He writes: "Some cloud providers don’t make pricing available until you sign up for their service. Others hide pricing schedules behind complex formulae
So what you're saying is by going with the "cloud" your money could end up disappearing into thin air.
It interrogates the airwaves for the ID and signal strength of local digital TV and radio signals,
So let me drive 3 hours north of Perth, Western Australia and find that this system is as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.
I cant really see a use for this technology that GPS doesn't already fill and a huge drawback because as soon as you get to places with only one mobile phone tower or one source of TV signals (most rural towns in Oz) its fucked (the fewer sources you have for triangulation, the less accurate the result). Then we have the great wide expanse between towns which can get up to 500 KM of open road with no TV, no mobile coverage, no WiFi networks and even AM radio is spotty at best. In fact in many places the only source of radio transmissions will be from 2 way radios mounted on trucks... if there happen to be any trucks in the area.
Really this is some nice research BAe but it has no practical use outside the lab. Seeing as it's only useful within cities any commercial product will remain inferior to traditional GPS.
I hack my phones and make sure they're on the latest community ROM's but my housemates also have Android phones and they dont know, let alone give a shit what Android version they're on.
\
99.9999999% of IOS users are the same, they dont know, let alone give a shit about what version of IOS they are on. I regularly come across outdated Iphones, hell I've come across Iphones that are over 2 years out of date with the user being completely oblivious to this ("oh, Apps? I don't bother with those" or "Itunes, oh I don't listen to that new fangled music son"). All because the user couldn't care less.
It didn't stop anyone on Android or IOS.
The great grim spectre of "fragmentation" is not the spectre that iFanatics have made it out to be.
We already have them. Every single aspect of Justin Bieber / Britney Spears / Beyonce's projection in public life has been fabricated, test marketed, and refined down to the microscopic level.
Whilst I don't disagree with this at all, a complete fabrication they still need a human being at the centre of it, a human being that will still have issues, problems and more importantly a personality that will need to be worked around.
Whilst that real person is necessary for the fabrication they are just fake, not virtual.
Why develop a computer program to be a virtual pop star when you have living breathing human beings that are more than willing to sell every aspect of themselves already to be one?
Because computer programs don't get addicted to drugs, say things of their own accord (often racist or just incredibly stupid) or make sex tapes.
People can be adjusted to be as popular to the widest range of people possible, but this is very limited. A program will be designed from the ground up for the same goal, essentially 1 virtual pop star will fill the same roles as all the Beibers, Beyonces and Britneys.
Seriously though, we are going to see the emergence of "virtual pop stars" designed by committee to be appeal to as many people as possible appear in the next few years. Electronically produced music makes this goal a hell of a lot easier (a robotic arm that can play the guitar or piano as well as a human is probably a long way off).
Linux users would be given the address of a home depot, a list of vacant lot sites, and a "makefile" for building a hotel. Unfortunately, there would be library dependencies with links to unmaintained building codes.
Unless they choose a ready made chain like Staybuntu or Hotel Mint. But if they do that, things like power points, TV's or air conditioners may not always work correctly and the owners may randomly re-arrange things regardless of how much you complain.
This just confirms my theory that "Hip Hop" is not a real form of music. No talent is required in it's creation. Soon enough I'll be able to write a script that combine sound samples and replace all human Hip Hop "artists" (depressingly enough I'll probably do this before I master playing the electric guitar).
You can add Electronica, House, Rap and Dubstep to the things that can be automated (probably will in a few years).
"claimed its Mac computers were completely immune to viruses"
No, that's not what it said. It said, and I quote, "A Mac isn't susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers."
No, the second sentence is "That's thanks to built-in defences in Mac OS X that keep you safe without any work on your part". If you want to quote it, quote all of it.
So yes, they were claiming immunity to viruses. In perspective, the first sentence is merely a comparison between the number of viruses on Windows based computers and the number of viruses on OS X based computers.
Mac OS X is more secure than Windows on an ongoing basis - that fact is indisputable.
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
Macs have fewer viruses because they are not nearly as numerous as Windows Machines, less machines == Fact.
Macs have the same kind of malware Windows machines, Flashback proved that == Fact.
So your statement is not only disputed, it's quickly refuted.
Microsoft plays whack-a-mole with security,
Apple plays stick your head in the sand with security.
Their response to Flashback and every other bit of Mac Malware is proof of this. First pretend it didn't happen, then months after the event add that particular file to a blacklist. The core of OSX security is a freaking blacklist of known threats. Anyone with an iota of security knowledge knows blacklists are useless because of unknown threats.
Microsoft goes out of its way to make backwards compatibility happen for even its most wayward developers
This statement has just proven you don't live in the real world. Backwards compatibility for business (not developers, actual users) is a very big thing. A lot of printing shops were scared off of Macs when OSX was released because a lot of software written for OS 9 would not work on OSX and the developers had no interest in making software that was compatible with their current systems. So a lot of shops were forced to change their procedures, equipment and in many cases, pay up to tens of thousands of dollars for an updated program. Many just went to Windows because Microsoft has a good history of backwards compatibility (even with Vista/7).
IIRC, the claim was that Macs were immune to "Windows viruses".
Actually, the claim was "thousands of viruses that plaguing windows based computers" not "Windows viruses".
Its a comparison about the number of viruses on Windows and OSX, not a statement of immunity against windows specific viruses. It's meant to imply that OSX cannot get viruses, while not directly saying it, it is enough to be done for false advertising in many countries which is why Apple removed it (they've just been stung for false advertising on the Ipad in Australia).
Because we've made the Iranians the "Evil Brown People Du Jour"
Just so you know, the Persian race is white. Its the Arabs that have darker skin (The Iranian president is ethnically Arab, most of Iran's ruling council was actually born in Iraq).
I've just gotten over a bout of the flu, at best I sounded like a 2 pack a day smoker, at worst you couldn't hear me properly 2 meters away. Its winter here in Oz but its entirely possible that he's just got the common cold, I've come back from the UK winter to Oz summer to get a cold 2 days after getting back.
it's probably just a common infliction that has caused his voice to be less then optimum, not like the cancerous fingers of Steve Jobs are grasping at him from beyond the grave.
actually, a lot of people use office starter, even in soho environments.. and that's microsoft's "problem", it was cutting into sales. not enough people actually *buying* their overpriced office products.
plus, some clever folks online have figured out how to install starter on any newer (vista or seven, i think) pc.
Yep, I used Office Starter when it came with my personal laptop, it was pre-installed. That laptop got stolen and the replacement didn't have Office Starter, I'm back to using Open Office as all I need on that laptop is to open a few.doc or.xls files and maybe do something simple like write a letter or do a personal budget. Not worth paying A$300 for an office license.
I think you have one major flaw with your conclusions: Credit Card processing companies have absolutely no reason to make their systems secure if there are any costs associated with it. The main reason for this is that they pass all the liability onto the retailer. Their goal is the provide the most fees that can be charged to the merchant and cardholder. Until there is a disruption in this market they will continue to ignore security and pass the costs onto the retailer.
There, fixed that for you.
Credit processing companies are there to make money, they do this by charging a fee every time you use your card. Because "consumers" don't like paying fees directly they charge the merchant for accepting the card instead. Merchant fees for paying in credit in Australia are up to 3% of the transaction depending on which bank owns the terminal. So banks endorse and pressure customers to use CC's instead of cash or debit (debit has a flat fee of about A$0.20) because they make a lot of money off it. The merchant is between a rock and a hard place because it costs them to accept cards or idiotic consumers get angry if they openly pass on the fee (surcharge), of course the merchant does not adsorb this fee, he has to pass it on and this is in the form of higher prices. Australia puts A$16-22 billion per month on the card, just 1% of this puts it in the A$20 million fees collected, $16-60 million dollars that people didn't have to pay per month but did.
Also in Australia, the liability isn't passed onto the retailer, it's passed onto the bank but the end result is the same, the costs of fraud are passed onto you.
I am behind the times! Apple will be jealous! Can it read through my tin wallet?
I wonder what the range is, which I realize it is a function of the phone, but a ball park. Are we talking 10 cm, 50 cm, 1 m?
Up to 20 metres, but distances in reality will be much lower. Passive RFID card range is dependent on the transmitter providing power to it IIRC.
Just imagine what you could do in a crowded shopping mall with a range of 5 metres and a system designed to reject numbers already collected/charged? The limit on paypass/paywave in OZ is A$35 per transaction, 100 unique cards pass you in 1 hour and that's A$3,500 ripped off. Many Aussies don't even earn that in a month and 100 unique cards is a very low number for a crowded mall.
I mean really, how idiotic do these companies need to be to make a system where the full Credit Card information is TRANSMITTED over the air with no authentication. Even a token would be more acceptable.
They're banks.
Further more, they don't give a shit who spends the cardholders money as long as they can charge fees for it (for the idiots who believe their cards are "fee free", the bank charges the merchant for accepting the card rather then you for using it).
Ok, let's switch goalpoasts. We'll now consider the cost of Doctor Who, instead of BBC's overall offerings and costs.
Doctor Who is watched by, conservatively, 7 million Britons (more for premiers, finales and specials). It's also redistributed to 50 other countries. The US viewership peaked at around 1 million, and Australia was achieving about the same viewership in 2005, so let's be again conservative and say that those 50 other countries add about half of Britains viewership, bringing the worldwide total to around 10 million viewers. At that rate, it costs $0.30 an episode per viewer, or about $4 a season. Your $400 is off by 2 orders of magnitude. Even if we double that, and give the BBC a nice, chunky profit, you're off by a factor of 50. Note that my estimates are conservative; I wouldn't be surprised if the worldwide viewership for Doctor Who was closer to 15 - 20 million.
You're treating the BBC like its a private corporation... stop that.
The Beeb is a public broadcaster that operates under a Royal Charter, basically they can do whatever they want as long as they fulfill that charter (which is, in case you haven't been paying attention is to be a public broadcaster). They dont have to make a profit, in fact they probably dont even have to break even. But they are probably making a mint from Doctor Who. Not only do other networks pay the BBC for rights, but there's DVD sales, toys and merchandise, books and what not. When the BBC does make a profit, that money is funnelled into other productions (news, web services, other shows) Doctor Who probably pays for a bunch of BBC shows.
The problem with TNG is that there were so many good episodes... and so many mediocre episodes. And several that started plot lines that were never completed.
This is why I dont mind the fact that modern series have been cut down to 10 episodes a season. I've always been a fan of the British way of doing serials, when TNG and B5 were offering up 24 odd eps a season, maybe half were good and only 4 or 5 of them were gold. At the same time Red Dwarf served up 6 1/2 hour episodes per season and almost every single one was pure gold.
I suppose the point I am making is quality over quantity. Have fewer filler episodes and poor the money from those into making better episodes. Realistically there were seasons of TNG/DS9 that had 18 filler episodes in them.
How bad would Game of Thrones be if they stretched the budget out to have 15 or 20 eps a season? This week Robb Stark picks his nose and talks a lot, even with all the material from the books, it would still get boring and quality would suffer.
I actually quite like my 7" Nook, i can actually stick it in my pocket if i'm wearing cargo pants/shorts. I'm not sure i'd be able to do that if it was much bigger though.
I used to believe 7" tablets were too small until I actually used one (an old Samsung P1000) but that changed my mind, the text wasn't too small to read, it's a little bit bigger then an A5 page, which is the standard size for novels. Web pages were fine as was video.
Considering that the places where I use my tablet tend to be spaces that are too small for a full sized laptop (such as on the plane) 7" is not a drawback at all with reduced weight and size. If Google and Asus pull this off and deliver a reasonable price point I might eschew my 10" iconia for a Nexus 7 Slate.
Slashdot Mirror
He writes: "Some cloud providers don’t make pricing available until you sign up for their service. Others hide pricing schedules behind complex formulae
So what you're saying is by going with the "cloud" your money could end up disappearing into thin air.
OK, I'll get my coat.
Essentially there are only 2 ways to ease traffic jams
1. Widen existing roadways and build more new thoroughfares to accommodate the vehicles
or
2. Cut down on the number of vehicles that travel on the road
Don't need IBM engineers to figure that out
Yes, but IBM engineers can make driving so user unfriendly and convoluted that fewer people will want to drive, thus achieving solution number 2.
It interrogates the airwaves for the ID and signal strength of local digital TV and radio signals,
So let me drive 3 hours north of Perth, Western Australia and find that this system is as useful as an ashtray on a motorbike.
I cant really see a use for this technology that GPS doesn't already fill and a huge drawback because as soon as you get to places with only one mobile phone tower or one source of TV signals (most rural towns in Oz) its fucked (the fewer sources you have for triangulation, the less accurate the result). Then we have the great wide expanse between towns which can get up to 500 KM of open road with no TV, no mobile coverage, no WiFi networks and even AM radio is spotty at best. In fact in many places the only source of radio transmissions will be from 2 way radios mounted on trucks... if there happen to be any trucks in the area.
Really this is some nice research BAe but it has no practical use outside the lab. Seeing as it's only useful within cities any commercial product will remain inferior to traditional GPS.
But 99% don't give a crap.
This,
I hack my phones and make sure they're on the latest community ROM's but my housemates also have Android phones and they dont know, let alone give a shit what Android version they're on.
\
99.9999999% of IOS users are the same, they dont know, let alone give a shit about what version of IOS they are on. I regularly come across outdated Iphones, hell I've come across Iphones that are over 2 years out of date with the user being completely oblivious to this ("oh, Apps? I don't bother with those" or "Itunes, oh I don't listen to that new fangled music son"). All because the user couldn't care less.
It didn't stop anyone on Android or IOS.
The great grim spectre of "fragmentation" is not the spectre that iFanatics have made it out to be.
Whilst I don't disagree with this at all, a complete fabrication they still need a human being at the centre of it, a human being that will still have issues, problems and more importantly a personality that will need to be worked around.
Whilst that real person is necessary for the fabrication they are just fake, not virtual.
Because computer programs don't get addicted to drugs, say things of their own accord (often racist or just incredibly stupid) or make sex tapes.
People can be adjusted to be as popular to the widest range of people possible, but this is very limited. A program will be designed from the ground up for the same goal, essentially 1 virtual pop star will fill the same roles as all the Beibers, Beyonces and Britneys.
You're missing the important element for selling hip hop - the arrogant thug-life frontman. Without that attitude, you aint gonna sell shit.
Arrogant and Thuggish enough for you?. Just got to program it to say "bitch" instead of "sir" when a person walks by.
Seriously though, we are going to see the emergence of "virtual pop stars" designed by committee to be appeal to as many people as possible appear in the next few years. Electronically produced music makes this goal a hell of a lot easier (a robotic arm that can play the guitar or piano as well as a human is probably a long way off).
So you're saying that a Mac users' disposable income is about $1-2k total?
When someone buy a $500-1000 machine for $1000-2000 it kind of tells you that they are willing to overspend without thinking about things.
Orbitz caught on to this... I'm sure they're not the only one but they are the only ones who's been caught.
Linux users would be given the address of a home depot, a list of vacant lot sites, and a "makefile" for building a hotel. Unfortunately, there would be library dependencies with links to unmaintained building codes.
Unless they choose a ready made chain like Staybuntu or Hotel Mint. But if they do that, things like power points, TV's or air conditioners may not always work correctly and the owners may randomly re-arrange things regardless of how much you complain.
"Beat making software."
This just confirms my theory that "Hip Hop" is not a real form of music. No talent is required in it's creation. Soon enough I'll be able to write a script that combine sound samples and replace all human Hip Hop "artists" (depressingly enough I'll probably do this before I master playing the electric guitar).
You can add Electronica, House, Rap and Dubstep to the things that can be automated (probably will in a few years).
"claimed its Mac computers were completely immune to viruses"
No, that's not what it said. It said, and I quote, "A Mac isn't susceptible to the thousands of viruses plaguing Windows-based computers."
No, the second sentence is "That's thanks to built-in defences in Mac OS X that keep you safe without any work on your part". If you want to quote it, quote all of it.
So yes, they were claiming immunity to viruses. In perspective, the first sentence is merely a comparison between the number of viruses on Windows based computers and the number of viruses on OS X based computers.
http://sophosnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/mac-osx-before-after.jpg
Also read the part under "Download with peace of mind".
You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.
Macs have fewer viruses because they are not nearly as numerous as Windows Machines, less machines == Fact.
Macs have the same kind of malware Windows machines, Flashback proved that == Fact.
So your statement is not only disputed, it's quickly refuted.
Apple plays stick your head in the sand with security.
Their response to Flashback and every other bit of Mac Malware is proof of this. First pretend it didn't happen, then months after the event add that particular file to a blacklist. The core of OSX security is a freaking blacklist of known threats. Anyone with an iota of security knowledge knows blacklists are useless because of unknown threats.
This statement has just proven you don't live in the real world. Backwards compatibility for business (not developers, actual users) is a very big thing. A lot of printing shops were scared off of Macs when OSX was released because a lot of software written for OS 9 would not work on OSX and the developers had no interest in making software that was compatible with their current systems. So a lot of shops were forced to change their procedures, equipment and in many cases, pay up to tens of thousands of dollars for an updated program. Many just went to Windows because Microsoft has a good history of backwards compatibility (even with Vista/7).
IIRC, the claim was that Macs were immune to "Windows viruses".
Actually, the claim was "thousands of viruses that plaguing windows based computers" not "Windows viruses".
Its a comparison about the number of viruses on Windows and OSX, not a statement of immunity against windows specific viruses. It's meant to imply that OSX cannot get viruses, while not directly saying it, it is enough to be done for false advertising in many countries which is why Apple removed it (they've just been stung for false advertising on the Ipad in Australia).
http://sophosnews.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/mac-osx-before-after.jpg
Because we've made the Iranians the "Evil Brown People Du Jour"
Just so you know, the Persian race is white. Its the Arabs that have darker skin (The Iranian president is ethnically Arab, most of Iran's ruling council was actually born in Iraq).
Not that I disagree with your point.
My only question is looking for the bottom so I can maximize returns after this economic war turns into a shooting one.
Buy stocks in munitions companies.
Okay so he's got Laryngitis or something similar.
This,
I've just gotten over a bout of the flu, at best I sounded like a 2 pack a day smoker, at worst you couldn't hear me properly 2 meters away. Its winter here in Oz but its entirely possible that he's just got the common cold, I've come back from the UK winter to Oz summer to get a cold 2 days after getting back.
it's probably just a common infliction that has caused his voice to be less then optimum, not like the cancerous fingers of Steve Jobs are grasping at him from beyond the grave.
actually, a lot of people use office starter, even in soho environments.. and that's microsoft's "problem", it was cutting into sales. not enough people actually *buying* their overpriced office products.
plus, some clever folks online have figured out how to install starter on any newer (vista or seven, i think) pc.
Yep, I used Office Starter when it came with my personal laptop, it was pre-installed. That laptop got stolen and the replacement didn't have Office Starter, I'm back to using Open Office as all I need on that laptop is to open a few .doc or .xls files and maybe do something simple like write a letter or do a personal budget. Not worth paying A$300 for an office license.
I think you have one major flaw with your conclusions: Credit Card processing companies have absolutely no reason to make their systems secure if there are any costs associated with it. The main reason for this is that they pass all the liability onto the retailer. Their goal is the provide the most fees that can be charged to the merchant and cardholder. Until there is a disruption in this market they will continue to ignore security and pass the costs onto the retailer.
There, fixed that for you.
Credit processing companies are there to make money, they do this by charging a fee every time you use your card. Because "consumers" don't like paying fees directly they charge the merchant for accepting the card instead. Merchant fees for paying in credit in Australia are up to 3% of the transaction depending on which bank owns the terminal. So banks endorse and pressure customers to use CC's instead of cash or debit (debit has a flat fee of about A$0.20) because they make a lot of money off it. The merchant is between a rock and a hard place because it costs them to accept cards or idiotic consumers get angry if they openly pass on the fee (surcharge), of course the merchant does not adsorb this fee, he has to pass it on and this is in the form of higher prices. Australia puts A$16-22 billion per month on the card, just 1% of this puts it in the A$20 million fees collected, $16-60 million dollars that people didn't have to pay per month but did.
Also in Australia, the liability isn't passed onto the retailer, it's passed onto the bank but the end result is the same, the costs of fraud are passed onto you.
Although neither of us would be happy were I drawn into a discussion of Game of Thrones, I agree in spirit.
GOT was just a prominent example but a bit off topic, Doctor Who is another good example and even then they have 1-2 filler eps per season.
BTW, DS9 did not get good until season 3/4, ENT was crap so you didn't miss much.
I am behind the times! Apple will be jealous! Can it read through my tin wallet?
I wonder what the range is, which I realize it is a function of the phone, but a ball park. Are we talking 10 cm, 50 cm, 1 m?
Up to 20 metres, but distances in reality will be much lower. Passive RFID card range is dependent on the transmitter providing power to it IIRC.
Just imagine what you could do in a crowded shopping mall with a range of 5 metres and a system designed to reject numbers already collected/charged? The limit on paypass/paywave in OZ is A$35 per transaction, 100 unique cards pass you in 1 hour and that's A$3,500 ripped off. Many Aussies don't even earn that in a month and 100 unique cards is a very low number for a crowded mall.
I mean really, how idiotic do these companies need to be to make a system where the full Credit Card information is TRANSMITTED over the air with no authentication. Even a token would be more acceptable.
They're banks.
Further more, they don't give a shit who spends the cardholders money as long as they can charge fees for it (for the idiots who believe their cards are "fee free", the bank charges the merchant for accepting the card rather then you for using it).
Really. Broadcast data can be intercepted by anyone with the ability to receive?
The millions of idiots who were believed Visa/Mastercard when they said this was safe.
Unless you mean anyone here. Well I'm sure there's a few.
Ok, let's switch goalpoasts. We'll now consider the cost of Doctor Who, instead of BBC's overall offerings and costs.
Doctor Who is watched by, conservatively, 7 million Britons (more for premiers, finales and specials). It's also redistributed to 50 other countries. The US viewership peaked at around 1 million, and Australia was achieving about the same viewership in 2005, so let's be again conservative and say that those 50 other countries add about half of Britains viewership, bringing the worldwide total to around 10 million viewers. At that rate, it costs $0.30 an episode per viewer, or about $4 a season. Your $400 is off by 2 orders of magnitude. Even if we double that, and give the BBC a nice, chunky profit, you're off by a factor of 50. Note that my estimates are conservative; I wouldn't be surprised if the worldwide viewership for Doctor Who was closer to 15 - 20 million.
You're treating the BBC like its a private corporation... stop that.
The Beeb is a public broadcaster that operates under a Royal Charter, basically they can do whatever they want as long as they fulfill that charter (which is, in case you haven't been paying attention is to be a public broadcaster). They dont have to make a profit, in fact they probably dont even have to break even. But they are probably making a mint from Doctor Who. Not only do other networks pay the BBC for rights, but there's DVD sales, toys and merchandise, books and what not. When the BBC does make a profit, that money is funnelled into other productions (news, web services, other shows) Doctor Who probably pays for a bunch of BBC shows.
The problem with TNG is that there were so many good episodes... and so many mediocre episodes. And several that started plot lines that were never completed.
This is why I dont mind the fact that modern series have been cut down to 10 episodes a season. I've always been a fan of the British way of doing serials, when TNG and B5 were offering up 24 odd eps a season, maybe half were good and only 4 or 5 of them were gold. At the same time Red Dwarf served up 6 1/2 hour episodes per season and almost every single one was pure gold.
I suppose the point I am making is quality over quantity. Have fewer filler episodes and poor the money from those into making better episodes. Realistically there were seasons of TNG/DS9 that had 18 filler episodes in them.
How bad would Game of Thrones be if they stretched the budget out to have 15 or 20 eps a season? This week Robb Stark picks his nose and talks a lot, even with all the material from the books, it would still get boring and quality would suffer.
I only do "i"s.
Sir, if I only had mod points.
I used to believe 7" tablets were too small until I actually used one (an old Samsung P1000) but that changed my mind, the text wasn't too small to read, it's a little bit bigger then an A5 page, which is the standard size for novels. Web pages were fine as was video. Considering that the places where I use my tablet tend to be spaces that are too small for a full sized laptop (such as on the plane) 7" is not a drawback at all with reduced weight and size. If Google and Asus pull this off and deliver a reasonable price point I might eschew my 10" iconia for a Nexus 7 Slate.