In my understanding, Bitcoin is nothing more, nothing less than a Pyramid Scam system, and a self-limited and volatile one. Also, to make things even worse, the Bitcoin is a closed system, meaning that only exists a total amount of possible money that can be generated, and the only way to make it gain more value is to try to do nasty things like "market speculation"... things that will only help to create an "I-will-explode-soon" kind of market bubble, and (if you think it cannot be worse) inside a "glass ceiling". Also, from the start of its creation, all the big slots already had an owner, leaving only the little ones to "the rest of us" to try mining...
But the worst part is the amount of people encouraging this "system". The ones participating are already trapped in this scam and cannot leave without loosing everything invested (or try to sell to other people and helps perpetuate this insanity).
But, some day, when all this abomination "magically" disappears in thin air, everyone in it will loose all their "money" and (eventually) will cry a lot... but it will be too late:(
Just buy it (the entire and updated book set) and read it;) and continue to use it as a permanent reference for whatever you want to do with programming...
Still, we need more than what the Open Hardware movement can offer to us in FOSH (Free and Open Source Hardware) products. We also need to be able to DIY them, and therefore we need to have access to the right tools so we can create (or, as an option, order) the chips by ourselves;) Also, we need a tool to (that is easy to) design the chips too, so we can build them later:D
But, at a start, this action is a very good one...
A language that is powerful as C and easier to debug? Choose one:D
Unfortunately there is no such a thing... for now. But I believe that, someday, a language better than C will be born. It is the next major step of the Programming Language's evolution (and it will be unavoidable).
I think it could be extended to Inkscape too. Imagine the three software - GIMP, Blender and Inkscape - working as modules, sharing the same user file model.
I think we need to create bigger ports too. A monster company like Maersk probably think that the bigger is the better in terms of transportation cost. So, if they are right, the world countries need to upgrade all their ports for this new "standard size" for cargo ships (or they think they can create bigger ones in the future?).
Other companies need to built bigger cargo ships too, and probably decide about a standard and innovations like how is the best position for load/unload this massive ships.
Also, I think they have to maintain their short ships too. Let the bigger ones do the massive transportation and the small ones implementing something like a tactical supply in short routes (and support to the bigger ships before and after their standard routes).
Well, and massively above speed of light in this early days... If the theory of a dot-expanding-into-a-universe is real, we have a "46 billion light-years in all directions, filled with hundreds of billions of galaxies and having been around for nearly 14 billion years since the Big Bang".:D
Why this 1 GB RAM limit-thing in all this little boards in the market? Why we still have no access to little ones like this with at last 4 GB of RAM memory?
More importantly is that only A or B will likely be the best use, not both. Comparative advantage.
Even if the oil production could be enough for both use? I believe that we have a lot of plastic waste worldwide. And if this process could be so good and product a lot in less time, less money etc, maybe we could re-enter this final product in both ways: (A) fuel for machines AND (b) the plastic industry. Or economically speaking, even in this case scenario it will be better following ONLY A or B?
They have been doing this in South American countries for years. Venezuela and Brazil. And its more of a gasoline that comes out and not oil. The Oil companies most likely have been suppressing this info here for years as well.
Do you have some link to share with us about this process made in Brazil and Venezuela? I't would be interesting to learn more about it.
You have an interesting point. If (and only if) the process of making oil from plastic were (1) LESS EXPENSIVE than recycle used plastic into new plastic for the industry AND (2) the oil produced could be used into the plastic industry in a way it could be at least the same cost in comparison with the petroleum-to-plastic traditional industry way, it will be better to just transform all the world plastic waste into oil, and then redirect its final product to (A) fuel for machines and (B) the plastic industry. But I don't have any data and this is only a speculation.
If this technology is so good like they said, and many companies (or better: governments) adopt such ways of transforming plastic into fuel, we can organize all the World plastic waste in to TWO recycle ways: produce FUEL and recycle PLASTIC. We don't need to transform all the plastic waste into fuel. The industry still needs plastic in their products so with a better equilibrium we can reduce the petroleum extraction (a.k.a.: dependency), try to utilize all the annual plastic waste, and (better) we can contribute with the environment with less pollution, in the air and in the ground (I think).
I think in two ways worst than an alien disease, that can be a huge problem if in wrong hands.
The FIRST CASE SCENARIO is about miscalculation: capturing near Earth Asteroid is a complex challenge. One thing wrong and you could bombard Earth and cause serious problems (and billions of victims).
The SECOND CASE SCENARIO is hypothetical: what about finding a lot of tons of one or more of the 8 most expensive elements in the periodic table: Au, Ag, Pt, Pd, Ir, Rh, Os and Ru (or the worst case scenario: only Au and Pt) in the captured asteroids. And what if the company wants to "integrate" its achievement in the Earth economy?:) I know that, if used with wisdom this entrepreneurship can help humanity take a long leap in good, technology and expansion (and establishment) to other orbs in our Solar System, but things can go wrong (or intentionally wrong) and we need some guarantee.
The best way for this is called aquaponics. With this technique we can grow not only fishes but edible vegetables in a very fast rate. The best of aquaculture and hydroponics without their respective pitfalls. And we can do this not only in government/private sector large scale, but also in a small modular way: everyone with at last a 5m x 5m space available at home can implement it by their own.
I think this is a real problem only for fresh water ecosystems, and they did not represent the 6% of marine protein (fish, etc) that human intakes. I think 5% came from ocean, and only 1% came from fresh water ecosystems (lakes, rivers, and so on). If this is correct, the problem still exists but affect only 1% of the marine protein resources available. Of course, destroying an inland ecosystem is terrible for the environment and can be lead to other real problems (hazards or even nightmare situations) in other analysis, but not if we are talking about the marine protein resources available (ie. not directly involved)..
New protocols, new languages... This is not the path. I don't think creating new languages would be best for the Internet. And the actual structure (and protocols) is too much (organizationally speaking) confused. It needs modularization, not a long list of options for every feature, tools, whatever they want. This flying spaghetti (a.k.a.: Internet) needs to be shot down first.
This is called the real source of innovation: open source, open knowledge. Comparatively speaking: If the C programming language were closed source, companies like Apple would never be what it is today. Or even the actual jump in technology our society leaped. Maybe, with this action, Tesla can not only open a path for innovation, standardization, but most important (for them) they will be able to grow faster and faster technologically and in the market.
Slashdot Mirror
In my understanding, Bitcoin is nothing more, nothing less than a Pyramid Scam system, and a self-limited and volatile one. Also, to make things even worse, the Bitcoin is a closed system, meaning that only exists a total amount of possible money that can be generated, and the only way to make it gain more value is to try to do nasty things like "market speculation"... things that will only help to create an "I-will-explode-soon" kind of market bubble, and (if you think it cannot be worse) inside a "glass ceiling". Also, from the start of its creation, all the big slots already had an owner, leaving only the little ones to "the rest of us" to try mining...
But the worst part is the amount of people encouraging this "system". The ones participating are already trapped in this scam and cannot leave without loosing everything invested (or try to sell to other people and helps perpetuate this insanity).
But, some day, when all this abomination "magically" disappears in thin air, everyone in it will loose all their "money" and (eventually) will cry a lot... but it will be too late :(
Just buy it (the entire and updated book set) and read it ;) and continue to use it as a permanent reference for whatever you want to do with programming...
Still, we need more than what the Open Hardware movement can offer to us in FOSH (Free and Open Source Hardware) products. We also need to be able to DIY them, and therefore we need to have access to the right tools so we can create (or, as an option, order) the chips by ourselves ;) Also, we need a tool to (that is easy to) design the chips too, so we can build them later :D
But, at a start, this action is a very good one...
A language that is powerful as C and easier to debug? Choose one :D
Unfortunately there is no such a thing... for now. But I believe that, someday, a language better than C will be born. It is the next major step of the Programming Language's evolution (and it will be unavoidable).
As you can C there is only one Programming Language to rule them all :)
Because he was not trained enough with a massive farm of GPUs running 24/7? :D
I think it could be extended to Inkscape too. Imagine the three software - GIMP, Blender and Inkscape - working as modules, sharing the same user file model.
OK. And how about built one from scratch?
I think we need to create bigger ports too. A monster company like Maersk probably think that the bigger is the better in terms of transportation cost. So, if they are right, the world countries need to upgrade all their ports for this new "standard size" for cargo ships (or they think they can create bigger ones in the future?).
Other companies need to built bigger cargo ships too, and probably decide about a standard and innovations like how is the best position for load/unload this massive ships.
Also, I think they have to maintain their short ships too. Let the bigger ones do the massive transportation and the small ones implementing something like a tactical supply in short routes (and support to the bigger ships before and after their standard routes).
ForTran 77 evolved already :)
ForTran 95 and so on now has C-like syntax :D
I hope all Internet service company in the world to adopt this fair service to all their customers. No more upload limit :)
Well, and massively above speed of light in this early days ... If the theory of a dot-expanding-into-a-universe is real, we have a "46 billion light-years in all directions, filled with hundreds of billions of galaxies and having been around for nearly 14 billion years since the Big Bang". :D
Why this 1 GB RAM limit-thing in all this little boards in the market? Why we still have no access to little ones like this with at last 4 GB of RAM memory?
Fireworks in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, is really cool too.
More importantly is that only A or B will likely be the best use, not both. Comparative advantage.
Even if the oil production could be enough for both use? I believe that we have a lot of plastic waste worldwide. And if this process could be so good and product a lot in less time, less money etc, maybe we could re-enter this final product in both ways: (A) fuel for machines AND (b) the plastic industry. Or economically speaking, even in this case scenario it will be better following ONLY A or B?
They have been doing this in South American countries for years. Venezuela and Brazil. And its more of a gasoline that comes out and not oil. The Oil companies most likely have been suppressing this info here for years as well.
Do you have some link to share with us about this process made in Brazil and Venezuela? I't would be interesting to learn more about it.
You have an interesting point. If (and only if) the process of making oil from plastic were (1) LESS EXPENSIVE than recycle used plastic into new plastic for the industry AND (2) the oil produced could be used into the plastic industry in a way it could be at least the same cost in comparison with the petroleum-to-plastic traditional industry way, it will be better to just transform all the world plastic waste into oil, and then redirect its final product to (A) fuel for machines and (B) the plastic industry. But I don't have any data and this is only a speculation.
If this technology is so good like they said, and many companies (or better: governments) adopt such ways of transforming plastic into fuel, we can organize all the World plastic waste in to TWO recycle ways: produce FUEL and recycle PLASTIC. We don't need to transform all the plastic waste into fuel. The industry still needs plastic in their products so with a better equilibrium we can reduce the petroleum extraction (a.k.a.: dependency), try to utilize all the annual plastic waste, and (better) we can contribute with the environment with less pollution, in the air and in the ground (I think).
This remind me of the recent Turing Test competition...
Now we're all going to die of an alien disease.
Doesn't NASA watch any sci-fi?
I think in two ways worst than an alien disease, that can be a huge problem if in wrong hands. The FIRST CASE SCENARIO is about miscalculation: capturing near Earth Asteroid is a complex challenge. One thing wrong and you could bombard Earth and cause serious problems (and billions of victims). The SECOND CASE SCENARIO is hypothetical: what about finding a lot of tons of one or more of the 8 most expensive elements in the periodic table: Au, Ag, Pt, Pd, Ir, Rh, Os and Ru (or the worst case scenario: only Au and Pt) in the captured asteroids. And what if the company wants to "integrate" its achievement in the Earth economy? :) I know that, if used with wisdom this entrepreneurship can help humanity take a long leap in good, technology and expansion (and establishment) to other orbs in our Solar System, but things can go wrong (or intentionally wrong) and we need some guarantee.
No.
The best way for this is called aquaponics. With this technique we can grow not only fishes but edible vegetables in a very fast rate. The best of aquaculture and hydroponics without their respective pitfalls. And we can do this not only in government/private sector large scale, but also in a small modular way: everyone with at last a 5m x 5m space available at home can implement it by their own.
I think this is a real problem only for fresh water ecosystems, and they did not represent the 6% of marine protein (fish, etc) that human intakes. I think 5% came from ocean, and only 1% came from fresh water ecosystems (lakes, rivers, and so on). If this is correct, the problem still exists but affect only 1% of the marine protein resources available. Of course, destroying an inland ecosystem is terrible for the environment and can be lead to other real problems (hazards or even nightmare situations) in other analysis, but not if we are talking about the marine protein resources available (ie. not directly involved)..
New protocols, new languages... This is not the path. I don't think creating new languages would be best for the Internet. And the actual structure (and protocols) is too much (organizationally speaking) confused. It needs modularization, not a long list of options for every feature, tools, whatever they want. This flying spaghetti (a.k.a.: Internet) needs to be shot down first.
This is called the real source of innovation: open source, open knowledge. Comparatively speaking: If the C programming language were closed source, companies like Apple would never be what it is today. Or even the actual jump in technology our society leaped. Maybe, with this action, Tesla can not only open a path for innovation, standardization, but most important (for them) they will be able to grow faster and faster technologically and in the market.