Re: The master plan...
The free Sky line up is different from both Freeview and Freesat. In fact, I'm surprised they didn't get their arses sued off for trademark infringement when they called it "Freesat from Sky"....
1657 publicly visible posts • joined 10 Jun 2009
Maybe they're not exactly the same, but there is still a fuzzy overlap and the potential for their brand to be cast into shadow. I personally can't believe Microsoft were thick enough to call their remote management suite "SMS". It may be in a different technical domain from text messages, but it didn't mean there wasn't room for confusion. Just try explaining to the non-techie manager that you're going to upgrade the software via SMS. Go on -- I dare you.
So there is the potential for incidental brand damage, even though they're not in direct competition....
Dictionaries have always been expensive to compile, and a well compiled dictionary is a very valuable thing. And a good dictionary that's *installed* rather than "on the cloud" is a heck of a lot easier to use (and potentially cheaper in the long run, given mobile data price gauging....
The Torvalds vs Tanenbaum argument wasn't resolved to say "Linux is better" but "Linux is quicker and easier to produce". I don't think Tanenbaum ever argued against that, but rather suggested that Linux was quicker and easier to write because it was a hack. Ideologically, I'm on the side of the microkernel, but practically, I use Linux because it's there, and because there's stuff for it. And I use Windows more often than Linux, because there's even more stuff for it.
But with the volume of people working on Linux now, I don't see why there isn't a concerted effort to shrink the kernel. It would save a lot of the "roll your own" work required for installing on non-standard or Frankenstein systems. (And it might help get rid of that persistent laptop backlight problem...)
By the time you could afford the docking computer, you had to have learned the manual way anyway.
After weeks of struggling with the tap-tap-tap method on the C64 (no analogue stick), I reread the manual and spotted a little mention or "inertial dampers" or somesuch, eh voila! Nice, easy, controlled rotation.
Because for all their bitching about bad university standards, Udacity aren't really trying to be a university. They're turning themselves into a 21st century technology bootcamp. They're getting their next round of courses from all the usual suspects in the computing industry, which means they're going to end up being nothing more than a training camp and outsourced sales department for Microsoft et al.
They're not higher education by any stretch of the imagination.
Hmm.... but the combining the "brains" bit is important here -- I don't recall ever seeing a non-smart Android phone. A) The software doesn't exist. B) Would you honestly want a non-smart phone with the battery life of a smartphone (cos it's going to have to run off a smartphone processor anyway.
And in the end, why would you really need a dock? You can pick up a non-smart phone for a tenner in carphone warehouse -- the price of the docking mechanism is alone is going to be more than that, so your chosen target audience is going to be better served buying an independent phone+tablet.
The solution that YOU are looking for is a non-smart phone with 3G for modem purposes when coupled with a tablet. It doesn't need to dock, because Bluetooth will reach from your pocket to the table in front....
I thought the difference between vertebrate and invertebrate eyes was immediately visible -- aren't all the nerves on the outside of an invertebrate eye, making it non-spherical, whereas our nerves went inside to make a better curve and therefore make the eye socket possible?
Err... you may have missed the point.
1) They're suggesting that the power consumption is a barrier to wider adoption.
2) Also, what the Reg didn't cover was the other barrier to adoption: parallel computing suffers from a lack of skilled programmers. The first computing revolution was powered by self-taught hobbyist programmers on single-processor boards. The developers believe that this has created a generation of single-processor-centric programmers without the skills for parallel work. They want to create a hobbyist scene for parallel processing and foment a skills revolution in the parallel computing sphere, which will then (hopefully) allow genuine parallel processing to become part of mainstream computing, as opposed to the minimalist OS-managed parallelism of current-gen multicore processors.
Cynics viewpoint: what we have is a bunch of clever blokes who developed a clever processor and found that the people who could use it don't want it, and those who might want it couldn't use it, so they're repositioning it as a hobbyist teaching toy.
Optimist's viewpoint: a bunch of clever blokes developed a clever processor that solves a clever problem, and finding that the market couldn't take advantage of it, they decided to try to develop the market by themselves.
I read on Slashdot that some artist wanted to throw a disc into orbit for alien archaeologists.
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9231973/Artist_s_project_to_blast_gold_plated_artifact_disc_into_orbit?taxonomyId=19&pageNumber=1
My first thought was "great, more spacejunk".
Would a NASA cleanup respect moronic arts projects, or would they just sweep them all away?
You might as well ask "what's the harm in opening a bar and asking for volunteer barmen?"
"You will be paid in free beer, hugs, merch, and the opportunity to chat up good looking young trendies while serving them a professionally-mixed cocktail."
What's wrong with that is that it cuts the bottom out of the market for bar staff, and it has rightly been rendered illegal by UK law (and probably EU law too), except when the bar in question is operating for a genuine community group or registered non-profit.
Which leads to the interesting possibility that the MU could take this muppet to court as a high-profile way of proving that the same labour laws that guarantee a (barely) living minimum wage apply to musicians as well as public lavatory cleaners.
Her response goes on about doing lots for free, because that's the way it's always been in showbusiness.
But that's the way it was in finance, law, etc too, with high profile employers exploiting unpaid workers^H^H^H^H^H^H^H "interns" with promises of experience, exposure, and the possibility of a paid job at a later date. The laws that stopped them doing that apply.
The problem with using the evolution of Latin into the Romance languages is that:
A) the model of language expansion is totally different -- the Roman Empire was aggressively expansionist, with a settled and well-defended centre.
B) there has been no major invasion or new civilisation in the territories where Romance languages are still spoken.
Meanwhile the Germanic tribes have migrated many many times and encountered several other civilisations (Celts, Romans, Slavs and other unknown extinct ones)
If we were just going to end up with multicast IP, are we actually going to get any bandwidth benefits? Giving the commercial value of multiplexes, I don't imagine they're being anything other than frugal with bitrates etc as it stands. A switch to IP multicast would be a change of medium, but wouldn't really free up any space.
Also, while I'm not deep into networking, I do seem to recall that general purpose IP's dropped-packet handling is less suitable for video than video-specific DTV-B's...
I always thought it was weird that more phones didn't have control pads. I mean, how much more useful does it make things?
BUT...
Is there a standard API in Android for these things? If one device's controllers aren't compatible with another's, it's hardly going to encourage development of decent control-pad games for Android, so what would be the point...?
There's a reasonable market in internet language teaching, and let me tell you it works a lot better as a video conference than voice only. I teach one-on-one using Skype, and I was taking French lessons with the OU in a virtual classroom with no video -- Skype's a million times better.
When either party is trying to deal with an unfamiliar language, visual cues are far more important.
Although you have to learn to nod and shake your head very slowly....
"Should of" is the result of refusing to accept the correct form -- "should've" -- in writing. "Should've" is the act of the conditional perfect moving to a more synthetic form. No-one ever says "I of been" for "I have been", so it is clearly now a different thing in the native speaker's internal model.
Hi, I'm the chief executive of Nike, and having read your insightful post, I have decided to divert the millions I give to research on the aerodynamic properties of footballs into the field of cancer research. I see now that knowing the cure for cancer will better allow us to leverage the multi-billion dollar global market for high-grade specialist sports equipment.