How much energy is required to collect the waste and move it to the burning facility? Also, how much methane and CO2 is emitted when the energy is extracted from the waste? The calculation needs to take the entire system into account, not just the cost of the electricity.
OS X will do pretty much everything you've asked for, with very little work. You can use parental controls to create a whitelist for which programs and websites are allowed. You can restrict account access to specific times and days. You can use ssh or vnc to connect to each machine to remotely administer it. (OS X has a very nice, fast, VNC client and server built in.) You don't need a virus scanner, since there are no viruses in the wild for OS X. You can prevent installation of additional programs. Automatically limit access to adult websites. Restrict who they can mail and IM with. Limit computer use to a certain number of hours per day. Log what they have been doing. Receive e-mail requests to add additional websites, IM users, etc. so that you can confirm additions without having to use their computer. And if you install the istat pro widget, you can monitor all of the computer's hardware sensors, which will give you all of the rest of the info you asked for. VERY easy to set all of this up.
In 1992, UC Davis students working under Professor Andy Frank achieved 3313 mpg with its SideFX and Shamu. The school later developed some of the first hybrid car technology, among other things.
The original posting is lacking something very important - an explanation of why this is important. What benefits, if any, are there to being able to do this? Will it lead to faster or more power efficient processors? Will it result in tastier waffles? Will it bring about world peace?
There are lots of computer related jobs that are definitely NOT IT:
Computer scientist: performs basic research relating to computers and computing technologies CS Professor: teaches computer science Developer: *could* be IT, but may be developing software not related to companies at all! Software architect, Systems architect: creates high level designs for applications, software systems, etc.
IT is the set of people who provide internal computing services to companies, governments, universities, and other organizations. It's an infrastructure service. It takes commercial products (software, hardware, etc.) and configures and maintains them to support the operations of the parent organization. This is very different from developers who *produce* products, or from computer scientists who invent new technologies.
This seems to be part of a rather wide ranging campaign on the part of the conservatives to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the current government. The previous administration was clearly in over its head. This one seems to have a clue...
That sounds rather high for the Mini. Apple claims http://www.apple.com/macmini/environment.html that the new mini uses 14 Watts when idle. Typical laptops use 30-40 Watts or less when idle.
Your best bets are probably the Mac Mini, or another computer with an ultra low voltage desktop chip, an ARM processor, or a low voltage mobile processor. Laptops would be particularly good. Use an SSD instead of a hard drive. Use enough memory to cache your files so you don't have to keep hitting the drive, but don't use more than that, because memory takes power too. Don't use a display. Don't hook up unneeded devices to it - they draw power.
The laptops were surely backed up using a Time Capsule. Not only will Apple restore them to their pre-theft state, but they can also go back in time and wipe out the thieves' ancestors, thus preventing the crime from being committed in the first place. Of course, this will create a bit of a paradox...
3.6 alpha 2 pre (found here) has additional performance improvements (ie. is wicked fast), and seems quite reliable in the latest nightly build. Note that these are nightly builds, so you run the risk of being the first to experience a shiny, new bug!
There are alternative designs that do not have that sort of problem. For example, Windspire is a 30' tall wind turbine that can be erected even in densely populated areas.
While it is certainly true that many patents have been granted of late for things that should not pass the obviousness test, patents do provide a strong incentive to develop new technologies. They provide a monopoly on new inventions for a limited period of time in exchange for disclosing the details of that technology to the world, so it can later be used like others. If technologies can not be patented, they can be easily duplicated, and researchers will lose their investment when competitors simply duplicate their work without going to the initial research expense. A better solution would be to properly fund the patent office so that they can hire a sufficient number of examiners with a sufficient depth of expertise to be able to eliminate obvious patents and rapidly process valid ones.
I'm glad that they are going to be shipping 3 dimensional laptops. Those 2 dimensional laptops that I've been using are really inconvenient. The screen and the keyboard are on the same plane, and you can't push the buttons at all, because that would require a third dimension. Even worse, my 2 dimensional laptop keeps falling through infinitely thin slots, and cut my arm off once when it fell perpendicularly to the floor while my arm was in the way. It might be 2D, but it has mass after all, so it has an infinitely sharp edge. Apple made a big deal out of the Macbook Air being.25" thick at its thinnest point. That's nothing. My 2D laptop has 0 thickness!
1) You might not always have a network connection but still want to listen to music (for example, if you are traveling or your network is down). 2) You might want to take your music with you on a portable device. 3) Streaming kills battery life on mobile devices, especially if embedded in flash. 4) Your streaming music provider might not have, or might stop carrying, a song you really want to listen to. 5) Streaming providers may not have that eclectic genre of music you like. 6) You will likely have to pay subscription fees at some point, which means you keep paying for the same music over and over again. 7) Streaming does not necessarily provide music at its highest quality (in fact, it likely does not). If you want to listen to a recording at its original fidelity, streaming is a bad way to do it. 8) Streaming makes you dependent on whatever technology your streaming provider chooses to use. If you don't want to, or can't use that technology, you are out of luck. 9) You can't sell your copy of an audio stream to someone else when you no longer want it. 10) Streaming often takes much more CPU than local playback (for example, Pandora, which uses Flash) 11) Streaming often has advertisements in it, but you don't want to listen to ads or see them so you can listen to music. 12) Streaming may eventually come to be dominated by companies such as clearchannel, which will provide streams that cater to the largest groups of listeners, but exclude what you really like.
This bill offers money to people who drive inefficient vehicles in order to get them into new vehicles. But it need to ensure that the new vehicles are MORE efficient than the vehicle they are replacing. For example, suppose someone with a 15 MPG SUV gets rid of their SUV and uses the money plus the incentive to buy a new 12 MPG SUV. This clearly has not helped the environment (and in fact, has probably made it worse because of the additional energy and emissions required to produce the new vehicle). Additionally, it rewards people who bought the most fuel efficient vehicles possible for making a poor choice while giving no reward to people who did the right thing and bought an efficient vehicle to begin with. I propose the following changes to the measure:
-Offer people a reward based on the amount of *increase* in fuel efficiency of their new vehicle over their old vehicle. That cuts out the incentive for people who buy a less efficient vehicle, and rewards people more for buying more efficient vehicles while still providing an incentive for people who own an older fuel efficient vehicle.
-Weight the incentive so that the better the fuel efficiency of your new car, the better the incentive that you get. In other words, if you get rid of an old 15 mpg car and buy a new 16 mpg car, you get very little incentive. If you sell a 39 mpg car and buy a new 40 mpg car, you get a much higher incentive. This gives the best incentives to people who buy the most efficient cars.
-Offer the highest incentive for people who get rid of a car altogether. The bill appear to be offering a public transit incentive, but it is lower than the incentive to buy a new car. But we get a much greater environmental benefit if people take public transport.
-Also tie the size of the incentive to the improvement in emissions of the new vehicle over the old one. Old cars pollute much more than new ones. Getting cars with higher emissions off the road will help significantly in the fight against global warming. Thus, it makes sense to reward people for choosing the cars with the lowest emissions.
Ok, so you bought a super inefficient SUV, and now you are rewarded for buying something new! But if you bought a Prius, you are not. Of course, we want to get everyone in to more fuel efficient cars. But this bill wouldn't do that, because it appears to give you the reward regardless of how fuel efficient your new car is. This is only beneficial if you must buy a new car that is MORE fuel efficient...
There is not one built into windows. While there are a number of third party virtual desktops out there (dexpot, virtuawin, Desktops (Mark Russinovich), MSVDM), none of them work particularly well. Dexpot leaves drop shadows all over your screen. Desktops can only display a program on a single desktop,and can't move windows between them. MSVDM takes up large chunks of your taskbar, is slow, and doesn't handle child windows well. Virtuawin is fast and configurable, but its interface leaves a lot to be desired. None of them come close in functionality or ease of use to the virtual desktops available for Linux, or to Spaces on the Mac.
Not true. This was explicitly requested (and rejected by MS VP in charge of Windows Steve Sinofsky) on the Engineering Windows 7 blog: http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/ (I can't find the exact place where he said they weren't going to do it right now, but he did say so). It won't be happening in Windows 7. Sorry.
Slashdot Mirror
How much energy is required to collect the waste and move it to the burning facility? Also, how much methane and CO2 is emitted when the energy is extracted from the waste? The calculation needs to take the entire system into account, not just the cost of the electricity.
OS X will do pretty much everything you've asked for, with very little work. You can use parental controls to create a whitelist for which programs and websites are allowed. You can restrict account access to specific times and days. You can use ssh or vnc to connect to each machine to remotely administer it. (OS X has a very nice, fast, VNC client and server built in.) You don't need a virus scanner, since there are no viruses in the wild for OS X. You can prevent installation of additional programs. Automatically limit access to adult websites. Restrict who they can mail and IM with. Limit computer use to a certain number of hours per day. Log what they have been doing. Receive e-mail requests to add additional websites, IM users, etc. so that you can confirm additions without having to use their computer. And if you install the istat pro widget, you can monitor all of the computer's hardware sensors, which will give you all of the rest of the info you asked for. VERY easy to set all of this up.
In 1992, UC Davis students working under Professor Andy Frank achieved 3313 mpg with its SideFX and Shamu. The school later developed some of the first hybrid car technology, among other things.
http://books.google.com/books?id=OeMDAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA10&lpg=PA10&dq=uc+davis+side+fx&source=bl&ots=yNnL_bcwLY&sig=hhexAD2-JnRF_cp2YeJRXn20AVI&hl=en&ei=DVCAS-GrI4zgswOL7-SHBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CB8Q6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=uc%20davis%20side%20fx&f=false
The original posting has the incorrect name for Nathan Myhrvold. It's Nathan Myhrvold, not Nathan Myhrvol.
The original posting is lacking something very important - an explanation of why this is important. What benefits, if any, are there to being able to do this? Will it lead to faster or more power efficient processors? Will it result in tastier waffles? Will it bring about world peace?
There are lots of computer related jobs that are definitely NOT IT:
Computer scientist: performs basic research relating to computers and computing technologies
CS Professor: teaches computer science
Developer: *could* be IT, but may be developing software not related to companies at all!
Software architect, Systems architect: creates high level designs for applications, software systems, etc.
IT is the set of people who provide internal computing services to companies, governments, universities, and other organizations. It's an infrastructure service. It takes commercial products (software, hardware, etc.) and configures and maintains them to support the operations of the parent organization. This is very different from developers who *produce* products, or from computer scientists who invent new technologies.
This seems to be part of a rather wide ranging campaign on the part of the conservatives to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt about the current government. The previous administration was clearly in over its head. This one seems to have a clue...
That sounds rather high for the Mini. Apple claims http://www.apple.com/macmini/environment.html that the new mini uses 14 Watts when idle. Typical laptops use 30-40 Watts or less when idle.
Your best bets are probably the Mac Mini, or another computer with an ultra low voltage desktop chip, an ARM processor, or a low voltage mobile processor. Laptops would be particularly good. Use an SSD instead of a hard drive. Use enough memory to cache your files so you don't have to keep hitting the drive, but don't use more than that, because memory takes power too. Don't use a display. Don't hook up unneeded devices to it - they draw power.
The laptops were surely backed up using a Time Capsule. Not only will Apple restore them to their pre-theft state, but they can also go back in time and wipe out the thieves' ancestors, thus preventing the crime from being committed in the first place. Of course, this will create a bit of a paradox...
Ok. Let me try to get that link right. You can download Minefield here.
3.6 alpha 2 pre (found here) has additional performance improvements (ie. is wicked fast), and seems quite reliable in the latest nightly build. Note that these are nightly builds, so you run the risk of being the first to experience a shiny, new bug!
Ok, it might help if I posted that link with html included. :-) Windspire
There are alternative designs that do not have that sort of problem. For example, Windspire is a 30' tall wind turbine that can be erected even in densely populated areas.
You know, the cost of repairing or replacing the Jovian atmosphere is really high. I hope the planet had a good insurance policy...
While it is certainly true that many patents have been granted of late for things that should not pass the obviousness test, patents do provide a strong incentive to develop new technologies. They provide a monopoly on new inventions for a limited period of time in exchange for disclosing the details of that technology to the world, so it can later be used like others. If technologies can not be patented, they can be easily duplicated, and researchers will lose their investment when competitors simply duplicate their work without going to the initial research expense. A better solution would be to properly fund the patent office so that they can hire a sufficient number of examiners with a sufficient depth of expertise to be able to eliminate obvious patents and rapidly process valid ones.
I'm glad that they are going to be shipping 3 dimensional laptops. Those 2 dimensional laptops that I've been using are really inconvenient. The screen and the keyboard are on the same plane, and you can't push the buttons at all, because that would require a third dimension. Even worse, my 2 dimensional laptop keeps falling through infinitely thin slots, and cut my arm off once when it fell perpendicularly to the floor while my arm was in the way. It might be 2D, but it has mass after all, so it has an infinitely sharp edge. Apple made a big deal out of the Macbook Air being .25" thick at its thinnest point. That's nothing. My 2D laptop has 0 thickness!
1) You might not always have a network connection but still want to listen to music (for example, if you are traveling or your network is down).
2) You might want to take your music with you on a portable device.
3) Streaming kills battery life on mobile devices, especially if embedded in flash.
4) Your streaming music provider might not have, or might stop carrying, a song you really want to listen to.
5) Streaming providers may not have that eclectic genre of music you like.
6) You will likely have to pay subscription fees at some point, which means you keep paying for the same music over and over again.
7) Streaming does not necessarily provide music at its highest quality (in fact, it likely does not). If you want to listen to a recording at its original fidelity, streaming is a bad way to do it.
8) Streaming makes you dependent on whatever technology your streaming provider chooses to use. If you don't want to, or can't use that technology, you are out of luck.
9) You can't sell your copy of an audio stream to someone else when you no longer want it.
10) Streaming often takes much more CPU than local playback (for example, Pandora, which uses Flash)
11) Streaming often has advertisements in it, but you don't want to listen to ads or see them so you can listen to music.
12) Streaming may eventually come to be dominated by companies such as clearchannel, which will provide streams that cater to the largest groups of listeners, but exclude what you really like.
No. You actually have to send it in. Really.
Except Europa. Attempt no landings there.
What is this TV you speak of? Is that a program that runs on a computer?
Would you be happy staying there for another 5 years?
Would you be happier doing something else?
Could the company go out of business in the next 5 years?
Is it likely to be sold in that time?
Do the shares have any value otherwise?
Is the value of the shares (5 years from now) worth more than you might get in additional satisfaction and compensation elsewhere?
This bill offers money to people who drive inefficient vehicles in order to get them into new vehicles. But it need to ensure that the new vehicles are MORE efficient than the vehicle they are replacing. For example, suppose someone with a 15 MPG SUV gets rid of their SUV and uses the money plus the incentive to buy a new 12 MPG SUV. This clearly has not helped the environment (and in fact, has probably made it worse because of the additional energy and emissions required to produce the new vehicle). Additionally, it rewards people who bought the most fuel efficient vehicles possible for making a poor choice while giving no reward to people who did the right thing and bought an efficient vehicle to begin with. I propose the following changes to the measure:
-Offer people a reward based on the amount of *increase* in fuel efficiency of their new vehicle over their old vehicle. That cuts out the incentive for people who buy a less efficient vehicle, and rewards people more for buying more efficient vehicles while still providing an incentive for people who own an older fuel efficient vehicle.
-Weight the incentive so that the better the fuel efficiency of your new car, the better the incentive that you get. In other words, if you get rid of an old 15 mpg car and buy a new 16 mpg car, you get very little incentive. If you sell a 39 mpg car and buy a new 40 mpg car, you get a much higher incentive. This gives the best incentives to people who buy the most efficient cars.
-Offer the highest incentive for people who get rid of a car altogether. The bill appear to be offering a public transit incentive, but it is lower than the incentive to buy a new car. But we get a much greater environmental benefit if people take public transport.
-Also tie the size of the incentive to the improvement in emissions of the new vehicle over the old one. Old cars pollute much more than new ones. Getting cars with higher emissions off the road will help significantly in the fight against global warming. Thus, it makes sense to reward people for choosing the cars with the lowest emissions.
Ok, so you bought a super inefficient SUV, and now you are rewarded for buying something new! But if you bought a Prius, you are not. Of course, we want to get everyone in to more fuel efficient cars. But this bill wouldn't do that, because it appears to give you the reward regardless of how fuel efficient your new car is. This is only beneficial if you must buy a new car that is MORE fuel efficient...
There is not one built into windows. While there are a number of third party virtual desktops out there (dexpot, virtuawin, Desktops (Mark Russinovich), MSVDM), none of them work particularly well. Dexpot leaves drop shadows all over your screen. Desktops can only display a program on a single desktop,and can't move windows between them. MSVDM takes up large chunks of your taskbar, is slow, and doesn't handle child windows well. Virtuawin is fast and configurable, but its interface leaves a lot to be desired. None of them come close in functionality or ease of use to the virtual desktops available for Linux, or to Spaces on the Mac.
Not true. This was explicitly requested (and rejected by MS VP in charge of Windows Steve Sinofsky) on the Engineering Windows 7 blog: http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/ (I can't find the exact place where he said they weren't going to do it right now, but he did say so). It won't be happening in Windows 7. Sorry.