I don't know which is sadder, that you're so ashamed of your own heritage or that there is so little memory of actual Irish culture amongst Irish Americans.
I am American. 100%. That is my heritage, that is my culture. My fathers parents immigrated from Ireland. I am pretty sure I can point the country out on a map, and that is about it. I was never taught anything about the Irish culture. But I grew up American. I learned the American culture. Is that sad? I'm not "ashamed" of my "heritage." Because my heritage is American. If you know something of your past, you should hold on to some of your traditions. At the same time you should embrace traditions of the new place. But don't insult people because they only learned and embraced the new traditions.
My grand parents immigrated from Ireland. But I am not Irish, I am not an Irish American. I am American.
Studies confirm that there is a general racial bias in everyone
It isn't about being racist. It is about being different. Birds of a feather flock together. And people don't like other people that are different. Skin color is one huge big obvious difference. But there are other things as well, thats why there is the whole jocks vs nerds thing.
I'd venture to guess, that MANY people that are non-muslims feel that same tinge of fear or apprehension when they see someone get on a plane with "muslim garb".
I know I do....just natural these days,
But Why?
There are roughly the same number of Muslims in the world as Christians, although it is a bit less in the US. On American soil there are about as many (if not more) terrorist attacks from Christians as there are from Muslims. Yet you don't fear when you see a Christian board the plane, only from someone in "muslim garb?" That isn't natural, it is an irrational fear. Partially propagated by the stupid media. But also perpetuated by bigoted statements.
and that anyone who wears "Muslim garb" obviously identifies themselves as a Muslim first and an American second (if they are American at all).
This statement makes no sense. So does that mean anyone wearing a cross identifies themselves as a Christian first and an American second? How do you identify yourself as an American anyways (whether first or not) I thought America was supposed to be the great melting pot, and were proud of its diversity.
That is just a stupid, bigotted statement.
The C-64 came far later. It's only interesting aspect was the low cost - the technology inside was 5 years out of date. Steve Jobs is off 'inventing' the Macintosh, while Tramiel is pushing a $200 computer in K-Mart.
far later? far later than what? The C-64 came out in August of 82 with a price tag of $600 (The Vic 20 was the $200 computer at that point) The Apple IIe with similar specs (64K RAM, 6502 CPU) came out in Jan 1983. AFTER the C64 came out.
The Mac came out in 84 while CBM released the Amiga in 1985 (both with the 68K CPU). I don't see how the tech was 5 years out of date. Apple and Mac and Atari were neck in neck (with IBM PC languishing in the business world)
Things went downhill after Tramiel left for Atari. And things were never the same.
As far as TRS-80 being short "shrifted" it was never recognized as the most popular computer by Guinness.
No please. let it die. I love the C64, still got two on my desk, and I write software for the C64 and for emulator tools for it in my spare time. But it is over and done with. Either bring out a new computer with a new chip and new OS or bring out a linux box, but don't brand the linux box "commodore" or "amiga" because it is neither.
This sorry endeaviour reeks of political pork-barrell projects and I don't believe that this will cost the tax-payers nothing. Do you really think ad revenue will be enough to provide for the mamouth operating and maintenance costs?
TFA claims
Between coins and advertising, pay phones currently earn the city about $18 million annually,
Is this "mamouth operating" cost going to be more than 18 million?
I'm guessing they got it from the second sentence of the article:
The pilot program will replace crusty telephones
or perhaps from the third sentence:
And the futuristic screens could eventually replace all of the city’s 12,800 outdoor pay phones...
Those two sentences seem to imply they will be replacing phones. But perhaps I misread them.
As far as eventually, I assume "eventually" will be as soon as they can prove they'll make more than the $18 million a year they are making now.
There is a difference between programming and in game computer, and scripting the game.
There is an infinite amount of numbers between 1 and 2. There are an infinite amount between 2 and 3. Are there more numbers between 1 and 3? How is programming in one one game more or less interesting than scripting in another game?
This was recently announced. Can't get much newer than that. Announced by the author of a fairly popular game, and it has programming, and space... Pretty darn interesting.
20 years is a good start but what stop issues like this.
As for corporations not holding copyright, I don't understand why you think this is an issue or helps. Some things cost a lost of money to create. If we corporations can't hold copyright, then those things won't get created.
. They guaranteed a right to speech, and they were pretty clear about speech being, specifically, political speech. "
They were so clear about it that they forgot to use the word "political?" What exactly is "political speech" anyways? Are you only allowed to talk about laws and the government? That doesn't really sound to me like what the founding fathers meant.
I don't think porn should be banned outright, but to call it "speech" is ridiculous.
Why? Is it speech only when it is serious and conveys a point? Entertainment can't be "speech"
No you can't compare a porn pic to a newspaper column or editorial, any more than you can compare war and piece or the bible to an editorial column. Are you saying only newspapers and editorials are "speech" and war and peace should be banned? (We all know there is porn in the bible, so obviously that should be banned too.)
I image there can be a lot of things that are quite harmful to some marriages. Watching football, shopping, not paying attention to your significant other. Diablo 3, Golf, etc, etc, etc.
Not to mention the obvious distractions like the local strip club, the local bar, or the local red light district.
Porn IS pretty harmless.
If you funded the invention of a new crop version and wanted to recoup your hundreds of millions of development costs, you would not want the court to eliminate patent rights for 2nd generation crops.
So what are you going to do? Arrest the bee for cross pollination? Arrest the wind for blowing your seeds into my yard? If you want to control second generation don't let it out into the wild.
If you ask someone a question, you don't expect them to answer a different question.
The question posed to the SC was "Is it unconstitutional to strip search a person being jailed." The SC didn't rule on why the person was jailed, because that wasn't part of the question.
I think it was insane that this person was in jail for TWO weeks for failing to pay a fine, AND that it took two weeks to figure out there was a clerical error. But that is a separate issue on whether he should have been strip searched or not.
Seriously?
What did you think was reasonable? The part about making it unlawful to annoy or offend someone?
Or perhaps the part about obscene or profane language?
Or maybe it was the part that makes it illegal to do stuff that is already illegal?
I'd actually blame it on the absolutism of religion.....
What you describe is the increasing trend for people to want/expect the state to look out for their feelings and protect them from hearing things which go against their world view.
Why do people blame everything on religion? Religion has been around a LONG time. So if it is responsible for this increasing trend, well it sure has been increasing for a LONG time.
For instance, you can't directly block the entrance to, say, an office building by exercising your 1st amendment rights if that's the only way for someone who is offended by your message to enter.
Then you'll be arrested for trespassing or some other such, not for exercising your 1st amendment rights.
You may not hold an offensive rally (think pro-Nazi rallies on college campuses) if your free speech prevents someone from going from point A to point B without being offended
Where did you get this idea? As long as you aren't inciting a riot (you know, you are having a peaceful demonstration) you sure can offend other people. That is sort of the whole point of the whole freedom of expression. Obviously if I'm not offending you, then you really don't care what I say. But if I offend you, you will want me to stop, and that is why the free speech is protected.
The target audience for this IS the ADD-hyperactive 20-ish ctiy dweller.
But you are right there are uses for this in the working world. But a lot of those applications are highly targeted and you'll see videos for them on the convention floor of the proper field. Not on slashdot.
Targeting something like this for the average office user? I'm sure it is in the plans. But the first goal is to make it look "cool."
yes they are cool, but i don't see the usability factor other than it being a smartphone i wear. How will they change my life making them a killer device to buy?
That video sucked.
Imagine if you asked for walking directions, and you saw a green line on the sidewalk.
Imagine if you were looking for a book in the book store and there was a big blue circle around the book you wanted. Then you pulled the book off the bookshelf and saw user reviews (or something) on the cover of the book?
What if you went to a football game and saw the first down marker on the field? Or went to a Nascar race and saw the names of the drivers floating about the cars?
What if you were a geek and put blue triangles over your friends? Or changed the outfit a friend was wearing.
As far as AR goes, the demo looks a little meh. Good AR makes better use of positional awareness.
That video is in no way Augmented Reality... It is just, well a computer screen.
Augmented Reality would literally change the way things look. Much like they can draw the first down line on the field at a sporting event on tv. You could add arrows above the head of your friends. Or make it look like they are wearing a different hat, or whatever.
Sure there will be ad issues, as people will try to put ads everywhere. But at the same time the movie theatre could have a more interesting marquee. Your friends have their own avatars. You could add tons of data to anything.
For example when he pulled the book off the shelf and looked at the cover it could have listed its position on the NY times bestseller, or the number of likes or whatever.
Augmented reality isn't about some little icons you can click on.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know which is sadder, that you're so ashamed of your own heritage or that there is so little memory of actual Irish culture amongst Irish Americans.
I am American. 100%. That is my heritage, that is my culture. My fathers parents immigrated from Ireland. I am pretty sure I can point the country out on a map, and that is about it. I was never taught anything about the Irish culture. But I grew up American. I learned the American culture. Is that sad? I'm not "ashamed" of my "heritage." Because my heritage is American. If you know something of your past, you should hold on to some of your traditions. At the same time you should embrace traditions of the new place. But don't insult people because they only learned and embraced the new traditions.
My grand parents immigrated from Ireland. But I am not Irish, I am not an Irish American. I am American.
Studies confirm that there is a general racial bias in everyone
It isn't about being racist. It is about being different. Birds of a feather flock together. And people don't like other people that are different. Skin color is one huge big obvious difference. But there are other things as well, thats why there is the whole jocks vs nerds thing.
I'd venture to guess, that MANY people that are non-muslims feel that same tinge of fear or apprehension when they see someone get on a plane with "muslim garb".
I know I do....just natural these days,
But Why?
There are roughly the same number of Muslims in the world as Christians, although it is a bit less in the US. On American soil there are about as many (if not more) terrorist attacks from Christians as there are from Muslims. Yet you don't fear when you see a Christian board the plane, only from someone in "muslim garb?" That isn't natural, it is an irrational fear. Partially propagated by the stupid media. But also perpetuated by bigoted statements.
and that anyone who wears "Muslim garb" obviously identifies themselves as a Muslim first and an American second (if they are American at all).
This statement makes no sense. So does that mean anyone wearing a cross identifies themselves as a Christian first and an American second? How do you identify yourself as an American anyways (whether first or not) I thought America was supposed to be the great melting pot, and were proud of its diversity.
That is just a stupid, bigotted statement.
The C-64 came far later. It's only interesting aspect was the low cost - the technology inside was 5 years out of date. Steve Jobs is off 'inventing' the Macintosh, while Tramiel is pushing a $200 computer in K-Mart.
far later? far later than what? The C-64 came out in August of 82 with a price tag of $600 (The Vic 20 was the $200 computer at that point) The Apple IIe with similar specs (64K RAM, 6502 CPU) came out in Jan 1983. AFTER the C64 came out.
The Mac came out in 84 while CBM released the Amiga in 1985 (both with the 68K CPU). I don't see how the tech was 5 years out of date. Apple and Mac and Atari were neck in neck (with IBM PC languishing in the business world)
Things went downhill after Tramiel left for Atari. And things were never the same.
As far as TRS-80 being short "shrifted" it was never recognized as the most popular computer by Guinness.
No please. let it die. I love the C64, still got two on my desk, and I write software for the C64 and for emulator tools for it in my spare time. But it is over and done with. Either bring out a new computer with a new chip and new OS or bring out a linux box, but don't brand the linux box "commodore" or "amiga" because it is neither.
This sorry endeaviour reeks of political pork-barrell projects and I don't believe that this will cost the tax-payers nothing. Do you really think ad revenue will be enough to provide for the mamouth operating and maintenance costs?
TFA claims
Between coins and advertising, pay phones currently earn the city about $18 million annually,
Is this "mamouth operating" cost going to be more than 18 million?
How did you get "replace phones" out of this?
I'm guessing they got it from the second sentence of the article:
The pilot program will replace crusty telephones
or perhaps from the third sentence:
And the futuristic screens could eventually replace all of the city’s 12,800 outdoor pay phones...
Those two sentences seem to imply they will be replacing phones. But perhaps I misread them.
As far as eventually, I assume "eventually" will be as soon as they can prove they'll make more than the $18 million a year they are making now.
There is a difference between programming and in game computer, and scripting the game.
There is an infinite amount of numbers between 1 and 2. There are an infinite amount between 2 and 3. Are there more numbers between 1 and 3? How is programming in one one game more or less interesting than scripting in another game?
at least report something new and interesting ...
This was recently announced. Can't get much newer than that. Announced by the author of a fairly popular game, and it has programming, and space... Pretty darn interesting.
20 years is a good start but what stop issues like this.
As for corporations not holding copyright, I don't understand why you think this is an issue or helps. Some things cost a lost of money to create. If we corporations can't hold copyright, then those things won't get created.
. They guaranteed a right to speech, and they were pretty clear about speech being, specifically, political speech. "
They were so clear about it that they forgot to use the word "political?" What exactly is "political speech" anyways? Are you only allowed to talk about laws and the government? That doesn't really sound to me like what the founding fathers meant.
I don't think porn should be banned outright, but to call it "speech" is ridiculous.
Why? Is it speech only when it is serious and conveys a point? Entertainment can't be "speech"
No you can't compare a porn pic to a newspaper column or editorial, any more than you can compare war and piece or the bible to an editorial column. Are you saying only newspapers and editorials are "speech" and war and peace should be banned? (We all know there is porn in the bible, so obviously that should be banned too.)
I image there can be a lot of things that are quite harmful to some marriages. Watching football, shopping, not paying attention to your significant other. Diablo 3, Golf, etc, etc, etc.
Not to mention the obvious distractions like the local strip club, the local bar, or the local red light district.
Porn IS pretty harmless.
If you funded the invention of a new crop version and wanted to recoup your hundreds of millions of development costs, you would not want the court to eliminate patent rights for 2nd generation crops.
So what are you going to do? Arrest the bee for cross pollination? Arrest the wind for blowing your seeds into my yard? If you want to control second generation don't let it out into the wild.
Not everyone who is arrested is taken to jail.
If you ask someone a question, you don't expect them to answer a different question.
The question posed to the SC was "Is it unconstitutional to strip search a person being jailed." The SC didn't rule on why the person was jailed, because that wasn't part of the question.
I think it was insane that this person was in jail for TWO weeks for failing to pay a fine, AND that it took two weeks to figure out there was a clerical error. But that is a separate issue on whether he should have been strip searched or not.
Why are there so many holes in the image?
The summary almost makes the law sound reasonable
Seriously?
What did you think was reasonable? The part about making it unlawful to annoy or offend someone?
Or perhaps the part about obscene or profane language?
Or maybe it was the part that makes it illegal to do stuff that is already illegal?
I'd actually blame it on the absolutism of religion..... What you describe is the increasing trend for people to want/expect the state to look out for their feelings and protect them from hearing things which go against their world view.
Why do people blame everything on religion? Religion has been around a LONG time. So if it is responsible for this increasing trend, well it sure has been increasing for a LONG time.
For instance, you can't directly block the entrance to, say, an office building by exercising your 1st amendment rights if that's the only way for someone who is offended by your message to enter.
Then you'll be arrested for trespassing or some other such, not for exercising your 1st amendment rights.
You may not hold an offensive rally (think pro-Nazi rallies on college campuses) if your free speech prevents someone from going from point A to point B without being offended
Where did you get this idea? As long as you aren't inciting a riot (you know, you are having a peaceful demonstration) you sure can offend other people. That is sort of the whole point of the whole freedom of expression. Obviously if I'm not offending you, then you really don't care what I say. But if I offend you, you will want me to stop, and that is why the free speech is protected.
Was I the only one who thought it was kinda sad that he "shared" the sunset with the girl, but he really was there all alone?
I thought that was cool. I assumed she was away on a business trip, or a long distance girl friend.
The target audience for this IS the ADD-hyperactive 20-ish ctiy dweller.
But you are right there are uses for this in the working world. But a lot of those applications are highly targeted and you'll see videos for them on the convention floor of the proper field. Not on slashdot.
Targeting something like this for the average office user? I'm sure it is in the plans. But the first goal is to make it look "cool."
yes they are cool, but i don't see the usability factor other than it being a smartphone i wear. How will they change my life making them a killer device to buy?
That video sucked.
Imagine if you asked for walking directions, and you saw a green line on the sidewalk.
Imagine if you were looking for a book in the book store and there was a big blue circle around the book you wanted. Then you pulled the book off the bookshelf and saw user reviews (or something) on the cover of the book?
What if you went to a football game and saw the first down marker on the field? Or went to a Nascar race and saw the names of the drivers floating about the cars?
What if you were a geek and put blue triangles over your friends? Or changed the outfit a friend was wearing.
As far as AR goes, the demo looks a little meh. Good AR makes better use of positional awareness.
That video is in no way Augmented Reality... It is just, well a computer screen.
Augmented Reality would literally change the way things look. Much like they can draw the first down line on the field at a sporting event on tv. You could add arrows above the head of your friends. Or make it look like they are wearing a different hat, or whatever.
Sure there will be ad issues, as people will try to put ads everywhere. But at the same time the movie theatre could have a more interesting marquee. Your friends have their own avatars. You could add tons of data to anything.
For example when he pulled the book off the shelf and looked at the cover it could have listed its position on the NY times bestseller, or the number of likes or whatever.
Augmented reality isn't about some little icons you can click on.