Slashdot Mirror

It is acting as the legal agent of the recording companies. If the RIAA gets caught with its pants down in some of these cases, it makes sense that the victims should be able not only countersue the RIAA, but also Columbia, SONY--or whoever, as well.

What? Is the RIAA named in any of the cases? Have a look at this list of cases, and tell me how many are "RIAA v...". How many did you find? That's right, zero. In every case it is the record company not the RIAA doing the suing. For example, SONY v. DeMaria, or Capitol Records v. Foster. As such, the defendants are free to introduce counterclaims against the record companies, just as you suggest.

In fact, it is an advantage that this is older. Here is a review article by the authors: http://www.mps.mpg.de/projects/sun-climate/papers/ solphys-2004.pdf. This image from thier website http://www.mps.mpg.de/projects/sun-climate/image/C limate.gif basically says the same thing I did here: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/02/executive-summ ary.html, the Sun is not responsible for the current warming. You can find the caption for their figure here: http://www.mps.mpg.de/projects/sun-climate/results .html as figure 5.
--
Rent solar for what you pay now: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

In fact, it is an advantage that this is older. Here is a review article by the authors: http://www.mps.mpg.de/projects/sun-climate/papers/ solphys-2004.pdf. This image from thier website http://www.mps.mpg.de/projects/sun-climate/image/C limate.gif basically says the same thing I did here: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/02/executive-summ ary.html, the Sun is not responsible for the current warming. You can find the caption for their figure here: http://www.mps.mpg.de/projects/sun-climate/results .html as figure 5.
--
Rent solar for what you pay now: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

With respects to the Wii, most information regarding any DVD-playback within the U.S. date back to November of 2006, where it was stated that "...Even though software will be used to enable DVD-Video functionality, it apparently 'requires more than a firmware upgrade' and cannot therefore be implemented through the WiiConnect24 network."

As vague as that sounds, it seems as if the Wii will require an official hardware change to support any DVD playback. Still, another source shows that a tool was released sometime in January that will allow you to read and write to the Wii's DVD drive via serial port on a linux computer. This should move us a step closer to getting DVD playback without the need of a mod chip or buying a brand new Wii 2.0.

Wii DVD Tool - Firmware read/write

Here is another article regarding DVD playback for the Wii:

DVD Playback for U.S. Wii Coming

Thanks to democrats (neo-luddites?), the US doesn't already have this technology. Know your (recent) history.

http://www.rootsweb.com/~txecm/super_collider.htm

http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/03/ssc-and-clinton- administration.html

While this case is important, it has little to do with a standard RIAA case. She's probably going to get attorney's fees not because of the merits of her case in particular, but because the RIAA did not drop the lawsuit against her after it was made rather clear that her children were the more likely culprits, which the judge considered harassment (my words; read the motions/rulings). The motions for attorney's fees are quite clear on this.

That being said, there are some significantly more important cases going on for the likes of the everyday file sharer. In particular, Ray Beckerman finally managed to depose the RIAA's expert witness in UMG vs Lindor, and, while not absolutely crushing him, showed him to be a very poor witness on which to build an airtight case. The outcome of that case could have a huge impact on how these cases are done in the future. A disastrous result for UMG might well discourage further lawsuits. Before you get excited, though, that case is months from being solved.

In addition, there are some other cases going in which the defendants might get fees on their own merits, but they need some time to resolve. It's amazing, but these cases are the first ones that might actually go to a trial.

Beckerman's blog, which is great reading for those interested in this stuff, is http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

Bhuga

I don't know if it will happen but at least one person is calling for DDs to not flood unstable and testing with really broken packages.

http://stratusandtheswirl.blogspot.com/2007/04/etc h-lenny-and-future.html

Related see this audio maps project (via C). Fron the former link: "In the case of geo-referenced data where users need to combine demographic, economic or other data in a geographic context for decision-making, we designed iSonic, an interactive sonification tool that allows users to explore in highly coordinated table and choropleth map views of the data. Sounds of various timbres and pitches are tied to map regions and other interface widgets to create a virtual auditory data display."

Makes sense ... the fact that Google released its n-gram models (a training corpus of one trillion words from public Web pages) last November (for a nominal price to researchers) seems to support the assertion that although Google might have a few people working on Speech Recognition, developing their own engine is not part of their core strategy.

You might find the equivalent solar forcing units used in the field more useful. With these it is much easier to see that your argument is flawed http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/02/executive-summ ary.html.

Thanks very much, I've bookmarked this. It still seems to me that the most mitigation the reports are likely to address is stabilization of the CO2 concentration at the 2000 level but this is clearly not a physical bound to policy options with regard to mitigation. A sharp reduction in emissions from fossil fuels together with sequestrations methods such as reforestation, coastal ecosystem restoration (reduced nitrogen loads), and even Fe fertilization of the low nutrient portions of the oceans could all lead to both economic growth and reductions in the atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Economic growth? Yes!

Convertion to renewable energy in all sectors require quite a lot of economic activity and while some sunk costs for oil, gas and coal extraction and processing would see a substatially longer period to see return on investment, they would not be wasted investments since an oil field, for example, can still be exploited over 300 hundred years rather than 30.

Reforestation can be done in a profitable way that includes plants that have economic benefit.

Restoring ecological activity to costal areas restores enormously profitable fisheries that have been lost and especially the shellfish sequester carbon in a very stable way.

The economic and ecological effects of Fe fertilization need further study, but the potential to establish new fisheries suggest that it could be carried out at a profit http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=221624 &cid=17962344.

So, I feel that mitigation is, from the outset, going to get underplayed in the reports because CO2 concentration reductions are not even considered and the effects of currently stated policy are even ignored http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/02/executive-summ ary.html. Perhaps the next report will be a suprise, but the senarios adopted in the first two seem to me to be pre-censored.

They showed what would happen as a consequence of every degree increase in the earth's temperature. Those consequences include species disappearing, floods and starvation for humans.

Well, I recall the lines then and I'd say yes, consumption did go down, but not because of price. It went down because supply was restricted by an embargo. This is something to remember as our Saudi friends say our occupation their neighbor is illegal.

Because fossil fuels are so deep in everything we do to make a living, it is difficult for price to make an impact. Normally substitution would be the response to price but in a famine you're stuck with nothing to substitute and that is sort of like our situation because without coal, gas and oil, our infrastructure does not work. This is why a carbon tax that could lead to substantial reductions would have to be impoverishing. You have to dry up the money supply (or remove the oil supply) to get us to stop buying since our lives depend on it. A moderate carbon tax only gets the low hanging fruit as it has in Europe.

You can kind of see why so much of our very big navy is over there right now. We pay for oil in dollars and in defence spending as well.

This is why, I think, we need to be very deliberate about changing over to renewable energy. We can rely on price somewhat to encourage adoption but there are a number of infrastructure changes that need to happen, such as fueling plug in hybrids or balancing the grid amid non-constant power sources. We can also restrict the supply of fossil fuels somewhat through rationing (since price doesn't really work for necessities) as we did in the seventies if it comes to that kind of thing (better than a carbon tax) so that prices will remain stable or even drop owing two lower demand. It is an interesting question how long OPEC lasts if consumption is reduced by 30%. Those who feel that this kind of control of the market is a bad idea, remeber that we set farm policy to ensure food surpluses because food scarcity is not acceptable. Similarly, our defence policy includes vital interests in the Middle East. Free markets for widgets (which may be substituted for waggets at a certain price point) but prudent deliberate policy for necessities is the way to do things. We are running out of prudence on the fossil fuel side of things and so need some pretty deliberate and big changes.
--
Hey Mr. Pricing Mechanism, look over here! http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

You're assertion that folks will move is a little naive. Quite a lot of people would like to come to the US to get out of grinding poverty that is owing in part to environmental degradation. So, now there are vigilantes on the border.

People often don't like leaving their homeland. The folks in Darfur, for example, are not so happy being pushed out as the Sahara grows and makes usable land scarce, and when they are pushed out they die in droves. If migration is to be the adaptation for global warming, it seems like justice can only be served for those who are displaced to come and share the land of those who caused the disaster. So, you better tell the border vigilantes to lay down their arms, because they'll need to be cleaning up their kitchens to start cooking for oh, say, 6 new family members each.
--
Mitigation before adaptation: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

Perhaps you missed this news story.....

I agree there is a role for political leadership, perhaps a big one, but I kind of feel that we need to look hard in the mirror and ask, for example, why did we negotiate Kyoto when the Senate was saying it would not ratify without commitments from China and India? Leadership is not just giveing a damn alone but also follow through and paying close attention to what people (like the senate) are saying. We've had quite quite a few problems with that I think. Too much posing and not enough willingness to engage. There are further consequences to this I think: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/02/heir-of-leader ship.html.

http://freegamer.blogspot.com/2007/04/quake3-total -conversions.html

Come on, dude. Give credit to the source of your post.

I'm also in the market for a new cellular provider. I can now scratch Verizon off the short list.

What, Verizon Math wasn't already enough of a reason? My company has Verizon's slowest DSL plan, which we were paying $40/month for. I saw it advertised for $25/month and called them to ask why we were paying an extra 37%. They admitted that the rate had dropped 9 months before I called. Their rep actually told me that their database couldn't be automatically updated to reflect the new rate -- it had to be done manually for each customer when they called in. They refused to refund the 9 months of over-payment. A few months later, they raised the rate to $30/month. They must have upgraded their database, since they didn't have any problem making that change automatic (sarcasm). When it came time to buy a cell phone, I sure as hell didn't go to Verizon.

I think this is excellent. Now any company can be prohibited from taking on new customers including Verizon. This is one of the best penalties I've ever seen. It is fair to existing customers. A true Teddy Roosevelt move http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Roosevelt#Le gacy.
--
Get solar with technology with expired patents http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

I'm certainly thinking in the context of net metering laws which often (sadly now even for Maryland) confiscate excess power generation. So, 100% makes sense but not more. A smaller fraction could also make sense once it is available if it comes in at lower cost but it does mean continued reliance on coal if renewable energy is not generated elsewhere, and you are not fully protected from price increases on the portion you don't generate yourself.

You can get solar with good old reliable and 15% efficient silicon without the upfront cost and at a price competitive with utlity rates with price protection by following the links at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html. You can also wait for a better deal and this stuff might provide it though I think that it will end up in the commercial sector rather than the residential sector. It is not clear how soon it can be available or if it can last 25 years. This probably depends on what mode causes degredation. If it is cosmic rays, then it may last as long as silicon but if is fading caused by optical photons in may need more maintenance. That could turn out to be too big of a hassle. We'll see as things develop.

To me this sounds like a great feature to share travelogues to my family and friends -- makes them much more interesting, when I can plot my route and augment them with my videos/photos/commentary.

That's why we're announcing My Maps, a new feature that makes it quick and easy to create your own custom Google Maps just by pointing and clicking. You can add placemarks, draw lines and shapes, and embed text, photos and videos -- all using a simple drag and drop interface. Your map automatically gets a public URL that you can share with your friends and family, or you can also publish your map for inclusion in Google Maps search results. We'll continue to show organic local search results with red pushpins; user-generated results will have blue pushpins. The user-created results include KML as well as maps made through My Maps.

Some of the examples in that blog entry are pretty interesting, e.g.: America's Highway: Oral Histories of Route 66.

I agree that the the computers are hogs in the home electric bill. Not all utilities have such a tight cap and the thing that sort of assures that larger houses will use more electricity is cooling, and sometimes heating. So, most of the time, even with a ridgeline orientation that isn't perfect, you can get to 100% of what your using with silicon. That makes silicon good enough most of the time. With green building standards, it should be good enough all the time and also cover some transportation through plugin hybrids.

At lower efficiency it is hard to be good enough for residential without, as I said, using other space besides the roof.

My interest is getting as many people converted to solar as possible at a price they can afford, namely what they pay now for electricity. The base technology is not important to me but the feasability is. So, improved efficiency at a cost similar to or lower than silicon works but reduced efficiency regardless of price has problems because silicon is right on the edge of feasibility now. This is just an aspect of trying to get clean distributed residential power generation.

If you read my post, I did point out that lower cost at lower efficiency could work out well when the considerations are more on the bottom line side rather than the convenience side. In my example I was suggesting that commercial roofs might be a good market. Another example might be large solar installations like that planned by the Salt River Project where the cost of the land may be low enough that needing twice as much for the same power is less expensive than going with more efficient panels. Right now solar is growing a lot because of the way it can use space convienently and provide fixed grid competitive costs. Wind is out in front because it competes at the power generation level on cost and can be dual use for the raw land. But solar, in the small scale distributed form, provides a fundemental reliability that the grid, with large scale centalized/remote generation, cannot in the case of large scale natural disasters while also reducing the chance of grid failure owing to hot weather. So, broad solar deployment is going to be a very good thing. Just now, silicon is what is suitable for this aspect.

You can find out more on what I've been thinking about with regard to the transition to renewable energy at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/. Though you'll see in the comments that I get accused of spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about nuclear power, despite documenting the issues involved, I don't think you'll find any support for your idea that I'm doing this with regard to renewable energy sources. My interest there is how renewable energy can be made to work from a physics and cost perspective. I'm still trying to collect ideas about power storage at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/why-renewables -displace-nukes-first.html if you have any.

I agree that the the computers are hogs in the home electric bill. Not all utilities have such a tight cap and the thing that sort of assures that larger houses will use more electricity is cooling, and sometimes heating. So, most of the time, even with a ridgeline orientation that isn't perfect, you can get to 100% of what your using with silicon. That makes silicon good enough most of the time. With green building standards, it should be good enough all the time and also cover some transportation through plugin hybrids.

At lower efficiency it is hard to be good enough for residential without, as I said, using other space besides the roof.

My interest is getting as many people converted to solar as possible at a price they can afford, namely what they pay now for electricity. The base technology is not important to me but the feasability is. So, improved efficiency at a cost similar to or lower than silicon works but reduced efficiency regardless of price has problems because silicon is right on the edge of feasibility now. This is just an aspect of trying to get clean distributed residential power generation.

If you read my post, I did point out that lower cost at lower efficiency could work out well when the considerations are more on the bottom line side rather than the convenience side. In my example I was suggesting that commercial roofs might be a good market. Another example might be large solar installations like that planned by the Salt River Project where the cost of the land may be low enough that needing twice as much for the same power is less expensive than going with more efficient panels. Right now solar is growing a lot because of the way it can use space convienently and provide fixed grid competitive costs. Wind is out in front because it competes at the power generation level on cost and can be dual use for the raw land. But solar, in the small scale distributed form, provides a fundemental reliability that the grid, with large scale centalized/remote generation, cannot in the case of large scale natural disasters while also reducing the chance of grid failure owing to hot weather. So, broad solar deployment is going to be a very good thing. Just now, silicon is what is suitable for this aspect.

You can find out more on what I've been thinking about with regard to the transition to renewable energy at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/. Though you'll see in the comments that I get accused of spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about nuclear power, despite documenting the issues involved, I don't think you'll find any support for your idea that I'm doing this with regard to renewable energy sources. My interest there is how renewable energy can be made to work from a physics and cost perspective. I'm still trying to collect ideas about power storage at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/why-renewables -displace-nukes-first.html if you have any.

I myself have 2 monitors at my workplace, it definitely helps do things faster, even better than having a single huge monitor...

More on this topic can be found here, here and here.

I also get time to do other things at office by the time saved :)
some examples are at my blog
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/some-pics-fr om-my-cubicle-in-office.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/expressive-p ictures-of-my-ferrari.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/02/harley-garag e.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/04/and-best-pic ture-from-my-harley-model.html

I myself have 2 monitors at my workplace, it definitely helps do things faster, even better than having a single huge monitor...

More on this topic can be found here, here and here.

I also get time to do other things at office by the time saved :)
some examples are at my blog
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/some-pics-fr om-my-cubicle-in-office.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/expressive-p ictures-of-my-ferrari.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/02/harley-garag e.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/04/and-best-pic ture-from-my-harley-model.html

I myself have 2 monitors at my workplace, it definitely helps do things faster, even better than having a single huge monitor...

More on this topic can be found here, here and here.

I also get time to do other things at office by the time saved :)
some examples are at my blog
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/some-pics-fr om-my-cubicle-in-office.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/expressive-p ictures-of-my-ferrari.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/02/harley-garag e.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/04/and-best-pic ture-from-my-harley-model.html

I myself have 2 monitors at my workplace, it definitely helps do things faster, even better than having a single huge monitor...

More on this topic can be found here, here and here.

I also get time to do other things at office by the time saved :)
some examples are at my blog
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/some-pics-fr om-my-cubicle-in-office.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2006/02/expressive-p ictures-of-my-ferrari.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/02/harley-garag e.html
http://techniche.blogspot.com/2007/04/and-best-pic ture-from-my-harley-model.html

Touted as PlayTogether ?

could this be what you're looking for?

:P

Your number is averaged over both day and night over a year and works for southern Canada, here is a map: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Inso lation.png. As you can see from the map, much of what is going on is that the Earth is round so that surface is tilted with respect to the average direction to the Sun. Solar panels are tilted back towards the Sun so this compensates though there is still a larger airmass and so a larger likelihood of having a cloud in the way. A number closer to 300 w/m^2 is a better estimate because of the tilt. In a month of 30 days you get 32 kWh from a sqaure meter of 15% efficient silicon solar panel. So, you want about 31 square meters of panels to handle a 1000 kWh monthly power usage. That's about 5.5 meters on a side. You can get that much for the same that you are currently paying for grid power at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html and fix your rate for up to 25 years, so yes, it probably is worth it.

There has been some work on this but they are having stability problems: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6434.
--
Durable solar power: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

I never said that no defendant ever infringed a copyright. I have said that
(a) the RIAA has no information that the defendant committed a copyright infringement when it commences the suit (see the admissions of RIAA's "expert",
(b) most of the suits are against people who did not commit a copyright infringement, and
(c) as to those who have committed copyright infringement, they can and should assert several affirmative defenses, including (i) the fact that the remedy of $750 per song is unconstitutionally excessive (see decision of Judge Trager in UMG v. Lindor and Texas Law Review article, and (ii) the fact that the collusive conduct of the record labels constitutes copyright misuse (see litigation over motion in Lava v. Amurao.

The RIAA's own expert testified that based upon the information the RIAA has, it is impossible to determine what person committed a copyright infringement.

You know nothing. You do not even know what copyright misuse is, but have the nerve to tell me that what I have learned from more than 2 years of day-in day-out experience in these cases is "bullshit", proving yourself disrespectful as well as ignorant.

You don't fool me with your statement

"Don't get me wrong, I think the legal practices of the RIAA are despicable. Intimidation and extortion are horrible tactics. However ......"

I never said that no defendant ever infringed a copyright. I have said that
(a) the RIAA has no information that the defendant committed a copyright infringement when it commences the suit (see the admissions of RIAA's "expert",
(b) most of the suits are against people who did not commit a copyright infringement, and
(c) as to those who have committed copyright infringement, they can and should assert several affirmative defenses, including (i) the fact that the remedy of $750 per song is unconstitutionally excessive (see decision of Judge Trager in UMG v. Lindor and Texas Law Review article, and (ii) the fact that the collusive conduct of the record labels constitutes copyright misuse (see litigation over motion in Lava v. Amurao.

The RIAA's own expert testified that based upon the information the RIAA has, it is impossible to determine what person committed a copyright infringement.

You know nothing. You do not even know what copyright misuse is, but have the nerve to tell me that what I have learned from more than 2 years of day-in day-out experience in these cases is "bullshit", proving yourself disrespectful as well as ignorant.

You don't fool me with your statement

"Don't get me wrong, I think the legal practices of the RIAA are despicable. Intimidation and extortion are horrible tactics. However ......"

I never said that no defendant ever infringed a copyright. I have said that
(a) the RIAA has no information that the defendant committed a copyright infringement when it commences the suit (see the admissions of RIAA's "expert",
(b) most of the suits are against people who did not commit a copyright infringement, and
(c) as to those who have committed copyright infringement, they can and should assert several affirmative defenses, including (i) the fact that the remedy of $750 per song is unconstitutionally excessive (see decision of Judge Trager in UMG v. Lindor and Texas Law Review article, and (ii) the fact that the collusive conduct of the record labels constitutes copyright misuse (see litigation over motion in Lava v. Amurao.

The RIAA's own expert testified that based upon the information the RIAA has, it is impossible to determine what person committed a copyright infringement.

You know nothing. You do not even know what copyright misuse is, but have the nerve to tell me that what I have learned from more than 2 years of day-in day-out experience in these cases is "bullshit", proving yourself disrespectful as well as ignorant.

You don't fool me with your statement

"Don't get me wrong, I think the legal practices of the RIAA are despicable. Intimidation and extortion are horrible tactics. However ......"

I never said that no defendant ever infringed a copyright. I have said that
(a) the RIAA has no information that the defendant committed a copyright infringement when it commences the suit (see the admissions of RIAA's "expert",
(b) most of the suits are against people who did not commit a copyright infringement, and
(c) as to those who have committed copyright infringement, they can and should assert several affirmative defenses, including (i) the fact that the remedy of $750 per song is unconstitutionally excessive (see decision of Judge Trager in UMG v. Lindor and Texas Law Review article, and (ii) the fact that the collusive conduct of the record labels constitutes copyright misuse (see litigation over motion in Lava v. Amurao.

The RIAA's own expert testified that based upon the information the RIAA has, it is impossible to determine what person committed a copyright infringement.

You know nothing. You do not even know what copyright misuse is, but have the nerve to tell me that what I have learned from more than 2 years of day-in day-out experience in these cases is "bullshit", proving yourself disrespectful as well as ignorant.

You don't fool me with your statement

"Don't get me wrong, I think the legal practices of the RIAA are despicable. Intimidation and extortion are horrible tactics. However ......"

I'm finding that rate structures are quite varied. In Toledo there are a number of charges that appear to be proportional to energy use but are not listed as such. In Maryland, there is a charge for the electricity you use, and a proportional distribution charge and a flat connection fee. As home power production becomes a bigger part of the market, some of these proportional charges might become flat, but I doubt that you can go too far in this direction or landlords with empty apartments will get pretty upset.
--
Go solar! http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

This is what Bucky Fuller wanted to do, but over the whole world. Problems with power loses over long transmision distances seemed a little daunting but it you think about it, the resistance is inversely proportional to the cross-sectional area of the conductor and you need a thick conductor to carry continent-scale power. I've blogged on this recently at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/03/coast-to-coast .html

I've got just enough room on my roof to cover my electric use with 15% efficient silicon PV. I'm excluding about 25% of the south side which is shaded. Many of my customers use twice as much electricity as I do, but also have bigger houses. Some of them will be running up against 10 kW limits imposed by some utilities on net metering systems but others may not have enough roof and will need to put a portion of of their systems in the yard if they want full coverage of their electric use. Our systems or OK to split up because they go to AC at the panels.

If this new material is only 7% efficient, then people may only cover half of their electric use with roof mounted system. The lower cost will only help with a portion of their electric bill.

Because of this possible lack of fit for the new material, I suspect that silicon will hold its own for a while in the residential market. The place to look for an alternative may be in 40% efficient materials combined with moderate concentration of sunlight.

On the other hand, material that is less efficient but also less expensive could get a lot of use on commercial buildings where the interest is to get some extra use out of a roof or parking lot. In this case the purpose of the property is to make money rather than to provide comfort so the aesthetic issues are different and the financial issues may work out well.

You can sign up for silicon now at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

I've got just enough room on my roof to cover my electric use with 15% efficient silicon PV. I'm excluding about 25% of the south side which is shaded. Many of my customers use twice as much electricity as I do, but also have bigger houses. Some of them will be running up against 10 kW limits imposed by some utilities on net metering systems but others may not have enough roof and will need to put a portion of of their systems in the yard if they want full coverage of their electric use. Our systems or OK to split up because they go to AC at the panels.

If this new material is only 7% efficient, then people may only cover half of their electric use with roof mounted system. The lower cost will only help with a portion of their electric bill.

Because of this possible lack of fit for the new material, I suspect that silicon will hold its own for a while in the residential market. The place to look for an alternative may be in 40% efficient materials combined with moderate concentration of sunlight.

On the other hand, material that is less efficient but also less expensive could get a lot of use on commercial buildings where the interest is to get some extra use out of a roof or parking lot. In this case the purpose of the property is to make money rather than to provide comfort so the aesthetic issues are different and the financial issues may work out well.

You can sign up for silicon now at http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

Well, that's sort of the joke: they don't have any standing to send takedown notices, or rather, copyright infringement notices. According to their own website, "The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is the trade group that represents the U.S. recording industry." They are, at best, a partial shareholder in some intellectual property rights. However, they can't issue subpoenas or adjudicate in any way, which is doubly unfortunate for them since Federal courts seem to be ruling against them a lot as reported here and here and here and here.

I have personal experience in this. I've maintained a blog detailing my experience with the company. I was willing to work it out and even upgraded to a business account. I posted the contract last night in case anyone was interested along with a few other interesting bits.

If you are a Comcast customer, get VoiP. I mean it. If you get "The Call" and are disconnected, VoiP is what will get you back online. I've chatted with people in 15 states and found only one person who had their HSI turned back on again.

The lady lives in Orange County California and called the PUC. She said Comcast terminated our 911 service and had a sick daughter. She says her HSI was turned back on within the hour :-)

Apparently Comcast VoiP was her ONLY phone service to the house. I don't know if this story is true but it sounds good. Personally I'm saving money going DSL and Dish Network ($30 a month). Better service and my TFC/Counter Strike Source game has improved. No complaints. Heck, my ISP even tells me what I purchased when I signed up. 100 Gigs a month with 25 Gigs consumption a week.

I took screen shots of my usage over the last 30 days. Even setup a web server for family photos to push it and see what my usage REALLY is (Comcast claims I used 250 - 300 Gigs a month). We'll see if this is true or not. Check it out.

http://comcastissue.blogspot.com/

Oh, and support Verizon FioS and Utopianet projects. This is what we need to get the US back to #1 in the tech world. We also need Net Neutrality. Common Carrier providers should not be allowed to control what goes over the lines. If they do they should loose their common carreir status.

I have personal experience in this. I've maintained a blog detailing my experience with the company. I was willing to work it out and even upgraded to a business account. I posted the contract last night in case anyone was interested along with a few other interesting bits.

If you are a Comcast customer, get VoiP. I mean it. If you get "The Call" and are disconnected, VoiP is what will get you back online. I've chatted with people in 15 states and found only one person who had their HSI turned back on again.

The lady lives in Orange County California and called the PUC. She said Comcast terminated our 911 service and had a sick daughter. She says her HSI was turned back on within the hour :-)

Apparently Comcast VoiP was her ONLY phone service to the house. I don't know if this story is true but it sounds good. Personally I'm saving money going DSL and Dish Network ($30 a month). Better service and my TFC/Counter Strike Source game has improved. No complaints. Heck, my ISP even tells me what I purchased when I signed up. 100 Gigs a month with 25 Gigs consumption a week.

I took screen shots of my usage over the last 30 days. Even setup a web server for family photos to push it and see what my usage REALLY is (Comcast claims I used 250 - 300 Gigs a month). We'll see if this is true or not. Check it out.

http://comcastissue.blogspot.com/

Oh, and support Verizon FioS and Utopianet projects. This is what we need to get the US back to #1 in the tech world. We also need Net Neutrality. Common Carrier providers should not be allowed to control what goes over the lines. If they do they should loose their common carreir status.

You gotta hand it to IBM

No matter how crappy their business is they can always find a chunk of fool's gold in the pile of dogshit and then get someone in the media (or everyone in the media) to focus on that. Latest example was this story in yesterday's Wall Street Journal about how IBM's software division is just setting the world on fire. According to our spies at Fortune, IBM's flacks have been shopping this story around since January. At last someone bit. Wow, software sales were up 14% in the last quarter and a galloping 7% for the full year, and now Steve Mills is the second coming of Gerstner. Never mind that the way IBM did this was to move some revenue that used to get recognized in other categories over into the "software" division. Never mind that IBM spent $4.8 billion acquiring companies last year, and most of that went to software shops. Never mind that IBM's track record in software has been to buy up companies and ride them into the ground. Total assets at the end of 2006 are lower than at any time since 2002. Liabilities up, working capital down. Oh well. Who cares when that software division is setting the world on fire, baby?

Remember when the IBM story was the services division? Then that crapped out. Then they tried the "second coming of the mainframe" story. Then it was Linux. Then it was "business transformation outsourcing," which our good pals at Fortune swallowed and said here was a $500 billion market, "an ocean of potential revenue" that IBM was going to tap into. They predicted IBM would top $100 billion in revenues by 2005. Ahem.

Well, now it's software. Yup. That red-hot IBM software division. You know, someone ought to profile the one division that really is hot at IBM and which never gets any credit: the publicity department.

Besides rapid prototyping there is also rapid manufacturing which is using the equipment of rapid prototyping to make production grade parts and products. There are various system that can produce metal parts including titanium. Also, completely functional electronics and MEMS can be produced. When does it make sense to use rapid manufacturing ? - Short production runs where you do not want to set up dedicated high volume production. - Require bridge manufacturing while waiting for tooling. - Manufacture jigs and fixtures. - Require rapid turnaround of 2-5 days. (Alpha and beta product launches, for example, require a very small total production but very fast turnaround time.) - Need parts that utilize complex geometries with negative angles, undercuts, thin walls or complex injection molded parts. It's also appropriate for parts without draft angles or ejector pin placements, or those with critical dimensional stability requirements. - Need to conserve capital for cash flow. - Conduct continuous design iterations during feasibility and market validation studies. Rapid manufacturing parts allow engineers and manufacturers to design, build and test their parts as many times as necessary. There are service bureaus for Rapid Manufacturing as well. Just like going to a Kinkos to print off 24 inch by 36 inch architectural drawings for $2-10 each. Small and mid-size companies can go and get functional short run products produced for a few hundred bucks. The $20,000 to 1 million price of these machines is coming down. So first there will be a lot more 3D service bureaus. Breakthroughs to reduce the capital and operating costs could change the situation. the fab@home and reprap projects are more affordable capabilities. The DIY person who has a fully equipped workshop and CAD system could eventually upgrade when nanotech breakthrough versions arrive 2015-2030.

I strike a careless pose
And whistle a happy tune
And paint right under the nose
Of the King!

Apologies to Rodgers and Hammerstein "The King and I" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_and_I.
--
Enjoy the Sun http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

A lot of people seem to be unaware of how medeival Thailand is when it comes to morality. Why, just recently a beautiful Thai college student and actress got in a lot of trouble because the dress she wore was too revealing! (obligatory hot pix here)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Army_Balloon_Co rps before the blitz http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrage_balloon. There were problems though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barrage_balloon#Disad vantages.
--
Ground based solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

You can get tethered wind turbines now. One company is http://www.magenn.com/. Here is a writeup from a distributor http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/partner/s tory;jsessionid=89EBAB338FE0B78CFA33259EF429902B?i d=41478. This is not for placement in the jet stream but it is not bad for getting into more steady power generation.
--
The Sun makes the wind blow: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

Just scanned the replies (3 or higher, nested). Lots of uncritical praise, very little skepticism. If everyone here can take a breather from the mutual admiration and basking in the collective wisdom, as it were, I'd like to set everyone here straight.

First, and please remember this, the ideal is private voting and public counting. Aka "The Australian Ballot".

Computerized voting machines are fatally flawed. Unredeemable. There is no way to have a fully electronic system which protects the secret ballot as well as ensures the public vote count. Can't be done. Cannot. Be. Done. Period. Despite what all the electronic voting enthusiasts tell you. (I'm looking at you, Avi Rubin.) If you don't understand this, then please stop kibitzing, figure out how our voting systems should work (historically) and get up to speed. Thank you.

Second, this bill relies on "auditing" to ensure the integrity of our elections.

That never works. You cannot test your way to quality. Any one working software knows this. If you're in software and don't, please stop pretending and resign your job.

Additionally, by the time the mistake happens in an election, it's already too late. Too late. Because there's no recourse.

Timothy B. Lee, and other electronic voting apologists, like to mischaracterize the opposition of informed and experienced election integrity activists and experts. I can't guess why. My pet theory is unbounded technolophilia. Others suspect darker motives. Who's to say.

Anyone actually concerned about the health of our democracy would do well to read the criticisms of Holt's HR 811. Here's Beware of the Bandwagon -- A concise list of problems with Holt Bill HR 811 and Help Amend HR 811 to prohibit "electronic ballots."

That is all. I'm happy to answer anyone's questions. I'll check back later.