I'm not one to normally hold a device's physical appearance against it, but if something is going to be sitting near the TV in plain view, it has got to be better looking than the Link.
My PC runs Vista, so I can attest that it is slightly better than XP. At least Vista gives you a visual cue that it is busy and a basic progress bar while it is busy loading the folder contents.
But it still takes a long time and you can't access any of the contents that are displayed until the operation completes.
Anyone who uses VPN knows the pain of accessing network shares. You go to the server you want, wait while Windows loads all the contents of the folder, click on a folder, wait until Windows loads all the contents of that folder, and so on.
It would be nice if it could let you select an item as it appears in the list, instead of having to wait for the whole folder to be enumerated. It would also be nice if it didn't lock up Explorer when the network is slow.
Now, it IS true that if your value added part needs to be open sourced due to the GPL, life gets quite a bit more difficult. Would be hard to build a business model on.
I think this is the key point, especially going forward. The "Tivo-ization" of GPL software is something that is critical for the success of the companies building the devices, but it is detrimental to the OSS "movement" since it seems to be a loophole to take from OSS without giving back.
Since the GPL3 is designed to close this loophole, such companies, which I think we've already established have an important role in adding high value pieces to complete the whole picture, will be pushed away from GPL3 OSS into the arms of closed source vendors who will provide similar software stacks at very competitive prices.
By driving the cost of software to zero, OSS developers have made it difficult for many people to act creatively due to the high cost of development. While OSS developers may make some money developing an open source software package, they have essentially forever undercut anyone who might have also developed something similar. This isn't to say that closed source products are somehow more encouraging of competition, but simply that OSS stakes out the monopoly position as its first step (by pricing everything else out of the picture) whereas closed source companies must work hard to make every sale.
This, I think, is the reason why OSS is generally of poor quality (generally speaking) compared to closed source competition. Whereas OSS is driven by addressing specific needs, closed source must compete on its merits and advantages. This leads to very utilitarian software for OSS (Ubuntu) and much more colorful and creative software for closed source (Apple's OSX).
In fact, there is probably a middle ground that many hardware manufacturers are already taking. By pairing the utility of OSS with the style of closed source, they are able to build very interesting devices that not only look good, but also function well. And at the same time, by focusing on developing products with merit and advantages, these hardware makers are keeping competition alive and engineers employed. So maybe the middle ground is to write closed source software and steal from the unemployed OSS guys.
No need to worry. I'd be more worried about Conficker C. Lots of opportunities to shoot you in the foot.
Then someone will undoubtedly create Conficker C++ and everyone will cry about how hard it is to understand and they will all flock to Conficker Java which promises a much cleaner object system.
But eventually you know that some idiot is going to write Conficker C# which looks suspiciously like Conficker Java, but after a while grows into this gigantic mess of quickfix designs.
So if you think Conficker B is bad, just wait a while.
I had this great idea for a product. It would clean the soil in your yard. The soil itself would be clean soil after using the product. In other words, even if you rolled around in it and got the soil all over you, you would still be clean.
Strangely, it was a solution to a problem that no one had. It figures that I shouldn't get my product ideas from Bill & Ted
These new in-game browsers are great! I used to be annoyed that I'd have to hit Alt AND F4 to switch away from my game to check my stock prices, but now with these new in-game browsers I can simply hit Shift+F4 and browse at my leisure.
This is a huge step forward in usability. I can't wait until Emacs includes a browser that can be toggled with an intuitive set of keystrokes.
"We do not use AMSR-E data in our analysis because it is not consistent with our historical data."
And our historical data shows terrible calamity awaiting us at every turn, and even if reality doesn't bear this out, it makes sense that we should continue to sound the alarm because if we do decide to face reality people may not take us and our hysterical blatherings seriously.
We'd rather just keep on using outdated modes of measurement and forecasting that give incorrect results every year because the results fit our hypothesis better. And what better to support a hypothesis than data that will back it up?
Consider that just because a nation's average income is relatively high, it does not follow that everyone in that country is able to buy the products at the higher price. Why should people who had the dumb luck to be born in some shithole country be blessed with lower-priced medicine?
Google has the benefit of having a lot of employees, a lot of goodwill, and a lot of money, so when it takes the "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks" business strategy, things have a way of working out for them.
That assumes either that legal users would not have the right to duplicate the software for backup purposes, or that illegal users would somehow be reduced if it were easier to make duplicates of the software.
Neither of those are correct. DRM may not deter piracy (an assumption no one has challenged with any facts), but it doesn't follow that it must then encourage it.
I realize it is 16 pages long, but please read the EFF's submission. It clearly explains that DRM isso completely effective in the restriction of piracy that the simple threat to shutdown DRM servers (Yahoo!, MSN, AOL) sent users scrambling for legal measures to prevent the shutdowns. The loss of the servers would make all the DRM-covered items useless - the exact opposite of ineffective piracy measures.
Now, they also argue that DRM prevents users from using their legally-acquired items in legal ways, and that has some weight. But as a piracy deterrent, DRM is actually quite effective, if you are to believe the EFF.
Maybe different people wrote the submission. That would explain the contradiction between the summary and the details.
Which implies that piracy is an undesirable thing. Therefore we shouldn't be focused on DRM as the sole solution to the piracy problem, but as part of a larger set of steps to eliminate the problem.
Either piracy is a bad thing which ought to be dealt with, or it is a good thing which should be encouraged.
The EFF's point (as is typical for them) is full of rhetoric but fails to truly understand the issue. It's a shame they are on the right side because they aren't really helping.
Slashdot Mirror
Certainly asking this type of question on Slashdot exposes her bias?
You don't state a reason why you think it is a good idea to switch.
How would you like it if the government just decided to repave the roads with coral and rubber? Wouldn't that be great!
You may like a Volvo, but I'd take a Jaguar any day.
I'm not one to normally hold a device's physical appearance against it, but if something is going to be sitting near the TV in plain view, it has got to be better looking than the Link.
Features Shmeatures. This thing is ugly!
My PC runs Vista, so I can attest that it is slightly better than XP. At least Vista gives you a visual cue that it is busy and a basic progress bar while it is busy loading the folder contents.
But it still takes a long time and you can't access any of the contents that are displayed until the operation completes.
So what, are you blaming the woman for being raped?
She was asking for it?
What an incredibly insensitive and bigoted thing to say.
Anyone who uses VPN knows the pain of accessing network shares. You go to the server you want, wait while Windows loads all the contents of the folder, click on a folder, wait until Windows loads all the contents of that folder, and so on.
It would be nice if it could let you select an item as it appears in the list, instead of having to wait for the whole folder to be enumerated. It would also be nice if it didn't lock up Explorer when the network is slow.
The Panasonic phone runs Linux.
It's also buggy as hell (as all Japanese phones are), but I suppose if 3 inches of Japanese TV gives you a woody, get a plane ticket, man.
Now, it IS true that if your value added part needs to be open sourced due to the GPL, life gets quite a bit more difficult. Would be hard to build a business model on.
I think this is the key point, especially going forward. The "Tivo-ization" of GPL software is something that is critical for the success of the companies building the devices, but it is detrimental to the OSS "movement" since it seems to be a loophole to take from OSS without giving back.
Since the GPL3 is designed to close this loophole, such companies, which I think we've already established have an important role in adding high value pieces to complete the whole picture, will be pushed away from GPL3 OSS into the arms of closed source vendors who will provide similar software stacks at very competitive prices.
By driving the cost of software to zero, OSS developers have made it difficult for many people to act creatively due to the high cost of development. While OSS developers may make some money developing an open source software package, they have essentially forever undercut anyone who might have also developed something similar. This isn't to say that closed source products are somehow more encouraging of competition, but simply that OSS stakes out the monopoly position as its first step (by pricing everything else out of the picture) whereas closed source companies must work hard to make every sale.
This, I think, is the reason why OSS is generally of poor quality (generally speaking) compared to closed source competition. Whereas OSS is driven by addressing specific needs, closed source must compete on its merits and advantages. This leads to very utilitarian software for OSS (Ubuntu) and much more colorful and creative software for closed source (Apple's OSX).
In fact, there is probably a middle ground that many hardware manufacturers are already taking. By pairing the utility of OSS with the style of closed source, they are able to build very interesting devices that not only look good, but also function well. And at the same time, by focusing on developing products with merit and advantages, these hardware makers are keeping competition alive and engineers employed. So maybe the middle ground is to write closed source software and steal from the unemployed OSS guys.
No need to worry. I'd be more worried about Conficker C. Lots of opportunities to shoot you in the foot.
Then someone will undoubtedly create Conficker C++ and everyone will cry about how hard it is to understand and they will all flock to Conficker Java which promises a much cleaner object system.
But eventually you know that some idiot is going to write Conficker C# which looks suspiciously like Conficker Java, but after a while grows into this gigantic mess of quickfix designs.
So if you think Conficker B is bad, just wait a while.
Independent hacker Moxie Marlinspike showed off several techniques to get fool the tech behind the little padlock on your screen.
What do you command, master...
I had this great idea for a product. It would clean the soil in your yard. The soil itself would be clean soil after using the product. In other words, even if you rolled around in it and got the soil all over you, you would still be clean.
Strangely, it was a solution to a problem that no one had. It figures that I shouldn't get my product ideas from Bill & Ted
they are interested in trends, not absolute values
Climate scientists are the mental equivalent of teenagers and shallow women. Thanks for the clarification.
These new in-game browsers are great! I used to be annoyed that I'd have to hit Alt AND F4 to switch away from my game to check my stock prices, but now with these new in-game browsers I can simply hit Shift+F4 and browse at my leisure.
This is a huge step forward in usability. I can't wait until Emacs includes a browser that can be toggled with an intuitive set of keystrokes.
"We do not use AMSR-E data in our analysis because it is not consistent with our historical data."
And our historical data shows terrible calamity awaiting us at every turn, and even if reality doesn't bear this out, it makes sense that we should continue to sound the alarm because if we do decide to face reality people may not take us and our hysterical blatherings seriously.
We'd rather just keep on using outdated modes of measurement and forecasting that give incorrect results every year because the results fit our hypothesis better. And what better to support a hypothesis than data that will back it up?
Consider that just because a nation's average income is relatively high, it does not follow that everyone in that country is able to buy the products at the higher price. Why should people who had the dumb luck to be born in some shithole country be blessed with lower-priced medicine?
That's not social justice. It's social prejudice.
Google has the benefit of having a lot of employees, a lot of goodwill, and a lot of money, so when it takes the "throw shit at the wall and see what sticks" business strategy, things have a way of working out for them.
But would this work for anyone else? Maybe Apple.
The answer is A, but please provide information about courts ruling that you can't copy your game.
That assumes either that legal users would not have the right to duplicate the software for backup purposes, or that illegal users would somehow be reduced if it were easier to make duplicates of the software.
Neither of those are correct. DRM may not deter piracy (an assumption no one has challenged with any facts), but it doesn't follow that it must then encourage it.
That's a big assumption, isn't it?
I realize it is 16 pages long, but please read the EFF's submission. It clearly explains that DRM isso completely effective in the restriction of piracy that the simple threat to shutdown DRM servers (Yahoo!, MSN, AOL) sent users scrambling for legal measures to prevent the shutdowns. The loss of the servers would make all the DRM-covered items useless - the exact opposite of ineffective piracy measures.
Now, they also argue that DRM prevents users from using their legally-acquired items in legal ways, and that has some weight. But as a piracy deterrent, DRM is actually quite effective, if you are to believe the EFF.
Maybe different people wrote the submission. That would explain the contradiction between the summary and the details.
"DRM does not prevent piracy"
Which implies that piracy is an undesirable thing. Therefore we shouldn't be focused on DRM as the sole solution to the piracy problem, but as part of a larger set of steps to eliminate the problem.
Either piracy is a bad thing which ought to be dealt with, or it is a good thing which should be encouraged.
The EFF's point (as is typical for them) is full of rhetoric but fails to truly understand the issue. It's a shame they are on the right side because they aren't really helping.
The key difference is that I would trumpet the thinker and not the toymaker. It wasn't the guy who built the train that developed relativity.
But even with the made-for-demo demos shown in the video, you can't say that the blocks are intuitive. Did you see the drum demo?