icarus_drowning

I've had no end of problems with the graphics card and graphics card drivers on this model-- both times I've brought it in to be serviced the Apple techs have simply nodded and had the machine sent in for a new logic board without even testing. I guess NVida produced a terrible batch of GPU's that Apple used on these models.

It isn't that I oppose viewing this as a "bug" (obviously the user is led to believe that a password in and of itself would prevent this), but I would think that anyone security-conscious enough to have a password should be disabling smart cover unlocking anyway...

But really, the core of the issue that's been raised by Unity is that Ubuntu seems to be moving away from catering to power users to cutting features essential to them in favor of appealing to more amateur users. One can lament that decision, and even disagree with it, but I don't know how fair I think it is to criticize Unity for lacking those kind of power user features.

After all, it isn't like power users are exactly wanting when it comes to replacement options in the Linux space.

I'm genuinely curious about this, not trying to stir up a giant political debate.

Also, it is nice to see a content creator finally start talking seriously about internet streaming versus traditional cable as a means of content delivery.

Again, I'm not arguing this shouldn't be addressed if you disagree with some or all of it, but it isn't like this is some kind of trollbait that usually receives this kind of aggressive downvoting...

tl;dr I'm not giving up the ability to look at an orchestral score and have a pretty good idea of how it sounds just to learn that skill all over again.

I guess if you don't see potential applications of understanding where mass comes from, we're at a bit of an impasse here. It is difficult (if not impossible) to make predictions about what the discovery will bring, but the mere possibility that this research could or might lead to the ability to manipulate mass seems rather valuable to me, in many concrete ways.

[UPDATE:

I guess if you want to see this as a gamble, you need to take into account the very good track record of abstract scientific discovery leading to enormous benefits. Given that understanding electricity, magnetism, relativity, and countless other scientific discoveries have brought incalculable value to the human race, I guess I don't understand why one wouldn't believe that science was worth the gamble.]

Remember, we're trying to figure out why things have mass here, (which, I think, is rather prima facia a very important question to answer) and if we're wrong about how that phenomenon arises, we now have a very big clue to look somewhere else.

In short, they got petabytes of data out of it, and frankly, that will most likely prove to be invaluable in and of itself.

Shouldn't there be more intuitive ways of doing these things? Why is there a need for a move button or copy (one or the other) when you have drag and drop? I know it is very much in vogue to abstract the file system away from the user, and it strikes me that this is exactly the opposite, and just might be just a little over engineered.

It can be difficult to make choices that preserve the common good at the expense of one's own short term good.

I recently began teaching in a school where students are required to write extensively in every class, including "extras" like PE, Music, or Art. I've found that, generally, students who have been subjected to that system for a number of years are far better at reasoning (and expressing that reasoning, naturally) than those who are new to the school. (It is astonishing how quickly new students, who inevitably struggle with complex reasoning at the beginning of the school year have made leaps and bounds in this area, and are far more skilled at verbal reasoning by the end of the school year).

All of which is to say: I think that this style of thinking is greatly buttressed by enhanced linguistic ability, as language is critical to higher-level thinking.

Very interesting video, and the interactive transcript was extremely cool.

That strategy is going to conveniently rely on his readers forgetting his near-obsession with Google's supposed doom at the hands of Apple and Microsoft's patent portfolios.

That's why it is a reversal-- because patents, once so important, probably aren't going to factor into his incessant Google criticism in the future, despite the fact that he has made them the cornerstone of many of his arguments until now.

I get that Gruber's mainly going after the over-the-top Lyons piece (a piece which strikes me as poorly thought out and terribly argued). But it does seem like this is Gruber's first move toward a pivot away from the importance of patents in Android vs. Everyone.

You know, those patents that Gruber has been trumpeting for weeks now as the death knell of Android.

Just ignore those.

[1]: Or cheaper?: See recoiledsnake's comment below: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2890038

(I appreciate the clarification, btw)

I still read Gruber everyday- he has a lot of interesting things to say about technology in general and Apple in particular. But it is increasingly hard to take him seriously about any story related to Apple's anti-android litigation, because he seems to have abandoned any attempt to present the situation fairly, to the point where he has really become a rather naked shill for Apple.

I am typing this on an iPad 2. I love my iPad 2. I tried a great number of tablets prior to purchasing it, and I genuinely find it to be the superior product, and by a long shot. I am even sympathetic to Apple's claims in this case, as I do think the resemblance between the Galaxy and the iPad to be more than simple coincidence. But it seems pretty clear to me that this is about much more (or should be about much more) than one "doctored" photo, and I am absolutely sure that Gruber knows it.

The thing is, I don't think he cares, because it seems as if he's completely abandoned even the pretense of presenting a just and fair picture of any of Apple's recent patent litigation.

(For the record, I'm appalled that anyone would consider anything that could remotely be called "web censorship" as a response, I just don't think you're making any sense here).

No, Google's blog post rightly points out that Microsoft and Apple haven chosen to fight against Android by litigation rather than invention. If Google where "whining" that Microsoft and Apple were building cooler stuff into their phones, it would be laughable. But that isn't what Google is saying. Suggesting that Google wants MS/Apple to "[sit] back and [allow] Android to destroy their business" is an obvious and clumsy strawman.

Gruber isn't arguing the merits of the platforms. He's arguing that the patent system as-is does work, and that Microsoft and Apple shouldn't be criticized for using it. The problem is, they aren't merely using it, they are abusing it, which seems to suggest that it doesn't work nearly as well as Gruber says it does.

[EDIT: Minor grammatical cleanup]