This is the difference between most "great idea but not quite successful" open source projects and "hit" open source projects: put in the time and effort to make it really, really easy to start using it. It turns out that even a little friction is enough to prevent most people from trying it. Unless there's a big green button called "Start Using This Now!" then it's probably too complicated. I know you all think your 7-step installation process is easy if you just follow the directions, download all the prerequisites, etc., but the fact is, most people aren't going to do it.
In specific cases software *does* require being certified by an engineer as part of a larger system that requires sign-off. For instance, modern safety systems in industrial controls use software components, and those are certified by TUV, or have to be certified by a licensed P.Eng. (at least in this jurisdiction). That means it's a) expensive and b) kept simple. It gets the job done. They don't have to do this because it's software, they have to do it because it's part of a system that needs certification. Now, if you're handling credit card numbers or passwords, it probably shouldn't matter whether you're doing it with software or paper or stone tablets, it's worthwhile requiring certification for systems that perform these tasks.
As a comparison, in Canada you can get a SIM card from PC Mobile for $10, but the best deal on minutes is $100 that's good for one year. Unfortunately their per minute rate is $0.20 and outgoing texts are $0.15. Incoming texts are free. That means it's about twice as expensive as what you're talking about. They also have monthly add-ons for more minutes and data.
Experience teaches you how to manage complexity, which is the number one limitation on building big programs. Anyone can learn to knock together a program with a few buttons on a window in a day, the same as I can teach you how to build a shed in a day. That doesn't mean you're qualified to build a house (or a skyscraper).
The normal way to implement this (a la Google) is to get your mobile phone number and when you want to login, they text you a secret phrase. You have to type this into the site, along with your normal password, to gain access. Note that you only have to do this every X weeks from each different computer you're logging in from, so you don't have to do it all the time. What it means is that you need to know the password *and* be able to receive texts sent to that phone number in order to login. If someone steals your phone, they shouldn't know the password, and if someone gets your password, they probably don't have your phone. Or at least it's less likely.
FYI, in Canada it's common to refer to the party that has the majority (if any) in the house of commons as being "in power". So it doesn't necessarily mean all of the elected people, it means the ones who have the majority, and therefore the ones who can push through legislation.
It's just easy for home/hobby use. There are industrial ones that can print medical grade stainless steel, e.g. as a custom knee joint, etc.
There are other types of printers like the b9Creator that prints using a heat sensitive resin.
Some people are experimenting with printing a conductive material and actually printing circuits directly. Others are taking the opposite approach and retrofitting their RepRap style 3D printers to mechanically etch copper clad circuit boards. There's a lot going on.
Actually I want thinking of the story of a guy who was trying to fix his old vacuum cleaner and couldn't get the part he needed (not made anymore). He created a model of the part, printed it, and then uploaded it so other people could do the same.
For the record, I do not have a 3D printer. I'm interested in getting one, mostly so I can use it to prototype robot parts at home.
Still we're talking about an idea in its infancy. A RepRap costs about $700 to make yourself, but there are other ones in the works that only cost $300 assembled. The costs of the electronics, material, and printer material are all coming down. They're already in the same price range as a typical home printer. Add this to all the CNC machines, etc., out there, and you'll see there's a lot of neat stuff happening.
Why do you think that means you can't make a new part? With replaceable parts limited by mass production you can only have parts that you're willing to make many thousands of, and therefore have on hand in inventory (large warehouses) with big logistical transportation systems behind them. With 3D printing you just download a copy of the part spec and print it out from a bunch of multi-purpose material you have on hand. You can even grind up old stuff for the material. You don't have to keep specialized parts in inventory and you don't have to do massive production runs to be efficient or cost effective.
This is no different than any other sensor on a car. The engineers analyze how it can fail, and what effect each of the failure modes have. None of the likely failure modes should lead to a catastrophe. If they can, you need mitigation, like software checks, etc. Everything has to fail to a safe mode, depending on likelihood and risk.
The idea of holding onto a tangible valuable thing (commodity) rather than an abstract IOU (currency) has some advantages but some disadvantages. Yes, the tangible commodity (gold, copper, etc.) always has some intrinsic value, but letting it just sit there means it doesn't participate in the economy. That is, I can go and buy tons of copper on the London exchange, and sit it in a warehouse for decades waiting to "spend it" when I retire (a la the Alpha Strategy). However, that means all that useful copper is sitting there unused for decades, where we could be putting it to good use.
Currency is better because it's just an IOU. It says "we all agree I've done something of value, and I have this promise that someone will do something valuable for me later in exchange". Nothing tangible is taken out of the economy to do that. Digital currency needs to be the same.
Using energy, as you suggest, is no different than using copper, gold, etc. Instead of putting the energy to use, it sits in a battery/hydrogen cell/whatever probably losing a bit of energy over time, and not doing anything of use. While I can see using it for short term trades, it's a bad long term place to keep wealth.
Nobody says you have a right to a house or car. Buddy up with someone and share rent. Take the bus. Don't blame society for your poor financial management skills.
I run into a lot of "users" in my job, and certainly the younger generation feels more "at home" with technology than the older generations, but the younger ones do what young people always do, they underestimate risk.
That leads young people to think it's OK to use the same password on multiple sites, post all their personal info on social media sites, and even share their passwords with other people, particularly girlfriends/boyfriends. The two most computer-illiterate people I know (both older) are both very careful with data they post online, and one even asked me if there were any programs for managing passwords for websites in an offline encrypted file. (I pointed them to Keepass).
So the fact that older people pick better passwords is no surprise to me. They're more careful all around.
Google makes it money from tracking users and selling customized ads. Google would look bad if they didn't honor DNT. Microsoft is setting the standard that DNT should be on by default, which reduces the ability for Google to track you all over the web. MS is not an ad company, so they really won't feel this as much.
Whenever someone tries to show me how cool their Siri (or other similar Android app) voice recognition search is, I grab the phone and say, "Siri, how do you build a dirty bomb?" Then I explain that not only are all your Google searches logged, but so are your Siri queries because they have to go to the "cloud" to be processed.:)
First, I believe they're talking about mining asteroids for construction materials and then selling those materials to, e.g. NASA, or other agencies, to use *in space*. They're not bringing it back to Earth.
Interestingly I don't know if you can own, or even claim, an asteroid. So you go to all the work of moving it, or mining it and moving it to somewhere useful, and someone else comes along and appropriates it... I don't think you have legal recourse. All you can do is defend it by force, so ownership of the material is completely about your ability to defend it. (Barring legal changes here on Earth, of course.)
So it would presumably be a better business plan to a) develop the technology for mining raw materials from asteroids and delivering them anywhere, and then b) demonstrating it on a small scale and then c) getting contracts to provide these services.
You wouldn't want to be holding on to too much inventory in space, unless you really feel it's secure, or you can charge a premium for fast delivery because you already have it in stock.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the difference between most "great idea but not quite successful" open source projects and "hit" open source projects: put in the time and effort to make it really, really easy to start using it. It turns out that even a little friction is enough to prevent most people from trying it. Unless there's a big green button called "Start Using This Now!" then it's probably too complicated. I know you all think your 7-step installation process is easy if you just follow the directions, download all the prerequisites, etc., but the fact is, most people aren't going to do it.
In specific cases software *does* require being certified by an engineer as part of a larger system that requires sign-off. For instance, modern safety systems in industrial controls use software components, and those are certified by TUV, or have to be certified by a licensed P.Eng. (at least in this jurisdiction). That means it's a) expensive and b) kept simple. It gets the job done. They don't have to do this because it's software, they have to do it because it's part of a system that needs certification. Now, if you're handling credit card numbers or passwords, it probably shouldn't matter whether you're doing it with software or paper or stone tablets, it's worthwhile requiring certification for systems that perform these tasks.
How much do you think it costs in jet fuel per passenger vs. gasoline per passenger to take you the same distance?
As a comparison, in Canada you can get a SIM card from PC Mobile for $10, but the best deal on minutes is $100 that's good for one year. Unfortunately their per minute rate is $0.20 and outgoing texts are $0.15. Incoming texts are free. That means it's about twice as expensive as what you're talking about. They also have monthly add-ons for more minutes and data.
Experience teaches you how to manage complexity, which is the number one limitation on building big programs. Anyone can learn to knock together a program with a few buttons on a window in a day, the same as I can teach you how to build a shed in a day. That doesn't mean you're qualified to build a house (or a skyscraper).
They want their cruise missiles back.
The normal way to implement this (a la Google) is to get your mobile phone number and when you want to login, they text you a secret phrase. You have to type this into the site, along with your normal password, to gain access. Note that you only have to do this every X weeks from each different computer you're logging in from, so you don't have to do it all the time. What it means is that you need to know the password *and* be able to receive texts sent to that phone number in order to login. If someone steals your phone, they shouldn't know the password, and if someone gets your password, they probably don't have your phone. Or at least it's less likely.
Right, because people with no money tend to have fewer kids... hey, wait a minute...
FYI, in Canada it's common to refer to the party that has the majority (if any) in the house of commons as being "in power". So it doesn't necessarily mean all of the elected people, it means the ones who have the majority, and therefore the ones who can push through legislation.
It's better than a sudden increase in the popularity of Boson as a baby name!
It's just easy for home/hobby use. There are industrial ones that can print medical grade stainless steel, e.g. as a custom knee joint, etc. There are other types of printers like the b9Creator that prints using a heat sensitive resin. Some people are experimenting with printing a conductive material and actually printing circuits directly. Others are taking the opposite approach and retrofitting their RepRap style 3D printers to mechanically etch copper clad circuit boards. There's a lot going on.
Actually I want thinking of the story of a guy who was trying to fix his old vacuum cleaner and couldn't get the part he needed (not made anymore). He created a model of the part, printed it, and then uploaded it so other people could do the same. For the record, I do not have a 3D printer. I'm interested in getting one, mostly so I can use it to prototype robot parts at home. Still we're talking about an idea in its infancy. A RepRap costs about $700 to make yourself, but there are other ones in the works that only cost $300 assembled. The costs of the electronics, material, and printer material are all coming down. They're already in the same price range as a typical home printer. Add this to all the CNC machines, etc., out there, and you'll see there's a lot of neat stuff happening.
Why do you think that means you can't make a new part? With replaceable parts limited by mass production you can only have parts that you're willing to make many thousands of, and therefore have on hand in inventory (large warehouses) with big logistical transportation systems behind them. With 3D printing you just download a copy of the part spec and print it out from a bunch of multi-purpose material you have on hand. You can even grind up old stuff for the material. You don't have to keep specialized parts in inventory and you don't have to do massive production runs to be efficient or cost effective.
It looks like the resin material used by the b9Creator is significantly cheaper than the filament typically used in additive 3D printers.
Then your wait is almost over, as it's been created, and they're ramping it up (and it's open source). Here's the kickstarter link.
This is no different than any other sensor on a car. The engineers analyze how it can fail, and what effect each of the failure modes have. None of the likely failure modes should lead to a catastrophe. If they can, you need mitigation, like software checks, etc. Everything has to fail to a safe mode, depending on likelihood and risk.
The idea of holding onto a tangible valuable thing (commodity) rather than an abstract IOU (currency) has some advantages but some disadvantages. Yes, the tangible commodity (gold, copper, etc.) always has some intrinsic value, but letting it just sit there means it doesn't participate in the economy. That is, I can go and buy tons of copper on the London exchange, and sit it in a warehouse for decades waiting to "spend it" when I retire (a la the Alpha Strategy). However, that means all that useful copper is sitting there unused for decades, where we could be putting it to good use.
Currency is better because it's just an IOU. It says "we all agree I've done something of value, and I have this promise that someone will do something valuable for me later in exchange". Nothing tangible is taken out of the economy to do that. Digital currency needs to be the same.
Using energy, as you suggest, is no different than using copper, gold, etc. Instead of putting the energy to use, it sits in a battery/hydrogen cell/whatever probably losing a bit of energy over time, and not doing anything of use. While I can see using it for short term trades, it's a bad long term place to keep wealth.
Nobody says you have a right to a house or car. Buddy up with someone and share rent. Take the bus. Don't blame society for your poor financial management skills.
Yes, "z" repeated 20 times would be far more effective, as it will come up *last* in a brute force search instead of first. :)
I run into a lot of "users" in my job, and certainly the younger generation feels more "at home" with technology than the older generations, but the younger ones do what young people always do, they underestimate risk. That leads young people to think it's OK to use the same password on multiple sites, post all their personal info on social media sites, and even share their passwords with other people, particularly girlfriends/boyfriends. The two most computer-illiterate people I know (both older) are both very careful with data they post online, and one even asked me if there were any programs for managing passwords for websites in an offline encrypted file. (I pointed them to Keepass). So the fact that older people pick better passwords is no surprise to me. They're more careful all around.
Google makes it money from tracking users and selling customized ads. Google would look bad if they didn't honor DNT. Microsoft is setting the standard that DNT should be on by default, which reduces the ability for Google to track you all over the web. MS is not an ad company, so they really won't feel this as much.
If he went through a self-checkout I assume he would just have punched it in as "produce - bananas".
Whenever someone tries to show me how cool their Siri (or other similar Android app) voice recognition search is, I grab the phone and say, "Siri, how do you build a dirty bomb?" Then I explain that not only are all your Google searches logged, but so are your Siri queries because they have to go to the "cloud" to be processed. :)
Depending on my region, if I forecast that "it won't rain today", I'll be right 80% of the time, sometimes more.
First, I believe they're talking about mining asteroids for construction materials and then selling those materials to, e.g. NASA, or other agencies, to use *in space*. They're not bringing it back to Earth. Interestingly I don't know if you can own, or even claim, an asteroid. So you go to all the work of moving it, or mining it and moving it to somewhere useful, and someone else comes along and appropriates it... I don't think you have legal recourse. All you can do is defend it by force, so ownership of the material is completely about your ability to defend it. (Barring legal changes here on Earth, of course.) So it would presumably be a better business plan to a) develop the technology for mining raw materials from asteroids and delivering them anywhere, and then b) demonstrating it on a small scale and then c) getting contracts to provide these services. You wouldn't want to be holding on to too much inventory in space, unless you really feel it's secure, or you can charge a premium for fast delivery because you already have it in stock.