He's retired recently, and the company has already started down the orthodox path. Managers who believed in Sinegal's philosophy will resist for awhile, but they'll be pushed aside by those who thrive under Wall Street rules. Give it three years and they'll will be indistinguishable from Walmart.
Nuclear power can theoretically become a nuclear weapon. Sadly, the reverse is not true.
Actually, there have been proposals to use smallish nuclear weapons to super-heat a giant underground reservoir to super-heated steam, using that to run a power-plant. You can (in theory) set it up so the shockwave is absorbed before it reaches the containment walls.
Why would you say no? "Yea boss, yea I am. Why he surely gone to a lot of trouble to jus' be playing video-game, know mean? Sombitch got to be up to sommin bad. You doan break into sommun else house to jus' use their phone unless you want real bad not to have them know it you callin', know mean?"
More elegantly, once you've got a location on an external wall that consistently blocks the intruder, mount a decorative mirror. The silvering on the mirror should do the same job as the tinfoil while hiding its purpose behind teh pretty.
(Not many people realise that this is where Feng Shui came from. Back before ancient China lost its knowledge of RF tech.)
No, you're doing what every nerd does on Slashdot, deliberately distorting colloquial language in order to set up a strawman to spew faux-outrage or mockery at.
The phrase is a perfectly reasonable way of describing, in a pithy title, a pen-like device which can shape lines in 3 dimensions by hand.
No, the best way would be to force carriers at the end of a contract (which includes upgrades if you keep your old phone) to give you the unlock code as part of the contract expiration. Same goes if you decide to buy it outright with no contract - the carrier must give you the code ot unlock it.
If you have a contract, why does the phone need to be locked in the first place? Banning locking seems to be vastly easier than requiring unlock codes which most people won't know what to do with.
It gives the makers & carriers the power under DMCA to issue a take-down against any site/service/software that allows or helps people to unlock their phones.
By pushing such sites/services/software/chatrooms/instructionpages/etc underground, DMCAing them whenever they get too prominent, it makes it much harder for normal people to unlock their own phones. Defacto enforcement of the law against normal people, by taking away the tools that allow them to commit their "crime".
You could robo-arm vectorise a normal 3d-printer's extruder-head. Indeed, this pen is just an extruder-head made into a free-hand tool. The "breakthroughs" are in making it the right size/shape for a pen, making it cool/safe enough to hold like a pen (lots of heat right where you want to put your finger-tips), and making it idiot-proof to use. Putting it on a robot-arm, which doesn't need any of those things, you specifically aren't using the very things that makes this different from a regular old extruder head.
So the question is why hasn't someone stuck one of their extruders on a robot arm? I'd guess calibration control - the free-standing shapes would flex enough that you'd need a dynamic vision system for the arm to find a specific point on the existing shape to join/cross/branch lines. You can't just blindly follow a vector-map when the shape itself moves after being extruded.
Could only be used in a glove-box. Evaporating solvents from hot plastic are verboten, and the risk of accidentally breaking off small flakes (from drawing very thin, fast "lines") would be unacceptable.
Actually, isn't the web already 3d or better? Isn't that the whole point of the hypertext? It takes a flat 2d page and adds multiple dimension of information through linked text (and menus, sidebars, images, drop-downs/pop-ups, cascades (like/.'s comments), etc)
I suspect the reason that a Hollywood-style "graphical 3d" web interface hasn't taken off is the difficulty in re-representing the existing non-2d structure. Essentially it only works if the linked components can be represented in a single linear dimension. But the existing web is already more complex than that.
nowhere did it say anything about research that concluded that FPTP (which is what you need for tie-breakers to even exist) is an optimal system
Don't project your own assumptions on to what I'm saying. Voter-grouping and poll-systems are different parts of the problem of maximising voter power, I said as much in my original comment. A different poll-system, rank-order/IRV/quota/etc, may have different optimal group sizes than plurality, but the principle is the same. (Even in semi-demarchic systems, like the Venetian Doge.) And, as I said, the US's plurality system is the worst.
since it implies that all other votes are not important - so what about all the people who cast them?
It implies no such thing. The solutions are symmetrical, they apply to all voters. The tie-breaker is any arbitrary voter, they are not a special voter. The same maths works for any voter in the pool. It's about maximising the power of every vote within the pool, which means maximising the number of possible cases in the set of all possible outcomes in which a single voter could affect the outcome.
There's an optimal number of units in any voter pool which maximises the power of a single vote.
It's not like I pulled this out of me ass. There's over a century of mathematical/statistical and practical research into optimising electoral systems.
Actually, the best system is one that maximises the power of an individual vote. To do that, you need to increase the chances that your own vote is the tie-beaking vote, to do that you split the voter base into units and sub-units, because you are more likely to be the tie-breaking vote in the tie-breaking district in the tie-breaking state, than you are the single tie-breaking vote in a single national poll.
Second, you need to ensure the counting system doesn't introduce its own biases that effectively prevent new parties forming. Failing to do that means that you are effectively bound by the candidate choices of the top-two parties.
Hence whole-of-nation plurality voting is the worst in both measures.
Ungerrymandered even-population district voting, through a preference or approval-rank system, is the best.
You've got one element out of maybe five that you need, and you want to throw even that away.
Whereas the Hollywood version has miles of traffic coming to a stop, and people getting out of their cars to gawp at the fireball and trail, I did chuckle that in the Russian reality they don't even turn the radio down. Untz untz untz [booom] untz untz untz.
Gravity doesn't work that way. The objects that impact Earth are already in solar orbit. There's only a small change in momentum due to their slightly different orbits.
But even then, their masses are so tiny that measuring their effects in practice would be impossible. To bring down enough mass to alter Earth's annual orbit by a few minutes would release enough impact energy to re-surface the whole planet. Ie, a mere extinction level impact event, such as the one that killed the dinos, would not be enough to do the job. Variations in tidal effects probably does more. Planets are massive. Imagine a 12 foot high ball of solid nickel-iron rolling down a steep hill at around 100mph. Your job is to divert it by throwing one-inch glass marbles at it, one at a time, as it passes you. (At this scale, a one inch marble is a 50 mile wide monster asteroid. The dino killer was about 5mi wide, so about a tenth of 1% of the mass of a 50mile asteroid.)
Slashdot Mirror
He's retired recently, and the company has already started down the orthodox path. Managers who believed in Sinegal's philosophy will resist for awhile, but they'll be pushed aside by those who thrive under Wall Street rules. Give it three years and they'll will be indistinguishable from Walmart.
Yeah, "Funny".
Now if only it was possible to bribe the clergy that votes. Well, one can dream.
Rumour has it the Cardinals are amenable to a little black-mail.
(The littler the better.)
Nuclear power can theoretically become a nuclear weapon. Sadly, the reverse is not true.
Actually, there have been proposals to use smallish nuclear weapons to super-heat a giant underground reservoir to super-heated steam, using that to run a power-plant. You can (in theory) set it up so the shockwave is absorbed before it reaches the containment walls.
Why would you say no? "Yea boss, yea I am. Why he surely gone to a lot of trouble to jus' be playing video-game, know mean? Sombitch got to be up to sommin bad. You doan break into sommun else house to jus' use their phone unless you want real bad not to have them know it you callin', know mean?"
More elegantly, once you've got a location on an external wall that consistently blocks the intruder, mount a decorative mirror. The silvering on the mirror should do the same job as the tinfoil while hiding its purpose behind teh pretty.
(Not many people realise that this is where Feng Shui came from. Back before ancient China lost its knowledge of RF tech.)
No, you're doing what every nerd does on Slashdot, deliberately distorting colloquial language in order to set up a strawman to spew faux-outrage or mockery at.
The phrase is a perfectly reasonable way of describing, in a pithy title, a pen-like device which can shape lines in 3 dimensions by hand.
No, the best way would be to force carriers at the end of a contract (which includes upgrades if you keep your old phone) to give you the unlock code as part of the contract expiration. Same goes if you decide to buy it outright with no contract - the carrier must give you the code ot unlock it.
If you have a contract, why does the phone need to be locked in the first place? Banning locking seems to be vastly easier than requiring unlock codes which most people won't know what to do with.
It gives the makers & carriers the power under DMCA to issue a take-down against any site/service/software that allows or helps people to unlock their phones.
By pushing such sites/services/software/chatrooms/instructionpages/etc underground, DMCAing them whenever they get too prominent, it makes it much harder for normal people to unlock their own phones. Defacto enforcement of the law against normal people, by taking away the tools that allow them to commit their "crime".
You could robo-arm vectorise a normal 3d-printer's extruder-head. Indeed, this pen is just an extruder-head made into a free-hand tool. The "breakthroughs" are in making it the right size/shape for a pen, making it cool/safe enough to hold like a pen (lots of heat right where you want to put your finger-tips), and making it idiot-proof to use. Putting it on a robot-arm, which doesn't need any of those things, you specifically aren't using the very things that makes this different from a regular old extruder head.
So the question is why hasn't someone stuck one of their extruders on a robot arm? I'd guess calibration control - the free-standing shapes would flex enough that you'd need a dynamic vision system for the arm to find a specific point on the existing shape to join/cross/branch lines. You can't just blindly follow a vector-map when the shape itself moves after being extruded.
Could only be used in a glove-box. Evaporating solvents from hot plastic are verboten, and the risk of accidentally breaking off small flakes (from drawing very thin, fast "lines") would be unacceptable.
Yeah, boo to the devs for not inventing anti-gravity.
The Eiffel Tower is the Utah teapot of 3d printing. It's an expected test.
And is awareness a bell curve. As you get past a certain seniority, does reality again fade into propaganda.
Actually, isn't the web already 3d or better? Isn't that the whole point of the hypertext? It takes a flat 2d page and adds multiple dimension of information through linked text (and menus, sidebars, images, drop-downs/pop-ups, cascades (like /.'s comments), etc)
I suspect the reason that a Hollywood-style "graphical 3d" web interface hasn't taken off is the difficulty in re-representing the existing non-2d structure. Essentially it only works if the linked components can be represented in a single linear dimension. But the existing web is already more complex than that.
nowhere did it say anything about research that concluded that FPTP (which is what you need for tie-breakers to even exist) is an optimal system
Don't project your own assumptions on to what I'm saying. Voter-grouping and poll-systems are different parts of the problem of maximising voter power, I said as much in my original comment. A different poll-system, rank-order/IRV/quota/etc, may have different optimal group sizes than plurality, but the principle is the same. (Even in semi-demarchic systems, like the Venetian Doge.) And, as I said, the US's plurality system is the worst.
since it implies that all other votes are not important - so what about all the people who cast them?
It implies no such thing. The solutions are symmetrical, they apply to all voters. The tie-breaker is any arbitrary voter, they are not a special voter. The same maths works for any voter in the pool. It's about maximising the power of every vote within the pool, which means maximising the number of possible cases in the set of all possible outcomes in which a single voter could affect the outcome.
There's an optimal number of units in any voter pool which maximises the power of a single vote.
It's not like I pulled this out of me ass. There's over a century of mathematical/statistical and practical research into optimising electoral systems.
Actually, the best system is one that maximises the power of an individual vote. To do that, you need to increase the chances that your own vote is the tie-beaking vote, to do that you split the voter base into units and sub-units, because you are more likely to be the tie-breaking vote in the tie-breaking district in the tie-breaking state, than you are the single tie-breaking vote in a single national poll.
Second, you need to ensure the counting system doesn't introduce its own biases that effectively prevent new parties forming. Failing to do that means that you are effectively bound by the candidate choices of the top-two parties.
Hence whole-of-nation plurality voting is the worst in both measures.
Ungerrymandered even-population district voting, through a preference or approval-rank system, is the best.
You've got one element out of maybe five that you need, and you want to throw even that away.
Whereas the Hollywood version has miles of traffic coming to a stop, and people getting out of their cars to gawp at the fireball and trail, I did chuckle that in the Russian reality they don't even turn the radio down. Untz untz untz [booom] untz untz untz.
Linky: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derweze
Now draw a line from the ceiling. That's the trajectory of DA14. South-to-North.
I suspect this medal may well end up being called a Clayton's medal, the medal you get when you're not getting a medal.
So you're saying it's basically a free token?
Purple Coronary?
And you got to ride in a submarine!
Gravity doesn't work that way. The objects that impact Earth are already in solar orbit. There's only a small change in momentum due to their slightly different orbits.
But even then, their masses are so tiny that measuring their effects in practice would be impossible. To bring down enough mass to alter Earth's annual orbit by a few minutes would release enough impact energy to re-surface the whole planet. Ie, a mere extinction level impact event, such as the one that killed the dinos, would not be enough to do the job. Variations in tidal effects probably does more. Planets are massive. Imagine a 12 foot high ball of solid nickel-iron rolling down a steep hill at around 100mph. Your job is to divert it by throwing one-inch glass marbles at it, one at a time, as it passes you. (At this scale, a one inch marble is a 50 mile wide monster asteroid. The dino killer was about 5mi wide, so about a tenth of 1% of the mass of a 50mile asteroid.)