I think the whole premise of the article is bullshit. Graphics have stopped improving at the tremendous rate it used to. The difference between the current console generation and the previous one is nowhere near as great as previous generations (which is one reason why the Wii did so well).
The difference between current PC graphics and current console graphics isn't that great, either. A bit more high-fidelity, yes, but it just isn't that compelling of an upgrade. The next console refresh will be a yawner.
Have you seen the average non/. reading web user? This is exactly what they do, they click "ok" and and "yes" to anything that pops up without reading it automatically.
How many Slashdotters actually read the EULAs? Sometimes I do, or try to scan it, but usually life is too short for that kind of crap.
Yeah, apparently it's not so easy for everybody. And then if you go to the end of the page and hit "Shop for Ubuntu", you get a whopping choice of one machine with a base price of $460.
Funny, I did the same thing, but ended up on this page: http://linux.dell.com/ , which didn't have anything of interest. I didn't see the sponsored link because of Ad block, I assume. What's funny is if I click on the sponsored link, I don't see anything about Linux.
I still can't find the route you took to get to that machine. For example, from linux.dell.com, if I click on "Ubuntu on Dell", it doesn't show anything about 10.10. I can't see a simple link that lets you buy a Dell with Linux on it.
Dell is either making it very difficult to get Linux on a machine or I'm obtuse. Somehow I think it's the former.
I thought you could buy linux PCs off the shelf in one of big American chains (walmart???).
No, you can't. That was a short-lived experiment a few years ago.
Also as far as I know you can buy linux on laptops from Dell as well.
That's a mixed history as well. Can you find a page to buy a Dell with Linux pre-installed? I looked around and only found support options, not pre-packaged computers. I also looked at buying one of the cheap desktops, the Inspirion 560, and the only options for the OS were versions of Windows.
And in most contexts, I'd say that there's no moral difference between saying something which is strictly true but which you intend to be misleading and just lying.
I'm glad you at least agree with this.
But I think in that situation -- a "battle of wits, for the princess, to the death", deception should be expected to be part of the rules.
It's arguable, but I still call it cheating. You can use your wits without deception.
After all, Vencini himself used deception when he switched the cups.
True, and you might call that cheating, too. However, I think proposing a rigged game was the greater cheat. It was a dishonorable (in my opinion) way to win.
According to this Slashdot post, the settlement was for A$500,000 (with references provided). That was only one revenue stream.
Anyways, all things considered with software piracy, it sounds like you had at least a moderate amount of success. Kind of crazy that 15 years later people feel the need to donate.
You're frequently better off getting a second screen than going larger than 24". Hell even with a 20" screen it's likely better to get a second one.
Better in what sense? I've never liked working with multiple monitors, but I really like working with my 24" widescreen. No annoying gap in the middle, fewer wires, more desktop space, and no interface issues like you described.
The person I originally responded to was talking about perfectly simulating the final score.
Someone (in this case an oddsmaker) takes into account a lot of variables about the team (home/away, weather, injuries, past performance, current performance, alignment of the moon, etc etc) and comes up with a prediction of a spread. And more often or not, they're right.
The point of the spread is to get people betting evenly on both sides -- the bookies make money by paying winners less than they collect from losers. The spread usually doesn't predict the final score. In fact, they'd rather not have the final spread be right, because if they moved the spread to encourage equal betting, they stand a chance to lose money on both sides (by people who bet on the better spread) or not make any money at all (ties don't make any money).
The whole idea of accurately predicting a score in advance is completely ridiculous.
The App store is grouped in with the overall iTunes store, and remains a smidge over break even.
I still find it hard to believe that they aren't making very good money on their online, digital stores. They're either massaging the numbers or doing something wrong.
I do remember thinking that Apple simply had a glorified iPod touch. Then I tried one. Is the device "magical?" No. But it is a game changer, in more ways than people realize yet.
Yet you didn't manage to say one concrete reason why in the three paragraphs that followed. Please, be explicit. What features make iPad so great?
The whole point of chaos theory is that a computer cannot calculate "all of that". There's an essential random nature to it.
Sometimes the game will turn on the bounce of a ball. Players don't play consistently. Weather is a factor. There are so many variables that you have no hope of predicting the score reliably.
And the thing about chaos theory is that it says that even if you somehow measured every single variable, a slight change in one will end up producing drastically different results over a period of time. Now throw in quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle -- some things, even in theory, cannot be calculated.
Note that when teams play each other in a series for a championship, each game is different.
The concept that a computer could possibly beat a human at this complex, intuition-based game was considered ridiculous.
Actually, as first proposed, chess was supposed to be the fruitfly version of artificial intelligence. What was surprising to many is that it took so long. Yes, some people thought it would never happen, but I don't think that was a majority view.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the whole premise of the article is bullshit. Graphics have stopped improving at the tremendous rate it used to. The difference between the current console generation and the previous one is nowhere near as great as previous generations (which is one reason why the Wii did so well).
The difference between current PC graphics and current console graphics isn't that great, either. A bit more high-fidelity, yes, but it just isn't that compelling of an upgrade. The next console refresh will be a yawner.
Have you seen the average non /. reading web user? This is exactly what they do, they click "ok" and and "yes" to anything that pops up without reading it automatically.
How many Slashdotters actually read the EULAs? Sometimes I do, or try to scan it, but usually life is too short for that kind of crap.
Ah, never mind, found it. It was the 3rd link for me: http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/ubuntu?c=us&l=en&cs=19
"We're glad you found Dell's Ubuntu website."
Yeah, apparently it's not so easy for everybody. And then if you go to the end of the page and hit "Shop for Ubuntu", you get a whopping choice of one machine with a base price of $460.
Funny, I did the same thing, but ended up on this page: http://linux.dell.com/ , which didn't have anything of interest. I didn't see the sponsored link because of Ad block, I assume. What's funny is if I click on the sponsored link, I don't see anything about Linux.
I still can't find the route you took to get to that machine. For example, from linux.dell.com, if I click on "Ubuntu on Dell", it doesn't show anything about 10.10. I can't see a simple link that lets you buy a Dell with Linux on it.
Dell is either making it very difficult to get Linux on a machine or I'm obtuse. Somehow I think it's the former.
Congratulations. I looked and couldn't find one. Would you mind sharing the path you took to find it?
It would only be a couple of weeks worth of work for an engineer to create a sandbox policy, test it, and ship it with Safari.
Are you a program manager, by chance?
I thought you could buy linux PCs off the shelf in one of big American chains (walmart???).
No, you can't. That was a short-lived experiment a few years ago.
Also as far as I know you can buy linux on laptops from Dell as well.
That's a mixed history as well. Can you find a page to buy a Dell with Linux pre-installed? I looked around and only found support options, not pre-packaged computers. I also looked at buying one of the cheap desktops, the Inspirion 560, and the only options for the OS were versions of Windows.
And in most contexts, I'd say that there's no moral difference between saying something which is strictly true but which you intend to be misleading and just lying.
I'm glad you at least agree with this.
But I think in that situation -- a "battle of wits, for the princess, to the death", deception should be expected to be part of the rules.
It's arguable, but I still call it cheating. You can use your wits without deception.
After all, Vencini himself used deception when he switched the cups.
True, and you might call that cheating, too. However, I think proposing a rigged game was the greater cheat. It was a dishonorable (in my opinion) way to win.
According to this Slashdot post, the settlement was for A$500,000 (with references provided). That was only one revenue stream.
Anyways, all things considered with software piracy, it sounds like you had at least a moderate amount of success. Kind of crazy that 15 years later people feel the need to donate.
He wasn't cheating -- he never said only one was poisoned.
Still cheating. It's massively deceptive to intentionally lead somebody on by trying to trick them with words based on common expectations.
You're frequently better off getting a second screen than going larger than 24". Hell even with a 20" screen it's likely better to get a second one.
Better in what sense? I've never liked working with multiple monitors, but I really like working with my 24" widescreen. No annoying gap in the middle, fewer wires, more desktop space, and no interface issues like you described.
Who said anything about perfect simulation?
The person I originally responded to was talking about perfectly simulating the final score.
Someone (in this case an oddsmaker) takes into account a lot of variables about the team (home/away, weather, injuries, past performance, current performance, alignment of the moon, etc etc) and comes up with a prediction of a spread. And more often or not, they're right.
The point of the spread is to get people betting evenly on both sides -- the bookies make money by paying winners less than they collect from losers. The spread usually doesn't predict the final score. In fact, they'd rather not have the final spread be right, because if they moved the spread to encourage equal betting, they stand a chance to lose money on both sides (by people who bet on the better spread) or not make any money at all (ties don't make any money).
The whole idea of accurately predicting a score in advance is completely ridiculous.
The App store is grouped in with the overall iTunes store, and remains a smidge over break even.
I still find it hard to believe that they aren't making very good money on their online, digital stores. They're either massaging the numbers or doing something wrong.
I do remember thinking that Apple simply had a glorified iPod touch. Then I tried one. Is the device "magical?" No. But it is a game changer, in more ways than people realize yet.
Yet you didn't manage to say one concrete reason why in the three paragraphs that followed. Please, be explicit. What features make iPad so great?
It's fashionable with the people who think Legos are cool.
Maybe they do, but I didn't.
They don't do it by perfectly simulating the outcome of any particular game.
The whole point of chaos theory is that a computer cannot calculate "all of that". There's an essential random nature to it.
Sometimes the game will turn on the bounce of a ball. Players don't play consistently. Weather is a factor. There are so many variables that you have no hope of predicting the score reliably.
And the thing about chaos theory is that it says that even if you somehow measured every single variable, a slight change in one will end up producing drastically different results over a period of time. Now throw in quantum mechanics and the uncertainty principle -- some things, even in theory, cannot be calculated.
Note that when teams play each other in a series for a championship, each game is different.
I agree. I was just pointing out that there's a coach who went against the grain and got blasted for it in the press.
Coaches, to a man, vastly underestimate the value of going for it on 4th down. Vastly.
You might recall all the heat Belichick got for going for it on 4th down instead of punting against the Colts.
The concept that a computer could possibly beat a human at this complex, intuition-based game was considered ridiculous.
Actually, as first proposed, chess was supposed to be the fruitfly version of artificial intelligence. What was surprising to many is that it took so long. Yes, some people thought it would never happen, but I don't think that was a majority view.
I'd not be surprised if by 2020 the video game won't perfectly simulate the final score of the Super Bowl.
Which means you have no understanding of chaos theory, statistics, or monte carlo simulations.
They're not getting any cash : http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/15/debunk-elop-never-said-microsoft-is-paying-nokia-billions-of-do/
That article is pure speculation. We don't know what Nokia is getting.
I won't reveal here as I've already probably spoiled the story for anyone who hasn't already read it
I'm not going to read it, but would like a spoiler.
What ultimately backs up a court order? (What can be expected to happen if he persists in refusing it?)
Of course, except my parent wasn't talking about refusals. He was talking about cops busting down doors without any investigation.
You're just trying to change the situation after the fact.