My experience is the following: I once had a 60gb iPod. Cool. I could stash all my music in it. But the iPod proved in its very first uses not to be reliable enough so that I could leave my songs in the iPod and delete them from my hard disk, which had been my original wish-I-lived-in-a-perfect-world intent. Then came the Nano and I figured I could use a much more portable player and synch it whenever needed as my files would still be confined to my comp's HD anyway. Now, I bought myself a Sony Ericsson k800i phone to replace my old digital camera (and, yes, I'm very satisfied with the 3.2mp with the xenon flashy thing provided for my personal camera use - now it is with me everywhere, completely solving my wish-I-had-brought-my-camera problem).
Anyway, I got the k800i stacked with a 1gb mem stick and, even though the music player in it isn't fancy, it handles playlists and separates tracks by artists or albums, has a basic EQ and works, battery life is quite impressive on the device. Very quickly I figured I could carry 1 MP3 CD's worth of tracks while still having enough space for hundreds of 3.2mp photos. So now I only have one device, which I use with bluetooth stereo headphones or plug into my car stereo. It is enough for commuting, for strolling down the beach, and for listening to my tunes in the car. I still have to synch it anyway according to mood changes.
Summing it up, what I learned from my own personal experience AND requirements is that the huge storage the top iPods offer is just overkill, and that having to carry only one device is infinetely better and definitely the way to go. Right now I wouldn't move to the iPhone because: I'm in Brazil, the gadget will still be locked to cingular for quite a while and it doesn't have a minimum 3.2.mp camera w/ flash on it. Future versions might surely make me change my mind, but only as far as I can have one single all-purpose device.
True. And in that sentence the singular "they" wouldn't do the job either.
I'd go for "it". sibling is generic enough.
Does anyone know how the german language deals with this? Supposedly they would have the same problem.
One should study grammar in order to better understand how it can assist one in making one's point come across more clearly. It could prove very beneficial to oneself.
Please note it's usage as a subject pronoun, object pronoun, possessive adjective and reflexive pronoun, respectively. There really isn't (to my knowledge) a proper possessive pronoun for it though.
I'll never understand why people won't simply use this.
PS: This is not intended as grammar-nazi trolling.
Yeah. Apple products have been increasingly easier to hack or even upgrade ever since the original iMac first allowed users to update RAM and hard drive. Apple's thing about selling "closed" systems is pretty neat (to them), first because it allows for that software runnning better on controlled hardware; second, if one fidgets with it one loses warranty, having to give less support is always good; third, closed systems are bound to be replaced by other entire systems by the non-hardware-knowledgeable user, which I'd bet is the largest pergcentage of Apple customers. OTOH, leaving a few kinda easy ways for "hardware hacking geeks" to come in and tweak their stuff makes these guys happy by allowing them to tinker with a favorite toy, by creating some sort of "Ha! I hacked the newest !" fuzzy feeling/status and, in general, allows for some random software/hardware free r&d while at the same time keeping some sort of perversely distorted good PR with such types. All in all it seems to me a good business model for Apple.
I guess that the point would be getting AI controlled transportation units which you could take anywhere on the system and would stop anywhere you needed to go. Ok, so that's cabs for you. That's what public transport should be a huge mass of cabs. People shoudn't have to own cars anymore. The problem with current public transport (except for cabs) is that no matter how good it is, it mostly never gets you "quite there" where you could get with your own car or a cab. And it also takes more time. This is because when hauling 40 people in a bus, it has to make stops for many people to either get off or on it. Making lots of AI cabs move together in a constant flux seems pretty straight-forward, it's like the metro. The secret lies in how to make the units get in and out of the main traffic flow to make those individual stops. "Minority Report" and "I, Robot" were 2 films where interesting traffic solutions were depicted albeit maintaining the concept of private cars. But the same problem is still out there to be cracked: making it flow is easy, finding a way to enter/exit the system without incurring in multiple stops is a killer. Elevated or underground lanes?
Anyone know anything about work/family balance for people working at Google? This is a really good question. I guess the Googleplex way of life would be very suited to single or google-married people with no kids (if such exists).
But with a child and wife, one just can't afford to do even 12 hours a day. That leaves one 4 hours a day in which to have a social life, an intimate relationship, raise a child properly and reap the benefits of being with him/her and pursue a hobby or continued education.
There is some good mathematics in splitting a day into 8/8/8. I took me a while (including a change of marital status, which did include other reasons as well) to realise that. And I'm still trying hard to get to that balance. Even though by being single again and still young, the idea of Google-like perks is still very seducing, the kid is what really changes it all.
Besides, the real point (I think) of the article is not the simplistic "every sci-fi movie made is space opera" but the slightly more nuanced "the power of space operas to attract funding has taken away from the ability to make more serious sci fi". The serious stuff still gets made from time to time, but frequently on a more shoe-string budget (check Equilibrium). Meanwhile a lot of really good sci fi gets completely destroyed by the gravitational pull of Star Wars. Take a look at "I, Robot" as one example. (The article lists others).
The fact that some movies make it through as more serious sci fi (the article was written about "Children of Men" for crying out loud!) doesn't nullify the proposition that serious sci fi has suffered because of the space opera effect. But has it? Did it use to get better funding/chances before Star Wars? The turning really-good-sci-fi originals into space operas because the latter have proven to be more profitable is a shame but a very valid point for the reasons you have stated in your post.
Of course it's a larger problem with the fact that Hollywood is fundamentally an investment market. You invest millions in a movie, and the point is to maximize return on investment. I'm sure that's not what all actors, directors, and screen writers want to do but it *is* what the financeers want to do and they well, do the financing. Star Wars just added to this to make it really hard for serious sci fi to get funding. This is the absolute truth. Hollywood is not about art, it's about ROI. Occasionally the 2 can dance together. Most times they can't.
I myself apply that criterion when going to the movies. At times, I want plain entertainment, so I'll get myself into the first explosions-car chase-lotsa tits blockbuster I find, and will go home extremely satisfied. At other times, when the mood is right, I'll go to the "thinkers" and be as well satisfied by that. And finally, if I want "thinkers with lotsa tits" I'll just fix myself a G&T, sit on the couch and watch any of Andrew Blake's erotica/pr0n (and just wish I could somehow get THAT kind of satisfaction) =)
There is only so much advertising that has any effectiveness on the Internet. We're close to a saturation point now. (Probably only tolerable because people run pop-up ad blockers as standard practice.)
The entire Internet will never become "advertising supported". It simply can't, because advertisers won't keep paying for ads that don't bring in enough new sales to cost-justify them. Broadcasters streaming a new TV show or movie online can certainly insert a few ads, just like the TV airing counterpart has. But that doesn't signify a huge shift towards advertising "taking over" web sites everywhere. Yes, but what we see here is not a fully ad-supported model. You get a convenient but handicapped version of the product AFTER the main product was aired (so big bucks advertisers wil still go to the tv premiere for that - I agree tv licensing contracts are quite an issue they'll have to figure out yet) and you get nice space/possibilities for extra ads and even your own ads (DVD box sets, new series et al) with very good target audience placement. This way they're making some nice extra money they would not if people were simply putting it on YouTube. If users really want to get it all in one place, they'll have to face the consequences of that and possibly pay for access to licensed content. That's a lot how cable started, wasn't it?
A big plus of these initiatives, for me, is that finally, being in Brazil and an English speaker, I can watch shows when they are broadcast in the US, instead of having to wait half a season or more for it to become appear here. And, these episodes being made available by their actual producers will just end up in higher quality audio and video, once the coporate mind gets its head around the technology requirements for decent performance. And kudos to NBC, who is doing it basically DRM-free. The ad model is fine with me, being able to buy DVDs and t-shirts as well. That's some of the added value people have been preaching regarding music DRM as well, isn't it? Maybe I can't download it to my computer, but I can go there anytime and watch it for free, knowing what to expect (not HD, no surround sound, having to re-stream it if I want to watch it again, etc) and purchase the fancy features if I really want them.
Maybe the same concept could apply to the music industry? Go to a label site and stream whatever you want. Hey, I'm paying for my bandwidth. If I want to download and carry it in my iPod, I need to purchase the songs (of course here the DRM discussion continues as it seems now forever and ever). But, seriously, as bandwidth and delivery technology improve, a stream-for-free-with-ads/pay-for-other-uses-and-fe atures model could be conceivable for many (all?) kinds of media products. I guess the problem with this is that, yes, the corps would get greedy and end up screwing it up, if not, someone would come up with a way to download and re-distribute the material, but, in the unlikely scenario that EVERYONE makes a compromise, it might even work.
PS: the space in the middle of "features" is being put there by/. I previewed this post 4 times before submitting. And I know this is full of holes, but could be a start.
This is a lot how things work for me as well. I have certain "defaults" for certain categories of things. If someone comes and "organizes" these, I'm at a complete loss. It may seem lazy, like a pile of paper mail on the corner of the dining table, but once you rephrase it into what I'm really thinking when doing it, things sound a lot different: all new paper mail goes into a pile on the corner of the table closer to the door. That's the first surface available when entering my house. It ensures I won't forget that it is there. Once opened and deemed relevant, correspondence moves to the computer desk where action will be taken accordingly. End result is that most of my friends say I'm a very organised, although messy, person. Sounds fair to me.
--
It's not easy being green.
I'll trust the wisdom of the universe in this. Whenever it figures out it is time to wipe us out, let it do it. I don't see much worth saving around here anyway.
I'll totally go for cosmic-event-driven annihilation. I'd only oppose Darwin-award-winners-driven annihilation. Not that they are not supposed to obliterate themselves, but keep off my lawn.
Kudos to Avast! I've been using it for the past 3 years and it is beautiful. I even bothered to upgrade to the paid Pro version, which has a couple more resident scan modules and works with push updates from their servers, instead of me having to remember/set a schedule for it. There have been occasions where I got up to 3 virus definitions updates in a single day =) Could it be just eye-candy? Perhaps, but it feels good, is not invasive and doesn't clog my system. Very happy customer here.
Slashdot Mirror
Wish I had mod points.
First sensible suggestion I heard all day.
Start Menu => Control Panel => Regional and Language Options => Languages tab
Change your keyboard layout to US-International - that simple, won't hurt.
There's nothing like good visions of the future...
"I'm the operator
with my pocket calculator,
by pressing down a special key
it plays a little melody."
My experience is the following: I once had a 60gb iPod. Cool. I could stash all my music in it. But the iPod proved in its very first uses not to be reliable enough so that I could leave my songs in the iPod and delete them from my hard disk, which had been my original wish-I-lived-in-a-perfect-world intent. Then came the Nano and I figured I could use a much more portable player and synch it whenever needed as my files would still be confined to my comp's HD anyway. Now, I bought myself a Sony Ericsson k800i phone to replace my old digital camera (and, yes, I'm very satisfied with the 3.2mp with the xenon flashy thing provided for my personal camera use - now it is with me everywhere, completely solving my wish-I-had-brought-my-camera problem).
Anyway, I got the k800i stacked with a 1gb mem stick and, even though the music player in it isn't fancy, it handles playlists and separates tracks by artists or albums, has a basic EQ and works, battery life is quite impressive on the device. Very quickly I figured I could carry 1 MP3 CD's worth of tracks while still having enough space for hundreds of 3.2mp photos. So now I only have one device, which I use with bluetooth stereo headphones or plug into my car stereo. It is enough for commuting, for strolling down the beach, and for listening to my tunes in the car. I still have to synch it anyway according to mood changes.
Summing it up, what I learned from my own personal experience AND requirements is that the huge storage the top iPods offer is just overkill, and that having to carry only one device is infinetely better and definitely the way to go. Right now I wouldn't move to the iPhone because: I'm in Brazil, the gadget will still be locked to cingular for quite a while and it doesn't have a minimum 3.2.mp camera w/ flash on it. Future versions might surely make me change my mind, but only as far as I can have one single all-purpose device.
True. And in that sentence the singular "they" wouldn't do the job either. I'd go for "it". sibling is generic enough. Does anyone know how the german language deals with this? Supposedly they would have the same problem.
It already has "one", which is exactly that.
One should study grammar in order to better understand how it can assist one in making one's point come across more clearly. It could prove very beneficial to oneself.
Please note it's usage as a subject pronoun, object pronoun, possessive adjective and reflexive pronoun, respectively. There really isn't (to my knowledge) a proper possessive pronoun for it though.
I'll never understand why people won't simply use this.
PS: This is not intended as grammar-nazi trolling.
...first because it allows for that "software runnning better on controlled hardware" thing;
...by creating some sort of "Ha! I hacked the newest [insert apple product here]!" fuzzy feeling/statusYeah. Apple products have been increasingly easier to hack or even upgrade ever since the original iMac first allowed users to update RAM and hard drive. Apple's thing about selling "closed" systems is pretty neat (to them), first because it allows for that software runnning better on controlled hardware; second, if one fidgets with it one loses warranty, having to give less support is always good; third, closed systems are bound to be replaced by other entire systems by the non-hardware-knowledgeable user, which I'd bet is the largest pergcentage of Apple customers. OTOH, leaving a few kinda easy ways for "hardware hacking geeks" to come in and tweak their stuff makes these guys happy by allowing them to tinker with a favorite toy, by creating some sort of "Ha! I hacked the newest !" fuzzy feeling/status and, in general, allows for some random software/hardware free r&d while at the same time keeping some sort of perversely distorted good PR with such types. All in all it seems to me a good business model for Apple.
My sincerest apologies. Really wasn't the intention =(
I guess that the point would be getting AI controlled transportation units which you could take anywhere on the system and would stop anywhere you needed to go. Ok, so that's cabs for you. That's what public transport should be a huge mass of cabs. People shoudn't have to own cars anymore. The problem with current public transport (except for cabs) is that no matter how good it is, it mostly never gets you "quite there" where you could get with your own car or a cab. And it also takes more time. This is because when hauling 40 people in a bus, it has to make stops for many people to either get off or on it. Making lots of AI cabs move together in a constant flux seems pretty straight-forward, it's like the metro. The secret lies in how to make the units get in and out of the main traffic flow to make those individual stops. "Minority Report" and "I, Robot" were 2 films where interesting traffic solutions were depicted albeit maintaining the concept of private cars. But the same problem is still out there to be cracked: making it flow is easy, finding a way to enter/exit the system without incurring in multiple stops is a killer. Elevated or underground lanes?
This is a really good question. I guess the Googleplex way of life would be very suited to single or google-married people with no kids (if such exists).
But with a child and wife, one just can't afford to do even 12 hours a day. That leaves one 4 hours a day in which to have a social life, an intimate relationship, raise a child properly and reap the benefits of being with him/her and pursue a hobby or continued education.
There is some good mathematics in splitting a day into 8/8/8. I took me a while (including a change of marital status, which did include other reasons as well) to realise that. And I'm still trying hard to get to that balance. Even though by being single again and still young, the idea of Google-like perks is still very seducing, the kid is what really changes it all.
Proper free-time is the greatest perk of all.
I very much enjoyed Primer. Definitely not Hollywood =)
The fact that some movies make it through as more serious sci fi (the article was written about "Children of Men" for crying out loud!) doesn't nullify the proposition that serious sci fi has suffered because of the space opera effect.
But has it? Did it use to get better funding/chances before Star Wars? The turning really-good-sci-fi originals into space operas because the latter have proven to be more profitable is a shame but a very valid point for the reasons you have stated in your post. Of course it's a larger problem with the fact that Hollywood is fundamentally an investment market. You invest millions in a movie, and the point is to maximize return on investment. I'm sure that's not what all actors, directors, and screen writers want to do but it *is* what the financeers want to do and they well, do the financing. Star Wars just added to this to make it really hard for serious sci fi to get funding.
This is the absolute truth. Hollywood is not about art, it's about ROI. Occasionally the 2 can dance together. Most times they can't.
I myself apply that criterion when going to the movies. At times, I want plain entertainment, so I'll get myself into the first explosions-car chase-lotsa tits blockbuster I find, and will go home extremely satisfied. At other times, when the mood is right, I'll go to the "thinkers" and be as well satisfied by that. And finally, if I want "thinkers with lotsa tits" I'll just fix myself a G&T, sit on the couch and watch any of Andrew Blake's erotica/pr0n (and just wish I could somehow get THAT kind of satisfaction) =)
The entire Internet will never become "advertising supported". It simply can't, because advertisers won't keep paying for ads that don't bring in enough new sales to cost-justify them. Broadcasters streaming a new TV show or movie online can certainly insert a few ads, just like the TV airing counterpart has. But that doesn't signify a huge shift towards advertising "taking over" web sites everywhere.
Yes, but what we see here is not a fully ad-supported model. You get a convenient but handicapped version of the product AFTER the main product was aired (so big bucks advertisers wil still go to the tv premiere for that - I agree tv licensing contracts are quite an issue they'll have to figure out yet) and you get nice space/possibilities for extra ads and even your own ads (DVD box sets, new series et al) with very good target audience placement. This way they're making some nice extra money they would not if people were simply putting it on YouTube. If users really want to get it all in one place, they'll have to face the consequences of that and possibly pay for access to licensed content. That's a lot how cable started, wasn't it?
And still, I couldn't do a decent job of it. Sorry for the typos. It's too late (early?) for me here...
A big plus of these initiatives, for me, is that finally, being in Brazil and an English speaker, I can watch shows when they are broadcast in the US, instead of having to wait half a season or more for it to become appear here. And, these episodes being made available by their actual producers will just end up in higher quality audio and video, once the coporate mind gets its head around the technology requirements for decent performance. And kudos to NBC, who is doing it basically DRM-free. The ad model is fine with me, being able to buy DVDs and t-shirts as well. That's some of the added value people have been preaching regarding music DRM as well, isn't it? Maybe I can't download it to my computer, but I can go there anytime and watch it for free, knowing what to expect (not HD, no surround sound, having to re-stream it if I want to watch it again, etc) and purchase the fancy features if I really want them.
e atures model could be conceivable for many (all?) kinds of media products. I guess the problem with this is that, yes, the corps would get greedy and end up screwing it up, if not, someone would come up with a way to download and re-distribute the material, but, in the unlikely scenario that EVERYONE makes a compromise, it might even work.
/. I previewed this post 4 times before submitting. And I know this is full of holes, but could be a start.
Maybe the same concept could apply to the music industry? Go to a label site and stream whatever you want. Hey, I'm paying for my bandwidth. If I want to download and carry it in my iPod, I need to purchase the songs (of course here the DRM discussion continues as it seems now forever and ever). But, seriously, as bandwidth and delivery technology improve, a stream-for-free-with-ads/pay-for-other-uses-and-f
PS: the space in the middle of "features" is being put there by
This is a lot how things work for me as well. I have certain "defaults" for certain categories of things. If someone comes and "organizes" these, I'm at a complete loss. It may seem lazy, like a pile of paper mail on the corner of the dining table, but once you rephrase it into what I'm really thinking when doing it, things sound a lot different: all new paper mail goes into a pile on the corner of the table closer to the door. That's the first surface available when entering my house. It ensures I won't forget that it is there. Once opened and deemed relevant, correspondence moves to the computer desk where action will be taken accordingly. End result is that most of my friends say I'm a very organised, although messy, person. Sounds fair to me. -- It's not easy being green.
Now... Forgive me the off-topic, but the above was a beautiful example of perfectly civilised social behavior. /. was like that.
Wish more of
I'd bet that it originally was meant to be a $50 coupon, but surely someone somewhere is pocketing the extra $10...
I, for one, welcome our high definition entertainment overlords. =)
It seems pretty clear that somewhere along our evolutionary track, someone got a nice blowjob from a gorilla.
:P
[use your own imaginations here]
I'll trust the wisdom of the universe in this. Whenever it figures out it is time to wipe us out, let it do it. I don't see much worth saving around here anyway.
I'll totally go for cosmic-event-driven annihilation. I'd only oppose Darwin-award-winners-driven annihilation. Not that they are not supposed to obliterate themselves, but keep off my lawn.
Kudos to Avast! I've been using it for the past 3 years and it is beautiful. I even bothered to upgrade to the paid Pro version, which has a couple more resident scan modules and works with push updates from their servers, instead of me having to remember/set a schedule for it. There have been occasions where I got up to 3 virus definitions updates in a single day =) Could it be just eye-candy? Perhaps, but it feels good, is not invasive and doesn't clog my system. Very happy customer here.
Slashdotted... Sort of. ;)
See. They are way past Feminism already. Where does that put them then by Civ4 standards? ;)