×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

114 comments

gaaaa terrorist! (-1, Offtopic)

myowntrueself (607117) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284140)

I mean, look at the name!

"Sid Karin"? Who is this guy kidding? Thats *obviously* an acronym of "Kid Sarin" and as we all know, sarin is a nerve gas!

Terrorist!

Kid Sarin was the fifth guy in Punch Out! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284162)

Right after King Hippo, I think.

Isn't this "starting out" ? (-1, Offtopic)

Scorillo47 (752445) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284141)

Just asking... it's funny when you see typos in headlines.

No, it's not. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284164)

Staring down at means to glare at.

Idiot.

Mark (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284142)

Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes...

The town so nice they Marked it twice?

Re:Mark (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284150)

Posted by timothy Posted by timothy

Re:Mark (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284209)

mark from THE CITY is the new roland piquiPALLE.

Re:Mark (1)

Slipped_Disk (532132) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284267)

Seriously... Normally I don't comment on the editorial process here, but WTFF?

Perhaps the Editors' "read-out" the mistakes? (1)

Tavor (845700) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284294)

It's something I've found myself doing, and a few other english/techie friends of mine do as well. You will be reading, and your mind will automatically correct the small mistakes it makes. I call it "reading-out" the mistakes, for lack of a better term, but would gladly accept pointers on what it's called. As for the multiple bylines... newbie mistake. We all make them.

Re:Perhaps the Editors' "read-out" the mistakes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284358)

When I went to college I heard this effect called a schitoma, which translates to something like "blind spot". It's the psychological equivalent of the blind spot you have in the center of your vision, but your mind automatically compensates for this, so you don't notice it.

Re:Mark (0)

daspriest (904701) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284340)

Don't the editors have one of these friendly reminders on their interface?

"(Use the Preview Button! Check those URLs!)"

Re:Mark (-1, Redundant)

Trogre (513942) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284516)

Don't worry they're just getting the dupe out of the way by putting it IN THE ARTICLE.

Dupe (3, Funny)

sergiorepo (207331) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284144)

I guess this gives a whole new meaning to the term "dupe".

Its the first time I see a dupe inside itself.

Re:Dupe (0)

Basehart (633304) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284475)

Why not go for broke:

Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes " MARK OF THE CITY WRITES "Since helping to found the San Diego Supercomputer Center in the 1980s, Sid Karin has distinguished himself as a national expert on digital technology and its possibilities for scientific research. Go here for the full interview."

Re:Dupe (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284944)

Roses are red. Violets are blue. I'm schizophrenic, and so am I.

Re:Dupe (2, Insightful)

LordNightwalker (256873) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284951)

Not to mention the fact that you still got no clue who did the interview or what the interview was about.

Click here for the interview... THE Interview!!!

WHAT INTERVIEW?????

Yes, I know I can click the link to find out, but would it be so hard to actually describe the article in the short blurb? Imagine every submitter fucked up like this, then we'd have to RTFA on every single new slashdot headline. I'd never get around to getting actual work done...

Re:Dupe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13286920)

I'd never get around to getting actual work done...

What is this 'actual work' you speak of?

I wanted to let you know (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284155)

I wanted to let you know about this service I've found. I have not needed to go to the video store. :/ I have been able to find whatever I have looked for. There's a lot of music and videos, and I have even found video games :( , and it only costs 3.99 a month for all this. If you have a CD burner, you can even burn the movies and share them with your friends :/ they will be able to watch the movies on their CD-Rom drives. :(

P.S. I paid $9.00 for two sodas last week at the movie theater.

Never send spam. It is bad.

"Technological revolutions don't happen every day" (3, Interesting)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284161)

But they happen a lot faster when you have cheap energy. It will be interesting to see how all this rah-rah technology thing plays out as energy accelerates in price.

I think we'll see fewer bells and whistles and more fundamental and substantive shifts in how the technology basically works and how and when we choose/bother to use it.

RS

Re:"Technological revolutions don't happen every d (2, Insightful)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284194)

A bicycle is technology.

KFG

Re:"Technological revolutions don't happen every d (2, Funny)

pyrrhonist (701154) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284571)

A bicycle is technology.

And who are we to say that fish don't need them?

Re:"Technological revolutions don't happen every d (1)

pyrrhonist (701154) | more than 8 years ago | (#13287335)

Hmmm, 50% funny, 50% overrated. Was that one too subtle or too inflammatory for Slashdot?

Re:"Technological revolutions don't happen every d (1)

Geekbot (641878) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285503)

Yeah, technically. Technology is a tool we use to get a job done and a bicycle definitely counts.

OTOH, using the time honored, "was it created before I was born" rule of thumb, a bicycle was only technology to my great grandparents (or older as I am too lazy to look up when bicycles were invented).

They'll be technology to me when you mount lasers on 'em.

That would be pretty cool actually because then when some car doesn't respect your rights on the road you could blow out their tire (or vaporize them depending on if you upgrade to the "EVIL GENIUS" laser).

Re:"Technological revolutions don't happen every d (2, Insightful)

kfg (145172) | more than 8 years ago | (#13287183)

using the time honored, "was it created before I was born" rule of thumb. . .

That is the rule of thumb for tradition, not technology.

They'll be technology to me when you mount lasers on 'em.

Invented in 1958. By your rule of thumb not technology, unless you are older than myself, and I'm turning grey.

Same year the integrated circuit was first actually produced, although the invention goes back some years, to the same year the first nuclear power plant went critical.

Ahhhh, but what about that modern icon of technology, rocket science and space exploration?

The multistage rocket dates from 1650 and the first animal launched into space and successfully recovered by parachute. . .1806. Liquid fuel wont save you. That's still pre WWI.

On the other hand bicycle chainwheels are now so sophisticated that they can only be designed and cut by computer analysis and CAM, each individual tooth having a slightly different profile depending on where it lies in relation to the power stroke, other teeth and the size of the gear.

Be careful about your rules of thumb, or all your lights might go out. First city to city transmission of three phase AC current; 1891.

KFG

Re:Energy!=Oil (1)

vertinox (846076) | more than 8 years ago | (#13287471)

ALthough Energy Prices are linked directly with oil prices, they aren't 100% dependant. Since it does not preclude you have to use gasoline to ship electrons over a wire from a Nuclear Power Plant to you home (Yes, there is always gas used for the mining and refining of uranium and you have to drive the fuel and the waste around and you still have to have oil for the moving parts in the station, but you know what I mean).

But you don't have to have a truck to haul electrons directly to the consumer.

If technologies enable the consumer to do more without traveling like say download movies to his house so he doesn't have to drive to the store and visit relatives online instead of buying planeticets (which are quite expensive now because of fuel prices) with video confrencing then it will be more efficient and time saving.

Technologies that do not directly result in burning of gasoline will increase and those who cause more gasoline usage will decrease. (like the SUV)

His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (5, Insightful)

ReformedExCon (897248) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284224)

He likens terabyte storage to the numerous technological revolutions of the past. His opinion is that at some point storage will become so plentiful in personal devices that the concept of "having it all" will be a reality. His first example is loading all recorded media onto a personal device. His second is storing photo-realistic images in car navigation systems. This is his revolution?

Having infinite storage is interesting, but if you consider the Internet to be the same type of thing, there are already limitations. First, you need to realize that 90% of everything is garbage. The other 10% may be useful, but to whom? The tiny fraction of a percent of all information that may be useful to you personally needs to be able to find its way to you. So we have tools like search engines to help us. They are slowly getting better, but the tide of information only comes in, so though the engines are getting better, the quality of results is increasingly getting worse.

What would I do with all recorded music? I couldn't possibly listen to it all in my lifetime. I'd need some sort of intelligent agent to find things that I'd like and play those so that I don't waste time listening to things I'm not interested in.

This isn't some future revolution. It's reality now, and for the most part it works okay.

What will we do with infinite storage? Probably just hoard more data, I think. There's only a small amount of data that is actually usable to any one person, expanding storage capacity isn't going to change that.

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (2, Interesting)

syousef (465911) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284413)

This isn't some future revolution. It's reality now, and for the most part it works okay.

It's a reality today!? So does that mean when I'm on the way home on the train today I'll be able to watch any movie or any episode of any TV show I can name? Cool!!!

What will we do with infinite storage? Probably just hoard more data, I think. There's only a small amount of data that is actually usable to any one person, expanding storage capacity isn't going to change that.

And I suppose you're going to be able to tell me exactly what data you need for every day for the rest of your life? Even the stuff that hasn't actually been created yet? The point of having it all there is to be able to use whatever you want or need to suite the occassion.

My movie example is a little frivolous so try this. A lawyer may need to look up all case law in a particular area for example, but doesn't know what cases he'll have to look that up in a week or a month. Or what about the scientist or medical researcher that wants to look up all articles in a particular area of research?

By those standards, even a terabyte is tiny.

If you're failing to understand these basic ideas, it's no wonder you think we don't need more storage. You remind me of the infamous quote of Bill Gates' about no one needing more than 512Kb of RAM.

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (2, Interesting)

ReformedExCon (897248) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284442)

I'm not saying that we don't need more storage. I'm saying that it is not a revolutionary step in technology to have massive amounts of storage.

Lawyers have such a tool. Doctors have such a tool. These tools already exist. Yes, they will expand as information and knowledge grows.

But the question is not whether information will accumulate. It is whether we will have the tools to gather from that data the information that is relevant to us personally.

Yes, in a sense you can have access to any movie or TV episode you want to watch. Currently that information is out on the Internet. If your device is able to access that, download it, and decompress it in a reasonable manner, you'd be able to watch it anywhere you went. The storage medium is just not local to your device.

So what happens when it is? Well, things will be more convenient, for one. But fundamentally the things that you will do with that data is the same as what you do with it now.

But also consider this, information is always growing. So in order to have your stored data be up to date, it would need a constant uplink to some central database server to handle every change in information that happens every minute of every day. Why not just revert (Internet style) to data on demand? With sufficient bandwidth, it would be essentially the same as unlimited storage.

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

dal20402 (895630) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284483)

Option 1 (which you seem to be suggesting): Create the physical infrastructure to duplicate terabytes of data billions of times in order to allow every human being to carry everything that could possibly be relevant to him on his person.

Option 2: Store data once and build a cheap wireless network. Yes, it can work on your train ride.

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

asuffield (111848) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284736)

It's a reality today!? So does that mean when I'm on the way home on the train today I'll be able to watch any movie or any episode of any TV show I can name?

Yes, but you'll need to name the show precisely, including any misspellings that the nerd who keyed in the database made. You will also have to watch adverts from the original screening, because depriving those 1980s companies of their revenue would be PIRACY, and you can't eat while you're watching unless it's from an authorised supplier.

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

RicktheBrick (588466) | more than 8 years ago | (#13286718)

In my opinion non-volatile ram memory will be the next revolution in computers. Once they make this memory at a competitive price we should see an explosion in the number of computers and their capability. There should be computers that run on fuel cell batteries for years that will take care of one's home security, safety, and medical emergency needs. I also see for the very young who live to be over a hundred years in age, a link between the internet and one's own brain. They already have a man who controls a video game with his mind. I see a day for them when all human knowledge, skills and feelings are available to anyone who desires them. If you wish to play a musical instrument than just pick it up and ask for that skill and it will be downloaded to your brain. If you want to have the same feeling you or anyone had in the past doing whatever they did than that also will be downloaded to your brain. I see the ability to enforce laws by making the person about to commit a crime to go unconscious so there will be no need for prisons. I see a computer that will govern the people in a totally fair manner that it will be accepted as a dictator. All material needs will be free so no one will lack anything.

90% is garbage (1, Funny)

jurt1235 (834677) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284521)

That is again one thing the music industry should take in account with their pricing: People do not like to buy garbage at $16-20 per CD, and discover that 90% on that thing is garbage. Digital storage is much better in discarding garbage. Also to have all the music of the world with you will give you such a serious playlist, that you will dump 90% again just to be able to find the songs you like.

The fun thing of the interview is though that it is mainly centered on music as example again. I would go as far to say that every invention done since the start of time has been done to be able to make better copies of music so everybody can enjoy it.
Examples: Cavemen "invents" fire: Ability to send smoke signals of the latest hit list to next tribe.

Cavemen invents the wheel: Ability to drive instruments on carts making it possible to carry bigger instruments to concerts with less effort

Cavemen invents clothing: Ability to stand in front of audience in less embarassing way.

Etc etc etc.

I am with him, there. (2, Insightful)

imsabbel (611519) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284563)

Maybe you cant follow me, but the mere fact that one can have all the books of a large library on your computer, fully indexed with the possibility to do boolean and regular searches is as much an revolution as thethe printing press, imho.

And just like that (the press), it will take decades to slowly get recognition to its worth.

There wont even the possiblilities of "Burning libraries" anymore if everybody can store the whole history and culture of his country/region/religion on his ipod mk9...

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

aussersterne (212916) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284581)

The point is not that you, one person, will be able to hoard all data for yourself (with all people doing the same on their own storage devices) for some abstract sense of self-importance.

The point is that all barriers related to a lack of information will disappear. Anything that anyone knows or has ever known, you can know, too, just like that, instantly, at no cost, from the comfort of your couch. Any song ever written, any novel ever penned, any movie ever filmed, any speech ever given.

Once the network is omnipresent and user interfaces evolve a little bit more, it won't be about having a terabyte in your iPod, it'll be about having thousands of petabytes effectively as an extension of your brain. And because we will all share the same set of petabytes and are all adressable on the same network, what will emerge is a gestalt, a collective of knowledge, understanding, perspective, and opinion that will truly be HyperMedia, or, in other words, "the humamn collective."

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284646)

it'll be about having thousands of petabytes effectively as an extension of your brain.

What's the point of having a brain the size of a planet if you have a pain in all the diodes down your left side?

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284802)

what will emerge is a gestalt, a collective of knowledge, understanding, perspective, and opinion that will truly be HyperMedia, or, in other words, "the humamn collective."

RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.

small amount of data that is actually usable (1)

dpilot (134227) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285089)

Herein lies the danger...

Your view of the world is (obviously) a function of your information feeds. In the old days, that meant what you saw, heard, and felt. Slightly more recently it began to include newspapers, radio, and TV. In both "past eras" you couldn't do too much to select your feeds, and you got a pretty mixed view.

Today we have infoglut, and it has become necessary to manage our feeds. Unfortunately many will not have discipline to diversify their information input, and will only take in that which is slanted their way. IMHO this is part of the problem behind today's vaunted polarization - the various left and right wings no longer share information input. It used to be that they had common input, and came to different conclusions based on their culture and beliefs. Now their input has been preselected, then their culture and beliefs operate on that, so the conclusions differentiate even further.

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

Shaper_pmp (825142) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285184)

"His opinion is that at some point storage will become so plentiful in personal devices that the concept of "having it all" will be a reality. His first example is loading all recorded media onto a personal device. His second is storing photo-realistic images in car navigation systems. This is his revolution?"

Be fair to the guy - he's talking to an interviewer from a completely non-technical magazine. He's giving extremely good examples, because they relate directly to the lives of the kind of people who'll be reading it.

He could waffle on all day about "functionally infinite, ubiquitous semantically-organised storage accessible through a hypermedia interface functioning as a shared information-space and opt-in global group-consciousness", and you'd be nodding your head in agreement. However, he would have lost 99.999% of the intended audience by "ubiquitous".

"Having infinite storage is interesting, but if you consider the Internet to be the same type of thing, there are already limitations."

Since when has having access to the internet been the same as effectively infinite personal storage? Just because you can access lots of information on the net doesn't mean you own unlimited storage space. Sure, I can find and download much information that others find interesting, but I'm a long way away from cheaply and easily being able to assemble my own unlimited-size database, and share it with other people.

"First, you need to realize that 90% of everything is garbage. The other 10% may be useful, but to whom?"

Apples and oranges. 90% of the internet may be crap, but 90% of my personal MP3 collection isn't rubbish in the same way that 90% of my house isn't unliveable-in.

You're right, in that we will need enhanced searching and information-handling mechanisms, but that's a corrolary to what he's saying - he's not tackling that point (which is likely too esoteric for his audience), so your point is irrelevant.

"They are slowly getting better, but the tide of information only comes in, so though the engines are getting better, the quality of results is increasingly getting worse."

This seems to be a popular meme on slashdot - "Google was better in the old days - it's shit now".

In contrast, I've found Google to get better the older it is. And it's certainly better than Altavista before it. In this ever-increasing deluge of information, even staying as relevent as in the past is a great achievement, and the mild improvement I've seen represent a great advance. Am I alone here? Are all search engines really shit these days, or is it merely rosy-tinted nostalgia?

"What would I do with all recorded music? I couldn't possibly listen to it all in my lifetime. I'd need some sort of intelligent agent to find things that I'd like and play those so that I don't waste time listening to things I'm not interested in."

So what? Did he ever say you wouldn't need an intelligent suggestion agent to select items out of that for you? No, so what are you arguing about?

If you're arguing against the idea of everyone eventually having access to all music, just compare the size of the average CD collection to the average MP3 collection, and we'll talk again.

"This isn't some future revolution. It's reality now, and for the most part it works okay."

Yeah. For the few (hundred?) thousand nerds like us on the bleeding edge of the technology. And we're experiencing the very, very, very beginning of the revolution. This is an article in a mainstream site - these are the people who still can't program their videos, let alone reliably navigate a worldwide shared information-space, or assemble quasi-infinite storage space. Sure we're already starting to do it, but we're five minutes ahead on a month-long journey, so stop being so patronising.

"What will we do with infinite storage? Probably just hoard more data, I think. There's only a small amount of data that is actually usable to any one person, expanding storage capacity isn't going to change that."

Indeed. But have you ever noticed that our storage requirements are growing at the same rate as our storage is increasing? Computer games take multiple CDs now, but I remember when they fitted on a disk, and a 720k one at that. Pictures and movies get higher-resolution. MP3s get higher-quality. People archive more stuff on the computer instead of in photo albums or scrapbooks. Programs get more complex and powerful, and require more space to save state.

One of my machines practically fills its 60GB hard drive, but there's nothing on there I'd want to throw away. I've looked and tried.

Short answer: The revolution is only beginning, and he's predicting simple examples for an uneducated audience. "90% of everything is crap" applies to the sum of everything, not necessarily our personal data stores. He doesn't cover how to handle navigating extra storage space, just the fact that it's coming. Of course we hoard stuff, but that's not necessarily a bad thing - our requirements expand to fill the facilities, and that's what drives progress to better technology.

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

RosenSama (836736) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285593)

What would I do with all recorded music? I couldn't possibly listen to it all in my lifetime. I'd need some sort of intelligent agent to find things that I'd like and play those so that I don't waste time listening to things I'm not interested in.
How is this "problem" any different that finding music you like at the music store or on Amazon? I don't see how having all the info locally causes a new problem, but it does make it immediately available once you find what you want. Ditto for stuff outside of music.

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

Junior J. Junior III (192702) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285811)

First, you need to realize that 90% of everything is garbage. The other 10% may be useful, but to whom?

Even worse, what if everything is garbage to 90% of everyone, but everything is valuable 10% of everyone, and it's not always the same 10%?

Re:His revolution: seemingly infinite storage (1)

jav1231 (539129) | more than 8 years ago | (#13288362)

All of this storage is useless if your access to it is limited. That is the situation we find ourselves in now, to an extent. Windows, for instance, is largely useless as an OS for large amounts of data particularly if that data is in the form of thousands of small files. I realize this is an NTFS issue largely, but SMB is also limited. Then you look at bandwidth. Transporting large amounts of data over typical 100Mpbs of shared pipe can be cumbersome as well. It's nice to have a terabyte of storage but when it takes 4hrs to retrieve a couple of hundred gig what's the point?

Uh oh (4, Funny)

dirtsurfer (595452) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284227)

"Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes ">>STACK OVERFLOW

Re:Uh oh (0)

Mark of THE CITY (97325) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285932)

Yeah, I noticed this morning. It's my first approved story, but it was rejected at first because the synopsis was too long. In resubmitting I forgot to remove the link, hence the appearance of recursion.

Recursion (-1, Redundant)

invisigoth (131518) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284230)

Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes

Apparently, he writes about himself in the recursive tense.

Re:Recursion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284765)

recursion (n.)
See recursio(n-1).

Email? (2, Funny)

alienfluid (677872) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284243)

mailto:mrkwscha@yahoo.com [mailto] Who posts their email address in the main story summary on Slashdot? This guys must be nuts!

Re:Email? (1)

daspriest (904701) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284316)

its a way to test yahoo's mail server, and maybe he likes to get lots of email, a way to make him feel important?

Re:Email? (1)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284506)

Who posts their email address in the main story summary on Slashdot? This guys must be nuts!

Or, perhaps he's giving you his spam address.

Re:Email? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284514)

Who posts their email address in the main story summary on Slashdot? This guys must be nuts!

This guy's nuts! GRAB 'EM!!!!

Er, him. Grab him. Nevermind.

Re:Email? (1)

ari_j (90255) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284545)

Who posts their e-mail address in the main story summary on Slashdot? Mark of THE CITY. That's who.

Nuts, or TERABYTE STORAGE!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13287251)

Nah, he's just trying out his terabyte storage. Who says it's not a revolution when you can post your email in the main story summary on Slashdot and still have 0.9 TB left in your Inbox?!

A Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284246)

When did you first suspect that even scientists could use computers?

stdin:1 (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284249)

Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes "Since helping to found the San Diego Supercomputer Center in the 1980s, Sid Karin has distinguished himself as a national expert on digital technology and its possibilities for scientific research. Go here for the full interview."

PARSE ERROR. MISSING "

First Prime Factorization Post (2, Informative)

2*2*3*75011 (900132) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284263)

Factorization of the 1980s:

1980 = 2*2*3*3*5*11
1981 = 7*283
1982 = 2*991
1983 = 3*661
1984 = 2*2*2*2*2*2*31
1985 = 5*397
1986 = 2*3*331
1987 is prime
1988 = 2*2*7*71
1989 = 3*3*13*17

1980s rocked (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284424)

1980s was a terrific decade.

We had mullets, great clothes and hairstyle, rocking music and a kick-ass president.

Slashdotting apps? (1)

axonal (732578) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284288)

I wonder if the slashdot effect occurs with mail clients. Seeing as everyone probably clicked the first link thinking it was a web page, only to have their mail app load up.

Latest Sony all products keygen incl mp3/mpeg plug (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284309)

Latest Sony all products keygen incl mp3/mpeg plugin fix: http://rapidshare.de/files/3667497/sonyproducts-ke [rapidshare.de] ygen.zip.html [rapidshare.de]

Full version Sony app: http://download.sonypictures.com/current [sonypictures.com] [sonypictures.com]

Re:Latest Sony all products keygen incl mp3/mpeg p (2, Interesting)

sydres (656690) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284375)

i guess using the user check is not working since this has to be a bot i have seen it in other postings cmdrtaco better get of his ass and fix this and the moderation system or is this a cowboy neal problem.

Okay... (2, Insightful)

WhiteHat101 (874390) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284312)

So, now that we have a terabyte of space in out GPS we can use that to scroll ahead to find out the current gas price. How does that work? Won't that require access to the Internet or some other source to get current images anyways..? So that terabyte of space would be wasted because you're not going to be able to get that much current information that quickly!

I'm also confused on his ideas on buying a license for all music... and then playing $.16 for each song... Don't those ideas contradict themselves..?

I'm sure most people will think "I don't want to listen to half the music out there" and once they are done with that I'm sure purchasing a license for all music is going to be rather expensive, especially when you don't want a whole lot of it.

I personally would prefer to carry my iPod from place to place instead of paying $.16 for each of the thousands of songs I have...
Assuming I just have 1000 songs that all cost $.16
$.16 * 1000 = $160.00
I'm not gonna pay $160.00 for a home copy, and another $160 for a copy at work or on my laptop or whatever! I have better things to spend my money on!

Re:Okay... (1)

CDarklock (869868) | more than 8 years ago | (#13286083)

> that terabyte of space would be wasted

Most people drive in pretty limited areas, so that terabyte of space could be used to cache data for your usual driving area. When you drive somewhere else, you probably ask the GPS to give you directions, and it can cache the suggested route. It's not that bad an idea. Note also that he says "photorealistic", so I'd imagine large stretches of highway and desert would probably be simulated until satellite imagery is available to update it (and determined to contain useful information).

> I'm also confused on his ideas on buying
> a license for all music... and then
> playing $.16 for each song... Don't those
> ideas contradict themselves..?

Don't free radio, $1 song downloads, and $16 CDs contradict themselves? No. They're used in different ways. And I think it's ludicrous to suggest that EVERYONE will have a terabyte iPod; there will be people who do things different ways, and the market will support them.

Furthermore, if I read the article right, there is a website offering 16 cent songs *now*... which is only peripherally related to how music will be licensed for the terabyte iPod. It's an indication that the "per song" model is already being challenged and tested.

> I'm sure purchasing a license for all
> music is going to be rather expensive,
> especially when you don't want a whole
> lot of it.

I would assume this is a subscription, so I can get updates when new music comes out. You probably purchase archive material by the year. Personally, I'd do the "all recorded music" license with lower bit-rate files, and only offer the individual files with higher bit rates.

> I have better things to spend my money on!

And that's the beauty of markets. If everyone is like you, we get the things you prefer to buy. If nobody is like you, we lose them.

I *liked* new Coke and Crystal Pepsi.

mmm? (1)

NanoGator (522640) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284343)

"I don't think so. When cars first came along, there were places that said you had to have someone walking in front of the car ringing a bell."

I'm not sure I'm quite getting this reference. Does he mean that the bell would have to be rung so that people will stay clear of the vehicle? If so, why not affix the bell to the car?

I'm getting the point that there were people with silly ideas back then, but I was hoping somebody could clarify this point.

Re:mmm? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284401)

You don't get it because you're not a recognized expert in computing.

Obviously, such an allegorical metaphor is beyond the abilities of your puny pea brain to comprehend it. Karin's godlike ability to predict the future is in no way hampered by his ability to come up with obscure facts from the past.

In answer to your question stemming from pure ignorance, they didn't have bells that could attach to cars. The technology to attach bells to autos hadn't been invented yet. In fact, when they did invent it, they named it 'bling' after the sound it made when the bell rang. As the car would drive down the street, people would be aware of the car because of its bling.

Re:mmm? (2, Informative)

I confirm I'm not a (720413) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285871)

Does he mean that the bell would have to be rung so that people will stay clear of the vehicle? If so, why not affix the bell to the car?

(From wikipedia [wikipedia.org] )
...a backlash against these large speedy vehicles resulted in passing laws that self-propelled vehicles on public roads in the United Kingdom must be preceded by a man on foot waving a red flag and blowing a horn.

So, a vehicular-mounted bell wouldn't cut it - you needed the full servant-with-flag-and-horn set-up to remain lawful. This wasn't as hard as it might seem; at that time if you could afford a motor vehicle you could afford numerous servants. (And if you couldn't afford servants, you wouldn't be voting anyway and consequently didn't matter).

This was during the 19th century, but, to be fair, we're still capable of silly ideas now ;-)

GOODNIGHT YOU LUNIX FREAKS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284398)

Eat shit you fucking lunix freaks. Hopefully tomorrow will be the day you all decide to grow up and start bathing. Oh and BTW I LOVE WINDOWS XP you freaking dorks.

burning questions (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284431)

1. Sid, why the hell does that guy capitalize THE CITY?
2. Boxers or briefs?
3. Can I call you Karen?

Hopeless editors. (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284453)

What are they paying you morons for? Can't you get anything right?

Do you honestly expect people to subscribe to this rubbish? I'm going to block your stupid ads until you start getting it righ.

mp3's are the revolution? (1)

opencity (582224) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284460)

Personal data storage into the terabyte, a vast global communications network, and the article is about the music industry's inability to deal with digital file sharing (?) I expected to look at the bottom and see it dated 1998. Seriously, in the '05, shouldn't a supercomputer guy be thinking about biological modeling (or something).

IMHO, Ray Kurzweil [kurzweilai.net] , master book/snake oil salesman that he is, is at least addressing some of the changes implied by the (what are we calling it now?) Information Explosion. If a GPS screen in your car and .16 c a song is what's happening then 'the man can't stop our music', but still ...

We need some futurists that aren't being outrun by the present. Links, anyone?

Yeah, sure. (2, Interesting)

dal20402 (895630) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284472)

"All of recorded music" in a terabyte or two? I think not. My collection takes up 170 GB and covers only a tiny fraction of recorded classical music. The idea of buying a license to all recorded music is preposterous for the foreseeable future. Good thing, too... no universal license that anyone could afford could support any significant number of artists.

He seems to have noticed the problems with the record industry's current business model, but he's not saying anything new. Next!

Re:Yeah, sure. (2, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284671)

You could probably fit all recorded music they you might want onto a few terrabytes. The business model that would work in that case would be something like a subscription service, except that you could download anything and retain it (no DRM). The reason you would keep paying would be new music - which is also the reason the RIAA don't like this model; it requires them to continue making music people actually want to listen to.

Re:Yeah, sure. (1)

2008 (900939) | more than 8 years ago | (#13288370)

"no universal license that anyone could afford could support any significant number of artists."

If we all paid what we currently spend on music into a universal licence it would support the exact same number of musicians, since it's the same amount of money. Distributing it fairly (and preventing fraud) would be tricky... but if we wanted to maximise our gains at the expense of pure capitalism we could actually get MORE full-time musicians out of it by capping salaries - a few millionaire rock stars could go a long way.

wireless anyone? (1)

daithimacseoin (855289) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284593)

Rather than have lots of devices with terabytes of capacity, is it not more likely that people will access all of their data remotely from one central location?

Then depending on the situation, one could stream the data at varying levels of quality to the client.

Re:wireless anyone? (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284674)

Local storage is faster. It would be good to have a 10TB disk to use as a local cache. If you then wander somewhere where the coverage is spotty, then you can keep working on stuff in the cache and have it automatically re-sync when you get back into range. If the autonomic system is done right, you won't even notice when you go out of range (unless you are actually talking to someone).

Re:wireless anyone? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284689)

He is talking about things like terrabytes worth of space on your flash-like drive, or a simple media player. Hell even a credit card could hold that much data.

Why waste money on wifi when you can carry it in your pocket? It doesn't matter. It's the same thing.

Ever heard of distributed clustering file systems? You download and cache everything, it's distributed. Everything you want is transparently aviable to you, you don't have to worry about wifi being aviable or terrabytes of information aviable at your finger tips.. You will have both.

And it's not just your music, or most music genre... but ALL recorded music, from ALL of human history.

Think 'personal copy of the library of congress on your persona pseudo-mp3 player'. This would be cheaper and easier then picking out songs to carry with you or stream over a network.

Think 30-40 or a hundred years from now.. not just what is going to be aviable in 5-10 years.

This sort of thing would spell the end of pop culture as we know it. When you have equal access to recordings of Mozart to videos of authentic Mongolian folk dancing, to the collective lifetime works of artists now only known for being one-hit-wonders during the 70's, to the collective recordings of your neighbor down the street he made while singing to himself in the shower on everybody's computer on every street corner of the entire world it means that the '20 twenty list' or what VH1 has to say about a subject such as music idols as about as irrelevent to you and the average person as what my thoughts were on Jan 3rd of 2003 at 2:12am in the morning on the subject of silly putty.

All information, everywere, all the time. Everything about Everything. All of human history, updated by the microsecond.

Think the hitchhiker guide to the galaxy on steroids...

All we have to do is get rid of this pesky DRM bullshit, but I can't expect it to last much into the next decade or two. Realy.

Look at it another way... A ultra-unpersonalized (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13284723)

music player

Say you just busted your last set of headphones. You want to get a new player and some people have a slick looking pair of headphones to come with a updated music player device.

Notice the steps:
Step 1. You buy the music player device.
Step 2. You plug in your headphones.
Step 3. You listen to your music.

You notice how there is no 'download songs' or 'copy files' step?

This is because the media player comes pre-installed with the music you like.

However it's not because of focus marketting or they tracked your records thru you by some GPS doo-dad you carry around.

It has the music you like, becuase it already has all the music anybody anywere likes. In fact it also has music that nobody likes.

This is becuase it comes pre-installed with ALL music. All music everywere.

The wifi may come into it becuase you downloaded your 'favorites' playlist, although potentionally they could have that pre-installed, too.

New editorial technique? (0, Offtopic)

Johnno74 (252399) | more than 8 years ago | (#13284868)

Mark of THE CITY writes "Mark of THE CITY writes "Since helping


Is this a recursive story or something?

The _real_ questions for Sid. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13285046)

People really need to not worry about asking questions regarding the stuff that the marketplace and consumers like slashdot readers will work out for themeselves.

Karin is in a position to answer some really tough questions.

The questions that need to be answered are things like, how can peer review be improved to eliminate the cronyism that goes on? When will the National Science Foundation understand that persistent IT infrastructure for supercomputing is as critical as things like telescopes in hawaii and needs more than a 5 year vision and support structure? When will Congress recognie that cyberinfrastructure is a buzzword that no one knows how to apply? Cyberinfrastructure is a word that had no vision behind it and is headed down the path of just being a pot of money that all the science areas will divide among themselves at the _expense_ of any real infrastructure. Teragrid isn't an example either. That project was once a great concept, but everyone involved is competing with each other to stay alive, which means no one is truely working together. Teragrid has long since been forced off the path because the major centers don't want to let it succeed and most certainly don't want it to be a project through which their "partners" can be viewed as successful.

Sid and the leaders of his generation had a hand in getting the NSF to see reality once and setting the path. Now, NSF is trying to control and set a path itself instead of letting the visionaries and the scientists do it. The content of the Atkins report (http://www.communitytechnology.org/nsf_ci_report/ [communitytechnology.org] ) was all but ignored by the people inside of NSF who should have listened to it instead of following their personal agendas. They just lifted the term "Cyberinfrastructure" to create the appearance of following along.

Supercomputing, advanced storage, grid computing and next generation networks all are lagging behind in this country because the NSF doesn't listen to vision and can't create and sustain one of its own. They are into the playing of politics t hat they won't set up the foundation for infrastructure that could last long enough to make a difference without falling into funding battles every 3rd year. Given there isn't a 10 or 20 year vision and foundation, is it any surprise that the supercomputing centers are so busy protecting themselves from each other that serious attempts at visionary projects don't happen?

Fortunately, the Department of Energy appears to be taking up the slack for now. More power to DoE for recognizing and filling the gap, but its a sad state for NSF to be in.

Re:The _real_ questions for Sid. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13285455)

Perhaps the Department of Energy does have a 20 year vision and foundation but they are still stuck in 1980's thinking and management. Don't count on DOE to save the day.

Just another cog in the DOE computing machine...

Re:The _real_ questions for Sid. (1)

convolvatron (176505) | more than 8 years ago | (#13287130)

you're holding sid karin up as an example of how to fight waste and cronyism in funding for scientific research? and then the doe supercomputing efforts?

give me some of what you're smoking *right now*

Re:The _real_ questions for Sid. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13286793)

excellent evaluation from an obvious "insider". Want to see a truly dirty look? Go to any HPC center and mention that word "Cyberinfrastructure" *wait for it....*

A megabyte doesn't go as far as it used to. (1)

crovira (10242) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285253)

I used to own a 20MB drive, in 1985-86 that was huge.

Along with the local storage to each PC (4+15+15+40+80GB) I own a 160GB and I recently had to clear come files off of it.

I am thinking of installing a NAS with a 1TB drive from LaCie.

That shows me the amount of storage required in a 'digital home' can't be predicted with any certainty. As storage grows to encompass everything we used to store, we store something else which takes up a lot more space.

Re:A megabyte doesn't go as far as it used to. (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | more than 8 years ago | (#13287457)

The phrase you're looking for is, "Garbage expands to fill the space allotted."

How'd he do it?! (1, Funny)

Quass (320289) | more than 8 years ago | (#13285705)

What on earth does Sid Karin have to do with Nintendo?

A better question would be is how did he get information about the Revolution?? This guy must have some great contacts!

Dupidy Dupey Dupe :-p (1)

Vorondil28 (864578) | more than 8 years ago | (#13286582)

I love how "Mark of THE CITY" occurs twice in the "Related Links" box to the right of the story.

Wierd Name (0)

jimmyjim (906575) | more than 8 years ago | (#13286868)

This guy seems like one smart cookie but I agree with alot of the other people in here this guys name is wierd. But this was a great article would like to meet the guy and pick his brain for a couple hours!

Re:Wierd Name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#13288203)

For some reason, I have a feeling that Mr. Karin has no interest in having his brain picked by someone who cannot spell or construct a simple sentence.

By the way, out of curiosity -- when you wrote that post, were you under the impression that what you had to say added any value whatsoever to the thread? Did you mistakenly believe that somebody cares what you think?

Go back to your Xbox, and don't forget to pop your zits.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...