TFA specifically says that they'd have to use a series of artificial islands, mentioned specifically in the section of article you quoted. The height of the wave, as mentioned elsewhere, isn't the issue so much as the energy carried in the wave.
I was thinking this, too. However, if you read the article, it's intended for man-made structures and, if you look at the model (and read the article), it doesn't seem like it'd be feasible for anything on a larger scale, anyway. You'd end up destroying most of your own coastline and aquatic habitat in the process, and seriously screwing up the local ocean pretty much permanently.
I wouldn't gripe about the mini (you get what you pay for), but I agree that the glossy-screen-or-else option is really annoying. It seems like everybody has forgotten the original reason why glossy screens were bad for computer work (eye strain, and useless when you're trying to judge an image and confusing details with glare).:P
Ms. Quinn, the author of the Los Angeles Times article, is not a very good technology writer. She not only quotes that it won't work with iPods (which is terribly misleading; the microSD card won't, but the contained DRM-free MP3s will be very easy to work with), but she also refers to this as a "new music format".
Medium, yes; format, no. Distributing on the microSD cards is new, but seems like something people may latch onto quickly. MP3 is old and a de facto universal format, which is what makes this even better.
You're confusing the browser with the render engine. WebKit doesn't dictate how many threads are used, it just parses the web pages. That's how both Chrome and Safari can both use WebKit and have entirely different approaches to their tab implementation.
Since WebKit is in fact ten times lighter than Gecko in memory (an admission made by one of the developers in TFA), that is a Good Thing(tm). However, Firefox scrapping Gecko would also mean losing XUL and extensions along with it, which would be less than good for those of us who like that functionality.
That doesn't seem like a very good comparison. You're comparing the economics a car you've already paid off to one that you haven't bought yet?
Let's compare buying two new cars with equivalent features, but one is a hybrid and one isn't and then see how the comparison goes. If my car payments are the same but one involves paying less for gas, then I go with the one with the cheaper gas. If the cheaper price of a non-hybrid is canceled out by the higher gas cost, then I at least benefit by using less of a limited resource and polluting less while I'm at it.
They're claiming that you're granting a license, not transferring copyright, which is a lot easier to do. They would most definitely have a leg to stand on, unfortunately, although one would hope they wouldn't be very happy about taking it to court.
Copyright also gives Apple the exclusive right to authorize others to publish or modify its work, and Psystar's bad habit of installing a modified version of OSX on their own hardware is going to be what gets them in trouble.
Apple computers use an EFI architecture to validate that OSX is running on an Apple computer, and circumventing this check is going to cause problems for Psystar, no question about it. It's not so much that Apple is wrong in forcing this sort of check as that Psystar is wrong for choosing to take matters into their own hands and modifying Apple's source code. Coupled with the fact that Psystar is probably copying the pre-installed version from a single disk image to thousands of computers at a time is a serious copyright infringement issue.
This doesn't seem like a very strong case for anti-trust. You can't claim that Apple has a monopoly on their own product - it is *theirs*, after all - and their idea that the software is part of what makes the Macintosh brand so special, that's their business. The Sherman Antitrust Act was designed to prevent monopolies of an industry, and the last time I checked, Apple still had less than 10% of the market. Monopolizing your own product is by no means illegal.
If you had people trying to resell the software placed in embedded systems, or in the Sony PS3, the iPod, or your cell phone, you can bet that those companies would be just as angry, but I bet the public reaction would be much different.
Apple isn't telling its users what to do with the product once they've bought it, it's telling them the conditions under which they'll sell it. This is a well-known pre-existing decision of sale, which Psystar has chosen to flaunt for their own gain. They should have sued Apple before they started violating their implied consent to Apple's EULA.
I live in Osaka, so it's relevant. As an expat, I really long for the day that the US telecoms stop making excuses and start upgrading their networks. They HAVE the money. Geography is not an excuse (after all, they could just do the big cities, but they don't).
Isn't the high foreclosure rate due to the bad housing loan situation? I'd call that an exceptional situation, not the rule, and while California is the hardest hit, it isn't the only victim.
Wouldn't having judges re-elected every four years encourage more, not less, impartiality? How does having a long-term incumbent increase impartiality? Look at the Supreme Court: due to its system for replacing judges, those justices appointed are almost always biased towards the politics of the President who appoints them. Not exactly a shining example of a fair and balanced system.
Anyway, regardless of California's politics, this particular classification comes from recommendations by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the National Toxicology Program; California is merely following their warnings in this situation.
The really fun part is that they include nitrous oxide on the list as a substance that causes "developmental toxicity". I assume that this means that it's bad for pregnant women; worst case scenario, it means that getting laughing gas at the dentist will mentally impair you, but like, permanently.
You got married and changed careers at the same time? Too many factors. Also, while many men do gain some weight after marriage, 50 pounds is a bit extreme. It's more likely that the weight gain is due to a culturally specific diet (perhaps American), personal bad eating habits, and a lack of exercise. Not exactly things to blame on the wife.
I think that this study needs a lot more work. As others have observed, they're only sampling men who have already lived past 60, and of those who are polygamous, they are also most certainly wealthy enough to support their wives, which means that their lifestyle isn't realistically in line with your average middle-class monogamist. However, I do think that the concept of multiple care-givers within the same household could make for a far more easy-going lifestyle. Less stress means better longevity.
Why on earth would we have big brains that were dumb? That doesn't make any sense from a survival aspect. Carrying around extra weight and a non-functional large brain?
If this theory is true, then yes, we should suddenly see the rise of cat and dog civilizations. They will probably be so super-intelligent that they will actually enslave another, dumber race of creatures to take care of their daily needs. This will give them ample time to bask in the luxury of doing absolutely nothing at all besides playing, eating, sleeping and toying with their slaves.
As the parent said, though, that could never happen.
Americans aren't particularly bothered that they started the fingerprinting/photographing trend and that Japan's institution of the same requirement was in protest to America's. Japan had previously decided that such tactics would be discriminatory and unfair (pretty impressive, considering Japan's poor track record on discrimination).
FYI, Japanese law is much stricter regarding taking pictures of people without their permission. Google may actually run up against actual legal issues as well as the cultural ones already mentioned.
Nope, the grandparent is right. Quote: "Dr Angus Hunter warned that athletes are at risk for low performance if the air quality cannot be brought down to acceptable levels."
"Quality" is the object, the verb is "lower". Dr. Hunter may be an expert on athlete performance, but not so good with the English. I think we get the point, though.:)
I find that the button sensitivity (right versus left-click) is too finicky, and the side buttons require way too much force to use comfortably/realistically.
The only glaring problem in all of this is that the astronomers say the only things they know are the minimum mass of the planet and the separation from its star. That's not a lot to go on.
Sorry, but I disagree with Linus here. If you see Linux as merely a hobbyist operating system not to be taken seriously, then sure, all bugs are equal. However, if you actually aspire to having your kernel adopted as a serious replacement for even just mainstream computing, then you're going to have to accept the fact that your users want their data secure and their systems hardened against hacking.
Either Linus is being naive here or genuinely lacks the ego to see Linux widely adopted - the latter possibility is highly unlikely, or he would have quit by now.
If he were to include the bugs in the normal "this has been fixed" fix list with a description of what was wrong, then it will be, by definition, a patch to a security exploit, and he will have done his job.
Is his policy, or lack of one, security through obscurity? Yes, but more through his determination to pretend that it doesn't matter rather than any serious attempt to deceive his users. The only person he's fooling right now is himself.
They have forced an image on the public? They have merely advertised; what the public makes from that is their business, not Apple's. Apple is not some sort of all-powerful entity dictating what we think of them.
Anybody who takes those commercials personally can simply do what people do with 99% of the other commercials on TV: use the time to go into the kitchen to make a sandwich, or at the very least flip the channel.
Seems like an awful lot of work and risk for no guarantee of a return. Also, what about the priesthood lifestyle do you really think is that attractive that it would be worth it?
Slashdot Mirror
TFA specifically says that they'd have to use a series of artificial islands, mentioned specifically in the section of article you quoted. The height of the wave, as mentioned elsewhere, isn't the issue so much as the energy carried in the wave.
I was thinking this, too. However, if you read the article, it's intended for man-made structures and, if you look at the model (and read the article), it doesn't seem like it'd be feasible for anything on a larger scale, anyway. You'd end up destroying most of your own coastline and aquatic habitat in the process, and seriously screwing up the local ocean pretty much permanently.
I wouldn't gripe about the mini (you get what you pay for), but I agree that the glossy-screen-or-else option is really annoying. It seems like everybody has forgotten the original reason why glossy screens were bad for computer work (eye strain, and useless when you're trying to judge an image and confusing details with glare). :P
Ayup. Lived there for two years. I certainly was bemused. ;)
You're thinking of Europe, not Japan.
Dammit. We really have to get the movie out ASAP (http://www.spindle-movie.com)
Ms. Quinn, the author of the Los Angeles Times article, is not a very good technology writer. She not only quotes that it won't work with iPods (which is terribly misleading; the microSD card won't, but the contained DRM-free MP3s will be very easy to work with), but she also refers to this as a "new music format".
Medium, yes; format, no. Distributing on the microSD cards is new, but seems like something people may latch onto quickly. MP3 is old and a de facto universal format, which is what makes this even better.
It might also be a matter of their schools telling them they're not going to pay for the trip.
You're confusing the browser with the render engine. WebKit doesn't dictate how many threads are used, it just parses the web pages. That's how both Chrome and Safari can both use WebKit and have entirely different approaches to their tab implementation.
Since WebKit is in fact ten times lighter than Gecko in memory (an admission made by one of the developers in TFA), that is a Good Thing(tm). However, Firefox scrapping Gecko would also mean losing XUL and extensions along with it, which would be less than good for those of us who like that functionality.
That doesn't seem like a very good comparison. You're comparing the economics a car you've already paid off to one that you haven't bought yet?
Let's compare buying two new cars with equivalent features, but one is a hybrid and one isn't and then see how the comparison goes. If my car payments are the same but one involves paying less for gas, then I go with the one with the cheaper gas. If the cheaper price of a non-hybrid is canceled out by the higher gas cost, then I at least benefit by using less of a limited resource and polluting less while I'm at it.
They're claiming that you're granting a license, not transferring copyright, which is a lot easier to do. They would most definitely have a leg to stand on, unfortunately, although one would hope they wouldn't be very happy about taking it to court.
Copyright also gives Apple the exclusive right to authorize others to publish or modify its work, and Psystar's bad habit of installing a modified version of OSX on their own hardware is going to be what gets them in trouble.
Apple computers use an EFI architecture to validate that OSX is running on an Apple computer, and circumventing this check is going to cause problems for Psystar, no question about it. It's not so much that Apple is wrong in forcing this sort of check as that Psystar is wrong for choosing to take matters into their own hands and modifying Apple's source code. Coupled with the fact that Psystar is probably copying the pre-installed version from a single disk image to thousands of computers at a time is a serious copyright infringement issue.
This doesn't seem like a very strong case for anti-trust. You can't claim that Apple has a monopoly on their own product - it is *theirs*, after all - and their idea that the software is part of what makes the Macintosh brand so special, that's their business. The Sherman Antitrust Act was designed to prevent monopolies of an industry, and the last time I checked, Apple still had less than 10% of the market. Monopolizing your own product is by no means illegal.
If you had people trying to resell the software placed in embedded systems, or in the Sony PS3, the iPod, or your cell phone, you can bet that those companies would be just as angry, but I bet the public reaction would be much different.
Apple isn't telling its users what to do with the product once they've bought it, it's telling them the conditions under which they'll sell it. This is a well-known pre-existing decision of sale, which Psystar has chosen to flaunt for their own gain. They should have sued Apple before they started violating their implied consent to Apple's EULA.
Nope, just civilian. The Osaka/Kansai area is remarkable for being completely base-free.
I used to live in Germany so I know what you mean about Deutsche Telekom; they sock it to everybody.
Japan
$30 to $50 for
100 mbps
I live in Osaka, so it's relevant. As an expat, I really long for the day that the US telecoms stop making excuses and start upgrading their networks. They HAVE the money. Geography is not an excuse (after all, they could just do the big cities, but they don't).
Isn't the high foreclosure rate due to the bad housing loan situation? I'd call that an exceptional situation, not the rule, and while California is the hardest hit, it isn't the only victim.
Wouldn't having judges re-elected every four years encourage more, not less, impartiality? How does having a long-term incumbent increase impartiality? Look at the Supreme Court: due to its system for replacing judges, those justices appointed are almost always biased towards the politics of the President who appoints them. Not exactly a shining example of a fair and balanced system.
Anyway, regardless of California's politics, this particular classification comes from recommendations by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the National Toxicology Program; California is merely following their warnings in this situation.
The really fun part is that they include nitrous oxide on the list as a substance that causes "developmental toxicity". I assume that this means that it's bad for pregnant women; worst case scenario, it means that getting laughing gas at the dentist will mentally impair you, but like, permanently.
You got married and changed careers at the same time? Too many factors. Also, while many men do gain some weight after marriage, 50 pounds is a bit extreme. It's more likely that the weight gain is due to a culturally specific diet (perhaps American), personal bad eating habits, and a lack of exercise. Not exactly things to blame on the wife.
I think that this study needs a lot more work. As others have observed, they're only sampling men who have already lived past 60, and of those who are polygamous, they are also most certainly wealthy enough to support their wives, which means that their lifestyle isn't realistically in line with your average middle-class monogamist. However, I do think that the concept of multiple care-givers within the same household could make for a far more easy-going lifestyle. Less stress means better longevity.
Why on earth would we have big brains that were dumb? That doesn't make any sense from a survival aspect. Carrying around extra weight and a non-functional large brain?
If this theory is true, then yes, we should suddenly see the rise of cat and dog civilizations. They will probably be so super-intelligent that they will actually enslave another, dumber race of creatures to take care of their daily needs. This will give them ample time to bask in the luxury of doing absolutely nothing at all besides playing, eating, sleeping and toying with their slaves.
As the parent said, though, that could never happen.
Americans aren't particularly bothered that they started the fingerprinting/photographing trend and that Japan's institution of the same requirement was in protest to America's. Japan had previously decided that such tactics would be discriminatory and unfair (pretty impressive, considering Japan's poor track record on discrimination).
FYI, Japanese law is much stricter regarding taking pictures of people without their permission. Google may actually run up against actual legal issues as well as the cultural ones already mentioned.
Nope, the grandparent is right. Quote: "Dr Angus Hunter warned that athletes are at risk for low performance if the air quality cannot be brought down to acceptable levels."
"Quality" is the object, the verb is "lower". Dr. Hunter may be an expert on athlete performance, but not so good with the English. I think we get the point, though. :)
I find that the button sensitivity (right versus left-click) is too finicky, and the side buttons require way too much force to use comfortably/realistically.
The only glaring problem in all of this is that the astronomers say the only things they know are the minimum mass of the planet and the separation from its star. That's not a lot to go on.
If trading with China means being afflicted with "rampant spying", sign me up!
Sorry, but I disagree with Linus here. If you see Linux as merely a hobbyist operating system not to be taken seriously, then sure, all bugs are equal. However, if you actually aspire to having your kernel adopted as a serious replacement for even just mainstream computing, then you're going to have to accept the fact that your users want their data secure and their systems hardened against hacking.
Either Linus is being naive here or genuinely lacks the ego to see Linux widely adopted - the latter possibility is highly unlikely, or he would have quit by now.
If he were to include the bugs in the normal "this has been fixed" fix list with a description of what was wrong, then it will be, by definition, a patch to a security exploit, and he will have done his job.
Is his policy, or lack of one, security through obscurity? Yes, but more through his determination to pretend that it doesn't matter rather than any serious attempt to deceive his users. The only person he's fooling right now is himself.
They have forced an image on the public? They have merely advertised; what the public makes from that is their business, not Apple's. Apple is not some sort of all-powerful entity dictating what we think of them.
Anybody who takes those commercials personally can simply do what people do with 99% of the other commercials on TV: use the time to go into the kitchen to make a sandwich, or at the very least flip the channel.
Seems like an awful lot of work and risk for no guarantee of a return. Also, what about the priesthood lifestyle do you really think is that attractive that it would be worth it?