One of the companies
will be Poly9:
That I know, it has not been announced officially.
3439 posts • joined 3 Sep 2007
The Fortune Global 500, according to which Apple was 197th last year, ranks companies according to REVENUE, which is the total amount of money people have paid this company. The first one on this list is Wal-mart, with 408G$, and Apple is 197th with 36G$.
It is very different from EARNINGS, which is revenue less expenses. Gazprom is first on that list, with 24G$, and Wal-mart only comes in 9th with 14G$, because it has smaller margins. Apple must be around 70th with 5.7G$, because it has high margins.
Then, you have the MARKET CAPITALIZATION, which is roughly how much the investor think the company is worth. It is rather abstract and depends not only from revenue and earnings, but also of where the company seems to be headed. For instance, Research in Motion has a relatively low market cap, despite the fact that it is still making a lot of money, because investors assume that in 2012, all the smartphones will be iPhones or Androids, and Blackberries will have disappeared. You do not buy a house if you think it will burn tomorrow. Apple has a huge market cap, because investors assume that everybody is going to buy iPhones in the near future.
Let me see if I got the story straight:
- CIA wants a targeting software as precise as possible, but ended up accepting an imprecision of up to 13 meters, hoping it is precise enough in most case
- Netezza did whatever it could to make the CIA happy, including ripping imperfect code from IISi
- IISi... was not willing to deliver an imperfect solution? Is complaining about the code grab? They are also complaining that the CIA is using a solution that might kill innocents?
I would have thought that the ordinance is powerful enough that 13 meters is an insignificant error... And it is unlikely that the CIA is going to say "OMG we might kill innocent people with such an imprecision, we have to wait until the boffins get it down to 1 meter"
"YouTube offers content owners tools to remove copyright infringing content and this means that it is the responsibility of the copyright owner – not YouTube – to identify and tell YouTube when infringing content is on its website"
This argument really is a blanket get-out-of-jail-free card for copyright infringement. The way it sounds, copyright owners apparently have to play whack-a-mole endlessly just to remove content that can be re-uploaded and re-indexed in seconds.
You could practically ignore copyright laws with your website as long as:
1) You offer a way for copyright owners to complain
2) You can claim you did not put it yourself
3) You have "too many users" to control what they upload
Good for us, but I can imagine copyright owners shaking their heads in disbelief.
"We hold today that a software user is a licensee rather than an owner of a copy where the copyright owner (1) specifies that the user is granted a license; (2) significantly restricts the user’s ability to transfer the software; and (3) imposes notable use restrictions"
Considering (2) and (3) depend entirely on the copyright owner, why not stop at (1)? Does the copyright owner have to add (2) and (3) to the contract just so that (1) holds?
Because it is SO hard to find porn on the net, with these damn merkins censoring everything.
If you want a version of Facebook that lets you post nudie pics of yourself, you can find one in 5 seconds flat. Of course, it will not have as many users, but that is because most people do not want to see your nudie pics, and stay on Facebook. And that is true whether on the web or in real life.
You might as well complain that the supermarket wants you to wear clothes. If it let naked people in, they would lose most of their customers.
I'm really surprised here. Ok, so he would not have hurt anybody directly, and anyway he failed. But still, I would have assumed that such a breach of trust would be punished more severely in these circles.
- M doesn't mind you earning a little money on the side, Dryden. She'd just prefer it if it wasn't selling secrets.
- You have the wrong man, Bond. If M was so sure that I was bent, she'd have sent a double-0. Your file shows no kills, and it takes...
As the whole planet becomes wired, any logical observer would laugh at the idea of having millions of copies of the same movies stored all over the place in various formats, when it is much simpler to store them in data centers and stream them... If Apple's timing is correct, they will have a huge role in this. I feel awed, suddenly.
Sooner or later, people who want to have their own physical copy will sound out of touch. On the other hand, it will take a while. I'm not going to get rid of my 300+ books and replace them with eBooks anytime soon. Physical copies are here for at least 30 more years... But maybe not much more.
I really doubt that a pad without a proper keyboard can ever be something people want to do serious work on.
The iPad was a SOMEWHAT logical move, after Apple noticed the way many people were using iPod Touches to surf the web or play games. Making it larger does make it better to surf, play, or watch videos.
But claims of a productive pad runs directly against all the comments found on this very web site: a laptop or a notebook is way more useful.
I was lucky enough to use a web site of the French government that lets users choose a password. Considering this was a government web site, and for an important purpose, I chose carefully a rather high-level password.
The web site then happily sent me an email, with the line: "so that you do not forget it, this is the password you choose:" followed by the password, in clear, in a simple email.
Assange seemed to have a very particular way of asking for help checking the documents. He says that the Pentagon is "trying to bankrupt Wikileaks" by refusing to help checking the documents.
What I understand from this is that he basically told them:
"We will release the documents, filtered or not filtered. You want them filtered? The filtering will cost Wikileaks a lot of money, so please kindly send $$$ to the following bank account..."
It would be difficult to get closer to blackmail than this
I guess we are going to see... My hunch is that apart from a few vocal people, Germans give F... all, like the rest of the world.
Of course, the opposition already has an excuse ready: They all happened to be on holiday for the same exact month they were supposed to register.
I don't know if the New York Times story is true, but the idea of paying for giving priority to your data makes me really uncomfortable. This could easily lead to high-speed delivery for rich corporations web sites only, and 9600 baud modem speed for everybody else. Google can easily pay a million a week so as to offer a speedy youTube, but who else can? Especially among newcomers?
At least, Google is denying any such plans... for now. But I'm going to be jumping at shadows for a long while.
And I did see at least one article (Henry Blodget on Business Insider, may he rot) stating that "of course ISPs Should Be Able To Charge Higher Rates For Premium Traffic", on the lines that "pipe companies" have spent billions on infrastructure, they should be allowed to charge anyway they want. Lovely.
But how many are used?
As in, not just to register on web sites you don't want to give your real email to?
Or just to be able to use Microsoft Messenger?
I have two hotmail accounts that I use for these very purposes... And I never read the inbox.
I never could forgive hotmail for regularly sending me spam emails about its "features". The messages precised they were "part of the service", and that I could not turn them off (!)
Yet, I like Apple.
This is an attempt to take something that has been done for years on the web, put an extra-thin layer of originality on it, and patent it as an app. Why not go ahead and patent "everything that has been done on the web, but not yet on a cell phone app" while they're at it?
Considering so many apps are a simple copy of a website, I really hope the patent office decides that processes that exist on the web cannot be patented as an app. But anyway, Apple will be able to scare off developers for years with the words "patent pending", even if the patent are ultimately rejected. And who knows, they might even be granted...
Insert long list of swear words.
When I had a Dell laptop, I used to plug in a mouse whenever I could.
Now that I have a MacBook, I am happy using the multi-touch trackpad.
It does make a difference.
I am not sure the Bluetooth part is useful, though. How often do you need to recharge?
I already have too many gadgets to recharge.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019