Did not want Netcraft to confirm this. RIP Rob :(

Here's the report itself: http://icitech.org/wp-content/...

Not worth the read IMHO, only three generic references, none of which explain anything about Gryphon-X. While I agree that trying to use the same old defenses against an adapting adversary means you will get breached eventually, most organizations are not even properly managing the traditional security controls, much less developing next generation controls. I am skeptical of how well this could be applied widely to protect data, even assuming it is moonshot awesome.

I'd say this skiff was dead in the water.

1. infrastructure, i.e., the wire and fibre on the poles
2. ISP and phone services
3. content provider

This will allow for competition for those people who are stuck with Comcast being the sole provider.

I kinda get the feeling that "electronic" instruments are seen as replacing traditional/acoustic instruments, at least in the minds of geeks/young people. I disagree. :)

Anything that can be recorded by electronic means can in principle be duplicated in performances. Physical instruments are limited by physics and their design. Electronic instruments don't have such a narrow limitation as the types of notes available are not dictated by the materials and shape of the electronic instrument. Having said that, the video its self was rather underwhelming. Just variations on a single tone. The "instruments" were programmed by the students themselves which is what is novel about them; Not so much the fact that the performance its self was disappointing.

> It seems to me that this plan would be reliant on people actually wanting to watch the new releases after having seen the previous ones.

No, I don't think you got the point. The point is that this plan would be reliant on people actually wanting to wait to watch the new release in their most preferred format.

I propose the following:
(1) People have only one chance to have a first impression of a movie.
(2) They can chose what that first impression is.
(3) They will chose the one that best satisfies them, within their cost/convenience/quality/social mix (for the occasion).

Therefore, they will pass the chance to watch a movie in a format that robs them the full experience it can give. You know what I am talking about. Any /. reader knows very well how to DL a free copy of a movie, right now, at this moment. He/she can pick between a quick download that will be trasfered to (an can be watched on) their cellphone screen. Or they can get the PSP version. Or the VCD version. Or the DVD version. Or the HD version. Yet... how many /.ers have stopped going to movie theaters because of that?

Myself, I don't have time to watch every movie. And the limited time I have, I will use to watch the best movies in the grandest way (at a movie theater, or at least in HD). I will not be wasting time with bad movies, nor wasting great movies with a tiny screen...

could it be...

that you're BOTH RIGHT?

ie, you've just demonstrated that each person has their own take on what form of entertainment works for them and makes them happy.

there IS no one-stop style that fits all.

some movies: watch once. others, watch many
some songs: listen once. others, listen many

people are different. wow. what a revelation.

In case anyone missed the reference

"The attempt was a bust if I recall right."

The I-Appliance BBS is an interesting source of info on orphan devices whose business models shat the bed, beginning with the famous http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-Opener

http://www.linux-hacker.net/cgi-bin/UltraBoard/UltraBoard.pl

I could care less if someones business model fails, and if they gimme free stuff I'll happily put it to use.

Not so. You cannot prove that repeatedly making a measurement in the past is any indication that it will hold in the future. Pointing out that it's worked before is just begging the question, and therefore reproducing the results doesn't help, for it does not mean you'll reproduce the results *again*.

You *must* presuppose that the future is relevantly like the past for empiricism to have any meaning in any context; it's pretty much an irreducible problem.

With that said, such "faith" is, I would argue, essentially to daily living and doesn't really deserve to be categorized as "faith" except in the most pedantic of senses. Without acting under this presupposition, you cannot learn. Anything. I suspect that biologically this presupposition cannot be unlearned since it appears to be intrinsic to learning even in some of the stupider members of the animal kingdom.

People dress in a myriad different ways in London, and frankly nobody could give a toss about somebody wearing shorts and a baseball cap, heck, many locals will dress like that at times (not this time of the year tough, it has been quite cold and windy the last few days).