You're absolutely right about the applications for this.
The company I work for is building a custom medical device. It doesn't need much in the way of CPU or RAM horsepower, but a cheap board that uses very little power is quite attractive! If this thing can stream video over a USB port, it could be a serious contender for our product. We've tested some very low-end (processor-wise) boards and found smooth video playback to be one of the stumbling blocks. When you are talking about an embedded product, the latest, greatest, power-hungry, heat-producing performance monsters are NOT what you want. You want the best performance per watt using the fewest watts necessary.
An issue for us is also product life-cycle. We need a manufacturer that can assure us N (I don't know N) years of production. That's completely off-topic, but I'm definitely going to look into it and find out if this little gem will work for us.
I have no idea if those artificial legs are an advantage or disadvantage, and I'm not sure it's relevant. He is differently abled. Where does the line get drawn? Can a specially designed prosthetic arm be used for javelin or shot-put? If he won a race, would there forever be an asterisks by his name? In a competitive world that considers using your own previously-drawn red blood cells as "doping," how can this be considered "fair?"
Could a "normal" marathoner use running stilts? I doubt anyone, anywhere, would accept that. How are these prosthetics different? How much length could he add to his stride before it would break the rules?
Are performance "modifiers" allowed or not?
This puts a different twist on the LZR Swimsuit Controversy. When use of a specialized, passive fabric causes a stir and calls of "technological doping" there have to be serious questions about the use of entirely artificial limbs.
"The Man" tricked us into watching "Torchwood" by claiming it was a "Doctor Who" spin-off. I suspect the BBC is short of toaster ovens since the tragic loss of Talkie Toaster.
I don't think Microsoft is providing access to source code as a way to combat FOSS, but as a way to attempt to comply with an EU antitrust ruling.
Truly "Open Source" licenses may be part of the plan, but the real reason they are exposing source is so that developers of products that compete with MS products like Word or Excel aren't at a competitive disadvantage that could result in expensive lawsuits.
I don't think MS is trying to be confusing (this time). I think the confusion is a side effect of a large, complex corporate entity based on closed source proprietary software trying to expose the minimum required to pass legal muster. It's not FOSS and it's not pretending to be. Do you expect something simple and concise when they mix EU law with a giant US corporation?
An unpopular solution would be for ISPs to charge for actual internet usage. Heavy users pay the same amount as people who only check their email every couple days.
If ISPs charged per GB up and down, they'd quickly lose interest in people who shared with a neighbor. It would also discourage use of Sandvine to disrupt file sharing (Linux distros only, of course) because throttling bandwidth would throttle their profits. The marginal cost of bandwidth (for a subscriber) is Zero, so consumption is unrestrained.
People would have to be more careful securing their wireless, but they would also recognize that bandwidth is a commodity that costs money to provide. If you want to be a philanthropist under those conditions, go ahead! As it is, sharing a connection forces the ISP to be the philanthropist. (I'm not saying that's bad, mind you.)
The article doesn't say that "computers are wasteful" but that "computers are not being used most efficiently." If a computer is on and sitting idle, that's "wasted" power. I imagine data centers consume a lot of power "idling" just so they can meet the demands at peak times.
CPUs that sleep or go into low power mode under light loads do a lot to minimize power consumption. Also, CPUs have been getting more work done per watt of power consumed. 2005 Tom's Hardware article that mentions this idea.
It is an interesting notion that given current trends we will consume more power storing data than flying. I'd rather be flying.;)
Actually, there are a lot of possibilities for juggling in 0G. You can't do a normal "cascade" pattern, but you could do it by bouncing balls off the "ceiling."
A three ball pattern that looked like the outline of a bow tie should actually be pretty easy to pick up. Speed could be variable depending on skill, and you could control a relatively large number of objects at slow speeds. There are actually quite a few juggling patterns that don't rely on gravity - gravity is more of a limiting factor in those cases.
I'd love to see what an astronaut who can juggle five on Earth would come up with if allowed to play around and experiment for a while in 0G!
Slashdot Mirror
You're absolutely right about the applications for this.
The company I work for is building a custom medical device. It doesn't need much in the way of CPU or RAM horsepower, but a cheap board that uses very little power is quite attractive! If this thing can stream video over a USB port, it could be a serious contender for our product. We've tested some very low-end (processor-wise) boards and found smooth video playback to be one of the stumbling blocks. When you are talking about an embedded product, the latest, greatest, power-hungry, heat-producing performance monsters are NOT what you want. You want the best performance per watt using the fewest watts necessary.
An issue for us is also product life-cycle. We need a manufacturer that can assure us N (I don't know N) years of production. That's completely off-topic, but I'm definitely going to look into it and find out if this little gem will work for us.
I have no idea if those artificial legs are an advantage or disadvantage, and I'm not sure it's relevant. He is differently abled. Where does the line get drawn? Can a specially designed prosthetic arm be used for javelin or shot-put? If he won a race, would there forever be an asterisks by his name? In a competitive world that considers using your own previously-drawn red blood cells as "doping," how can this be considered "fair?"
Could a "normal" marathoner use running stilts? I doubt anyone, anywhere, would accept that. How are these prosthetics different? How much length could he add to his stride before it would break the rules?
Are performance "modifiers" allowed or not?
This puts a different twist on the LZR Swimsuit Controversy. When use of a specialized, passive fabric causes a stir and calls of "technological doping" there have to be serious questions about the use of entirely artificial limbs.
"The Man" tricked us into watching "Torchwood" by claiming it was a "Doctor Who" spin-off. I suspect the BBC is short of toaster ovens since the tragic loss of Talkie Toaster.
I don't think Microsoft is providing access to source code as a way to combat FOSS, but as a way to attempt to comply with an EU antitrust ruling.
Truly "Open Source" licenses may be part of the plan, but the real reason they are exposing source is so that developers of products that compete with MS products like Word or Excel aren't at a competitive disadvantage that could result in expensive lawsuits.
I don't think MS is trying to be confusing (this time). I think the confusion is a side effect of a large, complex corporate entity based on closed source proprietary software trying to expose the minimum required to pass legal muster. It's not FOSS and it's not pretending to be. Do you expect something simple and concise when they mix EU law with a giant US corporation?
An unpopular solution would be for ISPs to charge for actual internet usage. Heavy users pay the same amount as people who only check their email every couple days.
If ISPs charged per GB up and down, they'd quickly lose interest in people who shared with a neighbor. It would also discourage use of Sandvine to disrupt file sharing (Linux distros only, of course) because throttling bandwidth would throttle their profits. The marginal cost of bandwidth (for a subscriber) is Zero, so consumption is unrestrained.
People would have to be more careful securing their wireless, but they would also recognize that bandwidth is a commodity that costs money to provide. If you want to be a philanthropist under those conditions, go ahead! As it is, sharing a connection forces the ISP to be the philanthropist. (I'm not saying that's bad, mind you.)
The article doesn't say that "computers are wasteful" but that "computers are not being used most efficiently." If a computer is on and sitting idle, that's "wasted" power. I imagine data centers consume a lot of power "idling" just so they can meet the demands at peak times.
;)
CPUs that sleep or go into low power mode under light loads do a lot to minimize power consumption. Also, CPUs have been getting more work done per watt of power consumed. 2005 Tom's Hardware article that mentions this idea.
It is an interesting notion that given current trends we will consume more power storing data than flying. I'd rather be flying.
Actually, there are a lot of possibilities for juggling in 0G. You can't do a normal "cascade" pattern, but you could do it by bouncing balls off the "ceiling."
A three ball pattern that looked like the outline of a bow tie should actually be pretty easy to pick up. Speed could be variable depending on skill, and you could control a relatively large number of objects at slow speeds. There are actually quite a few juggling patterns that don't rely on gravity - gravity is more of a limiting factor in those cases.
I'd love to see what an astronaut who can juggle five on Earth would come up with if allowed to play around and experiment for a while in 0G!