Superior social status indeed!

There's a belief here in the USA that if you have clean white teeth, you should show them off as frequently as possible. It's evidence of your friendliness, sexual desirability, high income, and superior social status.

I thought it was hot

Seeing that more than 90% of all 'computer time' is used to
a) surf the web
b) read e-mail and
c) use a word processor,
I don't really see the relevence of special tasks like video editing for this question, to be honest. I have no idea what "matrox rtx-100" and "ati x850" do, but I'm sure it's no big deal anyway - mass production for 'gaming chips' has already been in full swing for almost ten years now. Specialized hardware (as opposed to pure software solutions) for video editing, on the other hand, is something which probably only 0.000000000000001% of all computer users need, so we can safely disregard that.

By the way: Is anyone else concerned about the unnatural grin of that woman? It looks... appaling!

Edited by Mr Creosote at 11:38 on March, 17th 2005

Yeah, especially since videos are huge huge files. Uploading it would take a long time, especially on todays networks.

Applications-yes. The proper connectors for the video apparatus you need to connect, plus the hardware you need for such a project-no.
I wouldn't want to pay for a standard terminal which can edit video like the future equivalent of an matrox rtx-100 card, as well as play 3d games like a , say, ati x850-equivalent. Sounds awfully expensive.

And I completely agree with you about the privacy part. I'm quite attached to my own privacy...

I just love how she skips over the privacy considerations of such a system with one single sentence. So because most people don't keep their data safe so far, they should now just hand it over to a commercial company? Erm... shouldn't it be the other way round? People actually securing their information? Her 'solution' sounds like taking a problem and using it as an argument to make matters even worse.

I'm not so sure it won't happen, though. From the technical point of view, it makes perfect sense to centralize as many services as possible. If you've ever done the administration of a LAN, you'll know what a waste of time it is to get all the computers up to date with the newest program versions / patches, fix each one's problems and so on. With thin clients, that's reduced to a minimum. So for company LANs, this is basically a perfect solution, because there aren't any privacy considerations there.

Also, let's not forget this is every company's dream to 'lease' their software / services only via subscription. It makes it impossible just to stick with the OEM software you got with your computer, just because you don't need newer versions. At the same time, the piracy problem is reduced significantly. You all know the anecdote about how Bill Gates saw vastly different operating systems on a computer show, but all of them running Netscape which lead him to develop IE. It's the same idea - all big companies will push this.

Don't see much of a problem there. Applications can be served over networks, too, you know...

It might happen. But I don't see any company linking up their vital files to the net, so there'd be a lot of small networks. You don't want just terminals for those. Besides, everyone uses their pc's for different things. Some people game, some edit video, and some only use the internet. No reasonably-priced terminal could do all that.
No, don't see it happening. Ever.

http://www.cnet.com/4520-6033_1-5759958-1.html?tag=nl.e501

I don't think this could happen for one,
and no doubt extremely bad.