http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/shortcuts/2011/dec/19/kim-jong-il-things-never-knew?intcmp=239

I done been hearing rumors that Siri is coming to the iPhone 4, but this is doubtful as there is a hardware limitation there - a significantly slower processor. Other than that, yea, lots of these things are business decisions rather than technical limitations. Remember when apple blocked the app that made the Volume button into a shortcut to take pictures - and then after a while released a new version of the camera software that had the feature in it. Lots of things like that happen too.
>> ^dag:

It's not about technical limitations. It's product alignment and yes, cynically, selling more iPhone 4s's. But even taking out the cynical bit - Siri does make more sense on the iPhone than an iPad. Much of Siri relies on GPS which is not built in to the iPad WiFI version. Siri also needs you to be online all the time to work- whereas the iPad is not. For these reasons and a few more - Siri on the iPad would not be an optimal experience- and if it's not optimal - Apple doesn't do it.
The real question is why isn't Siri on the 4 or even the 3GS? I'm afraid that's mostly about the Benjamins.

>> ^gwiz665:
The iPad 2 has identical hardware to iPhone 4S, then only differences is that 4S is downclocked to 800 MHz (from 1 GHz) and that it obviously has a different resolution. It could pull off Siri easily I would wager (unless it has some sort of extra gadget inside especially for it, which is doubtful).
>> ^dannym3141:
>> ^gwiz665:
As an iOS and Android developer, I recommend the iPad 2. From a user standpoint is has better apps and, at least to me, the interface "feels" better. In fairness though, I have not worked directly with the Galaxy 10.1, so I don't know too much about the performance of that. The iPad 2 is a beast and can pull off quite a bit of stuff though.
With dropbox on it, it becomes a lot more useful for work stuff, since you can easily move files on and off.
Siri is not available on the iPad 2, yet, at least. And nothing has been announced, so this should be kept in mind when purchasing, if Siri is a wanted feature.
There are apps that can interact from iPhone to iPad, and you can tether the iPad to use the iPhone as a hotspot, which can be nice.

I'm quite surprised siri isn't on the ipad 2... but i'd assumed it had the hardware for it.
Soooo it's apple, there's only gonna be one of two reasons - either it doesn't have the hardware (gwizz will know) or they're releasing a new ipad soonish and want to have a selling point. I'd recommend looking at estimated release rumours for a new ipad, might play into your decision.

How does a baby fair to the idea of a yes or no statement about a concept he has no idea of? Further, how can you say no to a concept than you don't understand to be true? Moreover, how is abstaining from a decision about something not a 3rd choice? For instance, what do you believe about the cardinality of infinities being infinite as they relate to the divisibility of finite sums? Huh? Not thought about it before? Need more information or time to form an opinion, I know I do. Abstaining from making a choice is not a no, yet, but nor is it a yes. Both yes and no require a justification, and for myself, that justification needs to be something more than just an inclining.

I agree; this is saying "I don't know", which I think is a legitimate answer, and the only intellectually honest one barring actual knowledge. This was my point that the atheist position is "no" to the proposition "does God exist?", which requires a justification.

As to belief, I think you are misusing the word here. Everything one thinks about something is a belief. Belief is the cognitive recognition of an idea. So yes, while the answer to the certain knowledge of God's existence is, indeed yes or no, the tribulation of the human experience is that we have few good ways of "knowing", and for the agnostic, we have no good way of "knowing" God's existence.

This was my position as an agnostic, so I understand what you mean. It was very difficult to even define what truth could be in that mode of thinking. When I understood that truth was a tangible concept that could be grasped, it blew me away. I will say that you have a good way of knowing whether God exists. If you prayed to Jesus and asked Him what the truth is, He would show it to you.

When I refer to knowing, I refer back to the Cartesian understanding of knowledge (which has been challenged rather unsuccessfully, imo, by Popper); justified, true, belief. True is uppercase true, belief is cognitively asserting the true belief, and justified is a more complex idea in that you need some way of asserting this IS the way it has to be and not some other, a possition that can't be reduced away froml by reductio ad absurdum, for example, or any other means.

The tension is between the objective and the subjective viewpoint. To define a universal concept such as truth, you would need an objective viewpoint. God is the only being which could have such a viewpoint, so therefore, unless God tells us, we have no way of knowing. Finite human beings are locked into their subjective bias. We cannot get outside of the Universe to look in and see what is really going on.

I do agree, however, that many atheists like to posit the position that God, indeed, does not exist. That would require some evidence as absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Yes, they do like to posit that. When asked for that evidence however, they like to say they merely "lack belief", which is meaningless. Basically, they want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to say no to the question of whether God exists but escape the burden of proof. That is what this "lack of belief" is all about. It's not an "i don't know", it's a "no, but i dont have to provide any evidence for that".

There is no compelling reason, to me, to decide either way. So in that, I am an Atheist because there is no overwhelming compelling story, beyond all doubt, what the idea of God should even be. I am Agnostic because I don't think there is a way we will ever be able to know. This is one area I would hope to be wrong on. I would prefer there to be some order, some cause, some point to life beyond some cosmic hapistance, but so far, I have no real reason to believe either story; purpose or accident.

That you're interested in the truth, and you are open to what it could be, is a very good thing. When I was agnostic, I felt much the same way. When I found out God is real, I wasn't even specifically looking for Him. I was searching for that truth and it ended up finding me. God rewards that open mindedness, that curiosity and drive to know what is real. What I suggested above is the shortcut; just ask Him and He will show you.

By the way, there is a whole area of computer science based in this idea. Multi-valued logic is my current area of study for developing asynchronous computing systems. The Aristotelian view of logic; of values being true or false, is, like I mentioned before, still the ontological certain position of outcomes (if you don't consider Turing's halting problem that is), but many times, the certainty of outcomes isn't needed to continue process on some other value of computing (like waiting on the slow ass system clock, when the ram is ready for more data from the bus, which is also ready). In that same way, I realize the great value in answering the question of God, it forever consumes my thoughts, but this doesn't have to halt me to processed onto other thoughts without a current answer. Humans are, in fact, natures most amazing asymmetric processor after all

I agree, and I will submit to you that all other truths are relevant to this question, and in fact, their ultimate reality could only be determined by the answer to that question. The funny thing about it is, the answer to it could only ever be yes. If it is no, you will never hear about it. The only thing you will ever hear is yes.

Your work sounds highly interesting. Could you direct me to any resources which would describe it in more detail?

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Hey @hpqp, I'd like to thank you for your reply and let you know I plan to have a furthering of that discussion when I get off work (on lunch break), but I had to address @shinyblurry rock argument.
How does a baby fair to the idea of a yes or no statement about a concept he has no idea of? Further, how can you say no to a concept than you don't understand to be true? Moreover, how is abstaining from a decision about something not a 3rd choice? For instance, what do you believe about the cardinality of infinities being infinite as they relate to the divisibility of finite sums? Huh? Not thought about it before? Need more information or time to form an opinion, I know I do. Abstaining from making a choice is not a no, yet, but nor is it a yes. Both yes and no require a justification, and for myself, that justification needs to be something more than just an inclining.
As to belief, I think you are misusing the word here. Everything one thinks about something is a belief. Belief is the cognitive recognition of an idea. So yes, while the answer to the certain knowledge of God's existence is, indeed yes or no, the tribulation of the human experience is that we have few good ways of "knowing", and for the agnostic, we have no good way of "knowing" God's existence.
When I refer to knowing, I refer back to the Cartesian understanding of knowledge (which has been challenged rather unsuccessfully, imo, by Popper); justified, true, belief. True is uppercase true, belief is cognitively asserting the true belief, and justified is a more complex idea in that you need some way of asserting this IS the way it has to be and not some other, a possition that can't be reduced away froml by reductio ad absurdum, for example, or any other means.
I do agree, however, that many atheists like to posit the position that God, indeed, does not exist. That would require some evidence as absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. There is no compelling reason, to me, to decide either way. So in that, I am an Atheist because there is no overwhelming compelling story, beyond all doubt, what the idea of God should even be. I am Agnostic because I don't think there is a way we will ever be able to know. This is one area I would hope to be wrong on. I would prefer there to be some order, some cause, some point to life beyond some cosmic hapistance, but so far, I have no real reason to believe either story; purpose or accident.
By the way, there is a whole area of computer science based in this idea. Multi-valued logic is my current area of study for developing asynchronous computing systems. The Aristotelian view of logic; of values being true or false, is, like I mentioned before, still the ontological certain position of outcomes (if you don't consider Turing's halting problem that is), but many times, the certainty of outcomes isn't needed to continue process on some other value of computing (like waiting on the slow ass system clock, when the ram is ready for more data from the bus, which is also ready). In that same way, I realize the great value in answering the question of God, it forever consumes my thoughts, but this doesn't have to halt me to processed onto other thoughts without a current answer. Humans are, in fact, natures most amazing asymmetric processor after all <IMG class=smiley src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/teeth.gif">
Ok, rant over! Back to work, slave!

At Dubai's only sewage treatment plant there are long queues and serious delays.
Truck drivers who are paid by the lorry load to collect waste from the city's septic tanks wait for several hours to dispose of their foul cargo legally.
There simply is not the capacity to deal with all the human waste the city dwellers produce.

"After dark some drivers are taking a shortcut and dumping their loads straight into manholes meant only for rainwater."

- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7663883.stm

Hi Ant, If this video ever sifted you'd probably vote for it... so to shortcut the process, here, have a link:

http://videosift.com/video/Caravan-Palace-Suzy-Electroswing

The guy at the front of the marathon has the pace car watching him non-stop, along with at least 1 of the mobile tv cameras.

The cheater probably had to wait for the gap between the pace car with the 1st and 2nd place runners and the rest of the group.

I was accused to cheating in a race once when I was a kid. A parent saw me behind her son near the end of the race, only to see me ahead of her kid by 50 feet at the finish line. The only possible explanation is that I had taken a shortcut to pass her son. When my dad brought me and my identical twin to the judges booth, she walked away without apologizing.

I heard another explanation that suggested they might take shortcuts through alternate dimensions. Personally I think there is a quite large likelyhood there is some sort of systematic error.

Either way its a very exciting time for Science. Seems like every other week some discovery makes excited to be alive this century.

Poe's Law - that's awesome. I've wanted a shortcut for that experience for so long!

Animation was expensive as all hell. I'm not surprised they took shortcuts when they could.

As Red Letter Media pointed out, the original SW was "Art from Adversity." This is the "Art of Profit-Squeezing".

Luc-a$$ put that "No" in there as a "Fk You" to the audience for mocking it in Sith, just like he place-matted Jar Jar in both follow-up prequels because the audience (rightfully) rejected him. It's entirely possible, the man is as arrogant as he is greedy.


>> ^ObsidianStorm:

As previously mentioned, the primary problem is that there is no way to get the film you saw on screen in 1977 (no 'episode IV'...) on DVD or Blu-ray. Anything that you would watch anyway...
I just find it interesting... Lucas set out to make a film called Star Wars in the mid 70's but didn't have the budget or technology to make the film in his head, so he was forced to make compromises, take shortcuts and eliminate scenes he had originally intended to see in his film.
As a result, he created a masterpiece of sci-fi fantasy, which just happened to be BETTER than the film he had envisioned.
What we've seen over the last twenty years or so is Lucas trying to realize that inferior (but original) vision.
I just find it ironic...

As previously mentioned, the primary problem is that there is no way to get the film you saw on screen in 1977 (no 'episode IV'...) on DVD or Blu-ray. Anything that you would watch anyway...

I just find it interesting... Lucas set out to make a film called Star Wars in the mid 70's but didn't have the budget or technology to make the film in his head, so he was forced to make compromises, take shortcuts and eliminate scenes he had originally intended to see in his film.

As a result, he created a masterpiece of sci-fi fantasy, which just happened to be BETTER than the film he had envisioned.

What we've seen over the last twenty years or so is Lucas trying to realize that inferior (but original) vision.

I just find it ironic...

Profit means you are utilizing resources effectively. The opposite is net destruction. If everyone consumed more than they produced, we would eventually have nothing. Henry Ford accumulated a lot of personal wealth for his innovations, but everyone he traded with got a car and his employees were better paid than unions. You can pay a guy with a bulldozer a lot more than a guy with a shovel and savings and investment is what makes that upgrade possible. No business can force you to trade your production for theirs, only the government with taxes can do that. If the government didn't have the power to dole out special favors to business, would business bother bribing them? Lobbying is the symptom, the problem is in excess government power.

The thing that socialists don't understand is that the wealth creation is what's important, not concentration. In capitalism, 1 guy could have 7 yachts and a moon base, but if the average person has two cars, two kids, a home, and countless amenities, who cares? Without the profit motive, who would go through the trouble of inventing and selling anything en masse if your greatest reward is no better than someone on the assembly line who took no risk? If everyone equally has very little as the soviets did, how is that better?

But you know, socialists act like all megarich people do is spend their money on frivolous things. In reality, they have too much to do that. It gets invested in upstart companies who need the capital to express their ideas and by the end, most is usually given to charity. In other words, it gets recycled back into wealth creation whereas the government would just waste it on bombs and embassies.

Oh, and to the guy who said the FDA is there to help you from business, look up stevia and aspartame. Your naive belief that giving others the power to choose for you is a complete backfire that accomplishes the opposite. The FDA is bribed shitless into using their "protective ban" powers to ban, harass, or steal from perfectly safe competitors on behalf of their corporate cronies. Also look up all the instances where a company was sued for supplying dangerous or defective products. That's not the FDA, that's libertarian-approved courts and recourse dissuading fraud and abuse in the marketplace. It's not more profitable to take shortcuts, it's less profitable because you'll be sued into oblivion. Do some businesses die because their owners are too stupid to see that? Yes. But business mortality is good, we don't want destructive businesses surviving like a horrid government program can.

You need to sift another 93 videos to use the promote invocation on another sifter's vids (gold star required).

Once you are silver you can call quality, which is almost as good. As a lurker, I always used to skip over the promoted video tab anyway, and I'm sure I wasn't the only one.

You can, of course, self promote as a shortcut if you go charter (or buy ad-hoc power points)... but to promote other peoples videos you need to do the legwork to get your own ones sifted first.

Now for the reason I wanted to leave you a note: By the time you have sifted 100 videos you will have worked out that there are many ways to promote a video, and using the promote invocation is only one of them. Upvoting a clever or witty comment gets it into the "recently upvoted comments" tab, putting in a clever or witty comment tends to draw folks in (from reading the recent comment stream), spamming the user profiles of everyone you think will like the video works rather well too There's always the option of starting a playlist of similarly cool videos, a cool title helps.

The guitar video had actually already been promoted by ctrlaltbleach, so even if you had the power points and a gold star, sifty would still have refused to listen.

Didn't KP tell you this once?
In reply to this comment by turboj0e:
yeah, i didnt think so. I still dont know how to promote

Has Yao Ming seen this vid?

BTW where does one sign up for "white privilege?" If you budget your time and $, watch less TV, read books, study, perhaps attend classes of any kind beyond high school, show up for a job on time every day and work hard, the "privilege" gap seems to go away on its own.

But I'm always looking for shortcuts.

>> ^longde:

Racial discrimination happens to people regardless of income. Noone checks your bank account or your credit when they decide to act on their prejudice against you.
Anyone in America who qualifies as "white" benefits from white privilege.
>> ^Morganth:
Affirmative action in Britain is simply known as "positive discrimination."
I can't deny that societal issues are still a problem - poor income areas still have poor quality schools, which means you can't do anything with your poor education and stay in the poor area with a poor job. However, if you wait until college applications are sent in or people are applying for jobs, the damage has already been done and you're just transferring discrimination to a different group.
Further, blanket rules (using race as an equalizer) just discriminate in different ways. There are some wealthy & affluent minorities who will benefit even more from affirmative action though they never needed it. There are also plenty of poor whites who will suffer even more. All Eastern European, Russian, & Jewish immigrants would still be classified as 'white' and be on the losing end of affirmative action even though they may need even more than some minorities here.
Societies do have a responsibility to their weaker members, but affirmative action is a terrible misapplication of a good intention. Instead, address the issue at its root - by the time people are applying for college and/or jobs, it's too late and not doing anything. Try bringing up the educational values of grade schools (I mean, before even high school) in affected areas.

Looks nice, but good graphics are commonplace today (I'll assume the every-few-second stutter is a result of the video, not the game itself). More importantly: the elder scrolls are unfortunately plagued by shortcuts in design (no doubt a result of trying to create such large worlds) which they just cannot seem to shake. Leveled lists and tile-constructed dungeons are not fun. The latter are insultingly tedious after the 4th one, and if you don't know what the former are, you haven't played much in the ES series. The same worthless loot over and over again is not fun. Always being at or near the same level as your enemy is not fun. Being able to exploit the system to become so powerful (in everything) that you can beat the end boss before you reach level twelve, is not fun. These things do not make for good gameplay. I don't know how much Skyrim makes use of these old poor designs, but Morrowind and Oblivion were completely based on them, and it ruined what could have been gaming excellence. The same experience again and again and again and again and again is not fun. Here's hoping Bethesda have learned by now, or will learn, someday.

Something else: I'm not sure why they're discussing Radiant AI as if it's new; it's mocked all over youtube with Oblivion.

Anyway, seeing mountains in the distance and plants up close is yesterday's news (I wonder if the shadows are real or faked; the original video demos for Oblivion had realtime light and shadow, but they were removed for performance reasons in the final release). Ditch the LL and tile construction and add a level of environmental diversity and interactivity like that of Thief (which is over a decade old), and I might be convinced to try another ES game.