The reality is that at this point you're pretty much stuck with a card from one of those two companies because Intel hasn't released a graphics chip that is competitive since 2D performance was the focus.
Personally, I haven't had much trouble with driver stability. The issue isn't the 0.1% or whatever it turns out to be, the issue is that those are the two companies that are competing to drive the technology forward. It's good for us to have them at each other like this, because what's a $700 card today in a couple years time is going to be what most people are using. Or will at least guide the improvements which benefit us all.
Even if you list it it wouldn't likely cause any problems. What the article was talking about was.net being hard to unlearn, and that too much investment in it might be harmful to ones career, outside the.net world. It doesn't sound to me like he refuses to hire those people just for having it on their resume, but that it does raise something that will be addressed in the interview.
To an extent he does have a point, that anybody that can't be trained or learn the tools that are in use at a given place of employment isn't qualified to work there. I just think that he perhaps phrased somethings rather poorly.
I can't personally speak to the merits of unlearning.net as I've never learned it to begin with. The bigger issue he's citing is the ability to retrain for work in a start up environment. Probably not much of a problem if you're a skilled programmer, but if you're a hack that started out with.net because it was the newest thing, you might be screwing yourself.
The same way that cybercriminals crack captchas, they just offered up a picture of a random boob to a random boob. The real problem was stopping at 1m pictures.
It's easy to give targeted viewers when the competition doesn't have enough viewers to be able to subsegment in a way that still has enough volume to be meaningful.
Search isn't an issue, Google isn't the first company to dominate the search market, the real problem is the advertising market. Ad space gets more valuable the more eyes look at it, consequently, advertising is a market where you shouldn't be allowed to buy out the competition, especially if you're the number one firm buying out the number two. Now that that's been done, there had to be consolidation of the rest of the market just to compete.
Hence why we've got the Clayton Antitrust Act and why Google is such a menace.
But yes, in terms of the search market it's really not that big of a problem.
Around here it's Qwest and Comcast, trust me this isn't that much better than what you have. I swear that Qwest isn't giving us the throughput we're paying for.
Yes, but thanks to their scale of efficiency, they can pick our pockets in the most efficient manner possible. Imagine if we had to have a dozen companies picking our pockets for that money, now aren't you glad that the government turns a blind eye to the lack of competitive market place?
Actually, SBC is AT&T, well a portion of the old AT&T after the break up. Similarly Qwest is another remnant of the old AT&T that's changed its name and bought out some of the other portions of the old business. It hasn't quite gotten to the point where it was originally, but at this point it's down to AT&T, Verizon and Qwest primarily controlling the assets that had been the old AT&T.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think that's a fair comparison to make. The main reason why coverage is better now than it was in the 80s and early 90s is because technology has advanced that much and there are more towers, there's absolutely no reason why we couldn't have a dozen or more cell phone carriers all jacked into the same network, that's managed either collectively or by another company that bids to provide the service on a regular basis for whatever region.
You overestimate the masses. Clearly Geohot is guilty, otherwise Sony wouldn't be suing him. Plus, he admitted cracking the protection scheme which could lead to losses of jobs after everybody stops buying games and just pirates them./sarcasm
It's definitely not the next step in human evolution. Saying it's not a disease is plausible, but if all or most people had autism, society would implode pretty quickly.
That's the thing, there's a lot of ideas that I've personally got that are unlikely to ever see the light of day, because I haven't got facilities to do the research. Getting a PhD would help, but even there it's not really enough to guarantee you get funding. Once you've got funding you then have to worry about actually conducting the research which isn't always easy, especially for cases like when Einstein was working on Relativity.
That's the thing, I'd wager that every genius is different. The way that lateralization happens or doesn't has a huge impact on what you get. I've often times grown frustrated with people for failing to grasp even the most simple concepts and the reason why is that my brain didn't ever finish lateralization. Even at age 30, I can learn as I did when I was a child, and develop completely knew talents that I never was capable of before.
More than that, it's how a person uses the faculties they've got and the ability of the person to re-purpose areas for other uses.
I'm going to have to call bullshit on that. Genius is a lot more work than you give it credit for. Even without accomplishing anything it just takes more work to do just about any task, because not only are you having to deal with the task, but you're also having to manage the things which are tangentially related to the task. And probably having to process everything else that's going on in the room, plus whatever else you've got on the back burner.
Beyond that you're assuming that his knowledge is superficial, but given the access that even the most mediocre of intellect have to information these days, I doubt very much that you can assume that the knowledge is superficial.
But beyond that, just the act of creating takes a lot more work for geniuses. I know that when I was teaching myself to count cards from scratch that while the period of time it took was exceedingly brief, the amount of actual work that was going on was both intense and strenuous. But, from outward appearances you would never have known it. Likewise, when I'm learning just about anything else, it appears like the abilities are just appearing in my repertoire, but in fact there's a huge amount of work going on at a very low level to make it work, and more than that to make sure that the information is integrated. I can't just learn something, I have to also learn how it's related to everything else I know. And that is where most of the work invariably is.
Unless something has changed recently, that's not entirely true. An OEM disc which comes bundled with a computer frequently has 2 keys available, one is on the disc and is valid for any number of computers as a part of the OEM computers and the one which is stuck to the side for that particular computer.
I've used OEM discs on upgraded computers many times and as long as you use the computer specific one on only one computer at a time you're fine. From time to time if you upgrade too quickly it will refuse to activate, but if you let it set for a period of time it'll install just fine. Otherwise you have to call MS for them to clear the previous install.
Um, you do realize that LCDs only do one resolution, right? Anything lower than that is the result of pixel doubling and the resolution that's listed is typically the native resolution.
Not to mention that Apple laptops have that stupid track pad with only one button. Meaning that it's not going to work correctly in Windows without extra work.
That's essentially illegal in most of the world. There's all sorts of bureaucratic stuff you have to go through if you want to drive on public roads. Not to mention the hassle of getting the thing licensed and probably emission tested as well.
That's really not that big of a deal. B&N opted to go with what was intended to be the standard for ebooks, as in epub, they knew that people would be buying from other stores. It's mostly Amazon's short sightedness that this isn't already possible.
OTOH, rooting Nook and removing the links to their store would hurt B&N, but I doubt that it's going to be common enough for them to worry about.
Nook Color uses an LCD, but the regular Nook uses E-Ink, hence the confusion.
Nook has been going that way for a while. Shortly after I got mine they upgraded the web browser to release status rather than beta. They included a chess program and audio player with the release as well. I've been wondering how long it was going to take them to include at least basic programs like a to do list or calendar program.
Mind you that's the Nook WiFi without the fancy color screen, the one with a color screen seems even more of a no brainer.
I suspect what's going on here is that Barnes & Noble figured out that allowing this is good for their sales, and that as long as the devices still can read the books they sell that there isn't really much to worry about.
Shocking I know, that a major corporation would be that open minded to people using the devices they buy as they like.
The problem is that it's expensive and time consuming somebody has to go through those emails and determine which ones are subject to disclosure and which ones aren't. The students themselves are not in a position to be able to defend themselves if the determination is made to release them and unless they can charge the person requesting the records for the legal review, it ends up serving as a significant disincentive to engage in free speech practices.
And as has been mentioned already, this is a professor, not an administrator, he's not supposed to be subject to FOIA requests.
Proposition 8 is hardly a valid example. The people have a pretty clear right to know who it is that's funding an unconstitutional measure to rescind rights. It also turned out that the Mormons were abusing their tax exempt status to tinker directly in the election process in a way which normally requires the funds not be tax exempt giving them an unfair advantage over the opposition.
Here in WA we've had the same argument going on over referendum 71 because they decided that they didn't want to actually be accountable for trying to revoke the civil rights of a minority group.
In practice, the claims of intimidation have been greatly exaggerated, and represented far less actual intimidation than the groups claiming to be targeted have meted out to others over the years.
That's easy, the politicians and courts let them get away with it. It's not that different from in the US when the RIAA studios sue single mothers and the dead for infringement which they know perfectly well was likely committed by somebody else. But would impinge on their ability to collect law suit money if they had to actually investigate thoroughly.
I think it's more a problem of them getting dependent upon payola and not being able to come up with an alternate business plan. The record industry was never about promoting quality music, it was always about control and telling people what they liked. They'd much rather spend a few hundred grand recording an album and a few million promoting some worthless group than to spend lesser sums of money hoping that one will make it big.
Under the old system they could just get an artist enough playtime that people were essentially brain washed into thinking that crap was good and people would then buy the album. But now that there are other means of getting heard it's getting harder and harder to trick people into listening to whatever crap they're pushing.
So, you use Intel? Or you don't use a graphics card at all? The reality is that at this point you're pretty much stuck with a card from one of those two companies because Intel hasn't released a graphics chip that is competitive since 2D performance was the focus.
Personally, I haven't had much trouble with driver stability. The issue isn't the 0.1% or whatever it turns out to be, the issue is that those are the two companies that are competing to drive the technology forward. It's good for us to have them at each other like this, because what's a $700 card today in a couple years time is going to be what most people are using. Or will at least guide the improvements which benefit us all.
Even if you list it it wouldn't likely cause any problems. What the article was talking about was .net being hard to unlearn, and that too much investment in it might be harmful to ones career, outside the .net world. It doesn't sound to me like he refuses to hire those people just for having it on their resume, but that it does raise something that will be addressed in the interview.
To an extent he does have a point, that anybody that can't be trained or learn the tools that are in use at a given place of employment isn't qualified to work there. I just think that he perhaps phrased somethings rather poorly.
I can't personally speak to the merits of unlearning .net as I've never learned it to begin with. The bigger issue he's citing is the ability to retrain for work in a start up environment. Probably not much of a problem if you're a skilled programmer, but if you're a hack that started out with .net because it was the newest thing, you might be screwing yourself.
The same way that cybercriminals crack captchas, they just offered up a picture of a random boob to a random boob. The real problem was stopping at 1m pictures.
It's easy to give targeted viewers when the competition doesn't have enough viewers to be able to subsegment in a way that still has enough volume to be meaningful.
Search isn't an issue, Google isn't the first company to dominate the search market, the real problem is the advertising market. Ad space gets more valuable the more eyes look at it, consequently, advertising is a market where you shouldn't be allowed to buy out the competition, especially if you're the number one firm buying out the number two. Now that that's been done, there had to be consolidation of the rest of the market just to compete.
Hence why we've got the Clayton Antitrust Act and why Google is such a menace.
But yes, in terms of the search market it's really not that big of a problem.
Around here it's Qwest and Comcast, trust me this isn't that much better than what you have. I swear that Qwest isn't giving us the throughput we're paying for.
Yes, but thanks to their scale of efficiency, they can pick our pockets in the most efficient manner possible. Imagine if we had to have a dozen companies picking our pockets for that money, now aren't you glad that the government turns a blind eye to the lack of competitive market place?
Actually, SBC is AT&T, well a portion of the old AT&T after the break up. Similarly Qwest is another remnant of the old AT&T that's changed its name and bought out some of the other portions of the old business. It hasn't quite gotten to the point where it was originally, but at this point it's down to AT&T, Verizon and Qwest primarily controlling the assets that had been the old AT&T.