Just a thought –
Privacy isn’t really about ‘public’ or ‘private’ content, these concepts mean less and less.
Instead, it’s about anonymity, obscurity and fragmentation versus authentication and search.
dp = Density-independent Pixels – An abstract unit that is based on the physical density of the screen. These units are relative to a 160 dpi/ppi (dots per inch) screen, on which 1dp is roughly equal to 1px (1dp = 1px on a 160 ppi screen). When running on a higher density screen, the number of pixels used to draw 1dp is scaled up by the OS by a factor appropriate for the screen’s dpi.
The ratio of dp-to-pixel will change with the screen density, but not necessarily in direct proportion. Using dp units (instead of px units) is a simple solution to making the view dimensions in your layout resize properly for different screen densities. In other words, it provides consistency for the real-world sizes of your UI elements across different devices.
sp = Scale-independent Pixels, and it’s for fonts. This is like the dp unit, but it is also scaled by the user’s font size preference. It is recommend you use this unit when specifying font sizes, so they will be adjusted for both the screen density and the user’s preference.
pt = a Point – a physical (real life) measurement. 1 pt = 1/72 of an inch.
mm / in = milimeteres / inches. a physical (real life) measurement.
Actual screen units:
px = Pixels – Corresponds to actual pixels on the screen
RATIOS AND DIMENSIONS
Android dpi calculator: http://coh.io/adpi/
mdpi = @1x = your standard 320×480 screen (eg iPhone 3), which based on a 3.5″ physical screen size works out to roughly 160 ppi. Mdpi is the baseline for a dp (dp being an abstract, scaleable unit based on a screen density of around 160 ppi).
hdpi = @1.5x
xhdpi = @2x
xxhdpi = @3x
Got the chance to speak at Lift Conference in Geneva alongside @jerrymichalski (who has mapped his brain at jerrysbrain.com for the last 16 years, his is the world’s largest), Porter Erisman (one of the co-founders of Alibaba) and Isaac Nortey of retailtower.com.
The session was on the relationship economy, the talk is below, enjoy!
tl;dr by @helenepouille here:
Just discovered this guy, Guy. ex-Cheif Evangelist at Apple. Really interesting talk at Le Web in December. Worth a watch.
“If i were sitting across the table form an entrepreneur and i brought up the question of defensibility and they said their defensibility was built on patents, i would laugh at them. The ideal number of times to use the word patent in a presentation is one. If you wanted to impress an investor you would say ‘we have a patent pending, however it is not a key part of our defensibility. Our defensibility is primarily built on aggressiveness, our ability to work hard, our team and our willingness to change in order to make this company successful.’
For most people, the amount of money and time it would take to successfully litigate is totally irrelevant for a startup.”
“… Finally, a fourth interesting use case [of Bitcoin] is public payments. This idea first came to my attention in a news article a few months ago. A random spectator at a televised sports event held up a placard with a QR code and the text “Send me Bitcoin!” He received $25,000 in Bitcoin in the first 24 hours, all from people he had never met. This was the first time in history that you could see someone holding up a sign, in person or on TV or in a photo, and then send them money with two clicks on your smartphone: take the photo of the QR code on the sign, and click to send the money.
Think about the implications for protest movements. Today protesters want to get on TV so people learn about their cause. Tomorrow they’ll want to get on TV because that’s how they’ll raise money, by literally holding up signs that let people anywhere in the world who sympathize with them send them money on the spot. Bitcoin is a financial technology dream come true for even the most hardened anticapitalist political organizer.”
Can’t remember where i found this, but it’s a great piece:
“… This is partly a side effect of our information economy, in which “paying for things” is a quaint, discredited old 20th-century custom, like calling people after having sex with them. The first time I ever heard the word “content” used in its current context, I understood that all my artist friends and I — henceforth, “content providers” — were essentially extinct. This contemptuous coinage is predicated on the assumption that it’s the delivery system that matters, relegating what used to be called “art” — writing, music, film, photography, illustration — to the status of filler, stuff to stick between banner ads.
Just as the atom bomb was the weapon that was supposed to render war obsolete, the Internet seems like capitalism’s ultimate feat of self-destructive genius, an economic doomsday device rendering it impossible for anyone to ever make a profit off anything again. It’s especially hopeless for those whose work is easily digitized and accessed free of charge. I now contribute to some of the most prestigious online publications in the English-speaking world, for which I am paid the same amount as, if not less than, I was paid by my local alternative weekly when I sold my first piece of writing for print in 1989. More recently, I had the essay equivalent of a hit single — endlessly linked to, forwarded and reposted. A friend of mine joked, wistfully, “If you had a dime for every time someone posted that …” Calculating the theoretical sum of those dimes, it didn’t seem all that funny.
I’ve been trying to understand the mentality that leads people who wouldn’t ask a stranger to give them a keychain or a Twizzler to ask me to write them a thousand words for nothing. I have to admit my empathetic imagination is failing me here. I suppose people who aren’t artists assume that being one must be fun since, after all, we do choose to do it despite the fact that no one pays us. They figure we must be flattered to have someone ask us to do our little thing we already do…”