...as the note says, it would be nice not to have to use quicktime player. Or RealPlayer, for that matter. In my experience, both of them tend to conflict with other applications/snap up the rights to play certain files without consent. Neither program is all that great, as far as I'm concerned.
Am I the only one very slightly disgusted by the fact that scientists know that a gecko's feet stick to walls in a vacuum? I mean... well, frankly, yuck.
...is if the robot grew back body parts when they were cut off.
Well, not really. I mean, yes, that would be more impressive, but not necessarily feasible. So climbing on walls and ceilings seems like a good accopmplishment.
Katz is fixated on the notion of the next Shakespeare. It's an interesting idea: but he's using Shakespeare -- or his *notion* of Shakespeare -- for a specific rhetorical purpose.
As I read this, he's not meaning the "next Shakespeare" literally -- he's apparently using the name "Shakespeare" to imply "a good writer." Or perhaps "a famous writer". Or, wait -- is a "good" *and* "famous" writer?
I think Katz's notion of Shakespeare is something along the lines of, "An incredibly famous writer who changes the way the world thinks for the next five hundred years."
Probably very closesly connected with, "And he'll also be the author of a book called 'Geeks.'"
Keep clacking away at the weblog there, Johnny Boy.
Ok, I get your point. I guess that my point is that I still don't know how this helps them actually interact with the computer. Interaction is two parts. One, you have to be able to communicate with the computer, as I'm doing through typing this. Two, the computer has to be able to communicate with you. Hence the monitor. This still does not help a blind and deaf person use any software at all.
That said, I do see your point about perhaps translating from sign language into text or spoken words. In effect, the computer would serve the purpose that a human translator does now. However, it still cannot allow a deaf and blind person to carry on a conversation, simply because there's no good way for the computer to translate back.
Or is there?
I honestly don't know. It seems like some sort of rudimentary braille panel would be possible to make, where the computer interpreted the text/voice it was getting, converted it, and relayed it in the form of braille on some sort of panel or pad. In fact, I'd be willing to bet these are already in existence in some form or another.
Still, at the same time, I suspect that most of the things the sighted, have come to expect from computers are probably not feasible. For example, the idea of a GUI is almost certainly not possible, for obvious reasons. In the same way, multimedia probably isn't very likely. Taste, smell and touch, the three senses that our hypothetical deaf and blind person does have access to, don't really have that much to do with the way we talk with computers, at this point.
I suspect that, in all likelihood, the only way a deaf and blind person will ever get the same level of use out of a computer that the average sighted person can is if some sort of "datajack," to steal a term, is invented. And I don't even want to get into the realm of direct neural interfaces here.
Exactly how does this help the blind? I mean, if you're blind, you are already not really in a good position to interact with a standard computer, where the majority of the interaction is visual in the first place.
Anyway, my point is that we keep reading stories on Slashdot about Iridium and about people suing Napster. In both cases, you're increasingly getting more and more posts along the lines of, "Who cares?" or, "Again, I don't see the point in keeping Iridium going." I just don't see why you keep posting these stories, when there are so many more interesting things you could talk about.
Hmmm. That looks like an apple logo at the top of the page to me. And most the comments here are negative. I guess we're just lucky that it's not Apogee with the buttonless mouse idea.
I don't think the plot is quite as bad as you make it out to be. It's certainly not Magnolia, but I don't think that it's JUST an excuse for shots of Thandie Newton's cleavage and car chases.
Also, I don't think the bad guy was really a lunatic. That's cliche, and I think that they tried to keep that from happening. I think that part of the reason for the love triangle in the movie is so that we get a good idea of why he hates Ethan Hunt so much. In that light, he's just an extraordinarily greedy, jealous human being. But I don't think he's just a cliche movie villain.
I guess this is really more of a reply to H's comments on the story, rather than the story itself, but is it really such a sad commentary? I mean, I'm much more comfortable with the idea that the government would detonate a nuclear weapon on the moon to scare the USSR than I am with them detonating them on earth. I guess I just make certain assumptions about the early cold war mindset that let me excuse "pissing matches," to a certain extent.
So they've made their move. First, they "accidentally" halt gun sales. Then, soon, the U.N. Helicopters move in, and the Russian Army soldiers take over our places of business and worship. Registered gun owners are rounded up, and the American government is subsumed in the new world order. So much more efficient than creating crop failures with the U.N.'s weather machine.
For the record, a search at the Patent Office's web site, reveals that Union Metals in fact owns the trademark, oddly enough. I'm just tacking this on to make my post somewhat less redundant, since two other people mentioned it was trademarked while I was posting.;)
Um, am I the only one to whom this seems like nothing more than an advertisement? I mean, frankly, it seems like Mr. Katz is either friends with the author, or is getting some sort of cut of the profits, because this column strikes me as nothing more than a big promo piece for the book. Example -- count the number of times he uses "Edge" with a capital "e." It's striking. Katz doesn't seem nearly so interested in discussing/reviewing the book as he does in promoting it. I question the value and ethics of this piece.
...this is really going to hurt them. It's interesting to see that Sony is willing to swallow a huge loss financially (I'm assuming the cost of recalling 1.25 million consoles is tremendous) just in order to keep DVD players without regional encoding off the market. They're a huge company with tons and tons of money, but at the same time, the recall definitely doesn't feel too good for them. I guess that shows how worried they are about losing that control, though.
I'm sorry, but these people are insane. Why are they saving Iridium? Basically, because it's there. It's had 7 billion spent on it, and they figure, "Well, it'd be a shame to see all that money go to waste. We'll spend another $650 on it." It seemed like a good idea when the project was started, but it's already obsolete over a huge chunk of the globe. I'm not alone in the fact that I'll probably never go anywhere where my only option for internet access is a 9600 baud satellite hookup.
And another thing. "Open Source." What the heck does that mean applied to this? I mean, I understand what they're trying to do, but unless I really don't understand the concept of open source, what they want to do is a parallel concept, at best. IT sounds like they're just trying to throw around buzzwords to get recognition from sites like/. (kinda like Wizards of the Coast's "Open Gaming License," for that matter)
I don't think that this makes any sense at all. I think any method of increasing voter participation is good. While registering people automatically is kind of silly, this doesn't fit along those lines. Basically, it makes voting a more convenient process, and increases participation.
Great. Blizzard is rewarding their exceedingly patient fans with a special edition of Diablo II. But they STILL have not set a release date. The game is going to end up like six months late. I'm all about quality, but I wish they could speed things just a little.
I mean, sure, I guess it's an advance, but does it deserve a lot of fanfare? It seems like it's nothing more than a new way of introducing foreign agents into cells. Opening a hole in a cell membrane isn't rocket science (it's biology, I know). But seriously, it's not much of a breakthrough.
Slashdot Mirror
...as the note says, it would be nice not to have to use quicktime player. Or RealPlayer, for that matter. In my experience, both of them tend to conflict with other applications/snap up the rights to play certain files without consent. Neither program is all that great, as far as I'm concerned.
Am I the only one very slightly disgusted by the fact that scientists know that a gecko's feet stick to walls in a vacuum? I mean... well, frankly, yuck.
Well, not really. I mean, yes, that would be more impressive, but not necessarily feasible. So climbing on walls and ceilings seems like a good accopmplishment.
As I read this, he's not meaning the "next Shakespeare" literally -- he's apparently using the name "Shakespeare" to imply "a good writer." Or perhaps "a famous writer". Or, wait -- is a "good" *and* "famous" writer?
I think Katz's notion of Shakespeare is something along the lines of, "An incredibly famous writer who changes the way the world thinks for the next five hundred years."
Probably very closesly connected with, "And he'll also be the author of a book called 'Geeks.'"
Keep clacking away at the weblog there, Johnny Boy.
That said, I do see your point about perhaps translating from sign language into text or spoken words. In effect, the computer would serve the purpose that a human translator does now. However, it still cannot allow a deaf and blind person to carry on a conversation, simply because there's no good way for the computer to translate back.
Or is there?
I honestly don't know. It seems like some sort of rudimentary braille panel would be possible to make, where the computer interpreted the text/voice it was getting, converted it, and relayed it in the form of braille on some sort of panel or pad. In fact, I'd be willing to bet these are already in existence in some form or another.
Still, at the same time, I suspect that most of the things the sighted, have come to expect from computers are probably not feasible. For example, the idea of a GUI is almost certainly not possible, for obvious reasons. In the same way, multimedia probably isn't very likely. Taste, smell and touch, the three senses that our hypothetical deaf and blind person does have access to, don't really have that much to do with the way we talk with computers, at this point.
I suspect that, in all likelihood, the only way a deaf and blind person will ever get the same level of use out of a computer that the average sighted person can is if some sort of "datajack," to steal a term, is invented. And I don't even want to get into the realm of direct neural interfaces here.
Exactly how does this help the blind? I mean, if you're blind, you are already not really in a good position to interact with a standard computer, where the majority of the interaction is visual in the first place.
Anyway, my point is that we keep reading stories on Slashdot about Iridium and about people suing Napster. In both cases, you're increasingly getting more and more posts along the lines of, "Who cares?" or, "Again, I don't see the point in keeping Iridium going." I just don't see why you keep posting these stories, when there are so many more interesting things you could talk about.
Deep breath
Hmmm. That looks like an apple logo at the top of the page to me. And most the comments here are negative. I guess we're just lucky that it's not Apogee with the buttonless mouse idea.
Ouch. Next, I suppose you're going to tell me you don't like American Beauty. Or Fight Club. Or Boys Don't Cry.
Also, I don't think the bad guy was really a lunatic. That's cliche, and I think that they tried to keep that from happening. I think that part of the reason for the love triangle in the movie is so that we get a good idea of why he hates Ethan Hunt so much. In that light, he's just an extraordinarily greedy, jealous human being. But I don't think he's just a cliche movie villain.
I guess this is really more of a reply to H's comments on the story, rather than the story itself, but is it really such a sad commentary? I mean, I'm much more comfortable with the idea that the government would detonate a nuclear weapon on the moon to scare the USSR than I am with them detonating them on earth. I guess I just make certain assumptions about the early cold war mindset that let me excuse "pissing matches," to a certain extent.
So they've made their move. First, they "accidentally" halt gun sales. Then, soon, the U.N. Helicopters move in, and the Russian Army soldiers take over our places of business and worship. Registered gun owners are rounded up, and the American government is subsumed in the new world order. So much more efficient than creating crop failures with the U.N.'s weather machine.
Hey, even better... I could wire it to my house's electrical wiring, and run my whole house off the furby!
After all these years, I finally have a guide to help me squat efficiently! Ha!
For the record, a search at the Patent Office's web site, reveals that Union Metals in fact owns the trademark, oddly enough. I'm just tacking this on to make my post somewhat less redundant, since two other people mentioned it was trademarked while I was posting. ;)
Um, UNIX is a trademarked word. I wouldn't pay very much for the domain name, since you might have to surrender it in court.
Um, am I the only one to whom this seems like nothing more than an advertisement? I mean, frankly, it seems like Mr. Katz is either friends with the author, or is getting some sort of cut of the profits, because this column strikes me as nothing more than a big promo piece for the book. Example -- count the number of times he uses "Edge" with a capital "e." It's striking. Katz doesn't seem nearly so interested in discussing/reviewing the book as he does in promoting it. I question the value and ethics of this piece.
Whoops. I knew it wasn't the consoles being recalled, and I still managed to type that in. CDs. This is still hugely expensive.
...this is really going to hurt them. It's interesting to see that Sony is willing to swallow a huge loss financially (I'm assuming the cost of recalling 1.25 million consoles is tremendous) just in order to keep DVD players without regional encoding off the market. They're a huge company with tons and tons of money, but at the same time, the recall definitely doesn't feel too good for them. I guess that shows how worried they are about losing that control, though.
And another thing. "Open Source." What the heck does that mean applied to this? I mean, I understand what they're trying to do, but unless I really don't understand the concept of open source, what they want to do is a parallel concept, at best. IT sounds like they're just trying to throw around buzzwords to get recognition from sites like /. (kinda like Wizards of the Coast's "Open Gaming License," for that matter)
I don't think that this makes any sense at all. I think any method of increasing voter participation is good. While registering people automatically is kind of silly, this doesn't fit along those lines. Basically, it makes voting a more convenient process, and increases participation.
Great. Blizzard is rewarding their exceedingly patient fans with a special edition of Diablo II. But they STILL have not set a release date. The game is going to end up like six months late. I'm all about quality, but I wish they could speed things just a little.
I mean, sure, I guess it's an advance, but does it deserve a lot of fanfare? It seems like it's nothing more than a new way of introducing foreign agents into cells. Opening a hole in a cell membrane isn't rocket science (it's biology, I know). But seriously, it's not much of a breakthrough.
Hard to pass on a Critic reference, regardless of how far I have to go to make it.