There is a flaw to your reasoning - expecting nations or governments to accomplish what the market should do. Companies and individuals have given us all of the great things we have (with a few notable exceptions, yes). Governments give us tax, wasted resources, and genocide.
As soon as the US government removes their immoral monopoly on space travel, I expect we will see quite the renaissance of our silly little species. Until then, we are doomed to this rock, and to the company of people who expect "the government" to do great things, instead of expecting to be able to do great things themselves.
In Austin, we have coal fired electric plants, and SOME nuclear from Houston, and maybe SOME hydroelectric.
Question: (and I am serious)
Assuming a newish car:
Is the amount of pollution from the used batteries and the electricity generation(including extraction, shipping, and burning) greater or less than the pollution from the refining, shipping, and buring of the gas?
In other words, does anyone have data for the amount of pollution created to create Energy Quantity X when using a gasoline engine vs. a battery/charger system?
Do hybrids do a better job?
Just wondering. I know that the amount of energy in a gallon of gas is quite high, and the energy in the same mass of lead/acid battery is not...
Use the LED's on your laptop to give yourself the output of your decrypting of your grandfather's 45 year old messages about the location of secret Nazi/Japanese gold caches in the Philipines, while you are being Van-Eck phreaked in a jail cell.
Extra bonus: Doing all this while next door to a priest who is intimidating you from "getting the job done".
Geez, another tax-financed study telling us how much is wasted on 'x' behavior in the free market.
Of course, we never see the government tell us how much money is wasted on government behaviors. 60 billion could be found in the couch cushions in the Pentagon.
The problems listed are not the result of lack of means to fix them, it is lack of political will to let them be fixed.
Democracies don't have famines. Countries with a free press don't have warlord/election troubles. Capitalist regions don't have pandemics.
The third world is in such a mess because the people "in charge" in these countries would not be "in charge" if these problems were fixed. A well fed, educated nation will eventually overthrow a dictator, so he will use hunger and ignorance as a weapon. UN food supplies? Heh.
So, instead of using these "think cycles" to "solve" these easily solvable problem, how about using our brains and energies to export freedom, democracy, law, and knowledge to other peoples, and not tolerate despotic thugs.
Hey Zimbabwe, I think you here us knocking! And were coming in!
1. EA completely sucks at online games. Ultima Online, a game that EA hated until they saw the money roll in, is the ONLY success from the over 500 million dollars they spent on EA.com. And it was already a success. The list of games that have failed is long and distinguished. These guys were so stupid, they even hired Anderson Consulting to design their back end!
Maybe, maybe, the SIMS might have a chance...but I hear that EA.com refugees have taken over Maxis.
EA sucks at online because online is about content and technology, things that EA executives do not understand. Normal EA SOP is all about politics, and the rise and fall of EA.com is a story of how reality trumps politics. Notice how all those EA.com stock options were quietly converted BACK to EA stock? Someone should write a book.
2. Microsoft wants to control the backend for selfish reasons, but not the ones that you think. Most console users are not very bright, not very technologically gifted, and very impatient with things that don't "work". That is why the console industry does not tolerate bugs, and spends so much effort on user interface and accessability. Console games are not simpler than PC games, but their interfaces ARE. Sony is going the "have at it, boys" route for online, and with some exceptions, most of them will have a hard time shoe-horning online connection issues and interfaces into the expectations of the consumers. All it takes for a online console title to fail is one EGM reviewer being unable to connect. Add to that the fact that each publisher will have it's own billing, the fact that users are using modems, and that Sony will have little or no control of the problems after ship (how are they going to enforce publisher server quality?), there are a lot of problems with this approach. They only good thing that can be said about this is that the publisher can make more money, and that is probably what is motivating EA.
Microsoft is attempting to work around that problem by providing the interfaces and services needed for the clients to connect. Then, when a game passes testing, and the user has got the broadband working on the client side, they have a much higher chance of having a seemless, usable, EASY interface to online gaming. And if they have a problem, they CAN hold Microsoft accountable, and Microsoft has the means (and maybe even the will) to fix the problems. If the user base can learn to trust this, then in the end, Microsoft might have a better chance of winning.
So bottom line: MS wants a clean way to make console online games so users can trust them, but their method makes less money for the publishers. EA is in it for the money, and they have serveral ex-EA.com people looking for places to land, and creating back end for Madden 2004 is a nice spot from which to watch the otions vest. And again, they have probably convinced the EA execs (again) that they know what they are doing. Poor Larry.
Donut
ps. I am agnostic. If the clients want Xbox, PS2, Gamecube, PC, GBA, or C64, I don't care, as long as the check clears.:)
Amidst all of the discussions about how much money MS will lose on this, y'all might want to remember this discussion and ponder whether or not they can afford it.
Yeah, we have seen in the past, all of the times that Microsoft tried to enter a market, failed miserably, and left the market forever.
Or, if I remember, didn't they get back on the horse, fail again, get back on the horse again, and with their third try, win? And then be called a monopoly?
Uh, all of the UltimateTV people went to work for - XBox!
I wonder if Microsoft saw that console with the 30 gig hard drive, and their Ultimate TV (with a 30 gig hard drive), and saw that the XBox already outsold UltimateTV, and went "Hmmmm?"
Check out this log, and search for Hollings. The main point from the BlogSphere is that Hollings, the committee chairman, is bought and paid for by the entertainment industry, and why would the same industry give themselves negative press?
The good news is that the "evil" republican House seems to be willing to tell Hollings to take a leap.
This book from David Gerrold, entitled "Jumping Into Space" has a real good explanation of the logistics, economics, and politics of beanstalks.
I would highly recommend it to anyone who has questions about the safety precautions (wrapping around the planet!), communities (cities halfway up, agriculture all over it), and consequences (he who controls the stalk, controls the universe!).
Mr. Gerrold is an excellent writer, cutting his teeth on Star Trek, and then writing the excellent Ch'tor books.
I thought the Koreans got all of their internet in those internet Cafes (that they also use to house the fist-fights after a rough game of starcraft). While the POPULATION might have 4x more than the US, I doubt the HOUSEHOLDS have as much.
Hmmm....one interesting thread in his article was that Microsoft was able to beat their competitors (in the application space) not with any evil, monopolistic scheme. Instead, Microsoft's software development was less incompetent than their competitors. The two greatest words in the English language! De Fault!
Well, I guess the more-incompetent competitors can always "buy" a nice government lawsuit. That'll make it even.
Where is the rumored European cut of the miniseries with the naked Chani?
Begging Questions and Urban Planning
on
This is IT?
·
· Score: 0, Insightful
I think that this is a pretty cool invention, and this guy is the real thing. But I was extremely disapointed when he started commenting about how it was going to "change cities" and get rid of cars.
This assertion begs several questions (which are extremly relevent to someone living in, say, Austin, where I am):
1. How many people live close enough to work that they can afford the time to communte on a device that moves at walking speed? (no one I know)
2. How many people live in places where the weather is neither too warm or too cold to spend the time outside?
3. How many businesses have the infrastructure to handle storing and charging these things?
4. Is it really going to share the sidewalk with pedestrians? Where are they going to go now?
5. What about security? Riding around on a $3000 device that can't move faster than walking speed is a huge crime oppurtunity.
I really get disapointed when people who are smart in one are (ie fantastic engineering) think that they can easily solve all the problems (real or not) for the rest of us. The market of ideas, economics, and labor always decides what happens based on the aggregate effect of the millions of small decisions made by the individuals.
If his device really is good enought to get rid of cars, it won't be because he SAID so, it will be because he made something that has the same (or better) combination of convinience, speed, economy (both $$ and time), and security as the car. And, unfortunately, this cool device is not "IT".
Donut, glad "IT" doesn't make you DP and ski-pole to operate.
I have been a PC game developer for 10 years, and have only recently started working on my first PS2 title. Here is what I found out while migrating:
1. PS2 is a closed system. That means that Sony holds all of the information about what the box is, how to make it go, and how to get and use the tools. I was never able to find any PS2 programming refs online, and you can't buy books. All the materials I use are from Sony. Sony is also very protective of their baby, and you have to "prove" your worth before you can even buy their warez.
2. You need expensive hardware. The Tools (which you run and debug on in real time from your PC) are these huge black PSX2 looking boxes that run Linux and you hook up to over IP. They are about 20K each. Then the test stations (PS2s that can run non-encrypted discs and have more memory) are expensive also. Burning a CD (for submission) requires you to use Sony blank CD/DVD's, on a Sony burner. $$$$$
3. The tools bite. No one uses the sony tools, everyone uses metrowerks. I never thought I would long for the days of MSDEV. Mwerks is slow, buggy, and acts like a mac program.
4. Middleware is the way to go, unless you have time and geniuses lying around. That costs REAL CASH.
My advice to you: find another platform. The sony PS2 is too closed and too expensive for casual or academic work. Use a plain old PC, you can learn as much, and probably actually DO more stuff, instead of trying to make the DMA work right.
I do not know why you people think that you have a legal right to privacy when you use an private ISP.
If you read ANY TOS, it specifically states that you cannot use their service for any illegal acts (such as stealing someones IP, which, believe it or not, is still illegal). The TOS also states that they can use any and all methods to monitor and enforce these rules, up to and including revoking your account and handing over evidence to the proper athorities.
This is obvious, straight-forward, and well spelled out in the contract/service agreement that you have with your ISP.
My question is, what makes you think that that you EVER HAD this privacy? Anything other than wishful thinking? Just because enforcement of these laws are lax, doesn't mean that they will never be used.
Having your ISP read your stream is unethical, and possibly immoral. Too bad, though, because we are not a world of morals or eithics. We are a world of laws.
I do not know why you people think that you have a legal right to privacy when you use an private ISP.
If you read ANY TOS, it specifically states that you cannot use their service for any illegal acts (such as stealing someones IP, which, believe it or not, is still illegal). The TOS also states that they can use any and all methods to monitor and enforce these rules, up to and including revoking your account and handing over evidence to the proper athorities.
This is obvious, straight-forward, and well spelled out in the contract/service agreement that you have with your ISP.
My question is, what makes you think that that you EVER HAD this privacy? Anything other than wishful thinking? Just because enforcement of these laws are lax, doesn't mean that they will never be used.
Having your ISP read your stream is unethical, and possibly immoral. Too bad, though, because we are not a world of morals or eithics. We are a world of laws.
Slashdot Mirror
Please, go read some Heinlein (or Allan Steele, or John Varley).
There is a flaw to your reasoning - expecting nations or governments to accomplish what the market should do. Companies and individuals have given us all of the great things we have (with a few notable exceptions, yes). Governments give us tax, wasted resources, and genocide.
As soon as the US government removes their immoral monopoly on space travel, I expect we will see quite the renaissance of our silly little species. Until then, we are doomed to this rock, and to the company of people who expect "the government" to do great things, instead of expecting to be able to do great things themselves.
Donut,
In Austin, we have coal fired electric plants, and SOME nuclear from Houston, and maybe SOME hydroelectric.
Question: (and I am serious)
Assuming a newish car:
Is the amount of pollution from the used batteries and the electricity generation(including extraction, shipping, and burning) greater or less than the pollution from the refining, shipping, and buring of the gas?
In other words, does anyone have data for the amount of pollution created to create Energy Quantity X when using a gasoline engine vs. a battery/charger system?
Do hybrids do a better job?
Just wondering. I know that the amount of energy in a gallon of gas is quite high, and the energy in the same mass of lead/acid battery is not...
Data makes the debate smart!
Want to impress ME?
Use the LED's on your laptop to give yourself the output of your decrypting of your grandfather's 45 year old messages about the location of secret Nazi/Japanese gold caches in the Philipines, while you are being Van-Eck phreaked in a jail cell.
Extra bonus: Doing all this while next door to a priest who is intimidating you from "getting the job done".
-Donut
Be very careful fueling your cars from the local school's fryers. You might not know if that fluid is spoken for.
-Donut
bonehead.
Uh, given the success of Spiderman, I think that we will actually be able to TEST your hypothesis. I bet that Spiderman will be less than $20.00...
Geez, another tax-financed study telling us how much is wasted on 'x' behavior in the free market.
Of course, we never see the government tell us how much money is wasted on government behaviors. 60 billion could be found in the couch cushions in the Pentagon.
-Donut
In a programming language! On a computer! Quick, make sure everyone on slashdot hits this server, so they can see this wonderous invention!
What next, devices to see this in color? With lowercase letters? Input without punchcards?
Jeesh, a programming language is JUST A TOOL.
-Donut
Again, I will say that Microsoft can afford to lose almost any amount of money on the XBox hardware. We have talked about it before.
The problems listed are not the result of lack of means to fix them, it is lack of political will to let them be fixed.
Democracies don't have famines. Countries with a free press don't have warlord/election troubles. Capitalist regions don't have pandemics.
The third world is in such a mess because the people "in charge" in these countries would not be "in charge" if these problems were fixed. A well fed, educated nation will eventually overthrow a dictator, so he will use hunger and ignorance as a weapon. UN food supplies? Heh.
So, instead of using these "think cycles" to "solve" these easily solvable problem, how about using our brains and energies to export freedom, democracy, law, and knowledge to other peoples, and not tolerate despotic thugs.
Hey Zimbabwe, I think you here us knocking! And were coming in!
Donut
Maybe, maybe, the SIMS might have a chance...but I hear that EA.com refugees have taken over Maxis.
EA sucks at online because online is about content and technology, things that EA executives do not understand. Normal EA SOP is all about politics, and the rise and fall of EA.com is a story of how reality trumps politics. Notice how all those EA.com stock options were quietly converted BACK to EA stock? Someone should write a book.
2. Microsoft wants to control the backend for selfish reasons, but not the ones that you think. Most console users are not very bright, not very technologically gifted, and very impatient with things that don't "work". That is why the console industry does not tolerate bugs, and spends so much effort on user interface and accessability. Console games are not simpler than PC games, but their interfaces ARE. Sony is going the "have at it, boys" route for online, and with some exceptions, most of them will have a hard time shoe-horning online connection issues and interfaces into the expectations of the consumers. All it takes for a online console title to fail is one EGM reviewer being unable to connect.
Add to that the fact that each publisher will have it's own billing, the fact that users are using modems, and that Sony will have little or no control of the problems after ship (how are they going to enforce publisher server quality?), there are a lot of problems with this approach. They only good thing that can be said about this is that the publisher can make more money, and that is probably what is motivating EA.
Microsoft is attempting to work around that problem by providing the interfaces and services needed for the clients to connect. Then, when a game passes testing, and the user has got the broadband working on the client side, they have a much higher chance of having a seemless, usable, EASY interface to online gaming. And if they have a problem, they CAN hold Microsoft accountable, and Microsoft has the means (and maybe even the will) to fix the problems.
If the user base can learn to trust this, then in the end, Microsoft might have a better chance of winning.
So bottom line: MS wants a clean way to make console online games so users can trust them, but their method makes less money for the publishers. EA is in it for the money, and they have serveral ex-EA.com people looking for places to land, and creating back end for Madden 2004 is a nice spot from which to watch the otions vest. And again, they have probably convinced the EA execs (again) that they know what they are doing. Poor Larry.
Donut
ps. I am agnostic. If the clients want Xbox, PS2, Gamecube, PC, GBA, or C64, I don't care, as long as the check clears.
Amidst all of the discussions about how much money MS will lose on this, y'all might want to remember this discussion and ponder whether or not they can afford it.
Donut
Yeah, we have seen in the past, all of the times that Microsoft tried to enter a market, failed miserably, and left the market forever.
Or, if I remember, didn't they get back on the horse, fail again, get back on the horse again, and with their third try, win? And then be called a monopoly?
Maybe I was thinking of some other company.
I wonder if Microsoft saw that console with the 30 gig hard drive, and their Ultimate TV (with a 30 gig hard drive), and saw that the XBox already outsold UltimateTV, and went "Hmmmm?"
Check out this log, and search for Hollings. The main point from the BlogSphere is that Hollings, the committee chairman, is bought and paid for by the entertainment industry, and why would the same industry give themselves negative press?
The good news is that the "evil" republican House seems to be willing to tell Hollings to take a leap.
Donut
This book from David Gerrold, entitled "Jumping Into Space" has a real good explanation of the logistics, economics, and politics of beanstalks.
I would highly recommend it to anyone who has questions about the safety precautions (wrapping around the planet!), communities (cities halfway up, agriculture all over it), and consequences (he who controls the stalk, controls the universe!).
Mr. Gerrold is an excellent writer, cutting his teeth on Star Trek, and then writing the excellent Ch'tor books.
I thought the Koreans got all of their internet in those internet Cafes (that they also use to house the fist-fights after a rough game of starcraft). While the POPULATION might have 4x more than the US, I doubt the HOUSEHOLDS have as much.
Small point, mod appropriately.
Hmmm....one interesting thread in his article was that Microsoft was able to beat their competitors (in the application space) not with any evil, monopolistic scheme. Instead, Microsoft's software development was less incompetent than their competitors. The two greatest words in the English language! De Fault!
Well, I guess the more-incompetent competitors can always "buy" a nice government lawsuit. That'll make it even.
-Donut
What I want to know is:
Where is the rumored European cut of the miniseries with the naked Chani?
I think that this is a pretty cool invention, and this guy is the real thing. But I was extremely disapointed when he started commenting about how it was going to "change cities" and get rid of cars.
This assertion begs several questions (which are extremly relevent to someone living in, say, Austin, where I am):
1. How many people live close enough to work that they can afford the time to communte on a device that moves at walking speed? (no one I know)
2. How many people live in places where the weather is neither too warm or too cold to spend the time outside?
3. How many businesses have the infrastructure to handle storing and charging these things?
4. Is it really going to share the sidewalk with pedestrians? Where are they going to go now?
5. What about security? Riding around on a $3000 device that can't move faster than walking speed is a huge crime oppurtunity.
I really get disapointed when people who are smart in one are (ie fantastic engineering) think that they can easily solve all the problems (real or not) for the rest of us. The market of ideas, economics, and labor always decides what happens based on the aggregate effect of the millions of small decisions made by the individuals.
If his device really is good enought to get rid of cars, it won't be because he SAID so, it will be because he made something that has the same (or better) combination of convinience, speed, economy (both $$ and time), and security as the car. And, unfortunately, this cool device is not "IT".
Donut, glad "IT" doesn't make you DP and ski-pole to operate.
I have been a PC game developer for 10 years, and have only recently started working on my first PS2 title. Here is what I found out while migrating:
1. PS2 is a closed system. That means that Sony holds all of the information about what the box is, how to make it go, and how to get and use the tools. I was never able to find any PS2 programming refs online, and you can't buy books. All the materials I use are from Sony. Sony is also very protective of their baby, and you have to "prove" your worth before you can even buy their warez.
2. You need expensive hardware. The Tools (which you run and debug on in real time from your PC) are these huge black PSX2 looking boxes that run Linux and you hook up to over IP. They are about 20K each. Then the test stations (PS2s that can run non-encrypted discs and have more memory) are expensive also. Burning a CD (for submission) requires you to use Sony blank CD/DVD's, on a Sony burner. $$$$$
3. The tools bite. No one uses the sony tools, everyone uses metrowerks. I never thought I would long for the days of MSDEV. Mwerks is slow, buggy, and acts like a mac program.
4. Middleware is the way to go, unless you have time and geniuses lying around. That costs REAL CASH.
My advice to you: find another platform. The sony PS2 is too closed and too expensive for casual or academic work. Use a plain old PC, you can learn as much, and probably actually DO more stuff, instead of trying to make the DMA work right.
But, the games are cool, when they work
Donut
And this is not a coincidence. Anniverseries are the prime days for terrorism.
I do not know why you people think that you have a legal right to privacy when you use an private ISP.
If you read ANY TOS, it specifically states that you cannot use their service for any illegal acts (such as stealing someones IP, which, believe it or not, is still illegal). The TOS also states that they can use any and all methods to monitor and enforce these rules, up to and including revoking your account and handing over evidence to the proper athorities.
This is obvious, straight-forward, and well spelled out in the contract/service agreement that you have with your ISP.
My question is, what makes you think that that you EVER HAD this privacy? Anything other than wishful thinking? Just because enforcement of these laws are lax, doesn't mean that they will never be used.
Having your ISP read your stream is unethical, and possibly immoral. Too bad, though, because we are not a world of morals or eithics. We are a world of laws.
Donut
I do not know why you people think that you have a legal right to privacy when you use an private ISP.
If you read ANY TOS, it specifically states that you cannot use their service for any illegal acts (such as stealing someones IP, which, believe it or not, is still illegal). The TOS also states that they can use any and all methods to monitor and enforce these rules, up to and including revoking your account and handing over evidence to the proper athorities.
This is obvious, straight-forward, and well spelled out in the contract/service agreement that you have with your ISP.
My question is, what makes you think that that you EVER HAD this privacy? Anything other than wishful thinking? Just because enforcement of these laws are lax, doesn't mean that they will never be used.
Having your ISP read your stream is unethical, and possibly immoral. Too bad, though, because we are not a world of morals or eithics. We are a world of laws.
Donut
Major Security Hole (Slashdot World):
Just making sure I get this right