I never really understood how usenet was better than torrents. All the usenet places you have to go to get good binaries access require monthly payments, and unless there's some way to pay cash (which would be very inconvenient in this day and age), they require some sort of transaction with an account linked to your name (credit card or paypal). So how does that not make it easier to get caught pirating via usenet than torrents where you actually release less personally identifiable info (just IP instead of IP and some sort of financial link)? Is it entirely more "secure" because it is "obscure"? Wasn't there some sort of saying deriding the combination of those two words? Yes I'm actually trying to "talk about usenet"...

Apparently "grammar checker" is the 11th technology they don't use. I almost stopped reading that article at "Honorable Mention: Ubuntu" but the grammar (or lack thereof) made it actually unreadable in the end. Serves me right trying to RTFA I suppose...

But, the article DOES say. Did you mistake the summary for the article? What you're reading now is a comment if you're still confused.

From said article:

Logitech DOES have a fancy modern Bluetooth Mouse, it's the MX Revolution. Unfortunately, the bluetooth version of the mouse seems to only be available by buying the keyboard and mouse set. Otherwise, you can only get the MX Revolution mouse on it's own in proprietary RF style.

I've been using it as a desktop mouse in both windows xp and linux and despite a few small quirks, I love it. I've very much gotten used to the auto shifting scroll wheel and am quickly approaching "how did I ever live without it". It does take a second to start up after idle but never more than 1 second. It has a lot of buttons and a very responsive laser sensor.

Personally I would use a Mighty Mouse Pro or whatever it is in your situation just because it goes with the mac, is a more compact design (for stowage) and has replaceable AA batteries (I think it will even run on only 1 battery). The MX Revolution has a charging cradle (which they finally improved and fixed from the old fiddle-with-it-for-an-hour pain in the ass cradle that would never make proper charging contact) and non-replaceable batteries.

One other advantage (I think it is an advantage) is that bluetooth is better about dealing with interference from other bluetooth devices and from other devices in the same bandwidth area as bluetooth. Thus, if you're working in a public place around other bluetoothers or RF mousers, I think it is naturally more likely that you can mouse in peace with a BT mouse than with an RF one, but this is a partially untested hypothesis. I've seen 2 RF mice fight with eachother at work whereas I've used two BT mice at home without problems. There aren't many good choices for BT mice out there for whatever reason, but keep asking about it and maybe manufacturers will pick up on the trend again and we'll see more and better designed bluetooth mice.

Google "Google Sites"

I've seen a lot of multitouch demos and have always wanted to mess around with the applications side of it, has anyone seen any software that allows you to plug in 2 usb mice and use that as at least a 2 point "multitouch" system? Windows 7 beta seems like it might possibly have the capability to do so with some sort of "TouchVista" add on, but other than that I can't seem to find anything for Linux or XP.

Any multitouch software I have found uses complicated algorithms to process an image from a webcam to try and deduce points from a blurry low rez low fps infrared image of fingertips. It seems like the first step (to just test out apps without complex hardware) would have been to make a driver for multiple mice, but I can't find that seemingly trivial interstitial step anywhere.

That's just an example application, demonstrating the pressure sensitivity and multi-touch capability of the technology. The technology is not exclusively limited to that demonstration and I know you are a smart enough person to see through that straw man argument you are putting up there.

Care to cite some sources? I have been following multi-touch technology for a while and this is the first demonstration I've seen of a non-capacitance based (iphone is capacitance) non-camera based multi-touch interface that is thin and flat and claims to be flexible, mostly transparent, and cheap. If you have some examples that show multi-touch from this "long dismal history" you are talking about, I am genuinely interested in hearing about them.

I think the more important typo in the headline is that the words "multi-touch" are not used. That is the most impressive part of this prototype above and beyond the fact that it is cheap, flexible, and pressure based.

Go watch the freaking video and then regret ever posting that comment.

http://www.technologyreview.com/video/?vid=290&a=f

In addition to that point, they aren't TAKING any personal information from you against your will. You have to consciously provide it. As long as you don't provide them with anything you don't want getting out there and until they suddenly start hacking and stealing information from us, I don't see what the big problem is. Google is still optional, save the complaining for when it isn't.

Basically it is saying that Dinosaurs held their hands in a palms inward fashion rather than a palms down fashion. Palms in can hold a basketball but you need to put your palm facing down to dribble it. Obscure, not in the original link, and citing basic sports knowledge - I know, not usual Slashdot fare, eh?

I agree, I don't understand why we all don't just call each other and tell eachother our comments instead of leaving these text messages on this website.

But seriously, text messaging is much less invasive and demanding of both parties for communication. If you want to communicate something non-vital that doesn't need an immediate response, which is more convenient? Initiating the call, waiting to see if they pick up (also forcing them to decide if they want to stop what they're doing at that exact moment) and then having the quick conversation and then saying your goodbyes, or sending the message and letting them decide when to stop to read the message and whether or not they want to / need to respond / when they want to respond. Then you also have record of everything that was sent and received. Also, what's easier, trying to read numbers or email addresses etc over a phone line or just sending it in a text message? (Did he just tell me to buy elephant shoes or did he say "I love you"?)