"Real Programmers" good read - thanks

V-day? Why not just shorten it all the way to VD?

Which is particularly funny because currently "the classic books" can be had for free in electronic format whereas "cheap paperback novels" cost $10.

So I guess you wouldn't consider John Sullivan an Apple fanboy then?

This is the best idea for a movie I've heard in a long time!

Just to be clear

frequency hopping != encryption

especially if you are the only transmitter in that spectrum nearby.

How about

• folders to organize apps
• the ability to see what apps I've previously paid for (and deleted from my phone because I ran out of room) before I have to click to buy them again (and risk having picked the wrong app for which I will then be charged).
• The ability to put files (pdf, doc, etc) in one place that other apps can also access instead of each app having to download it from the internet itself
• The ability to turn off ALL sound before the app/video starts to play.
• The ability to record a call (they don't have to build it, just allow that app on the store).
• how about NOT putting the main speaker under the left side of the phone where I'm likely to block it when I'm holding the phone in my right hand
• how about filtering in the app store (I'll say it again - indicating previously purchased apps would be huge... before you purchase them)
• How about actually downloading that visual voicemail message so I don't have to be "connected" to listen to it

Nothing terribly difficult there. And there are a bunch of things that Apple could make better that they wouldn't even have to do themselves

• A better music/podcast interface (pocket tunes anyone? - apple only allows the radio only version)
• How about Google Voice
• How about moving contacts from one list to another on the phone
• How about moving photos from one list to another on the phone

It's not that the phone can't do the things people want (it can - just jailbreak it), it's that apple doesn't want the phone to do things people want. All that said the iPhone is awesome. It is a platform for greatness and therefor it is great. It is only diminished in so much as Apple restricts the apps that can run on it. What's wrong with google voice? Do you really think ANYONE will mistake it for the built in phone app after begging and pleading simply to get an invite? Really? Even when their phone rings every time they make an outbound call? Really?

I loved my treo and the apps on my treo (and I had hundreds), but the iphone blows it away with the sheer number and quality of apps (with a few notable exceptions - no astronomy program approaches the quality of astromist (at any price), and I still keep my treo around just so I can play ackwire)

Without the OLPC driving, the industry had no interest in net books. And they still don't have much interest in durable netbooks. And, well, the cost does matter. And since the cost does matter I would question the dual screens on the device (assuming added a second screen makes it more expensive). It doesn't need to look and feel like a book - certainly not for people that haven't ever held a book. And even for those that have - let go of the past.

How can this be a troll? This is so true. I would however grant the extending the user base for an OSS project isn't exactly a bad thing, nor is having your company exposed to more OSS - but I sure would call it "giving back to the community".

The funny thing about emissions testing is new/recent cars have to have it done. And the only time I've heard of a new car failing the test is do do bad software in the car, or a sensor that is bad even though the emissions are fine. And for my 25+ year old classic car ('72 Opel GT)- I don't have to get emissions testing at all. WTF?

The whole emissions testing is a scam at this point. Test my care when it's 10 of 15 year old, not 2 or 3.

The program served it's purpose of enforcing lower emissions long ago, now it's just a racket for the state and few business owners to keep ranking in money.

While I'm sure they were trying to give an accurate representation of the molocule in the textbook, I always figured it was just a good way to _represent_ the significant parts of the idealized model - not they they had seen a photograph and then decided to sketch it out. And I thought atoms (and therefore molocules) were mostly empty space...

... so much for plausible deniability. I mean if you took the time to enter the specific url in the blacklist, it's hard to deny knowing about the site. Still deniable - just a little less plausible.

You have to seed the pool of reasoning... If they have no basis for "why" how can you expect them to reason out why something else happens?

I used to push my son in a stroller while I went for a run. He would ask why ad infinitum, and I kept on answering way past his ability to comprehend. But I was amazed at his memory - even years later he remembered the "why" and was able to apply that to new questions - no longer asking simply "why" but asking instead, "is it because...", or "is it like..." but referring to thing that were way outside of his comprehension level at the time he was originally "spoon fed".

I think the biggest problem is that teacher are used to being spoon fed themselves. How many teachers don't know the answer if it's not printed in the "teacher's edition" of the book?

Typical Q&A with the science teacher:
Why is the sky blue?

Because it reflects blue light.

Why does it reflect blue light?

Because it's blue.


It's a good thing they taught me to read early. That's about the only way I learned anything.

Clearly you got your video tapes out of the trunk of a car on a different corner than my parents did.

As long as that rate is ZERO!!