Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
Nest responded to this on their blog: "Your Nest Protect questions. Our answers." There is no requirement for a hard-wire, there is a requirement for a connection and that can be wireless. All vendors are incompatible and do not support hard-wire connection to other vendors.
For an eye opener on market pricing look at the KIDDE Silhouette, pricing over U$S110 (list price) by some vendors and that's only a hard wired carbon-monoxide detector. Amazon stocks it for a more reasonable US$60.
So Facebook are actually the good guys and on the 5th Anonymous are going to be all rounded up and hung, drawn and quartered?
Remember remember the fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason why gunpowder, treason
Should ever be forgot...
The more significant concern should be how complicated the device is. The Logitech Revue has the hallmarks of being rushed to market by a furiously masterbating manager in the corner of an office somewhere, refusing to listen to anything anyone is saying.
Just look at the Revue website and find anywhere mentioning how simple or easy the device is to use, no just a very daunting picture of a gargantuan remote that is some nerd's wet dream.
A lot of effort has been put into the product launch, the Logitech website is larger than any other product they ship and it also extends onto the support side. It is nice to see that they have a series of support videos until you actually view one. Oh dear. I'm wincing at these poor actors having to drive through an overly technical and obtuse script which spends far too much time discussing "HDMI capable AV systems" and optional components which only serve to make it look more complicated than it needs to be.
<t p='#'>text</t> Insert specified text at position p in message.
<e p='#' n='#'/> Deletes n characters of text to the left of position p in message.
<d p='#' n='#'/> Deletes n characters of text to the right of position p in message.
<c p='#'/> Move cursor to position p in message.
<w n='#'/> Execute a pause of n hundredths of a second.
<g/> Executes a flash/beep/buzz.
I think many other companies would be happy to have remotely 'ancient, creaking dinosaur' technology. I ponder to think what the authors opinion of infrastructure technology in the rest of the world that would be lucky to be only 15-20 years old.
Citing MessagePack is certainly surprising as that particular technology is significantly worse than Google Protocol Buffers, the website is littered with bad test procedures and many errors. Google's serialization doesn't have the speed of say TIBCO's QForms or the compactness of Reuters RForms but it is pretty clear from their documentation that flexibility and easy management were preferred goals over utmost highest performing technology.
Both the linked article and the article that links to are overly verbose answers that skim the purported issue of whether two boys born on a Tuesday should be counted as two equal probabilities or one.
If he’s a boy, he could have been born any day except Tuesday. (Otherwise this case would already have been counted in the first scenario: the older child a boy born on Tuesday). This second scenario generates just six, rather than seven, more possibilities.
When I tell you that one of my children is a boy born on a Tuesday, I eliminate a number of possible combinations, leaving the following: First child B-Tu, second child: B-Mo, B-Tu, B-We, B-Th, B-Fr, B-Sa, B-Su, G-Mo, G-Tu, G-We, G-Th, G-Fr, G-Sa, G-Su. Second child B-Tu, first child: B-Mo, B-We, B-Th, B-Fr, B-Sa, B-Su, G-Mo, G-Tu, G-We, G-Th, G-Fr, G-Sa, G-Su. Notice that the second row has one fewer members than the first, since the combination B-Tu + B-Tu already appears in the first row.
It would appear a fallacy to eliminate both B-Tu/B-Tu pairings, it is briefly discarded. However the difference of 7/378 to the answer (1/2 to 13/27) which is negligible.