If a chipmaker declared its chip could run only software written past some date such as 1990 or 1995, you would see a dramatic decrease in cost and power consumption, Crosby said. The problem is that deep inside Windows is code taken from the MS-DOS operating system of the early 1980s, and that code looks for certain instructions when it boots.
Even new software might (and often does) use the so-called old instructions. If you want to completely redesign the hardware you would also have to completely rewrite the software from scratch as you would not be able to rely on previously written code and libraries. This is simply not feasible on a global scale...
I think there is a very small chance of space debris reentering the atmosphere, hitting an airplane. It is possible ofcourse, but I think you've got a better chance of winning the lottery...
Most of the debris coming down is burned up before it even reaches commercial airplane altittudes. And it's not as if the sky is full of airplanes, the amount of sky taken up by airplanes is extremely small.
So I don't think this is an actual problem, it could happen but most likely it won't!
Eventually a single device combining cell phone, camera, pda, mp3 player, GPS,... will replace stand-alone devices. The transition has already started with devices such as the iPhone. Due to high prices, which is common with new types of devices, global adaptation will not happen instantly. People who have one or more seperate devices will not trade them in right away for a single device. If the seperate devices still work properly people will keep using them. But gradually as prices drop people will start buying the single device.
NASA used to be a organisation which looked to the future and developed new and astonishing technologies and dared to dream large. There is little left of all this nowadays...
The time between patent filing and product on market is not the only criteria you would need to check. There could be many reasons why a patent is still valid, and because of the tremendous amount of patents applied for and (maybe not yet) given the work involved would be too great to deal with. It's simply not feasible to apply such a check to all patents within a reasonable timeframe. You would never be able to do only a part because the patent holders that are damaged would cry murder over the fact that they were targetted and others not...
The entire patent system as it is in the US is rotten to the core. I'd rather see the way patents are handed out change first before taking a look at existing ones. What's the point of evaluating crappy patents when you are handing new crappy ones out every day...
Companies are going to give up patents, without wanting something in return? The reason they took out the patent in the first place is $$$.
I understand the underlying idea, if a company owns a patent which it can't use because it wouldn't be profitable, a non-profit organisation would be able to use the patent and create something useful out of it.
But let's face it, a company won't give up a patent just because it isn't profitable today... Who knows what happen tomorrow, making their patent profitable after all!
The only thing I got against water cooling is it uses water, no thanks
Amen brother! I also think putting water inside a pc is a bad idea... Water can do too much damage if it leaks, I know the chance is extremely small but I would prefer another material that will cause no damage if it ever leaks.
I just looked into this some more, and I don't think the law is applicable here. The law is meant to stop someone selling a certain item cheaper if you buy another item. It's for example illegal in Belgium for cellphone providers to give away cheap/free phones with a subscription. I don't think it's applicable here, it would be if they were offering the media cheaper because it only plays on windows media player, and by that forcing consumers to use windows. But that's not the case here... But perhaps there are other consumer protection laws which are applicable to DRM, I am definitely going to look into this some more.
IANAL, but where I live, Belgium, there is a law against such a practice. It is illegal to sell things which need another specific thing to be used. I think I'm gonna take a deeper look into this and perhaps contact some consumer groups because according to me DRM implemted like that is illegal over here... And most likely in other places as well.
Isn't the fact that so many environmental actions undertaken by humans have turned out to make things worse reason enough to be scared? We barely understand natural processes, or how they affect eachother. It seems to me that interfering with them is not a good idea unless it is absolutely necessary. Turning sand into stone to protect houses against earthquakes is just crazy... There is no emergency!
It seems to me that alot of research is needed to investigate possible side effects of such a process. Changing the soil composition is going to have far greater consequences than just protecting against earth quakes! Especially when used over large areas.
Also I wonder how one would contain these bacteria, and stop them from spreading? I don't think we would want our beaches turned to stone...
I am generally very reserved when it comes to releasing living organism where they don't belong and/or trying to alter the environment. There are just too many factors involved, and there is no way we can cover them all!
Well, it seems like US citizens are getting a taste of their own medicin...
The US has been doing the same to many foreign visitors for years, while traffic in the other direction has always been quite open.
The US doesn't allow people who have committed minor offences as well, except with special clearance (and I don't think getting one is easy, not sure about this but it would seem only logical that the US would make this hard). Now some countries are deciding to do apply this rule as well, seems only fair...
I applaud the use of these techniques in the movie industry, they are a great medium in telling a story on the big screen.
What scares me is that these techniques are finding there way into the news, documentaries,... There they offer a great medium to falsify stories, and mislead the public. In the future we will have to become ever more vigilant when looking at images of important events!
Can anyone name me a subject where the US government is in touch with the rest of the world? And where it's not just doing whatever the hell it feels like?
I would hardly call these "crackpot" ideas. Just because they probably aren't going to be mainstream anytime soon doesn't mean they are crackpot ideas... I find that quite insulting for all the people who are currently working on these technologies! They are visionaries, who might not even see the fruits of their work in their lifetime. And then they have the nerve to call them crackpots...
Slashdot Mirror
If a chipmaker declared its chip could run only software written past some date such as 1990 or 1995, you would see a dramatic decrease in cost and power consumption, Crosby said. The problem is that deep inside Windows is code taken from the MS-DOS operating system of the early 1980s, and that code looks for certain instructions when it boots.
Even new software might (and often does) use the so-called old instructions. If you want to completely redesign the hardware you would also have to completely rewrite the software from scratch as you would not be able to rely on previously written code and libraries. This is simply not feasible on a global scale...
3/ Recession! Well only for those who are poor to begin with...
1/ Find a country with lots of uranium.
2/ Invade in the name of freedom.
3/ Profit!
I think there is a very small chance of space debris reentering the atmosphere, hitting an airplane. It is possible ofcourse, but I think you've got a better chance of winning the lottery...
Most of the debris coming down is burned up before it even reaches commercial airplane altittudes. And it's not as if the sky is full of airplanes, the amount of sky taken up by airplanes is extremely small.
So I don't think this is an actual problem, it could happen but most likely it won't!
Eventually a single device combining cell phone, camera, pda, mp3 player, GPS, ... will replace stand-alone devices. The transition has already started with devices such as the iPhone. Due to high prices, which is common with new types of devices, global adaptation will not happen instantly. People who have one or more seperate devices will not trade them in right away for a single device. If the seperate devices still work properly people will keep using them. But gradually as prices drop people will start buying the single device.
NASA used to be a organisation which looked to the future and developed new and astonishing technologies and dared to dream large. There is little left of all this nowadays...
Unfortunately it's not that simple I'm afraid...
The time between patent filing and product on market is not the only criteria you would need to check. There could be many reasons why a patent is still valid, and because of the tremendous amount of patents applied for and (maybe not yet) given the work involved would be too great to deal with. It's simply not feasible to apply such a check to all patents within a reasonable timeframe. You would never be able to do only a part because the patent holders that are damaged would cry murder over the fact that they were targetted and others not...
The entire patent system as it is in the US is rotten to the core. I'd rather see the way patents are handed out change first before taking a look at existing ones. What's the point of evaluating crappy patents when you are handing new crappy ones out every day...
Companies are going to give up patents, without wanting something in return? The reason they took out the patent in the first place is $$$.
I understand the underlying idea, if a company owns a patent which it can't use because it wouldn't be profitable, a non-profit organisation would be able to use the patent and create something useful out of it.
But let's face it, a company won't give up a patent just because it isn't profitable today... Who knows what happen tomorrow, making their patent profitable after all!
I'm not ;-)
At least they can't break anything new this week!
The only thing I got against water cooling is it uses water, no thanks
Amen brother! I also think putting water inside a pc is a bad idea... Water can do too much damage if it leaks, I know the chance is extremely small but I would prefer another material that will cause no damage if it ever leaks.
I bet a lot of record company executives have a picture of this guy hanging in their office! On top of a darts board...
... to see the guy on the threadmill yelling at the guy on the stairmaster to "go faster!"
The pigeons had it coming... If they had been equipped with UAC in the first place:
Do you want the Chinese to control your movement? [A]llow [C]ancel
Microsoft wants to buy George Bush
Impossible! Big oil would never sell him!
It Maim Bad?
I just looked into this some more, and I don't think the law is applicable here. The law is meant to stop someone selling a certain item cheaper if you buy another item. It's for example illegal in Belgium for cellphone providers to give away cheap/free phones with a subscription. I don't think it's applicable here, it would be if they were offering the media cheaper because it only plays on windows media player, and by that forcing consumers to use windows. But that's not the case here... But perhaps there are other consumer protection laws which are applicable to DRM, I am definitely going to look into this some more.
IANAL, but where I live, Belgium, there is a law against such a practice. It is illegal to sell things which need another specific thing to be used. I think I'm gonna take a deeper look into this and perhaps contact some consumer groups because according to me DRM implemted like that is illegal over here... And most likely in other places as well.
but don't be scared without reason
Isn't the fact that so many environmental actions undertaken by humans have turned out to make things worse reason enough to be scared? We barely understand natural processes, or how they affect eachother. It seems to me that interfering with them is not a good idea unless it is absolutely necessary. Turning sand into stone to protect houses against earthquakes is just crazy... There is no emergency!
BUILD SOMEWHERE ELSE!
That would be logical, but since when are humans logical creatures?
It seems to me that alot of research is needed to investigate possible side effects of such a process. Changing the soil composition is going to have far greater consequences than just protecting against earth quakes! Especially when used over large areas.
Also I wonder how one would contain these bacteria, and stop them from spreading? I don't think we would want our beaches turned to stone...
I am generally very reserved when it comes to releasing living organism where they don't belong and/or trying to alter the environment. There are just too many factors involved, and there is no way we can cover them all!
Well, it seems like US citizens are getting a taste of their own medicin...
The US has been doing the same to many foreign visitors for years, while traffic in the other direction has always been quite open.
The US doesn't allow people who have committed minor offences as well, except with special clearance (and I don't think getting one is easy, not sure about this but it would seem only logical that the US would make this hard). Now some countries are deciding to do apply this rule as well, seems only fair...
I applaud the use of these techniques in the movie industry, they are a great medium in telling a story on the big screen.
... There they offer a great medium to falsify stories, and mislead the public. In the future we will have to become ever more vigilant when looking at images of important events!
What scares me is that these techniques are finding there way into the news, documentaries,
Can anyone name me a subject where the US government is in touch with the rest of the world? And where it's not just doing whatever the hell it feels like?
I would hardly call these "crackpot" ideas. Just because they probably aren't going to be mainstream anytime soon doesn't mean they are crackpot ideas... I find that quite insulting for all the people who are currently working on these technologies! They are visionaries, who might not even see the fruits of their work in their lifetime. And then they have the nerve to call them crackpots...