726 posts • joined 23 Mar 2012
Re: I'm curious...
I can understand that making such a thing is different than actually writing about it in sci-fi.
But the fact of the matter is, most of these devices are made by combining existing parts, in different ways. As said, we have had mobile phone watches and smart watches for ages now... so that in and of it's self cannot be "new".
However, just as fashion gets along well without patents, you could instead protect the design/feature/logo and brand name (hopefully with a real attachment of good construction and materials).
Or you can patent a specific novel function or design... not sure they are here, as even power/cams/functions in the straps have been done before.
tell me there is something original and special about the idea or function they are attempting to patent. Please. I wish to continue to hold hope there is not just a game of paper chasing going on in the courts over patenting existing ideas, products and technology...
PS, I'd type this on a current smart watch, smart phone watch, bluetooth smart wrist device, touch enabled wrist mounted HID or my casio caculator watch, but I'm hard pressed for time and cannot decide which one to use. No doubt all these devices will disappear into the ether as soon as the patent surfaces in a court room?
Re: This is what happens ....
It's not always the designers I suppose. If you set up a separate display for the radio, and one for the dash/info... then someone comes along and "saves some money", all the good engineering in the world goes out the window (along with some vital nuts and bolts I assume)!
I might get the controller if it supports other tablets and works nice with other apps/software. I can already stream to a tablet using existing apps quite nicely... so not really keen on being tied into a format.
But if it's available on both, I can see the gaming tablet for those who won't also want other options.
The controller though is win win in most cases.
Why would life exist everywhere? I observe there are limits to it's existence.
This is the case for matter. This is also interestingly the case for Earth.
If I deal a pack of cards, I can state "this dealt hand only exists here on earth". Why do you suggest I can say that it exists else where?
So, with some things, I can say "it only ever happens once". I consider life to be at least as unique (and / or complex) as a pack of 52 cards. Something that seems extremely simple, can in reality have a mathematical probability so obscure that it only ever happens once in the lifetime of the universe. :)
Re: John Bailey
There is no life on the moon. This is an observable fact. Therefore, while it's incorrect to state "there is no life outside of 20 miles of my house" it is correct to state "there is no life on the moon".
We can state there are places where no life is. Does that boundary stop on the earth, or extend past it? But there is a certain boundary to life.
It's not impossible for a whale and a pot of petunias to appear. It is however extremely not probable.
Really, make the universe as big as you like. Make time as long as you like. There is a limit on what will and will not happen. We prefer to use evidence and observations for this. Speculation does not help one bit to change our understanding.
A spontaneous pot of petunias is about the same probability (within an acceptable margin of error) as life appearing (in the vastness of the universe multiple times). So, if we state that one can happen, we have to admit we also believe the other is likely. Are we happy to make that conclusion?
" In contradiction to what quite a few people believe in statistics a sample size of one will reveal quite a lot about what you have sampled."
No, no it does not. Our solar system has 1 sun. We can conclude from this:
Solar systems only ever have 1 sun. Or all orbital systems have 1 sun.
Both are incorrect, as we have binary star systems, and orbits around planets (or dwarf/failed stars if we wish to keep the stellar definitions in our example).
So... long story short, with 1 data point, we can only ever (mathematically, logically and scientifically) state "There is at least one star in at least 1 solar system in the universe", the same applies to life.
We got more data on stars, we need more data on life. :)
PS, citation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_joke#Stereotypes_of_mathematicians
Re: A quote from Hawking
If they wished or had the ability to harm us in such a way they would have already. Which leaves two options.
1) They cannot.
2) They can, but are playing games with us until they do.
With Occam's razor at play, I'd say they are not there. That and the fact any space faring race could colonise/explore/leave marks on the galaxy so quickly, if they existed before us, we'd see the evidence everywhere.
The current evidence points to us being the only/first intelligence within observable and traversable distances.
Re: X customers
Is that the plan? Kill off all mobile phone markets to get people to lug around PCs... um, Tablets... um Xboxes...
Wait, none of that seems on MS plan, well successful plan. So is it they plan to kill off all markets, then retire to the Good Life?
Re: you mean movie makers still have not realised
Actually, Netflix having only 1 and 3 is a bonus in the subscription fees IMO... Though only having the first would be better.
Like most Trilogies, they only ever made the first film, the other 2 are figments of our imagination and shall never be watched...
(Or in the case of trilogies of trilogies, only watch the first 3... though Disney could turn it around ;) )
Re: Slowly does it
That's my new response. I've had enough with BT. In the past it was "I'll help you sort it" and I had success every time. Now it's "Call BT, they'll hell... wait, their not helping? Well, you chose to go with them against my advice..."
Re: "Refine the fuel from ice".
The reality is more amazing than we realise, but sadly our imaginations are just that, and rarely do they become real...
You cannot just make fuel from ice. That's not how thermodynamics works. "Water" is an energy store here, from which we make rocket fuel (ox and hydrogen) with the assistance of a power source.
You have solar in space, but much less in the asteroid belt. So your looking at decades to return something that way. Taking your own fuel is again problematic as you hit the rocket equation and fuel becomes a payload you cannot afford to carry (basically a reducing return of investment problem).
Has no one made a story about land grabs in space? And people claiming their own lands, laws and zones?
Re: Why the UN?
They'll be effected the first time a "returned roid" hits the wrong landing zone...
If anything comes back here, others are effected. It's a small effect, but no need to tread people as a minus on the landscape.
Re: As pointed out above
Other islands are so far away, it's not possible within our own planning time. That is, even beyond our own lifetimes into the distant future for whatever effect we can have on it.
Perhaps in the distant future when setting up such a travel AND sustenance is possible. But now? It's no more possible than attempting time travel. Though we can do other things closer to home, but "colonisation" is not going to be it. We'd be there already if we could. The rocket science was done. The other obstacles are planet sized. Choose a planet, and you have a problem the size of a planet!
Even the most hospitable rock we could find within 100 light years, is more likely to get torched before this one does. We'd be bailing out into the sea, when we had a perfectly repairable, though arguably leaky, ship already. Our planet getting hit by a rock? It's got the best odds of avoidance. Our planet getting solar flared out? It's got the best shielding out there... So any other destination lowers our odds of survival. It's the gamblers fallacy. Until we find a perfect match and a way to get there.
I mean no harm, but I'd hope anyone taking a dip, is able to swim the distance. We're not talking rivers and lakes here, we're talking attempting to swim an ocean, with no supplies...
I think someone coined "space ship planet earth". The best space craft for travel, is already under your feet. We'll reach a close encounter of another solar system naturally, before we will through technology...
In the mean time, exploration is for the joy of seeing and learning and progressing. But it's not to be our false crutch or hope.
Re: As pointed out above
"Eggs in one basket" argument does not hold. Think of an island in an ocean. You can start to live out in boats in the sea. These don't help you survive. Their more at risk of sinking than the island. Even surviving a tsunami, if you prepare, is easier on an island than out at sea (though a random unseen tsunami is the opposite).
Exploration is purely that. It's not going to give us a second place to live. It would be easier to live at the bottom of the ocean and ride out (not literally ;) ) any destruction above sea from an asteroid.
Anything bigger than an asteroid (so moving from life killer to planet obliteration) has already been cleared out of our local neighbourhood. Anything outside of that, probably has less likely probability of hitting us before the heat death of the universe (see number of star collisions in galaxy mergers for how low the probabilities are) that we don't have anything to worry about.
Re: There are so many problems.
Oxygen is not running out any time soon. As a hint, it helps make up 70% of the surface area...
There is a stupid amount of material on our earth let alone in space.
Re: Who actually wears a watch anymore?
The sun is consistent. It was clocks that originally needed to either be set each day to the correct solar time, or made to account for seasonal differences (through clever clockwork).
Over time, it was decided the sun was wrong, and the clocks were correct.
In reality, there is no "right or wrong" with this, just a preferred reference frame. As we now have globalisation and other forms of communication and work (travel east and west as mentioned above ;) ), then our relative importance changed... to the clocks time. :)
Re: What am I missing?
There is a is distinct hole in the market for network speakers with either 1) Built in data over powerline 2) powered but takes Ethernet input 3) Power over Ethernet input.
A quick google gives me... No products or companies for "ethernet speakers". Nothing, nada. Wow. I'd have thought that would be easy.
But the real problem of networking over powerlines is for a multi room, PA system and similar, you cannot guarantee that each room (think office or shops in addition to homes) will be on the same mains ring. So if you have to add some networking ability, a wifi antenna and chip is probably the same price as a socket and Ethernet chip, but 100% guaranteed to have a range.
Re: Bluetooth audio... pah
That's ok, they already sell gold plate ended optical cables...
(Oh, and big name brands do it too. I'm certain they KNOW what they are doing...)
Re: 2 main problems with this fancy wireless audio gumpf
For all honesty it's poor marketing, but it's the marketing that works for the majority. They market the big numbers, over the "reality".
A Sonos is a mini wireless hifi. It's not really there to replace a speaker setup. It's for ease of install on either a PA system (great for just wifing music around, change tracks, change zones etc) or for a few systems where you may wish to link them together at times.
No idea about the others, but each Sonos can stream it's own music, work as a morning alarm, works are a repeater to the other speakers and lots more.
So they are not priced the same as an input only wireless speaker, their trying to compete with that old CD hifi. I'd not use them as a stereo pair (though they support it) but as a replacement to a FM radio.
I doubt it. Some setups have a lot of noise on the line...
It's all true.
Though I could see changes to speakers at some points. There are some really interesting ways to generate sound in the natural world. Insects for instance can out roar a lion at times. :)
Re: @ MJI 'Sony stuff is heavy'
Sony are known for putting lead weights in their products...
I agree, good kit is usually made out of solid and good materials (thus usually heavy unless your using aluminium of similar :P ). But some go way out of their way to confuse customers. :(
Re: What are the odds...
Like current displays can do if we just add a camera to them? Transparent displays are usually used in areas like transportation and security... not for TV viewing...
Unless... [goes off to patent a 100% transparent display, transparent 100% of the time and invisible to consumers]
Re: Patent This!
 Ah, or as said by above, it's already available. :) [/edit]
It's been done. One exists already.
An old school option is a spinning disk (or any surface) with a projector (or laser) pojecting your frames/pixels onto it. :)
Re: That, Stuart, is the question
I'm going to call it here. I would not be at all surprised if "diversity" changes and appears much quicker than most "scientists" realise. Faster than they could imagine. We've only had what, 100 or 200 years of current observation? Has there been much change since then? How do we know if any species are "new" or "existing, but just recently found"?
Re: Re. terror "threat"
Anyone buying a lot of batteries should be put on a list. Because they either:
1) Bought a horrid toy for the kids that uses too many batteries
2) Are too thick to realise rechargeables exist!
Re: I wonder
True. But that requires everyone to use flight mode. Plus it at least solves the presented problem of "is it batteries in the battery?"
I'm assuming it's the usual "your arrested on the technicality". If they cannot arrest you for an actual crime, they can arrest you for lying about why you visited...
"I came to see the family" when it was "I want to buy some cheap booze".
Re: I wonder
You presume they need to install tracking software or hack it...
Hint, they just wish it turned on. Then they get the key/data from it's own unique id. Everything is "on the cloud", or rather tracked via the ISPs/teleco operators anyhow. Then they known who, if it's your phone, you are. If it's not your phone, they still know where it has been.
Not anon, because it would not make any difference. :P
But it could have been polished a bit. I'd love another small square Ipod. Though I guess a "widescreen" version prevents a break in app compatibility. :/
Well, this at least suggests why they removed the design and option of a small square Ipod player... no need to cannibalise your own sales. :P
Tablet sales seem to have hit the low? Will they get beat by laptops soon?
Nah. They will do the same all companies do... skirt the law. They would just make everything dependant on browser toolbars.
Know the term "unintended consequences"?
The thing about websites complaining about advertising blocking... it's like the Mafia complaining about having their bats taken off them.
Some people fund their own websites out of their own pocket. Others fund them in other ways.
Once I know the adverts are SAFE, then I might turn off an adblocker. Until then, the only adds you get to show, are ones part of your content, not ones passed through dodgy Google algorithms with zero safety checks.
Seems there has been a trend of companies offering just enough to buy (either directly, or through offering funding support) the popular free programs. Then quickly adding or insisting the makers add bloatware/foist ware to it.
As other companies follow suit (Adobe being one of the biggest guilty right now) it becomes the "norm". :(
Re: Um....You can't buy children
And some can't look after them either... ;)
Re: Regarding the terminology problems...
That's ok, now anything with a "memory" has a "Hard disk in it", even if it's chip or mechanical. :P
Re: Computers are not white goods
Or a pet. Or a plant. Or children...
(Answer applies for "are not able to look after" and "instead of a" computer)
Re: Been there with my own Dad.
The first question I got asked by someone who "was getting an Apple because it's better than Windows" was "So where is Microsoft Word/Excel and Outlook on this thing?"
Visual cues of 3d objects versus 2d/vocal/linguistic objects.
Computers are, by their nature "language" either as logic circuits forming abstract ideas, or as actual programming languages used to display images.
I have this problem, but thankfully learnt how to work around it back when I was a kid. Being dyslexic (correct spelling first time! Whoa!) I can form logical concepts, work with 3d objects and spaces, work with language and communication... but reading? Nope, it's a real struggle.
It's not just "reading" though, it's my brains ability to connect random strings of symbols (letters that make words, or numbers that reference barcodes/shopping etc) with physical objects or practical concepts.
It's usually only through constant use, brute force and other things, like muscle memory that I can build such connections.
I wonder if the same happens here. At least for those who cannot grasp what an "icon" or a "hyperlink" is. But when they have difficulty with "mouse" and "screen"... I'm not so sure... :(
Re: Good practice
I'm assuming if A.G. (name hidden for legal reasons... ;) ) is with holding additional details, it's because "Bill" is:
A) A friend who just does not get computers, we would all feel sorry and want to help
B) Family, with power over things that we dare not risk!
C) Just a customer, and sometimes it's just too hard to get rid of them. :P
We've all had the "It was a box with Error in it" conversation!
"The computer said it had an error, do you know what it is?"
"What error did it say it had?"
"It said 'Error, something something I did not read it then forgot' is that any help?"
"Yes, that's perfect, it means the fault lies between the keyboard and chair..."
(Not sure if Joke icon or Real life icon)
Re: All too familiar
The mistake is assuming it IS Internet Explorer then... though yes, your correct. :P
Re: now hope for some volcanoes
Volcanic activity = consistent. The carbon cycle in nature is already accounting for it and coping. If it changes, we will see if the natural cycle (and animals/plants) cope or change as well (don't cope!).
Human activity = inconsistent. So is nature and the rest of the earth "coping" with our activity? On a local scale, it often does not. Try cutting down the last tree on your island, or shooting the last bird etc. No idea if this is the same on a global scale, with a gas being emitted.
One thing is for certain, we are doing things we were not previously... so the results will be different than what they were before.
Re: Licence Offence
So everyone with Eyes in Eyeland needs a TV license? :P
Re: A basic misunderstanding of supernovae
Ahhh... so he is "just" (though said in context, a lot of hard work goes into improving data and results) improving the theory and info about why the light takes so long to reach us. Not replacing it entirely (as that would be going against established observations and theories).
I do wonder, what other effects can the quantum mechanics, this "no true vacuum" cause?
Re: One of these things is not the same as the other...
That is the actual theory so far. That the neutrinos escape before the light as the light gets caught up in debris, clouds etc.
No idea why I got downvotes. If I misspell something, or get some facts and details wrong, please correct me, I'm no genius that is for sure and not afraid to be told so.
- Updated HIDDEN packet sniffer spy tech in MILLIONS of iPhones, iPads – expert
- Peak Apple: Mountain of 80 MILLION 'Air' iPhone 6s ordered
- BBC goes offline in MASSIVE COCKUP: Stephen Fry partly muzzled
- PROOF the Apple iPhone 6 rumor mill hype-gasm has reached its logical conclusion
- US judge: YES, cops or feds so can slurp an ENTIRE Gmail account