> You ever see a child born addicted to meth? It's not a pretty sight.
Did you ever stop to think that it might be the fault of the mother who took the drugs instead of the guy who sold it to a guy... to a guy... to a guy... who sold it to a pregnant woman. Or just gave it to her cuz they're friends. Ever see a child born in alcohol withdrawal? Jail the barbarous Bartles & James! They are terrorists trying to corrupt our unborn children! Couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the stupid bitch was drunk every day of her pregnancy. Noooo, blame the supplier for the mother's fucking ignorance.
> So don't be so hung up on a WORD ("phone"). There are many situations where integration gives benefits and "just a phone" isn't a good idea.
The original poster said "What the heck is the point of a phone that can't send text messages?" He did NOT say "What the heck is the point of a universal multi-function device, one of which is a phone, that can't send text messages?"
A phone is made to make calls, not a fucking Yahoo! Pager. If your phone has SMS (Glorified ICQ), yay, good for you, but why complain that it isn't a feature on every phone, when obviously, the majority of people never use it.
You talk of narrowmindedness of the term "phone" and then explain features that are, by definition, not part of a phone. You describe a cellphone/PDA.
> Maybe then I'll have something that will power my intergalactic Segway scooter.
Intergalactic Segway? I think you'd better work on the life support system first. Either that or learn how to hold your breath for a LONG time. Oh and being able to withstand a vacuum might help. Minor speedbumps on the road of progress, though, eh?
> I'm just assuming that he didn't breath the toxic vapors
I think he meant more along the lines of being electrocuted. Unless he happened to be jumping in the air while tightening lugs. Err, I suppose he could have worn boots too...
> does this mean that cardboard boxes will no longer be recylable
Well' I don't think it would make a whole lot of difference, since these things are so small. I'm guessing that in the recycling process, the tags would be destroyed somehow and ground up & becomes part of the new cardboard. Maybe the destroyed tags will start interfering with active tags attached to recycled boxes. Either that or a solar flare will activate a part of a destroyed one, causing a spark and burning down the warehouse. That would be some crazy shit if suddenly 100 warehouses went up in flames because they used recycled materials. "Save the environment!" Oh, the irony.
Granted, this is all a guess; your question is very interesting.
> this scenario is somewhat far-fetched, but it serves to demonstrate a major downside of fully automated inventory
Not only farfetched, but unrelated. Sort of. The same thing could happen today. Driver comes w/ wing nuts & contractor tells him to put them in the corner, so he does. The person doing the unloading might notice the boxes are too light, but they would have noticed that with just RFIDs as well.
Maybe you are seeing something I am not, so how would RFIDs cause the problem? Either way, the problem is that the foreman didn't look in the box (the lazy bastard).
> what keeps them from installing such a reading device every 20 cms?
Because a reader device is probably larger than 20cm square. Of course, they coul probably make a repeater/amplifier to make the distance travel further, but you lose the pinpoint functonality and go more into "This certain RFID is within 50 feet of this point."
> That's a canard perpetrated by companies that don't want the US government to sign on to Kyoto
Why is there always at least one asshole who makes every story political? Your statements in no way apply to what is going on here. The idea is to reduce HEAT, not consumption.
> Unfortunately, only NOT is reversible. (Name one other gate that is? > So that gets us nowhere.
Very true. That is why they are not using your standard gates, they are making reversible gates so it overcomes your limitations.
> Although I have no idea how it is stored, or how it is re-routed.
I believe this is where the problem in your thinking crops up.
As you know, most gates have two inputs and one output. Therefore, if the power from both inputs exceeds what needs to be sent on the output pin, the extra energy is converted to heat.
Now these reversible gates come in. The fact that they are reversible is not important in this context. The important bit here is that the excess energy can be sent on a second output pin to be stored (in a capacitor, whatever) instead of being automatically wasted to heat.
However, I may be misunderstanding this technology, as I only grokked this much 2 minutes ago in a burst of insight.
> You certainly shouldn't look at entry price being unaffordable
$650 for a 450Mhz G3 may not be unaffordable, but it is certainly far too expensive for that old, slow, hardware.
I have no complaints with Macs except price (well, and lack of hardware compatibility, but that's to be expected). They are unreasonably expensive, even for obsolete hardware.
> some people *want* both in the one machine - maybe you don't get that.
It might as well be another machine. The point of having everything in one device is convenience. It's not convenient that you have take the damn thing apart to make a phone call or play a game. They should not have released this device until they could get the phone & games to work at the same time. If they could have done that, people might be moderately impressed. C'Mon, Nokia, get with the times.
> you want the free speech to argue that people shouldn't be given the right to vote?
Absolutely. If radical extremes aren't allowed to voice their opinion, what is deemed "radical" becomes closer and closer to the norm.
Just because I believe they can voice their opinion does not mean I agree. I believe the KKK has a right to their opinion. And I have the right to call them ignorant, inbred, racist, scumsucking, bastard hicks. That's what free speech is all about.
> Do you honestly think the US could do shit if Idaho and Montana decided to go at it?
Uh, yeah? Although your question about whether they would bother is very tough to answer. A better question is would anyone more than 2 states away care or even notice?
Slashdot Mirror
> You ever see a child born addicted to meth? It's not a pretty sight.
... to a guy ... to a guy ... who sold it to a pregnant woman. Or just gave it to her cuz they're friends. Ever see a child born in alcohol withdrawal? Jail the barbarous Bartles & James! They are terrorists trying to corrupt our unborn children! Couldn't have anything to do with the fact that the stupid bitch was drunk every day of her pregnancy. Noooo, blame the supplier for the mother's fucking ignorance.
Did you ever stop to think that it might be the fault of the mother who took the drugs instead of the guy who sold it to a guy
Dumbass
> So I guess reading the article makes me an asshole on /.,
No, using this story to emphasize your political views makes you an asshole. You brought up Kyoto, which was not even alluded to in the article.
> > > anything that's sold as a solution to a non-existent problem [...] is intrinsically bad
And reusing electricity and reducing heat aren't nonexistent problems.
> So don't be so hung up on a WORD ("phone"). There are many situations where integration gives benefits and "just a phone" isn't a good idea.
The original poster said "What the heck is the point of a phone that can't send text messages?" He did NOT say "What the heck is the point of a universal multi-function device, one of which is a phone, that can't send text messages?"
A phone is made to make calls, not a fucking Yahoo! Pager. If your phone has SMS (Glorified ICQ), yay, good for you, but why complain that it isn't a feature on every phone, when obviously, the majority of people never use it.
You talk of narrowmindedness of the term "phone" and then explain features that are, by definition, not part of a phone. You describe a cellphone/PDA.
> IBM could designate a great big black bull as an honorary IBM executive
as opposed to the great big white ass running SCO.
> Wouldn't that mean that Microsoft also has an illegal monopoly of being a sco customer?
No, HP was dumb enough to buy one as well.
> (or even IAABASOTHCONZ.. try figuring that one out)
Pssh, isn't it obvious?
I Am A Big- Assed Servant Of The Hobo Catching Order, New Zealand.
> Maybe then I'll have something that will power my intergalactic Segway scooter.
Intergalactic Segway? I think you'd better work on the life support system first. Either that or learn how to hold your breath for a LONG time. Oh and being able to withstand a vacuum might help. Minor speedbumps on the road of progress, though, eh?
> Ever change a automotive battery and have the wrench touch the body of the car?
> Batteries have that same "no current feature" that caps do.
I don't think I understand what you mean by "no current," because I've done that a few times & lotsa sparks jump.
> I'm just assuming that he didn't breath the toxic vapors
I think he meant more along the lines of being electrocuted. Unless he happened to be jumping in the air while tightening lugs. Err, I suppose he could have worn boots too...
> All RFID is realy is a serial number.
Umm, a discretely readable serial #... that you don't have to even be able to see, just be nearby.
> do motion capture for a IK chain
Excuse my ignorance, but what's an IK chain?
> does this mean that cardboard boxes will no longer be recylable
Well' I don't think it would make a whole lot of difference, since these things are so small. I'm guessing that in the recycling process, the tags would be destroyed somehow and ground up & becomes part of the new cardboard. Maybe the destroyed tags will start interfering with active tags attached to recycled boxes. Either that or a solar flare will activate a part of a destroyed one, causing a spark and burning down the warehouse. That would be some crazy shit if suddenly 100 warehouses went up in flames because they used recycled materials. "Save the environment!" Oh, the irony.
Granted, this is all a guess; your question is very interesting.
> this scenario is somewhat far-fetched, but it serves to demonstrate a major downside of fully automated inventory
Not only farfetched, but unrelated. Sort of. The same thing could happen today. Driver comes w/ wing nuts & contractor tells him to put them in the corner, so he does. The person doing the unloading might notice the boxes are too light, but they would have noticed that with just RFIDs as well.
Maybe you are seeing something I am not, so how would RFIDs cause the problem? Either way, the problem is that the foreman didn't look in the box (the lazy bastard).
> this could be a future where people look alive, but, really, they might as well be dead.
Great! For once, I'm ahead of the curve on something!
> what keeps them from installing such a reading device every 20 cms?
Because a reader device is probably larger than 20cm square. Of course, they coul probably make a repeater/amplifier to make the distance travel further, but you lose the pinpoint functonality and go more into "This certain RFID is within 50 feet of this point."
> Maybe it's a texas thing or something. We don't have camels and deserts in these parts.
Hate to break it to ya', but there aren't too many camels in Texas. Or the whole U.S., for that matter.
> That's a canard perpetrated by companies that don't want the US government to sign on to Kyoto
Why is there always at least one asshole who makes every story political? Your statements in no way apply to what is going on here. The idea is to reduce HEAT, not consumption.
> good luck trying to get your TCP socket to unsend data
If you melt down every wire and piece of hardware that packet was on, philosophically speaking, did it ever exist to begin with?
I'm no Plato...
> Unfortunately, only NOT is reversible. (Name one other gate that is?
> So that gets us nowhere.
Very true. That is why they are not using your standard gates, they are making reversible gates so it overcomes your limitations.
> Although I have no idea how it is stored, or how it is re-routed.
I believe this is where the problem in your thinking crops up.
As you know, most gates have two inputs and one output. Therefore, if the power from both inputs exceeds what needs to be sent on the output pin, the extra energy is converted to heat.
Now these reversible gates come in. The fact that they are reversible is not important in this context. The important bit here is that the excess energy can be sent on a second output pin to be stored (in a capacitor, whatever) instead of being automatically wasted to heat.
However, I may be misunderstanding this technology, as I only grokked this much 2 minutes ago in a burst of insight.
> That's a 100% waste of valuable time.
Not necessarily. "Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer."
> It only happened after a long time (with XP).
I thought it was with Win2K? It uses NTFS and has a version # NT 5.0...
> You certainly shouldn't look at entry price being unaffordable
$650 for a 450Mhz G3 may not be unaffordable, but it is certainly far too expensive for that old, slow, hardware.
I have no complaints with Macs except price (well, and lack of hardware compatibility, but that's to be expected). They are unreasonably expensive, even for obsolete hardware.
> some people *want* both in the one machine - maybe you don't get that.
It might as well be another machine. The point of having everything in one device is convenience. It's not convenient that you have take the damn thing apart to make a phone call or play a game. They should not have released this device until they could get the phone & games to work at the same time. If they could have done that, people might be moderately impressed. C'Mon, Nokia, get with the times.
> you want the free speech to argue that people shouldn't be given the right to vote?
Absolutely. If radical extremes aren't allowed to voice their opinion, what is deemed "radical" becomes closer and closer to the norm.
Just because I believe they can voice their opinion does not mean I agree. I believe the KKK has a right to their opinion. And I have the right to call them ignorant, inbred, racist, scumsucking, bastard hicks. That's what free speech is all about.
> Do you honestly think the US could do shit if Idaho and Montana decided to go at it?
Uh, yeah? Although your question about whether they would bother is very tough to answer. A better question is would anyone more than 2 states away care or even notice?