But also it's common to sell grain in small lots, particularly if you are cleaning things out. Grain cos don't care who they buy from, particularly. People in this industry are pretty trusting (that could change). A thief could just call up a grain handling company in another county and make arrangements to sell a single load.
The theft of bulk food commodities is becoming more and more of a problem with commodity prices climbing. Even in more traditional areas like grains such as wheat. Most farms, if they don't sell or ship off the combine store their grain in bins or silos sometimes for months, and sell it and ship it slowly. Right now I am looking out my window at a row of shiny bins that hold a crop worth between $100k and $200k per bin depending on how much is in the bin (worth that to me; worth ten times that to the company that I grew under contract for). We actually put padlocks on the bottoms of our more expensive crop bins. Won't keep out a very determined thief, but it will hopefully provide a bit of a pause.
Recently a trucker told me he was hauling out of a remote bin for a farmer. Because it was quite hassle to put the auger in the bin to unload, once he was set up he just left it set up, and would come about twice a day for loads. During that time someone came along with a truck and helped themselves to a load. The bin was about 15 tonnes short; exactly one small truck load. So after that he started taking the belts with him, and disabling the auger's engine. Not a lot of money was lost (this was wheat after all... only between $3k and $4k), but not a happy thing for the trucker who had to make up the difference.
So yes, theft happens in bulk, and it can be a lot of money. Sounds funny, or nutty, but still a serious concern.
I know you are trying to be funny, but "cash" in this case doesn't mean the same thing as "cash" in your case. "Cash" simply means that there was no stock swap, no payment by way of stocks, and no paying over time. He takes the money and walks away. I can't imagine he would totally sell his rights to the Star Wars franchise IP, though.
I taught myself how to program in BASIC at the age of six. In 6th grade I switched from BASIC to the more structured way of programming in Turbo BASIC. Then a year or two later I taught myself C++ using Turbo C++. I even accidentally discovered how to do a recursive descent parser along the way.
However, it wasn't until I went to university and began to learn formal algorithm theory (from teachers), programming language theory, and computational theory, compiler design, that I was really able to put it all together. I could hack code before, but after being taught, I could actually produce something useful. I had formerly almost discovered recursive descent parsing, but my education taught me how to do it right, how to do error recovery, how formal grammars work, how to do other forms of parsing (and lexing). I was taught how to pick appropriate data structures, and how to use them. All of these things I do on a fairly regular basis now.
Could I have learned all that online? Perhaps, but having a real human to even answer questions and share experiences is invaluable.
Despite these kids learning how to play alphabet songs and unblock the camera, did they truly learn anything about software development, or how a computer actually works? Or really anything that could lift them out of poverty?
Ironically, here in N.A. where we generally don't have crippling poverty and everyone has a computer, laptop, phone, or tablet, and very few people know how they work. So maybe none of what I said matters. In some ways technology is returning us to a guild age, and our technology may as well run on magic. We don't care, so long as it does our bidding. I used to wonder how a civilization could lose knowledge and fall back into a primitive state as many a science fiction story relates. But now I realize how it could happen very easily.
Cool logo today... the old VGA font is available on any linux system as console8x16.pcf (Console). Or "Perfect DOS VGA 437.ttf" downloadable on the internet.
The app appears to be for sale right now, so any troubles with the FDA must have been resolved. I did a quick google search and was unable to fund anything about this FDA action. Is there a news article somewhere that talks about exactly what the FDA said and did?
That's because the socialized healthcare insurance systems in Canada typically don't cover drugs or medical devices except in certain cases (like diabetes, or if you are poor or elderly... except of course hearing aids). They mainly cover doctors and hospitals. Many Canadians buy secondary insurance to cover drugs and things like crutches, wheel chairs, and the like.
Illegal? Are you kidding? This situation has absolutely nothing in common with the PsyStar case. Selling an HTC phone with a hack for iOS to run on it, that would be the PsyStar case. As for this company, first sale doctrine is the primary law that they operate under. Apple could probably cut off app store access for devices they thought were sold this way, but other than that I can't see any other legal recourse for Apple. And why should they interfere? A sale is a sale, and whoever receives the device is at least as likely to buy something through the App Store as with a device from a direct channel.
I looked through the other replies to see if I could mod someone up, but unfortunately no one answered your question and most posts missed the point.
The difference has nothing to do with the kernel. The difference in in the graphics architecture and how the subsystem works with the hardware.
First, Android's graphic subsystem is probably closer to Wayland than X11. The reason X11 is slow (or rather seems slow) is because X11 is an asynchronous API. That means things like window resizing and widget redrawing are all done without any synchronization, at roughly the same time, but not in any particular order. This means that you often get stuttering and tearing. So oddly enough if you use a compositing manager on Linux (any modern desktop), moving windows around is very snappy. Resizing windows is much better than it used to be because the widget toolkits have gotten much better at things like event compression, and even using synchronization extensions to X11 to time redraws to coincide with refresh rates. Also the API involves a lot of round-trips to the server, so over the network it's extremely chatty and subject to latency.
As allude to, X11 is a client/server architecture, which is a very powerful concept, but also causes some problems in making things appear smooth and fast (the asynchronous issue I just mentioned). X11's most powerful feature, is network transparency. I can remote log into any number of machines, and run individual apps and interact with them all on my desktop. Sure vnc or rdp can do this sort of thing, but not at an app (really per window) basis. I run remote apps as if they were local. I use this feature every day. It's not perfect; doesn't connect my local drive to the remote app, and it doesn't do sound. And if you're not on a LAN, it's better to use FreeNX.
Android is pretty much just OpenGL compositing onto a frame buffer screen. This can be very fast and smooth, and Wayland will likely be as fast and smooth. But it lacks the remote network transparency of X11.
Pollution consists of at several things, and its unclear which you are referring to. Soot is partially-burned hydrocarbons and virtually all cars no longer emit any appreciable amounts of this, except older diesels, and diesels are not what the article is about! The article is about producing gasoline-like molecules. Very different. And dust is dust. Nothing to do with fossil fuels.
Modern, clean, SCR diesels use urea to clean up the NOx, and the engines run such that no smoke is ever produced. Diesel exhaust from and SCR system doesn't smell bad at all. The typical diesel exhaust smell that we all recognize may not even be recognized by our children and grandchildren as it really has gone away with the latest generation of cleaner engines.
I can't take any diagram seriously that counts greenland as part of the North American debt problem! Who'd have thought their debt was even greater than the country that Greenland belongs to in 1970!
GPS is used for *all* farming operations. Spraying is just the best example. Everything from tillage to planting to harvesting is all done with autosteer.
We already have pipes buried and center pivots. But pivots move way too slow for spraying out of! 1000 gpm doesn't work well for spraying, even at top speed (which is about.2-.3 inches of water).
While this is true I would never want to drive manually like that for hours on end. Believe me operator fatigue is at an all-time low with autosteer. I can get under 5 feet myself currently, but it is super fatiguing, especially when you have to look back and watch the machine you are pulling.
I humbly suggest that crane operation and pulling a 120 foot sprayer at 10-20 mph are different things entirely!:)
As the other poster said, we don't really need accuracy all that much. We do need precision. And Glonass can give us some, provided it's corrected with a signal like WAAS does for GPS.
In agriculture GPS guidance systems already have the capability of talking to Galileo when it is finished, and Glonass right now. After the military, agriculture is probably the most dependent on positioning technology these days. If GPS guidance goes down (IE our hardware has a problem), we simply cannot drive the machines. They are too wide to drive manually (my sprayer is 120 feet wide-- very difficult to drive that manually at less than 5 feet overlap even with markers) and the inputs too expensive to waste on overlaps. If GPS fails, everyone can switch to Glonass with Glonass correction signals, which should keep us going, but Galileo would offer superior accuracy and also precision. Such a switch, however, is not instantaneous. Would take weeks or months to get the firmwares updated (though the radios already are capable). And if that failed, I guess we can do terrestial positioning signals.
But it's not a matter of if GPS will fail. It's a matter of when. Maybe the US will be able to replace satellites when they die, but if not, it should be very interesting to see what happens.
Seems to me if a simulation is so perfect that it can simulate reality with 100% accuracy, then the simulation has, in fact, created reality. I obviously didn't read the article yet (in keeping with longstanding slashdot tradition), but I can only assume that by "simulation" they mean imperfect simulation. Or a simulation that has holes it it, much as there are holes in reality in dreams that sometimes one is aware of.
So physical devices are protected by patents. A patent is filed to reveal to the world how your device works, and how to build it. That's the whole point. That way if someone comes up with a similar device you can use the patent as a test to see if their device infringes on your patent.
The thought of adding a DRM layer to protect physical devices is ludicrous. I can see why someone would go down this road, but it is madness and will not end well. It's tantamount for suing someone because they might not buy something.
I think a patent filing itself should contain enough information for anyone skilled in the art to make the patented object. For software I think I think patents should be done similarly, if at all. If I as a programmer cannot build something that is described in the patent in a workable form, it should not be patentable. That should get rid of 90% of those vague, nebulous patents, many of which have never really been implemented in any useful way by the patent filer.
As an aside I was talking to a truck driver as I loaded him up (45 tonnes of bulk) and he said with the new generation of big diesel rigs with scads of horsepower (600 is typical) and lots of torque (pulling along at 1500 rpm is easy) that he gets fantastic fuel economy. On flat roads while crusing, he gets about 6 mpg! That's amazing fuel economy for a big rig! Might be imperial gallons so not as amazing. But still we have come a long ways in fuel efficiency.
Despite our love of fast cars, we now drive cars now that are much more efficient, have much more power, and way more torque than before. But the main difference is they now weigh thousands of pounds more than they used to. If we put modern engine and transmissions in a compact car from the 70s or 80s, it'd likely get 50-60 mpg easily.
Wow that is one of the most interesting papers I've ever read. Had almost a Jonathan Swift feel to it, making wonder if he's really serious! Seems to me he glosses over a lot of issues such as the short-term chaos that would entail from every road having its own rules. That and the possibility that if one could not buy access to necessary roads, one would find oneself imprisoned on his own island, unable to even talk off it! Why stop there though. Why not privatize the military, the police, and so forth. Just think of it. Taxes could be dropped to zero! It's a win win for everyone!
Just a cautionary tale here. Alberta has indeed embarked down this road, and the results are not pretty. In Alberta we've privatized just about every public utility and resource short of roads. All forms of building inspections, licensing of all kinds (drivers licenses, etc) are all contracted to private, for-profit companies. And yes, tax rates are gloriously low. But that ends up not mattering because we still pay for everything, but we pay way more now than we ever did. Now to register my vehicle I pay a smaller fee that goes to the government (they keep centralized records after all), and another set of fees to the private company (we often refer to them as bribes around here). It's crazy. And no one has saved anything. Bureaucracy has increased because now you deal with government bureaucracy *and* private company bureaucracy, which is just as bad or worse. Everything that is private is now much more expensive, but not for the reasons you might think. Electricity is triple the rate of pre-privatization now. The companies involved have managed to enshrine a 9% annual ROI in law!
Most people don't realize it, but the humble, ubiquitous earthworm is an invasive species in North America. Though you might think of it as useful and beneficial to the soil, in the forests of north America, the earthworm is causing a lot of damage. So I get a bit concerned when they start talking about throwing in "imported worms."
When I read a report like this, or hear about "collateral damage" in drone strikes and other US operations, I feel a constant need to apologize to my foreign friends for what the US has started to stand for. It's appalling, really. A bit ironic that Obama has been accused of apologizing for America while all this time ratcheting up the drone strikes. I have little evidence that Romney would end the conflicts, either. In fact his hard line on Israel and Iran indicates we're likely not going to see the end of conflict anytime soon. So no matter who gets elected, I want the world to know I am truly sorry!
So what, realistically are the replacements? CFL is out for me, since -40 weather is hard on them. Also I have 20 pivot irrigation systems that have telltale lights on them and CFLs would burn out in a week there (end tower light turns on and off with the motor at least once a minute, and some center tower lights have blinkers on them). My shop has a bunch of 200W rough service bulbs as well. CFL is not going to replace that. I understand there are cold-weather flourescent tubes I can install, but they are much more expensive than incandescents, and the fact they are only turned on for days out of the year total makes any efficiency benefits moot.
Someone mentioned before the ban isn't on incandescents per se, but on inefficient bulbs. So will there be higher-efficiency incandescents out there? Some sort of hybrid? Besides CFL and LED, what is really happening in the the incandescent area?
What does he mean the hardware is going "closed source?"
I have a commercial gantry for doing CNC plasma cutting. It's only 2'x2'. But nothing is stopping me from a bigger table utilizing the same design, same parts, and so on. My table certainly has never been "open source" in any way. But I can see it in front of me and that's as good as open.
The only thing that matters in here is the software. As long as it is open source, or there are good open source software solutions available, then there's no problem.
Sure the designs and plans have been shared in the past, but hardware is by definition open source and, thanks to first sale doctrine, is yours to reverse engineer to your hearts content once you buy it. So just have someone buy a replicator 2 and figure out what's so special about it. The only protection a business has over hardware is patents. And that really only protects a business from another business or money-making venture. But nothing stops you from implementing a patented idea for personal use, such as a fancy extruder nozzle system. Patents are public after all.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly.
But also it's common to sell grain in small lots, particularly if you are cleaning things out. Grain cos don't care who they buy from, particularly. People in this industry are pretty trusting (that could change). A thief could just call up a grain handling company in another county and make arrangements to sell a single load.
The theft of bulk food commodities is becoming more and more of a problem with commodity prices climbing. Even in more traditional areas like grains such as wheat. Most farms, if they don't sell or ship off the combine store their grain in bins or silos sometimes for months, and sell it and ship it slowly. Right now I am looking out my window at a row of shiny bins that hold a crop worth between $100k and $200k per bin depending on how much is in the bin (worth that to me; worth ten times that to the company that I grew under contract for). We actually put padlocks on the bottoms of our more expensive crop bins. Won't keep out a very determined thief, but it will hopefully provide a bit of a pause.
Recently a trucker told me he was hauling out of a remote bin for a farmer. Because it was quite hassle to put the auger in the bin to unload, once he was set up he just left it set up, and would come about twice a day for loads. During that time someone came along with a truck and helped themselves to a load. The bin was about 15 tonnes short; exactly one small truck load. So after that he started taking the belts with him, and disabling the auger's engine. Not a lot of money was lost (this was wheat after all... only between $3k and $4k), but not a happy thing for the trucker who had to make up the difference.
So yes, theft happens in bulk, and it can be a lot of money. Sounds funny, or nutty, but still a serious concern.
I know you are trying to be funny, but "cash" in this case doesn't mean the same thing as "cash" in your case. "Cash" simply means that there was no stock swap, no payment by way of stocks, and no paying over time. He takes the money and walks away. I can't imagine he would totally sell his rights to the Star Wars franchise IP, though.
I taught myself how to program in BASIC at the age of six. In 6th grade I switched from BASIC to the more structured way of programming in Turbo BASIC. Then a year or two later I taught myself C++ using Turbo C++. I even accidentally discovered how to do a recursive descent parser along the way.
However, it wasn't until I went to university and began to learn formal algorithm theory (from teachers), programming language theory, and computational theory, compiler design, that I was really able to put it all together. I could hack code before, but after being taught, I could actually produce something useful. I had formerly almost discovered recursive descent parsing, but my education taught me how to do it right, how to do error recovery, how formal grammars work, how to do other forms of parsing (and lexing). I was taught how to pick appropriate data structures, and how to use them. All of these things I do on a fairly regular basis now.
Could I have learned all that online? Perhaps, but having a real human to even answer questions and share experiences is invaluable.
Despite these kids learning how to play alphabet songs and unblock the camera, did they truly learn anything about software development, or how a computer actually works? Or really anything that could lift them out of poverty?
Ironically, here in N.A. where we generally don't have crippling poverty and everyone has a computer, laptop, phone, or tablet, and very few people know how they work. So maybe none of what I said matters. In some ways technology is returning us to a guild age, and our technology may as well run on magic. We don't care, so long as it does our bidding. I used to wonder how a civilization could lose knowledge and fall back into a primitive state as many a science fiction story relates. But now I realize how it could happen very easily.
Cool logo today... the old VGA font is available on any linux system as console8x16.pcf (Console). Or "Perfect DOS VGA 437.ttf" downloadable on the internet.
The app appears to be for sale right now, so any troubles with the FDA must have been resolved. I did a quick google search and was unable to fund anything about this FDA action. Is there a news article somewhere that talks about exactly what the FDA said and did?
That's because the socialized healthcare insurance systems in Canada typically don't cover drugs or medical devices except in certain cases (like diabetes, or if you are poor or elderly... except of course hearing aids). They mainly cover doctors and hospitals. Many Canadians buy secondary insurance to cover drugs and things like crutches, wheel chairs, and the like.
Illegal? Are you kidding? This situation has absolutely nothing in common with the PsyStar case. Selling an HTC phone with a hack for iOS to run on it, that would be the PsyStar case. As for this company, first sale doctrine is the primary law that they operate under. Apple could probably cut off app store access for devices they thought were sold this way, but other than that I can't see any other legal recourse for Apple. And why should they interfere? A sale is a sale, and whoever receives the device is at least as likely to buy something through the App Store as with a device from a direct channel.
Isn't LLVM a backend for the Mesa3d library? Without Mesa, there is no interface to the LLVM pipe engine.
I looked through the other replies to see if I could mod someone up, but unfortunately no one answered your question and most posts missed the point.
The difference has nothing to do with the kernel. The difference in in the graphics architecture and how the subsystem works with the hardware.
First, Android's graphic subsystem is probably closer to Wayland than X11. The reason X11 is slow (or rather seems slow) is because X11 is an asynchronous API. That means things like window resizing and widget redrawing are all done without any synchronization, at roughly the same time, but not in any particular order. This means that you often get stuttering and tearing. So oddly enough if you use a compositing manager on Linux (any modern desktop), moving windows around is very snappy. Resizing windows is much better than it used to be because the widget toolkits have gotten much better at things like event compression, and even using synchronization extensions to X11 to time redraws to coincide with refresh rates. Also the API involves a lot of round-trips to the server, so over the network it's extremely chatty and subject to latency.
As allude to, X11 is a client/server architecture, which is a very powerful concept, but also causes some problems in making things appear smooth and fast (the asynchronous issue I just mentioned). X11's most powerful feature, is network transparency. I can remote log into any number of machines, and run individual apps and interact with them all on my desktop. Sure vnc or rdp can do this sort of thing, but not at an app (really per window) basis. I run remote apps as if they were local. I use this feature every day. It's not perfect; doesn't connect my local drive to the remote app, and it doesn't do sound. And if you're not on a LAN, it's better to use FreeNX.
Android is pretty much just OpenGL compositing onto a frame buffer screen. This can be very fast and smooth, and Wayland will likely be as fast and smooth. But it lacks the remote network transparency of X11.
Seriously doubt there were any. Double-sided sticky tape seems to be a staple of Star Trek actress costumes going back to the original series.
Pollution consists of at several things, and its unclear which you are referring to. Soot is partially-burned hydrocarbons and virtually all cars no longer emit any appreciable amounts of this, except older diesels, and diesels are not what the article is about! The article is about producing gasoline-like molecules. Very different. And dust is dust. Nothing to do with fossil fuels.
Modern, clean, SCR diesels use urea to clean up the NOx, and the engines run such that no smoke is ever produced. Diesel exhaust from and SCR system doesn't smell bad at all. The typical diesel exhaust smell that we all recognize may not even be recognized by our children and grandchildren as it really has gone away with the latest generation of cleaner engines.
I can't take any diagram seriously that counts greenland as part of the North American debt problem! Who'd have thought their debt was even greater than the country that Greenland belongs to in 1970!
GPS is used for *all* farming operations. Spraying is just the best example. Everything from tillage to planting to harvesting is all done with autosteer.
We already have pipes buried and center pivots. But pivots move way too slow for spraying out of! 1000 gpm doesn't work well for spraying, even at top speed (which is about .2-.3 inches of water).
While this is true I would never want to drive manually like that for hours on end. Believe me operator fatigue is at an all-time low with autosteer. I can get under 5 feet myself currently, but it is super fatiguing, especially when you have to look back and watch the machine you are pulling.
I humbly suggest that crane operation and pulling a 120 foot sprayer at 10-20 mph are different things entirely! :)
As the other poster said, we don't really need accuracy all that much. We do need precision. And Glonass can give us some, provided it's corrected with a signal like WAAS does for GPS.
In agriculture GPS guidance systems already have the capability of talking to Galileo when it is finished, and Glonass right now. After the military, agriculture is probably the most dependent on positioning technology these days. If GPS guidance goes down (IE our hardware has a problem), we simply cannot drive the machines. They are too wide to drive manually (my sprayer is 120 feet wide-- very difficult to drive that manually at less than 5 feet overlap even with markers) and the inputs too expensive to waste on overlaps. If GPS fails, everyone can switch to Glonass with Glonass correction signals, which should keep us going, but Galileo would offer superior accuracy and also precision. Such a switch, however, is not instantaneous. Would take weeks or months to get the firmwares updated (though the radios already are capable). And if that failed, I guess we can do terrestial positioning signals.
But it's not a matter of if GPS will fail. It's a matter of when. Maybe the US will be able to replace satellites when they die, but if not, it should be very interesting to see what happens.
Seems to me if a simulation is so perfect that it can simulate reality with 100% accuracy, then the simulation has, in fact, created reality. I obviously didn't read the article yet (in keeping with longstanding slashdot tradition), but I can only assume that by "simulation" they mean imperfect simulation. Or a simulation that has holes it it, much as there are holes in reality in dreams that sometimes one is aware of.
So physical devices are protected by patents. A patent is filed to reveal to the world how your device works, and how to build it. That's the whole point. That way if someone comes up with a similar device you can use the patent as a test to see if their device infringes on your patent.
The thought of adding a DRM layer to protect physical devices is ludicrous. I can see why someone would go down this road, but it is madness and will not end well. It's tantamount for suing someone because they might not buy something.
I think a patent filing itself should contain enough information for anyone skilled in the art to make the patented object. For software I think I think patents should be done similarly, if at all. If I as a programmer cannot build something that is described in the patent in a workable form, it should not be patentable. That should get rid of 90% of those vague, nebulous patents, many of which have never really been implemented in any useful way by the patent filer.
As an aside I was talking to a truck driver as I loaded him up (45 tonnes of bulk) and he said with the new generation of big diesel rigs with scads of horsepower (600 is typical) and lots of torque (pulling along at 1500 rpm is easy) that he gets fantastic fuel economy. On flat roads while crusing, he gets about 6 mpg! That's amazing fuel economy for a big rig! Might be imperial gallons so not as amazing. But still we have come a long ways in fuel efficiency.
Despite our love of fast cars, we now drive cars now that are much more efficient, have much more power, and way more torque than before. But the main difference is they now weigh thousands of pounds more than they used to. If we put modern engine and transmissions in a compact car from the 70s or 80s, it'd likely get 50-60 mpg easily.
The NASA feed mentioned that they shut down one engine to reduce the dynamic pressure on the rocket during that phase of flight.
Wow that is one of the most interesting papers I've ever read. Had almost a Jonathan Swift feel to it, making wonder if he's really serious! Seems to me he glosses over a lot of issues such as the short-term chaos that would entail from every road having its own rules. That and the possibility that if one could not buy access to necessary roads, one would find oneself imprisoned on his own island, unable to even talk off it! Why stop there though. Why not privatize the military, the police, and so forth. Just think of it. Taxes could be dropped to zero! It's a win win for everyone!
Just a cautionary tale here. Alberta has indeed embarked down this road, and the results are not pretty. In Alberta we've privatized just about every public utility and resource short of roads. All forms of building inspections, licensing of all kinds (drivers licenses, etc) are all contracted to private, for-profit companies. And yes, tax rates are gloriously low. But that ends up not mattering because we still pay for everything, but we pay way more now than we ever did. Now to register my vehicle I pay a smaller fee that goes to the government (they keep centralized records after all), and another set of fees to the private company (we often refer to them as bribes around here). It's crazy. And no one has saved anything. Bureaucracy has increased because now you deal with government bureaucracy *and* private company bureaucracy, which is just as bad or worse. Everything that is private is now much more expensive, but not for the reasons you might think. Electricity is triple the rate of pre-privatization now. The companies involved have managed to enshrine a 9% annual ROI in law!
Most people don't realize it, but the humble, ubiquitous earthworm is an invasive species in North America. Though you might think of it as useful and beneficial to the soil, in the forests of north America, the earthworm is causing a lot of damage. So I get a bit concerned when they start talking about throwing in "imported worms."
When I read a report like this, or hear about "collateral damage" in drone strikes and other US operations, I feel a constant need to apologize to my foreign friends for what the US has started to stand for. It's appalling, really. A bit ironic that Obama has been accused of apologizing for America while all this time ratcheting up the drone strikes. I have little evidence that Romney would end the conflicts, either. In fact his hard line on Israel and Iran indicates we're likely not going to see the end of conflict anytime soon. So no matter who gets elected, I want the world to know I am truly sorry!
So what, realistically are the replacements? CFL is out for me, since -40 weather is hard on them. Also I have 20 pivot irrigation systems that have telltale lights on them and CFLs would burn out in a week there (end tower light turns on and off with the motor at least once a minute, and some center tower lights have blinkers on them). My shop has a bunch of 200W rough service bulbs as well. CFL is not going to replace that. I understand there are cold-weather flourescent tubes I can install, but they are much more expensive than incandescents, and the fact they are only turned on for days out of the year total makes any efficiency benefits moot.
Someone mentioned before the ban isn't on incandescents per se, but on inefficient bulbs. So will there be higher-efficiency incandescents out there? Some sort of hybrid? Besides CFL and LED, what is really happening in the the incandescent area?
What does he mean the hardware is going "closed source?"
I have a commercial gantry for doing CNC plasma cutting. It's only 2'x2'. But nothing is stopping me from a bigger table utilizing the same design, same parts, and so on. My table certainly has never been "open source" in any way. But I can see it in front of me and that's as good as open.
The only thing that matters in here is the software. As long as it is open source, or there are good open source software solutions available, then there's no problem.
Sure the designs and plans have been shared in the past, but hardware is by definition open source and, thanks to first sale doctrine, is yours to reverse engineer to your hearts content once you buy it. So just have someone buy a replicator 2 and figure out what's so special about it. The only protection a business has over hardware is patents. And that really only protects a business from another business or money-making venture. But nothing stops you from implementing a patented idea for personal use, such as a fancy extruder nozzle system. Patents are public after all.