Clearly this is why the financial industry is in such a constant state of crisis. They are basically dumb, believing what any says, as long it might make then a buck. The more stupid, outlandish, and gibberish compliant the idea is, the more they like it.
I mean really, if they wanted near zero latency communication, they should just come to me for some basic technology. For instance, a basic, yet expensive, path is telepaths. Right now we would simple takes twins or triplets or whatever, test them for basic ability, and then train them. Pay each 100K a year to be on staff for a few year, then replace then as needed. This would be a great job for someone right out of high school. For the longer term we would go to some country with low regulation and genetically engineer the telepaths. At first this would be just selective breeding and early training, but eventually we should have labs set up to create telepaths on demand. Pay for their room and board, keep them on for 10 years, then send them on their way with a couple million in trust.
A more expensive and lower bandwidth method would be quantum entanglement. Chang the spin on one particle, it's entangled particle will immediately be changed as well. A 8 bit system could be built, An alternating all up then all down could be sent as a metronome, then an STX, then a certain amount of datadata, then and ETX, then a check sequence, then an EOT. Speed would be limited on by how long one must hold a state for reading. The advantage here is that there is absolutely not latency.
You see, there are always simple solutions when one thinks about it.
It really depends on how you take notes. If you are simply copying without thinking, it really does not matter what you use. If you are trying to use notes to learn, a very hard thing to do, it pretty much depends on you personally. There are many good apps for the iPad that will let you write with a stylus. This is good for classes that are not primarily text, in which you will mostly use the notes as examples to complete recitation after class.
For other classes, I found it best to rewrite or retype notes after the class. In this case summarizing during class and then summarizing in a more concise and legible form is very useful. I agree that the livescribe pen is a very useful tool. It has been on Woot for a very reasonable price. It is useful if you follow all that graphic organizer stuff.
of course there is a question about what is a fact and what is not. For sports, I think the facts are suitable developed at the moment of the action. That is, after all, why umpires are paid. To establish the facts based on objective observation and the rules of the game. It is the one value of sports, to teach kids that truth and facts are not the same. A sane person understands that calls are the game are practicle approximations to reality.
Unfortunately the facts of politics have much more far ranging implications, yet the facts are treated much more loosely. For instance, fact checkers have said that Romney does not pay less than many middle class americans. This is based on the supposition that Romney has released two years of tax returns. In fact we have one year of just under 14% and second year with approximate tax rate of 15-16%. The average middle class effective tax rat is 15-16%, with many paying up to over 20% before a refund. These fact checkers interpreted the facts to achieve a defensible yet invalid result.
Then there is all the debate over the deficit. Many look at %ofGDP which is a useful figure. In 1991 the debt was about 70% of GDP while in 2010 it was close to 90% of GDP, which is bad. OTOH the intest payment in 1991 were about 451B in 2010 dollars, while in 2010 the payments were 413B in the same dollars. Which of these are factual significant, of either, is subject of valid debate.
If we are talking about the post-compaq era, the PC won out because it was cheap and there was software to be had for no additional investment. Apple was relatively expensive and software not was free. There was feature bloat for relatively cheap components, such as fast chips and ports, while the expensive parts of the computer, a fast bus, were cut back to produce a cheap machine and usually slower computer. It was said you could upgrade for a faster machine, but upgrading the bus was often not that easy. Pretty much the PC market, like the mainframe market before it, was built on services not machines.
eventually Apple did become less expensive and the specs became more comparable. PC components became fast and reliable enough for use on Apple products, and eventually Intel, in need of a high end market, and Apple in need of a power efficient cheap, created a chip Apple could use.
Until recently much of the selling has continued to be feature bloat often in order to sell a cheaper product. For instance, look at the number of table that come with no memory, but promote the SD card. Sure it is cheap to add an SD card, but what are the speed and security penalties. Look at Amazon FIre that is selling fine without a camera or an SD slot.
The fact is that Apple got it right this time. The machine is not expensive, and the services are there in abundance. Amazon has it right as well. Google sells advertisement, not services, so it is for the new apple, but worse since the hobby toys are not even that business capable. MS who is not end user service oriented, is going to have to create that culture if it does not provide a real way for the third parties to generate expected profit ont he new windows 8.
No it is a misunderstanding of what Algebra is trying to teach. Each basic subject, at the secondary level, it trying to get a person to think at new levels of abstraction. Science teaches to gather and analyze a set of data in valid ways. History teaches us to question facts within a framework of other accepted facts. Writing teaches us to communicate abstract ideas in more or less concrete fashion. Math teaches us to create and manipulate abstract representations of physical constructs to gain new valid information.
Frankly, 'real world algebra' or whatever fancy methods are popular at the moment are worthless if they try to hide of minimize the abstraction of physical information. It is ok to minimize the symbolic manipulation, as that is just rules. A student must know how to manipulate symbolically, but understanding why those manipulations and not others are valid is the important information.
Algebra is also a gatekeeper for college. It is a simple way to make sure a student is mature and has the capacity for abstract thought. One thing to remember is that not only does everyone not need to go college, but not everyone needs to go to college at 18. There are many people who start college in early and mid 20's, and many who do not receive a bachelor degree untile much older. That is fine. College requires a level of development that not everyone has at 18.
This kind of reminds me when I saw a couple on a date. His shirt said "I'm not listening".
At first I was thinking these would not catch on because they do exactly oppositie of what many people want. Instead of getting rid of excess reality, they just make it worse. Look at the return of the ugly big headphones that are all the rage again. Look at the number of kids that still get high. These glasses may have a market. In terms of dating the question is how to pass the time until it becomes socially acceptable to have sex.
There are some virtual reality applications now. Some are not widely used because they do not have a purpose, or because they are privacy concerns. You meet someone, your facebook profile in on you phone, that person now has access to all the info. In many states you tax records are on public file. Someone comes to the house to beg for money, the homeless, a church, whatever, they now have a bunch of information. Likewise someone looking for a car to follow and hijack.
Google did collect unnecessary personal information. Google has not deleted it. The issue with these are not going to be technical buy political.
While there may be overlaps, my understanding is the primary objective of FaceBook and Adultfriendfinder are not precisely the same. For example, it seems that many more photos on facebook involves clothing, and I am sure many of the people on facebook do not intend to have sex with everyone who friends them.
Just for clarification, we have hardly been waiting for fish in space. Some of us saw them way back when. Getaway Special Payload G332 included the study of brine shrimp. This was a project from the a little high school in Houston called Booker T. Washington. In was developed in the early 80's and flew 1986. Colombia no less, and the last flight before Challenger.
It is also possible they did it to aggressives control the supply line for the iPad and iPhone. It is through this control that Apple is able to deliver a premium and unique product. They now own the technology they will likely use in these devices. Lack of such foresight is why Android makes are paying MS maybe $10 a device to cross license technology, presumably the *nix core is a major part of this as MS believes that all the *nix technology has been stolen from MS.
It could be that Apple will use this to gain normal FRAND access to technology. I don't know if Samsung is not complying with the contractual agreement, or if Apple is abusing the agreement, but this would certainly be leverage for Apple. Any licensing agreements that Apple has asked for outside of the FRAND tech is irrelevant. Samsung has already shown a willingness, with MS, to pay for questionable tech if it means that lawsuit will be avoided.
That is to not to say that Apple would not do this just to be aggressive. It is arguable that Maps on iOS is funding Android development, certainly Google makes no significant money from Andoid, SO apple is replacing maps, probably at a far greater expense.
I would also say it depends on what the author understands. A simple example is the word paradigm. For scientists this has a specific meaning. Many writers who use this word have clue of the how to use it in the sense that it compresses communication, rather using it to indicate they have some knowledge of how scientists might speak.
Vocabulary is an issue in any writing and always depends on the knowledge of the writer and the audience. Jargon is just a instance, almost a trivial instance. In general selecting a word is a compromise between norrowing meaning and comprehension of the audience. Suppose I were writing about someone and I wanted make a clear instance of relationship. There was a time when, if I assumed I were writing for an education audience, I might be able to leave the confines of english and use conocer or saber. For a naive audience, the meaning will be lost, but to a more sophisticated audience the hair is split.
My point is two fold. If the writer is knowledgeable enough to use jargon is a precise sense, then there is every reason to use this jargon. In most cases where I see objection to jargon it is where the writer is merely trying to show a broad vocabulary and in the process creating a jumbled and inaccurate mess. Given that the writer can use the words correctly to correctly communicate the correct idea, then the question becomes can the audience be brought along to understand the underlying concepts, if they do not, and is the piece of writing the appropriate place to so do.
I find interesting that Uranium is often ordered with Unicorn Spam.
I understand why these magnets are in trouble. They are simply marketed badly, as a toy for children, in the mass market. Uranium and Bleach are not packaged as a toy, though cleaver people seem to be ordering it as such. But clever people repurposing a chemical as a toy is not a problem. It is when dangerous things are marketed or go viral as a toy where the problem occurs. For example, when just a few people knew that a mercury thermometer was a toy, it was not a big deal, But then everyone started doing it.
When a toy gets in trouble, there is also take about water being dangerous, as here. The thing that most people miss is that water as a toy is highly thought out. Wading pools are designed to be shallow. Deeper pools have a series of regulation to insure they do not become an attractive nuisance. Sinks are shallow and fill slowly. Showers do not normally have methods to block the drain. Baths have a high flow of water, but have a large base area so the depth increases slowly. I am sure that people who think that design appear magically are going to say none of this matters, but designs and marketing evolve over time to increase the safety and usability of an object.
Ah, the mythical three decades ago. It was much better. I seriously agree. The hands on and real computing power was innovative. And customizable.
For example, I bought a printer and could not connect it to my computer. Fortunately I had a manual, could buy parts, and had a soldering iron. In a few hours I was able to hack together a workable interface. The rest of thd manual told me the escape codes needed to produce special formats and graphics using my text editor.
In fact my covers on my Apples were almost never on. There were many things to do. For instance, the EEPROM programer was not an external device like my current Universal Programmer, but was inside the computer. I would put an EEPROM in, program it, and then plug the program into the S100 based computer to run whatever I wanted to do.
Repairs were also a snap. I recall once when my hard disk went out. A replacement pot and a soldering iron fixed it right up. Of course not all computer were this easy to fix. My Tandy 100 broke and I could never figure out why.
Pretty much the only thing I hated was the price of computers. I too wanted a Unix enthusiast, and really wanted a machine. In 1985 it was possible since ATT sold one, but it cost way too much. I was early able to by an Apple \\\ as they were heavily discounted, and this allowed me to do many things in a format that did not readily otherwise exist. Compaq had just recently reversed engineered the IBM computer, and prices were just coming down to the $1000 mark. That would not happen until 1985 or so, which is why the MAC seemed all of sudden expensive to those who were not keeping track of computer prices. There were of course board computer that were cheaper, but they were hacker tools. There were also video consoles, but these were meant to sell video games, not for technology enthusiasts.
As a technology enthusiast, I really like were technology has taken me, though I do miss programming and soldering the metal. I like being able to plug a dongle into my car and wirelessly receiving a constant stream of OBDB data. I like have my music everywhere and tools to be able to hack it as I please. I like that I have tools like Eclipse and XCode that are free. I remember having to pay large sums of money for error ridden Borland tools. That all I need to buy is computer and I can write software is nice. A little Python a a webserver and I can have something that will run on any device. What is there not to love.
I went to public and private schools. In public schools I went to schools where the did the best they could, schools where students were expected to conform and learn or be expelled, and schools where there was a genuine demand that student meet outrageously high expectations but also met more than halfway by the teachers. The middle case is the preferred as it is cheap, easy, and can be easily staffed. It is not however innovated teaching. We have known how to effectively and cheaply teach the motivated kids at a high level since at least WWI. There were a bunch of kids educated in the 1920's, 1930's and 1940's who went to war and came back and did very interesting things. In the 1970's and 1980's innovative schools were created where kids with different motivations who be approached differently. Today there are a lot of academics on computer, this was happening long before Kahn, so kids could make up work or spend more time on non-academics.
So the Kahn thing is not innovative, it is just a natural progression of costs that allow corporation to provide it free, or for a profit, like word processing. There was a time when a basic Office Suite was worth a few hundred dollars. Now it is not. We see this with many charter schools, and places like the Kipp academy. If a student does not want to be educated, if a student does not choose to perform at a high level, that student can be removed. This cannot happen at a comprehensive school. Student population are much harder to finesse to minimize costs. This cost minimization is not innovative, and often not indicative of anything other than fancy accounting. Without added value, it is simply Enron Accounting.
Which isn't to say value is not added. It could cost more educate a student in another setting. Schools often finesse population exactly to have funds to add valuable opportunities. But it does not always happen. For instance I have seen parent remove children from schools where they are getting highly technical training and advanced credits to school where they are getting no technical training and just credit at the local community college. The school can point to every student in the technical program gaining admittance and scholarships to good schools, but the charter or online school wins out because of the press packet.
So no, no teacher who wants to teach is going to afraid of Khan or any other thing like it. It is free which means they make it available, use it, leverage it, just like anyone else. They are going to lost some good students, but honestly a lot of bad, meaning student that don't allow others others to learn, those that don't want to learn, those that do badly on standardized tests, are also going to go with is a good thing. Probably a net good thing. Schools are going to have to raise their game, but if they haven't already they are losers. It is not just about reading and writing and maths. No one makes above average income just with that. It is about thinking and feeling and listening to solve problem or figure things out. Just read Devil Wears Prada. That is the job world. Corporate will train you, but only if you are not stupid. The computer wil read, write and do math for you.
Teachers and schools have always been a place to provide resources. A well educated person has always been one that has resources outside of school. Though I think there were five years of my schooling that was critical, I had really smart parents summer and winter trips, a set of Britannicas and two libraries when I was young, a computer and online services when I was older, and a maker creed that also helped me create production products before I was 20.
A real anecdote from almost 30 years ago. I was one of the few students who went to public school in my neighborhood. The school I went to was little rough, but was very good in terms of math, science, and music. After a year my neighbor moved to a private school. At my school we had a very good music hour and science hour. At the private school t
How would the internet fix this? The developer pushed out a bad patch which caused users to lose data. Another patch was then put out, and we don't know if it was a fix or simply more bad code. The internet does not magically make bad code good. It does allow bad products to be patched on the fly, but that does not really help lusers who think they are getting a functioning application..
Here is my take on this. One does not have 25 years continuous profits by accidents. One has accountants which manufacture the numbers so that quarterly expectations are meet. So the question is why did they allow a non profitable quarter. It is simply a lack of management. I am not saying that we have an Enron situation in which the profits are fabricated. But I am saying is that there is clearly a breakdown in balancing profit and losses. It could be a laziness that has developed because it has always been easy to balance losses from bad decision from profits due to market monopoly. It could be a deeper issue with lack of control of purchasing and managing expectations of departments.
In any case a loss is indicative of a problem. We will see if there are more losses in the future, and what this does to the companies expectation.
There was a great deal of dishonesty in the SUV. When the US was trying to solve problems relating to dependence on trade with people who to some degree wanted to kill us, people began to talk about the poor farmer and the undue burden protecting us from out enemies would place on them. So trucks were excluded from the regulations. This resulted in the building of SUVS that could be built cheaper because they did not have to follow the regulations of cars. In reality, the minivan beats the SUV in room, seating and safety, but did fall under regulations. The end result is that in 2001, using money given by SUV drivers, the america was attacked resulting in the largest loss of life on US soil in a very long time. Those are facts, no fantasy of some greenie.
Gas engines are inefficient. The fuel is never fully combusted, much of the energy is lost to heat, and then there is energy lost in the mechanical transmission of power. This is simple thermodynamics and physics. For sure electrical generation at commercial power plants is greatly more efficient than local generation in a car. For sure turning a wheel with electric motors is going to remove the inefficiency introduced with mechanical linkages. Now, whether a higher percentage of energy is going to be applied to useful work in the electric model than the gas model, that is an open question. Certainly with batteries this may not be case. However fuel cells can have a very high efficiency. Internal combustion engines are very mature, and the efficiency can be assumed to be maximized for the price consumers are willing to pay. OTOH, the electric car is relatively immature and as time goes on we should see better engines with better range. Remember 40 years ago it was not uncommon to require a tank of 20 gallons or more to achieve a range of 300 miles. Now at highway speeds that amount can achieve double the range.
Diesel is worse than gas for the same reason hybrids are worse than gas. They are less familiar to many people and more expensive. For instance, a VW Passat is $20K, but a TDI is $25K. There is no payback model for the TDI because Diesel tends to be more expensive that even premium gas. So, for diesel to be competitive a bit of government social engineering is necessary, like in Europe. This would be a good interim solution. Hybrid, electric, and diesel would be a good way to increase efficiency. In particular, if SUV were diesel and had to meet all emission requirements, the world would be a better place.
An SUV us an incredible inefficiency use of energy and space. As mentioned, part of the problem is going to be the inefficiency. If I were doing this, I would start by looking at the aerodynamics and see what can be done to help the car cut through the air. In particular the height, the rear, and the engine area. In particular, because cooling is going to be less of an issue there will not be a requirement for as much air.
First, a relationship has nothing to do with crime. I have knows people in what might be called serious relationship who risk their families to go out of and do commit minor crimes for fun and small profit. I have known people who engage in antisocial behavior because they think it is the only way to help their family. Madoff had a wife and kids and what didi he do? He was a professional criminal.
Generally entering a lasting relationship, for an adolescent a month to a few months, is a sign of maturity. Maturity indicates that one can understand that one's actions has an effect on others. This means that one has empathy and understands that if one steals a car, it hurts another person. One can rationalize that it hurts people less than it benefits you, but at least there is empathy.
But just having a person who you have sex with. Just fathering a child. What does this to do with anything. This is why it is a dumb idea. Yes promoting relationships, empathy, compassion, that is good.Embedding people in civilized society by giving them fair benifits of such society, that can be good as well. But we see that is no guarantee.
Ultimately it is about power. If we educate people so they know they are powerful and have choices, perhaps they will be more likely to make choices that limit harm to other. Perhaps they won't make choice that arbitrarily hurt people. I say anyone can break a window, run a program on a computer, insult another person. That is not power. It is something else to build a house, help someone use a computer to enrich their lives, promote a person. This is power. This is how we can get teens to do real work.
And as a benefit, boys will not be so likely to sleep with and impregnate girls just to feel a sense of power.
When I see ads for this kind of rental, it is like saying you are going to get free money. In reality, a car is somewhat delicate machine and even when used with care requires usage incurs non trivial costs. So renting your car is not like renting your house. Yes, there is risk to renting a house, but the car is certainly guaranteed to come back more used. The rental structure appears to externalize most costs to the car owner.
The second thing I see in the ad is that insurance is provided by the firm brokering the rental. It implies there is no risk to the owner, which I think is hogwash. If I loan my car to someone than that person and anyone they harm can go after my insurance. With the involvement of cash the situation becomes even more complex.
Now, I can imagine using this to fund the acquisition of an extra car. If it is mostly available to rent, and well insured, then maybe the payments can be made by the rental fees. To fund a $500 monthly payment and insurance though one would to rent enough to get about $700, which would mean that car would have to rented about half the days in a month.
Everyone who knew about a Grid wanted on. It was the first piece of computer industrial design I knew about. OTH it really wasn't a clamshell. it was a pop up screen, like the tandy 200, released two years later. I would say the Tandy 200 is the first useful affordable laptop computer. Both were integrated systems with custom OS. It is interesting to note that we are returning to metal enclosures for high end computers, or those that want to look like it.
Unlike the Tandy, the grid computer only ran on line current. Compared to other portable computers the innovation in this machine was the flat display and internal expandability and storage. The expense of the screen was significant. Note that first Apple Mac was also a portable computer, but used a CRT.
In any case most of the computers through the 80's were not laptops, and we did not get reliable clamshells until 1990's.
Years ago, just as the average person began to know what the Internet it, my city went to one newspaper. It is was known at the time, but denied, that surviving paper made a buyout offer to speed the demise of the losing paper. I believe that the issue was capital assets. There were simply not enough people to support two sets of building, printing presses, and distribution sites.
In this transitional period, the question is who is going to pay for the printing presses and buildings that cost the same no matter the distribution? Local papers in major metropolitan areas maybe print a couple hundred thousand copies a day. The WSJ, USA Today, and NY Times sell maybe 4 million papers a day, which is probably on the order of all other major papers combine. These are printed around the country, so probably help support many of the larger papers support the costs of the press.
So when is the distribution of a physical paper going to be small enough that the huge buildings and presses are going to eb sold, and reports are going to be out reporting, editors are going to be in small offices editing, and no one is going to be sitting around saying how wonderful it is that I can have a big office to support my ego? The Huffington Post model has been criticized, but the citizen reporter model with minimal editor control is going to be future. When there is no need to arrange a page, deciding what goes above the fold, what gets hidden in the middle, what get hidden after a jump, what words get cut because of costs, the expense of a newspaper is simply the cost of reporters.
Ultimately this will be good. Too much money is spent on not reporting in newspapers.
It kind of reminds me of prototyping. I have been in situations where the prototyped system, often done Ina RAD has never been reimplimented for production. Prototyping is important, and underused. Specifications change as a project develop and the process and minimum deliverables are better understood. What funding agents seem to be looking for is a way to skip prototyping, which is dangerous as specifications evolve quickly at the early stage, or build a prototype that can be quickly converted to a scalable production product. This may be possible if money is put in earlybtobsuport future development. Of course that money could be wasted if the prototype is not viable.
Which is today Agile is probably a perfectly good process, but maybe it should not be sold as a way to save money, but to get a product running quickly with additional costs incurred later
The customer of microsoft is never the end user. The customer of MS WIndows is the OEM. The customer of the xBox is the the developer. Obviously this business model is not working, so they must p the ads.
Yes, this is a problem if it is hurting developers. However, if the developers are not using screen real estate effectively, then MS has to do something else.
To me it seems the issue is the charging for xBox Live.Charging to do what one can do for free on a computer is really stupid. I can see some value in multiplayer games, but if they are going to be using advertising, why charger?
Not necessarily. You would be amazed at how many oil refineries and chemical plants are located only 1-10 meters above sea level, in areas that flood yearly. Just look at how gas prices rise during the yearly shutdown.
I think it is even worse than that. It is like fighting a war against a foe defeated years ago. MS is not only innovating against a competitor that is directly threatening their marketshare, they are allowing true competitors to roam freely.
Look at the market statistics. The end of the PC may be neigh, but that is a few years away, and building a hybrid machine that maintains the MS Windows desktop may or may not be an effective method to counter this. In near term, though, what is driving MS share downwards is a new browser, a new phone, and lack of growth in the advertising market. None of these is Apple. The only threat that Apple made was many years ago with the Intel MacBook. Lately the issue is Google. Most of the user fleeing IE seem to be going to chrome. Most people buying smart phones seem to be buying Android phones. The iPhone market share is still significant, but MS is not likely to win iPhone users with a MS phone. If a Surface tablet does appear, it is simply going to poach sales from more expensive laptops, which is why HP and Dell and the others are so pissed off.
Google Docs has essentially made the home student versions of MS Office obsolete in a way that OO.org could not. IE is not needed for anything anymore because Google has developed techniques that are standards based. THe Damage has been done. MS can remain long term viable only by provided direct customer service to end users. Whether it needs to do this is questionable. They have lots of revenue, and any large amounts of money spent is going to be just thrown down a whole for a long time.
I think it is a little more complex than this. When things are going on that we do not like, there are many ways to deal with the conflict. In the US, for instance, we have a process to deal with problems using non-violent means. We can get laws passed, we can appeal to the courts, we can have people arrested who break the laws. Of course no everyone believes in this process, and the only mean of change for them is violence, terrorism, intimidation. For instance, many religious folks do not seem to have a lot of faith in the process of democracy, so the resort to violence, shooting doctors, intimidating people who disagree with them, calling such people names and ridiculing beliefs that do not agree with their own. They live in fear of those of think differently.
So this is where I think we are with the anarchists. Obviously these are people who do not base their actions on the process of law and order. If an anarchist does not like the implications of nanotechnology, and I agree some of those implications are frightening, they cannot just go and work within a framework of government diplomacy. They, presumably, cannot even take confort of some blowhard at the pulpit or on a rooftop condemning everyone who does not follow a dictatorial path. So what is the option? Violence, killing, intimidation. As was said, it is not science per se. But it is not corporations either. It is simply egotistical people who cannot imagine that they are so unimportant that everyone would not automatically agree with all of their beliefs.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean really, if they wanted near zero latency communication, they should just come to me for some basic technology. For instance, a basic, yet expensive, path is telepaths. Right now we would simple takes twins or triplets or whatever, test them for basic ability, and then train them. Pay each 100K a year to be on staff for a few year, then replace then as needed. This would be a great job for someone right out of high school. For the longer term we would go to some country with low regulation and genetically engineer the telepaths. At first this would be just selective breeding and early training, but eventually we should have labs set up to create telepaths on demand. Pay for their room and board, keep them on for 10 years, then send them on their way with a couple million in trust.
A more expensive and lower bandwidth method would be quantum entanglement. Chang the spin on one particle, it's entangled particle will immediately be changed as well. A 8 bit system could be built, An alternating all up then all down could be sent as a metronome, then an STX, then a certain amount of datadata, then and ETX, then a check sequence, then an EOT. Speed would be limited on by how long one must hold a state for reading. The advantage here is that there is absolutely not latency.
You see, there are always simple solutions when one thinks about it.
For other classes, I found it best to rewrite or retype notes after the class. In this case summarizing during class and then summarizing in a more concise and legible form is very useful. I agree that the livescribe pen is a very useful tool. It has been on Woot for a very reasonable price. It is useful if you follow all that graphic organizer stuff.
Unfortunately the facts of politics have much more far ranging implications, yet the facts are treated much more loosely. For instance, fact checkers have said that Romney does not pay less than many middle class americans. This is based on the supposition that Romney has released two years of tax returns. In fact we have one year of just under 14% and second year with approximate tax rate of 15-16%. The average middle class effective tax rat is 15-16%, with many paying up to over 20% before a refund. These fact checkers interpreted the facts to achieve a defensible yet invalid result.
Then there is all the debate over the deficit. Many look at %ofGDP which is a useful figure. In 1991 the debt was about 70% of GDP while in 2010 it was close to 90% of GDP, which is bad. OTOH the intest payment in 1991 were about 451B in 2010 dollars, while in 2010 the payments were 413B in the same dollars. Which of these are factual significant, of either, is subject of valid debate.
eventually Apple did become less expensive and the specs became more comparable. PC components became fast and reliable enough for use on Apple products, and eventually Intel, in need of a high end market, and Apple in need of a power efficient cheap, created a chip Apple could use.
Until recently much of the selling has continued to be feature bloat often in order to sell a cheaper product. For instance, look at the number of table that come with no memory, but promote the SD card. Sure it is cheap to add an SD card, but what are the speed and security penalties. Look at Amazon FIre that is selling fine without a camera or an SD slot.
The fact is that Apple got it right this time. The machine is not expensive, and the services are there in abundance. Amazon has it right as well. Google sells advertisement, not services, so it is for the new apple, but worse since the hobby toys are not even that business capable. MS who is not end user service oriented, is going to have to create that culture if it does not provide a real way for the third parties to generate expected profit ont he new windows 8.
Frankly, 'real world algebra' or whatever fancy methods are popular at the moment are worthless if they try to hide of minimize the abstraction of physical information. It is ok to minimize the symbolic manipulation, as that is just rules. A student must know how to manipulate symbolically, but understanding why those manipulations and not others are valid is the important information.
Algebra is also a gatekeeper for college. It is a simple way to make sure a student is mature and has the capacity for abstract thought. One thing to remember is that not only does everyone not need to go college, but not everyone needs to go to college at 18. There are many people who start college in early and mid 20's, and many who do not receive a bachelor degree untile much older. That is fine. College requires a level of development that not everyone has at 18.
At first I was thinking these would not catch on because they do exactly oppositie of what many people want. Instead of getting rid of excess reality, they just make it worse. Look at the return of the ugly big headphones that are all the rage again. Look at the number of kids that still get high. These glasses may have a market. In terms of dating the question is how to pass the time until it becomes socially acceptable to have sex.
There are some virtual reality applications now. Some are not widely used because they do not have a purpose, or because they are privacy concerns. You meet someone, your facebook profile in on you phone, that person now has access to all the info. In many states you tax records are on public file. Someone comes to the house to beg for money, the homeless, a church, whatever, they now have a bunch of information. Likewise someone looking for a car to follow and hijack.
Google did collect unnecessary personal information. Google has not deleted it. The issue with these are not going to be technical buy political.
While there may be overlaps, my understanding is the primary objective of FaceBook and Adultfriendfinder are not precisely the same. For example, it seems that many more photos on facebook involves clothing, and I am sure many of the people on facebook do not intend to have sex with everyone who friends them.
Just for clarification, we have hardly been waiting for fish in space. Some of us saw them way back when. Getaway Special Payload G332 included the study of brine shrimp. This was a project from the a little high school in Houston called Booker T. Washington. In was developed in the early 80's and flew 1986. Colombia no less, and the last flight before Challenger.
It could be that Apple will use this to gain normal FRAND access to technology. I don't know if Samsung is not complying with the contractual agreement, or if Apple is abusing the agreement, but this would certainly be leverage for Apple. Any licensing agreements that Apple has asked for outside of the FRAND tech is irrelevant. Samsung has already shown a willingness, with MS, to pay for questionable tech if it means that lawsuit will be avoided.
That is to not to say that Apple would not do this just to be aggressive. It is arguable that Maps on iOS is funding Android development, certainly Google makes no significant money from Andoid, SO apple is replacing maps, probably at a far greater expense.
Vocabulary is an issue in any writing and always depends on the knowledge of the writer and the audience. Jargon is just a instance, almost a trivial instance. In general selecting a word is a compromise between norrowing meaning and comprehension of the audience. Suppose I were writing about someone and I wanted make a clear instance of relationship. There was a time when, if I assumed I were writing for an education audience, I might be able to leave the confines of english and use conocer or saber. For a naive audience, the meaning will be lost, but to a more sophisticated audience the hair is split.
My point is two fold. If the writer is knowledgeable enough to use jargon is a precise sense, then there is every reason to use this jargon. In most cases where I see objection to jargon it is where the writer is merely trying to show a broad vocabulary and in the process creating a jumbled and inaccurate mess. Given that the writer can use the words correctly to correctly communicate the correct idea, then the question becomes can the audience be brought along to understand the underlying concepts, if they do not, and is the piece of writing the appropriate place to so do.
I understand why these magnets are in trouble. They are simply marketed badly, as a toy for children, in the mass market. Uranium and Bleach are not packaged as a toy, though cleaver people seem to be ordering it as such. But clever people repurposing a chemical as a toy is not a problem. It is when dangerous things are marketed or go viral as a toy where the problem occurs. For example, when just a few people knew that a mercury thermometer was a toy, it was not a big deal, But then everyone started doing it.
When a toy gets in trouble, there is also take about water being dangerous, as here. The thing that most people miss is that water as a toy is highly thought out. Wading pools are designed to be shallow. Deeper pools have a series of regulation to insure they do not become an attractive nuisance. Sinks are shallow and fill slowly. Showers do not normally have methods to block the drain. Baths have a high flow of water, but have a large base area so the depth increases slowly. I am sure that people who think that design appear magically are going to say none of this matters, but designs and marketing evolve over time to increase the safety and usability of an object.
For example, I bought a printer and could not connect it to my computer. Fortunately I had a manual, could buy parts, and had a soldering iron. In a few hours I was able to hack together a workable interface. The rest of thd manual told me the escape codes needed to produce special formats and graphics using my text editor.
In fact my covers on my Apples were almost never on. There were many things to do. For instance, the EEPROM programer was not an external device like my current Universal Programmer, but was inside the computer. I would put an EEPROM in, program it, and then plug the program into the S100 based computer to run whatever I wanted to do.
Repairs were also a snap. I recall once when my hard disk went out. A replacement pot and a soldering iron fixed it right up. Of course not all computer were this easy to fix. My Tandy 100 broke and I could never figure out why.
Pretty much the only thing I hated was the price of computers. I too wanted a Unix enthusiast, and really wanted a machine. In 1985 it was possible since ATT sold one, but it cost way too much. I was early able to by an Apple \\\ as they were heavily discounted, and this allowed me to do many things in a format that did not readily otherwise exist. Compaq had just recently reversed engineered the IBM computer, and prices were just coming down to the $1000 mark. That would not happen until 1985 or so, which is why the MAC seemed all of sudden expensive to those who were not keeping track of computer prices. There were of course board computer that were cheaper, but they were hacker tools. There were also video consoles, but these were meant to sell video games, not for technology enthusiasts.
As a technology enthusiast, I really like were technology has taken me, though I do miss programming and soldering the metal. I like being able to plug a dongle into my car and wirelessly receiving a constant stream of OBDB data. I like have my music everywhere and tools to be able to hack it as I please. I like that I have tools like Eclipse and XCode that are free. I remember having to pay large sums of money for error ridden Borland tools. That all I need to buy is computer and I can write software is nice. A little Python a a webserver and I can have something that will run on any device. What is there not to love.
So the Kahn thing is not innovative, it is just a natural progression of costs that allow corporation to provide it free, or for a profit, like word processing. There was a time when a basic Office Suite was worth a few hundred dollars. Now it is not. We see this with many charter schools, and places like the Kipp academy. If a student does not want to be educated, if a student does not choose to perform at a high level, that student can be removed. This cannot happen at a comprehensive school. Student population are much harder to finesse to minimize costs. This cost minimization is not innovative, and often not indicative of anything other than fancy accounting. Without added value, it is simply Enron Accounting.
Which isn't to say value is not added. It could cost more educate a student in another setting. Schools often finesse population exactly to have funds to add valuable opportunities. But it does not always happen. For instance I have seen parent remove children from schools where they are getting highly technical training and advanced credits to school where they are getting no technical training and just credit at the local community college. The school can point to every student in the technical program gaining admittance and scholarships to good schools, but the charter or online school wins out because of the press packet.
So no, no teacher who wants to teach is going to afraid of Khan or any other thing like it. It is free which means they make it available, use it, leverage it, just like anyone else. They are going to lost some good students, but honestly a lot of bad, meaning student that don't allow others others to learn, those that don't want to learn, those that do badly on standardized tests, are also going to go with is a good thing. Probably a net good thing. Schools are going to have to raise their game, but if they haven't already they are losers. It is not just about reading and writing and maths. No one makes above average income just with that. It is about thinking and feeling and listening to solve problem or figure things out. Just read Devil Wears Prada. That is the job world. Corporate will train you, but only if you are not stupid. The computer wil read, write and do math for you.
Teachers and schools have always been a place to provide resources. A well educated person has always been one that has resources outside of school. Though I think there were five years of my schooling that was critical, I had really smart parents summer and winter trips, a set of Britannicas and two libraries when I was young, a computer and online services when I was older, and a maker creed that also helped me create production products before I was 20.
A real anecdote from almost 30 years ago. I was one of the few students who went to public school in my neighborhood. The school I went to was little rough, but was very good in terms of math, science, and music. After a year my neighbor moved to a private school. At my school we had a very good music hour and science hour. At the private school t
How would the internet fix this? The developer pushed out a bad patch which caused users to lose data. Another patch was then put out, and we don't know if it was a fix or simply more bad code. The internet does not magically make bad code good. It does allow bad products to be patched on the fly, but that does not really help lusers who think they are getting a functioning application..
In any case a loss is indicative of a problem. We will see if there are more losses in the future, and what this does to the companies expectation.
Gas engines are inefficient. The fuel is never fully combusted, much of the energy is lost to heat, and then there is energy lost in the mechanical transmission of power. This is simple thermodynamics and physics. For sure electrical generation at commercial power plants is greatly more efficient than local generation in a car. For sure turning a wheel with electric motors is going to remove the inefficiency introduced with mechanical linkages. Now, whether a higher percentage of energy is going to be applied to useful work in the electric model than the gas model, that is an open question. Certainly with batteries this may not be case. However fuel cells can have a very high efficiency. Internal combustion engines are very mature, and the efficiency can be assumed to be maximized for the price consumers are willing to pay. OTOH, the electric car is relatively immature and as time goes on we should see better engines with better range. Remember 40 years ago it was not uncommon to require a tank of 20 gallons or more to achieve a range of 300 miles. Now at highway speeds that amount can achieve double the range.
Diesel is worse than gas for the same reason hybrids are worse than gas. They are less familiar to many people and more expensive. For instance, a VW Passat is $20K, but a TDI is $25K. There is no payback model for the TDI because Diesel tends to be more expensive that even premium gas. So, for diesel to be competitive a bit of government social engineering is necessary, like in Europe. This would be a good interim solution. Hybrid, electric, and diesel would be a good way to increase efficiency. In particular, if SUV were diesel and had to meet all emission requirements, the world would be a better place.
An SUV us an incredible inefficiency use of energy and space. As mentioned, part of the problem is going to be the inefficiency. If I were doing this, I would start by looking at the aerodynamics and see what can be done to help the car cut through the air. In particular the height, the rear, and the engine area. In particular, because cooling is going to be less of an issue there will not be a requirement for as much air.
Generally entering a lasting relationship, for an adolescent a month to a few months, is a sign of maturity. Maturity indicates that one can understand that one's actions has an effect on others. This means that one has empathy and understands that if one steals a car, it hurts another person. One can rationalize that it hurts people less than it benefits you, but at least there is empathy.
But just having a person who you have sex with. Just fathering a child. What does this to do with anything. This is why it is a dumb idea. Yes promoting relationships, empathy, compassion, that is good.Embedding people in civilized society by giving them fair benifits of such society, that can be good as well. But we see that is no guarantee.
Ultimately it is about power. If we educate people so they know they are powerful and have choices, perhaps they will be more likely to make choices that limit harm to other. Perhaps they won't make choice that arbitrarily hurt people. I say anyone can break a window, run a program on a computer, insult another person. That is not power. It is something else to build a house, help someone use a computer to enrich their lives, promote a person. This is power. This is how we can get teens to do real work.
And as a benefit, boys will not be so likely to sleep with and impregnate girls just to feel a sense of power.
The second thing I see in the ad is that insurance is provided by the firm brokering the rental. It implies there is no risk to the owner, which I think is hogwash. If I loan my car to someone than that person and anyone they harm can go after my insurance. With the involvement of cash the situation becomes even more complex.
Now, I can imagine using this to fund the acquisition of an extra car. If it is mostly available to rent, and well insured, then maybe the payments can be made by the rental fees. To fund a $500 monthly payment and insurance though one would to rent enough to get about $700, which would mean that car would have to rented about half the days in a month.
Unlike the Tandy, the grid computer only ran on line current. Compared to other portable computers the innovation in this machine was the flat display and internal expandability and storage. The expense of the screen was significant. Note that first Apple Mac was also a portable computer, but used a CRT.
In any case most of the computers through the 80's were not laptops, and we did not get reliable clamshells until 1990's.
In this transitional period, the question is who is going to pay for the printing presses and buildings that cost the same no matter the distribution? Local papers in major metropolitan areas maybe print a couple hundred thousand copies a day. The WSJ, USA Today, and NY Times sell maybe 4 million papers a day, which is probably on the order of all other major papers combine. These are printed around the country, so probably help support many of the larger papers support the costs of the press.
So when is the distribution of a physical paper going to be small enough that the huge buildings and presses are going to eb sold, and reports are going to be out reporting, editors are going to be in small offices editing, and no one is going to be sitting around saying how wonderful it is that I can have a big office to support my ego? The Huffington Post model has been criticized, but the citizen reporter model with minimal editor control is going to be future. When there is no need to arrange a page, deciding what goes above the fold, what gets hidden in the middle, what get hidden after a jump, what words get cut because of costs, the expense of a newspaper is simply the cost of reporters.
Ultimately this will be good. Too much money is spent on not reporting in newspapers.
It kind of reminds me of prototyping. I have been in situations where the prototyped system, often done Ina RAD has never been reimplimented for production. Prototyping is important, and underused. Specifications change as a project develop and the process and minimum deliverables are better understood. What funding agents seem to be looking for is a way to skip prototyping, which is dangerous as specifications evolve quickly at the early stage, or build a prototype that can be quickly converted to a scalable production product. This may be possible if money is put in earlybtobsuport future development. Of course that money could be wasted if the prototype is not viable. Which is today Agile is probably a perfectly good process, but maybe it should not be sold as a way to save money, but to get a product running quickly with additional costs incurred later
Yes, this is a problem if it is hurting developers. However, if the developers are not using screen real estate effectively, then MS has to do something else.
To me it seems the issue is the charging for xBox Live.Charging to do what one can do for free on a computer is really stupid. I can see some value in multiplayer games, but if they are going to be using advertising, why charger?
Not necessarily. You would be amazed at how many oil refineries and chemical plants are located only 1-10 meters above sea level, in areas that flood yearly. Just look at how gas prices rise during the yearly shutdown.
Look at the market statistics. The end of the PC may be neigh, but that is a few years away, and building a hybrid machine that maintains the MS Windows desktop may or may not be an effective method to counter this. In near term, though, what is driving MS share downwards is a new browser, a new phone, and lack of growth in the advertising market. None of these is Apple. The only threat that Apple made was many years ago with the Intel MacBook. Lately the issue is Google. Most of the user fleeing IE seem to be going to chrome. Most people buying smart phones seem to be buying Android phones. The iPhone market share is still significant, but MS is not likely to win iPhone users with a MS phone. If a Surface tablet does appear, it is simply going to poach sales from more expensive laptops, which is why HP and Dell and the others are so pissed off.
Google Docs has essentially made the home student versions of MS Office obsolete in a way that OO.org could not. IE is not needed for anything anymore because Google has developed techniques that are standards based. THe Damage has been done. MS can remain long term viable only by provided direct customer service to end users. Whether it needs to do this is questionable. They have lots of revenue, and any large amounts of money spent is going to be just thrown down a whole for a long time.
So this is where I think we are with the anarchists. Obviously these are people who do not base their actions on the process of law and order. If an anarchist does not like the implications of nanotechnology, and I agree some of those implications are frightening, they cannot just go and work within a framework of government diplomacy. They, presumably, cannot even take confort of some blowhard at the pulpit or on a rooftop condemning everyone who does not follow a dictatorial path. So what is the option? Violence, killing, intimidation. As was said, it is not science per se. But it is not corporations either. It is simply egotistical people who cannot imagine that they are so unimportant that everyone would not automatically agree with all of their beliefs.