Cuong Do, one of the original engineers at YouTube from the beginning, talks about how YouTube achieves scalability in a Google Tech Talk. Definitely very informative.
I'm a little late with this one, but perhaps you've seen this interview with an Ubisoft Splinter Cell developer. In the interview, he states that "the PS3 can't handle AI nearly as well as the 360."
First off, let me state that I am in no way a Sony fanboy. I don't even own a current generation console. That said, this statement is completely devoid of meaning.
You know what AI is? A plain old algorithm. A search process, selecting a rule from a rule base, or running through a pattern matcher. Saying the PS3 cannot do AI is like saying it cannot do sorting or print the first ten integers.
What some people are referring to to support the Ubisoft developer's argument is the PS3's relatively poor branch prediction ability. The argument then being, since most game AI is simply a giant switch statement, performance will suffer.
My response to this is, developer ignorance of AI is not a good excuse. If you think AI amounts to a giant switch statement then you need to go read a book, or a modern survey of AI planning.
When you've got a piece of software, and you're thinking about how to get money in exchange for it, there are clearly many sources advising you to give it away for free - the logic being that you monetize eyeballs. By far, the most popular way to do so is some form of advertising. One way this works is through site adds, where if you're clever you'll figure out how to make the adds targeted, such as Pandora. Another way this works is through some sort of affiliate program. In an affiliate program you get a fraction of the payment a customer gives a company you helped hook up through your site. Any coupon finding service works like this, like this one.
The typical value you get in exchange for an ad click, though, is extremely small. To get a feeling for the state of things, check out Guy Kawasaki's review of one year of blogging (for those unaware, Guy Kawasaki is an extremely popular blogger on tech entrepreneurship, who also happens to be a venture capitalist). He got on avg. 6,200 page views per day, and with the adds placed on his site, generated $3350 during the entire year. To contrast this, look at something like MySpace, which evidently makes $30 million in advertising dollars. And that's because they get, according to TechCrunch, 15 million daily unique logins.
What I"m trying to say is, this model makes financial sense only if you can attract a gigantic amount of traffic to your site. So much so that, in order to reach sufficiently many people, what you're doing has to appeal to the absolute lowest common denominator. Everyone has to be in the target market for your software.
Do you think Mathematica could survive with this model? Photoshop? Maya 3D? These are spectacular achievements of software that absolutely could not survive if the creators were gripped with the Web 2.0 mania that demands you give your software away.
So, if the circumstances are right, be unafraid to do the old fashioned thing and exchange what you've made for money. If you possess specialized knowledge which you've used to make something great, people will pay you for it.
Nuff said.
There's an excellent article over at Ars on the history of the Amiga computer. The computer, loved by so many, that absolutely will not go away. Long after humanity is gone and the Sun has gone nova, there will be two things to carry on our legacy: Cockroaches and the Amiga. You heard it here first.
So, Ars Technica noted that, exciting documentaries about the history of the PC have been made (e.g. Revenge of the Nerds, by Bob Cringely), which only mention the Amiga in passing, if at all. Yet the Amiga did things like have specialized graphics hardware a decade before anyone else, and pre-emptive multitasking. It influenced a generation of engineers. Given it's great presence felt in the computer industry, why is it barely mentioned in PC history?
As I began researching, I discovered the answer, and it surprised me even more than the existence of the computer itself. The story of Commodore and the Amiga was, by far, even more interesting than that of Apple or Microsoft. It is a tale of vision, of technical brilliance, dedication, and camaraderie. It is also a tale of deceit, of treachery, and of betrayal. It is a tale that has largely remained untold."
Do yourself a favor and check it out.
If you're anything like me, your competency at food preparation is zero plus one. That is, you can basically identify one kind of food from another, you can excise the really dangerous bacteria from it with threshold confidence, and you can chop stuff up and stick it in a pot / wok / frying pan and turn the heat on. And the food doesn't kill you or turn you blind or anything. But that doesn't mean it tastes good.
So, I found this very helpful, short, guide on properly frying an egg. Take this knowledge and impress your significant other.
Remember my company, Method in Mind? Our first product is called Operatus. Hooray! Much more on this in the coming weeks. In discussing Operatus with some early customers, I discovered an interesting thing that some fellow entrepreneurs might find interesting. I was talking idly about social networks (Operatus is *not* a social network), and so of course mentioned Facebook and MySpace, at which point they displayed this expression on their face conveying "I....you just made those words up."
This highlights a very important point. Your competitors are not actually your competitors until your customers know about them. When you're advocating your product, you are in an excellent position if yours is the only solution they know about, and they only know about yours because you're telling them. Having a website, and having a foothold in the public mind, are two very different things.
For example. Suppose you've got this great idea to make a great mass emailer for companies (then you are a horrible person). Perhaps, you did the Google search and were disheartened by the existence of your competition. However, if you stroll down to your boss' office, I doubt they would be able to name even one of these companies.
At the extreme other end, suppose you've got this great idea to make a great mp3 player. You tell your mom, the complete non-technophile, and she tells you "You mean you want to make an iPod?" Yeah, the competition's got a good foothold there.
- The Bird and the Bee - The Bird and the Bee. I would describe this as ranging in various places between Pizzicato Five (but in English) and Combustible Edison
- The Smiths - The Smiths. Shutup.
- Opeth - Morningrise. Hmmm...less good production value, "And from that moment I witnessed your beauty, felt your death", awesome guitar riffs, must be early Opeth.
- Bjork - Volta
"For years people have been begging Microsoft for leaner, simpler products with fewer features. Not just befuddled and baffled consumers but CIOs at big companies, guys who manage tens of thousands of PCs, who are considered "thought leaders," and who definitely have Microsoft's attention. They've been screaming this from the rooftops: Fewer features, greater ease of use, greater reliability. They've done everything but put up billboards on the roads around Redmond saying, "Small. Fast. Cheap. Easy." They don't want slightly fewer features. They want a lot fewer. Like 90% fewer. So what does Microsoft do? It rolls out a huge new OS and a new version of Office with a 10x gain in features. Then it hires an army of MBAs to go "unlock value" and get customers to use all those features that they've already told Microsoft they don't want."
The whole article is really quite insightful and well worth a read. This is the sort of thing that makes you think Fake Steve is the Real Steve.
Last night, I was fortunate enough to go to another Battlestar Q & A. Last time was with the writers, but this time, it was with the cast (Katee Sackhoff (Starbuck), Jamie Bamber (Apollo), Edward James Olmos (Admiral Adama), Mary McDonnel (Laura Roslyn) ) and the executive produces, Ron Moore (Ron Moore!!) and David Eick. First of all, Katee Sackhoff is, uh, hot. White dress and cowboy boots equals very yes.
The email they sent out said the event begins at 8:00 pm, but then they decided they were screwing with us and began the event at 6:00 pm. Good thing I was there at 5:00 pm...There were actually people lined up at 8:30 am!!
Anyway, I got to have Bodie Olmos (Hotdog) point his cell phone camera at my face as I was being herded along into the theater. I accused him of getting revenge on his fans, but he didn't respond. Jerk.
At the concession stand, I got my drink, turned to my left, and there was Admiral Adama ordering soda. You drink soda!!? I drink soda too! Uh...can I give you a high five?
I did get to have a brief conversation with Eddie Olmos (that's right, I call him Eddie..we're like this you see) and then I pissed my pants.
Anyway, we get into the theater, and they show us the season 3 finale (crossroads, part II) on the gigantic screen in the Cinerama Dome. It's funny..if you take ordinary tv and throw it up on the big screen, you can immediately tell it does not belong there. It is two levels below film. But Battlestar, however, totally looked like it belonged up there on the screen. Absolutely gorgeous looking.
Then Lucy Lawless came out and moderated a Q & A with the cast + executive producers. You could really see that the people who make the show really care about the audience. Usually, with this sort of thing, they're like "aaaand two more questions are all we have time for I'm afriad." But here, they literally kep taking questions until people had no more questions to ask. It must have taken about 2 hours to do the whole Q & A.
Lucy Lawless said her favorite Battlestar moment was when her character was interviewing Lee Adama while his bathrobe was falling off. She was like "what was keeping your towel on, Lee?" Jamie Bamber had this look on his face like "well clearly it was my giant british penis" but elected to say nothing.
I'm trying to remember what people asked...
- One person asked if they needed a post production coordinator (they didn't)
- (To Mary McDonnel) "When are you and the Admiral going to get it on?" Answer: We'll see.
- (To Mary McDonnel) "As an actor [Grooooooaaaaaan] how do you perform when you personally disagree with what the character is doing?" Mary said she had this problem when Roslyn advocated genocide against the Cylons, and admitted that at times, it is very difficult, but that it forces her to keep an open mind.
- Eddie Olmos brought up the great point that most Science Fiction on TV and movies is complete shit, and that we're all lucky to have something like Battlestar Galactica, which is not simply an action movie set in the future, but rather actual science fiction. He brought up Blade runner several times, interestingly. He mentioned that there were actually supposed to be sequels (which didn't happen because Bladerunner tanked at the box office). More to the point, however, he mentioned that Battlestar was another example, like Bladerunner, of something that takes science fiction seriously, and makes something special as a result.