I guess that a proof-of-concept boat might seem - at some levels - as though it was about as silly looking, in comparison to conventional boats, as silly looking as most concept cars, in comparison to the common consumer models.
I think I understand, just from the summary, that it demonstrates the viability of solar power, in ocean vessels. Were I a boat designer aware of the matter, I might endeavor to give it some thought.
It's hard to overturn the massive bulk of legal precedents supporting the recording industry's claims to intellectual property - and not much easier, out here, to gain popular attention about anything not accompanied by a sensational presentation - regardless of the actual content of an argument, quite frankly.
To respond to the second matter: Myself, I don't suppose we'll see any coups at any time soon. Plenty of gun sales, I know, but no coups I think - quite.
Though I don't feel any particular warm fuzzies about it, I understand that the recording industry is simply endeavoring to protect its collective assets, in so far as legal precedent may define its collective assets to be.
I'm sure that there may also be a certain side to it, in which they're simply endeavoring to impress shareholders. The main issue seems to be the matter of legal precedent, however.
...the main basis of my argument, which I did not fully present in that one comment, I notice. My apologies.
I think we should be careful to keep the matter in proportion.
My statement that it's innovative was presented, I should say, with a lot of tongue in cheek.
Though I understand there is the typical argument of "car becomes a weapon", but I notice that cars are not assault rifles. The matter of the driver's sense of personal responsibility remains the main basis of my argument.
Neither the judge nor (even less) the jury have the skill and background to make a sound decision in this area.
Sounds like a fair argument for the appeal. In appealing any verdicts to the contrary, hopefully they'll think of that
In discussing governmental regulations in regards to such matters, I'm afraid that we overlook the angle on which the matter boils down to a concern of personal responsibility. Not to suggest that we should give up the ghost, but government truly cannot enforce such a thing. Community leaders may themselves be able to inspire sense of personal responsibility in a community - but only if the community leaders, themselves, represent personal responsibility themselves, and then only if it's understood as such.
Granted, there is the concern in regards to public safety, I understand, in the motivation of laws regulating such things as cel phone use on the roads. I can understand that, I simply wish to note that no regulation is a suitable substitute for plain sense of reason.
So explain to me why a passenger would need to have their smartphone in hand and have the application for it appear on the dash, rather than just looking at it in their hand, that doesn't involve the driver.
Because innovations like this can drive sales.
To quote the Bard's Tale, in regards to these recurring typos: Beer beer beer, tiddly beer beer beer. Cheers.
Erm, to correct myself, I meant: If to enforce a sense of personal responsibility - though I'm afraid it only becomes political, at which point.
It seems I have a Freudian slip, at the matter. My apologies.
I'm for personal responsibility, not necessarily for government stepping in beyond the limits of basic law, if to enforce a sense of political responsibility - I think that it sets a bad precedent for government, to say the least.
I find myself distracted at the original occurrence of the word, "Infotainment" however. What a shiny.....
I hope it would be appropriate to denote the observation that your comment presents a fine example of common ethnography.
To return to the common vernacular, however: Lyk, geez you mean they don't do it like us?
(cough cough lol and such)
What "goofy little partly functional device" would you be referring to, then?
But then again, some people drive apparently without having payed any attention in driver's education, and society deals with that too. I think we should focus, moreso, on sense of personal responsibility, in such things.
As far as the app thing: We could try to stop that matter of innovation,but I do not know if we could succeed at halting it. I am, admittedly, biased about it however. I think it sounds like a reasonable development in concepts of vehicle utility - and I am not enough convinced that it would be of any concern for the many responsible drivers around - overall, per capita, and so on.
I have a tablet, namely an iPad, which I use in the kitchen on occasion. I would recommend a few apps for that: The All Recipes app; the Epicurious app; the Food Guru app. I'm sure that there must be apps about wine selection, and maybe even about beer, too.
For browsing, I'd recommend iCab. Atomic Web Browser is another good one. (iCab, as one of its many features, can synch its bookmarks with Dropbox, which I don't know if Atomic can, as of yet.) Either of those offers some more features than the conventional Safari mobile browser, in a pretty reliable browser platform. (App crashes seem like less of a concern, on the tablet platform, I think)
You can also take it outdoors with you - weather permitting, of course. There's pUniverseHD for iPad, when it comes to stargazing after dinner
As far as TV, then, there's Netflix on iPad - it's close enough for my tastes
Lastly: For hanging it from the kitchen counter, Belkin makes a nice little temporary mounting bracket, and I'm sure there are more permanent options available. The major technology retailer, BestBuy, carries the Belkin bracket, in their iPad section.
Entertainment and utility abound on the well supported mobile platforms, these days - enjoy!
All life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities. -- Dawkins
