It will happen. The CNC machine and the 3D printer will morph together. I will be able to program my own gun parts design and share/sell it over the Internet. People will improve on my design and we will have much better guns and other products. Can you imagine 10 million people working on a design for the perfect AR15? Colt can't pay 10 million designers, just like Microsoft can't pay the millions of programmers that have written tho open source software we use every day.
What good is a gun without ammunition? (what if instead of controlling guns, the US govt would switch to ban ammunition and/or gun powder and/or primers? It'd be just as simple as to make "illegal to possess or handle explosives in any shape, form or packaging without a license"... this in the name of "the war on terror")
the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers... argue that giving Amazon control over such addresses—which include '.book,' '.author' and '.read'—would be a threat to competition and shouldn't be allowed.
You know? I agree with them... of would be like/.-ers raising a kickstarter to take the.grits TLD without giving a damn on the what Natalie would think.
Obviously the man is onto something... I mean, the NFC shows good promises, but there is a clear (and admitted as such) limitation: the near part of it.
Also obvious, Jeff's not a engineer: instead of addressing the limitation, he threw the baby with the water and switched the communication carrier from EM to sound... needless to say that the bandwidth will be awful and interference a big problem
Now, to address the limitation, a clever engineer will want to keep the EM but increase both the range and the frequency. Let's see what solutions we can imagine and possibly get a patent for them:
1. one can imagine a situation of using some predefined bands (I don't know, say 2.4GHz or 5 Ghz?) but with a low power omni-directional transmission, so that the devices can find each other within a limited range but not interfere with others farther away. To avoid troubles caused by interference, come frequency-division multiplexing and frequency hopping may be used for the case more than 2 devices are in the same range. We may use it in an homogeneous setup (let's call it meshing), or with a central router/hotspot acting as a hub. I don't know, would one think of patenting this stuff, a catchy name may be advisable - maybe WiFi?
2. to increase the usefulness of the above, one can imagine a situation in which a device searches for a special access point/transceiver and exchange signals with it - sort of dividing the area to be covered in cells. We can imagine encoding voice or data or whatever else. Of course, a protocol for establishing a connection, device identification, etc will be required, but since it's going to be used for a short percentage of the time, one can think of also using it as a service to off-band dispatch short messages as well.
3. finally, none of the above are free of interference, so if a higher bandwidth and more reliable connection is required, one can even think of using dedicated links over copper wires or... why not... even optical fiber between the communication end points... mind you, we'll be still using EM.
If the above would feel to any of you as a dehumanizing use of technology... nothing stops you joining your friends to dinner and use the old and verified way of face to face communication. Later and with a restricted participation, one may even use a pheromone encoded communication and finish the evening with an exchange of DNA based bits of info (about 23 chromosomes-worth of it, but on a massive number of redundant copies... you know? just for the scientific curiosity and the joy of verifying the theory of evolution... an experiment never growing old or meaningless). The only catch in here: sorry guys, not patentable any more.. lucky so, otherwise - for reasons of pertaining to intellectual property - the human race would come extinct in less than 1 generation.
The coplanar... mmmhh... maybe an acceptable approximation.
I'd say that depends on the stability of those systems. It's not just about point solutions in the parameter space, for astronomers, it's more about stable regions, like the L4/L5 Lagrangian solution. You simply won't hit a point solution with real objects, be it the mass or coplanarity, it doesn't matter.
You reckon?
1. when you speak stability of the system, what reference of duration you think of? Because, look, I'm pretty sure the Solar System is mathematically unstable in the absolute sense, however the changes in the planet orbits are so minute on millennial scale that we can consider it "pretty stable" even if, hundreds of millions of years the changes would be notable (my point: unless catastrophically unstable to exist, a real astronomical star system does not impose/require stability in the absolute sense)
2. I don't know why I remember 3 points always define a plane, at least in 3D Euclidean geometry. Now, it's highly likely a system to have a central star that is more massive than the planets; thus, the planets will rotate more or less around the star (that means the mass center is much closer to the start); such a system will not have a null angular momentum (that's why the second Kepler law holds so well). By the conservation of angular momentum, it means that - at least for an 3 body isolated star system (e.g. not too close to a black hole to avoid precession/nutation), this plane is likely will be stable (or become stable by exchange of angular momentum) or the system is unstable on long term. (my point: I wouldn't be dismissing the coplaneity and the difference of masses as not significant)
But... don't get me wrong, I do agree with you if you say what the guys did is sort of intellectual masturbation with little applicability for real life astronomy (maybe we may differ on the reasons why we consider their indulgence as such). Funny thing, they are not even the firstto fool aroundwith that
While the results are interesting, it looks like the 13 new solutions all involve 3 equal mass bodies with total zero angular momentum and coplanar. Of course, all the periodic solutions are probably special cases of some sort.
From the point of view of "conceivably help astrophysicists understand new planetary systems" (TFA claim): the zero angular momentum doesn't bother me that much: it'd be a planetary system that rotates in time. The coplanar... mmmhh... maybe an acceptable approximation. It is the mass equality that one doesn't see too often.
But lolcats would have done miracles. Add in a pinch of hot grits and the rack disaggregation would have been at light speed (what am I talking?... would have been as instantaneous as the loss of entanglement in a quantum setup)
Usually this degenerates to: "I'm right, you're wrong".
If speaking of politicians, I'd say - give them both some drones and permission to obliterate one another: for the last politician standing, we may need to find some other means to keep at bay - the ballot box may be a start.
I'm showing my nerdiness here, but that reminds me of the time when the crew of the Enterprise discovered an ancient space vessel. Bodies were found aboard, and Piccard observed that they had apparently died in their sleep, and Lt. Worf commented "what a terrible way to die!"
Well, are you a klingon who should die in a battle with fierce enemies or else be dishonored? If you are, I don't think calling yourself a nerd does any good to your standing reputation.
Multiple Sclerosis is a horrible disease that leaves you incapable of doing anything but sitting around waiting to die
You're doing it wrong. Double the amount of salt in your diet, throw in some other pleasurable and unhealthy things in your lifestyle and I guarantee you'll never linger in this world until you get bored.
What if they cannot afford $7 cup of coffee? (aren't too many implicit assumption thrown into discussion for propping up the idea "Everyone that doesn't pay for a movie is stealing from my pocket because I have to pay more?")
No, you idiot
Think! Think twice! Then watch you mouth, sonny. The quip I see at the bottom of the page fits:
Keep your mouth shut and people will think you stupid; Open it and you remove all doubt.
If the other viewers aren't pulling their weight because they're sucking down a torrent stream, well I've got to pay more or the production quality drops. I don't like either choice.
So pull your weight.
(to give you an example on what's wrong with your argumentation)
No, I won't do it only because you want to watch movies cheap. And I tell you what: I won't pirate them either, I simply refuse to consume what your beloved Hollywood produces. Now you'll have to pay a bit extra not because I pirated the movie, but because I chose not to play your game. Is it better for you? Will you sue me because of it?
You are talking on hypotheticals. Let it happen first, punish after. Until then, I guarantee you most of the populace will use iPad/Android tablets to reliably exchange info on FaceBook.
Chinese oppression is pretty clearly aimed at perpetuating the party rule and guaranteeing their members cushy jobs and a steady income.
Ummm... a national economic growth rate of 7.5% p.a. under conditions of global economic crisis... that's a lot if steady income, I wonder what they are doing with it?
In response to question 1, I believe we are at war with ______. This is not by accident, but by design; without a defined enemy, the people are suspicious of every activity. Further, when an undesirable is targeted, people are less likely to object to the heavy handed treatment of the enemy as it would bring a slight relief from this unknown and unspecified threat.
I surmise that not the undefined enemy is what keeps people on their toes: would be just enough to have the feeling of constantly being at war. If retreating from Afghanistan, other wars would need to be invented: the lower cost of troupes maintenance the better, as long as it's menacing enough. What a boon a cyberwar would be, wouldn't you think?
Will it go towards something applaudable like technology for education, or technology for the unprivileged, or will it go to pay off the lawyers, and change the office furniture (including the windows shades;)?
bundling an "app store" into Windows 8 then designing the OS to refuse certain local API features to products that haven't been sold through Microsoft's own store, no other vendor can or has been given the chance to setup their own store or is able to offer products that can utilise those APIs without restriction, the customer (lol) cannot shop anywhere else, effectively making the OS a 2 tier system, fully featured applications or those that haven't paid MS a fee
.
a prime case of a monopoly abuse, nice try
I'm looking around and I can't see Win8 having a significant percent of the market (maybe I can't see because it's night time, but anyway...) what monopoly are you talking about?
We are not "at war" with Al Qaeda in the United States. There are plenty of opportunities to catch terrorists without infringing on the rights of law-abiding Americans who have done nothing wrong.
Questions (bitter type of humor, I wish it could be sarcastic, but it's just sad):
1. in the United States, if not Al Qaeda, who are the Americans "at war" with? (given the amount of "security theater" in US, somebody should be cast in the "enemy role". Well, who's currently playing that role?)
2. just how FBI could know who are the law-abiding Americans without spying them? (just how much security the Americans ask today in exchange for the "presumption of innocence" right? Isn't the "security farce admission ticket" a bit too expensive for the quality of the play?)
our company's responsibility to pay for the materials, allow them to study and practice while on the job,
Where's the control of the employer over the "learning" process? (mind you, the employer is supposed not to have expertise in the topic of study, otherwise why pay for it at all?)
In other words: how much time slacking on the pretext of studying until the boss is morally allowed to cut the crap?
Sorry, I don't work by tasks nowadays... the minimal unit is either projects or project phases.
"Develop" means you need vi and a compiler of your choice, which any OS these days will provide...
Then, by your definition, I don't develop. You see... I don't need vi any more... I'm using Eclipse (on CentOS at the office, Ubuntu with LXDE at home).
OS X will let you distribute builds across multiple machines with a few clicks and an OS X server.
Ummm.... how's that unique to OSX? By the use of an OSX server for running a distributed build?
Slashdot Mirror
It will happen. The CNC machine and the 3D printer will morph together. I will be able to program my own gun parts design and share/sell it over the Internet. People will improve on my design and we will have much better guns and other products. Can you imagine 10 million people working on a design for the perfect AR15? Colt can't pay 10 million designers, just like Microsoft can't pay the millions of programmers that have written tho open source software we use every day.
What good is a gun without ammunition? (what if instead of controlling guns, the US govt would switch to ban ammunition and/or gun powder and/or primers? It'd be just as simple as to make "illegal to possess or handle explosives in any shape, form or packaging without a license"... this in the name of "the war on terror")
You tell her about DCMA and how the bad guys may come to you at night to take you to jail?
the Authors Guild and the Association of American Publishers... argue that giving Amazon control over such addresses—which include '.book,' '.author' and '.read'—would be a threat to competition and shouldn't be allowed.
You know? I agree with them... of would be like /.-ers raising a kickstarter to take the .grits TLD without giving a damn on the what Natalie would think.
Jeff just patented the 300 baud modem.
Obviously the man is onto something... I mean, the NFC shows good promises, but there is a clear (and admitted as such) limitation: the near part of it.
Also obvious, Jeff's not a engineer: instead of addressing the limitation, he threw the baby with the water and switched the communication carrier from EM to sound... needless to say that the bandwidth will be awful and interference a big problem
Now, to address the limitation, a clever engineer will want to keep the EM but increase both the range and the frequency. Let's see what solutions we can imagine and possibly get a patent for them:
1. one can imagine a situation of using some predefined bands (I don't know, say 2.4GHz or 5 Ghz?) but with a low power omni-directional transmission, so that the devices can find each other within a limited range but not interfere with others farther away. To avoid troubles caused by interference, come frequency-division multiplexing and frequency hopping may be used for the case more than 2 devices are in the same range. We may use it in an homogeneous setup (let's call it meshing), or with a central router/hotspot acting as a hub. I don't know, would one think of patenting this stuff, a catchy name may be advisable - maybe WiFi?
2. to increase the usefulness of the above, one can imagine a situation in which a device searches for a special access point/transceiver and exchange signals with it - sort of dividing the area to be covered in cells. We can imagine encoding voice or data or whatever else. Of course, a protocol for establishing a connection, device identification, etc will be required, but since it's going to be used for a short percentage of the time, one can think of also using it as a service to off-band dispatch short messages as well.
3. finally, none of the above are free of interference, so if a higher bandwidth and more reliable connection is required, one can even think of using dedicated links over copper wires or... why not... even optical fiber between the communication end points... mind you, we'll be still using EM.
If the above would feel to any of you as a dehumanizing use of technology... nothing stops you joining your friends to dinner and use the old and verified way of face to face communication. Later and with a restricted participation, one may even use a pheromone encoded communication and finish the evening with an exchange of DNA based bits of info (about 23 chromosomes-worth of it, but on a massive number of redundant copies... you know? just for the scientific curiosity and the joy of verifying the theory of evolution... an experiment never growing old or meaningless). The only catch in here: sorry guys, not patentable any more.. lucky so, otherwise - for reasons of pertaining to intellectual property - the human race would come extinct in less than 1 generation.
The coplanar... mmmhh... maybe an acceptable approximation.
I'd say that depends on the stability of those systems. It's not just about point solutions in the parameter space, for astronomers, it's more about stable regions, like the L4/L5 Lagrangian solution. You simply won't hit a point solution with real objects, be it the mass or coplanarity, it doesn't matter.
You reckon?
1. when you speak stability of the system, what reference of duration you think of? Because, look, I'm pretty sure the Solar System is mathematically unstable in the absolute sense, however the changes in the planet orbits are so minute on millennial scale that we can consider it "pretty stable" even if, hundreds of millions of years the changes would be notable (my point: unless catastrophically unstable to exist, a real astronomical star system does not impose/require stability in the absolute sense)
2. I don't know why I remember 3 points always define a plane, at least in 3D Euclidean geometry. Now, it's highly likely a system to have a central star that is more massive than the planets; thus, the planets will rotate more or less around the star (that means the mass center is much closer to the start); such a system will not have a null angular momentum (that's why the second Kepler law holds so well). By the conservation of angular momentum, it means that - at least for an 3 body isolated star system (e.g. not too close to a black hole to avoid precession/nutation), this plane is likely will be stable (or become stable by exchange of angular momentum) or the system is unstable on long term. (my point: I wouldn't be dismissing the coplaneity and the difference of masses as not significant)
But... don't get me wrong, I do agree with you if you say what the guys did is sort of intellectual masturbation with little applicability for real life astronomy (maybe we may differ on the reasons why we consider their indulgence as such).
Funny thing, they are not even the first to fool around with that
While the results are interesting, it looks like the 13 new solutions all involve 3 equal mass bodies with total zero angular momentum and coplanar. Of course, all the periodic solutions are probably special cases of some sort.
From the point of view of "conceivably help astrophysicists understand new planetary systems" (TFA claim): the zero angular momentum doesn't bother me that much: it'd be a planetary system that rotates in time. The coplanar... mmmhh... maybe an acceptable approximation. It is the mass equality that one doesn't see too often.
It's obsolete hardware, sure, but it seems like a shame to throw it out when it still works as well as it did when new...
So, throwing it on a LEO doesn't equate to throwing it out? ;)
So those organisms survive when the water turns to steam? I doubt it.
Stop doubting - thermal energy was one of the first to used by bacteria.
But lolcats would have done miracles. Add in a pinch of hot grits and the rack disaggregation would have been at light speed (what am I talking?... would have been as instantaneous as the loss of entanglement in a quantum setup)
There needs to be more "Right vs. Wrong".
Usually this degenerates to: "I'm right, you're wrong".
If speaking of politicians, I'd say - give them both some drones and permission to obliterate one another: for the last politician standing, we may need to find some other means to keep at bay - the ballot box may be a start.
I'm showing my nerdiness here, but that reminds me of the time when the crew of the Enterprise discovered an ancient space vessel. Bodies were found aboard, and Piccard observed that they had apparently died in their sleep, and Lt. Worf commented "what a terrible way to die!"
Well, are you a klingon who should die in a battle with fierce enemies or else be dishonored? If you are, I don't think calling yourself a nerd does any good to your standing reputation.
Multiple Sclerosis is a horrible disease that leaves you incapable of doing anything but sitting around waiting to die
You're doing it wrong. Double the amount of salt in your diet, throw in some other pleasurable and unhealthy things in your lifestyle and I guarantee you'll never linger in this world until you get bored.
A heart attack or a stroke isn't my idea of a good way to die
Why not? I mean, if you get a chic "Don't resuscitate" tattoo, not only you'll be handsomer but chances are you'll never get to know you died.
No, you idiot
Think! Think twice! Then watch you mouth, sonny. The quip I see at the bottom of the page fits:
Keep your mouth shut and people will think you stupid; Open it and you remove all doubt.
The goal of Plasmate is to enable creating something new in seconds and publishing it immediately.
May I chose a tool that helps create something of good quality? I'm quite sick of crap published in seconds only because it's new.
If the other viewers aren't pulling their weight because they're sucking down a torrent stream, well I've got to pay more or the production quality drops. I don't like either choice.
So pull your weight.
(to give you an example on what's wrong with your argumentation)
No, I won't do it only because you want to watch movies cheap. And I tell you what: I won't pirate them either, I simply refuse to consume what your beloved Hollywood produces.
Now you'll have to pay a bit extra not because I pirated the movie, but because I chose not to play your game. Is it better for you? Will you sue me because of it?
You are talking on hypotheticals. Let it happen first, punish after. Until then, I guarantee you most of the populace will use iPad/Android tablets to reliably exchange info on FaceBook.
The Wall That Knows If You're a Criminal
25 years back or so they used a low tech solution for it...
Chinese oppression is pretty clearly aimed at perpetuating the party rule and guaranteeing their members cushy jobs and a steady income.
Ummm... a national economic growth rate of 7.5% p.a. under conditions of global economic crisis... that's a lot if steady income, I wonder what they are doing with it?
In response to question 1, I believe we are at war with ______. This is not by accident, but by design; without a defined enemy, the people are suspicious of every activity. Further, when an undesirable is targeted, people are less likely to object to the heavy handed treatment of the enemy as it would bring a slight relief from this unknown and unspecified threat.
I surmise that not the undefined enemy is what keeps people on their toes: would be just enough to have the feeling of constantly being at war. If retreating from Afghanistan, other wars would need to be invented: the lower cost of troupes maintenance the better, as long as it's menacing enough.
What a boon a cyberwar would be, wouldn't you think?
Will it go towards something applaudable like technology for education, or technology for the unprivileged, or will it go to pay off the lawyers, and change the office furniture (including the windows shades ;)?
Keep PIGS afloat for a couple of days longer.
bundling an "app store" into Windows 8 then designing the OS to refuse certain local API features to products that haven't been sold through Microsoft's own store, no other vendor can or has been given the chance to setup their own store or is able to offer products that can utilise those APIs without restriction, the customer (lol) cannot shop anywhere else, effectively making the OS a 2 tier system, fully featured applications or those that haven't paid MS a fee . a prime case of a monopoly abuse, nice try
I'm looking around and I can't see Win8 having a significant percent of the market (maybe I can't see because it's night time, but anyway...) what monopoly are you talking about?
We are not "at war" with Al Qaeda in the United States. There are plenty of opportunities to catch terrorists without infringing on the rights of law-abiding Americans who have done nothing wrong.
Questions (bitter type of humor, I wish it could be sarcastic, but it's just sad):
1. in the United States, if not Al Qaeda, who are the Americans "at war" with? (given the amount of "security theater" in US, somebody should be cast in the "enemy role". Well, who's currently playing that role?)
2. just how FBI could know who are the law-abiding Americans without spying them? (just how much security the Americans ask today in exchange for the "presumption of innocence" right? Isn't the "security farce admission ticket" a bit too expensive for the quality of the play?)
our company's responsibility to pay for the materials, allow them to study and practice while on the job,
Where's the control of the employer over the "learning" process? (mind you, the employer is supposed not to have expertise in the topic of study, otherwise why pay for it at all?)
In other words: how much time slacking on the pretext of studying until the boss is morally allowed to cut the crap?
By workload, I mean tasks.
Sorry, I don't work by tasks nowadays... the minimal unit is either projects or project phases.
"Develop" means you need vi and a compiler of your choice, which any OS these days will provide...
Then, by your definition, I don't develop. You see... I don't need vi any more... I'm using Eclipse (on CentOS at the office, Ubuntu with LXDE at home).
OS X will let you distribute builds across multiple machines with a few clicks and an OS X server.
Ummm.... how's that unique to OSX? By the use of an OSX server for running a distributed build?