OS/2 was once great, but was a little ahead of its time so it ended up slowly fading away. It's still used and will likely be used for time to come even after support has completely dried up.
Blackberry was once great, but was a little ahead of the smartphone curve so now it's slowly fading away. It's still used and will likely be used for time to come even after support has completely dried up.
My phone (LG Optimus Slider, 6 months old) is probably too insensitive for it to register as well, but some of the higher end Android phones I've played with have shown an amazing level of sensitivity and accuracy. Within a year or two, that will likely trickle down to the lower end models so that all new smartphones are sensitive enough for this to work.
It's not a perfect attack, but it doesn't need to be successful against every single user on every single phone. Most modern smartphones don't require physical abuse to register motion and most smartphone users don't put the phone down, put the password in, then pick it back up every single time. How about an analogy? Let's say there's a PC virus that exploits the wheel function of a USB mouse. Not every PC will have a USB mouse with a wheel, and even among those that do, not every user will use it. However, there's still enough vulnerable PCs that this theoretical virus could be highly successful.
Every technology that sees huge improvements over short timespans will begin to plateau eventually. There's only so much you can do before you start bumping into major constraints, such as the laws of physics.
You really don't need to know the physics behind how a processor works in order to administer servers. You don't need to know how Python directly affects bits to write a script. Do you think every mechanic has a deep understanding of thermodynamics before they begin working on cars? Or carpenters understand the molecular biology of different wood species? It helps to understand the basics, but you don't need the same in depth knowledge it takes to design things from scratch.
Call it what you will, but it's given me a great edge in getting decent jobs rather than starting at the ground floor. Isn't that what really counts in a degree anyway?
The way it broke down is CS degrees are for getting a job designing hardware at Intel or software at one of the big software vendors. IT degrees are aimed at supporting enterprise IT infrastructure, not creating a product.
My degree is in Network Administration, so we were very heavy on hands-on with Cisco gear, but we also needed experience with programming (either VB.NET or Java), BASH scripting, batch files/Powershell, HTML, Linux (CentOS was required for one class, Fedora for another and other classes let you choose your own distro) and Windows server administration, hardware (class was loosely based around A+ cert), database administration, project management, technical writing, etc. Likewise, all of the programming students still needed some server administration and networking classes.
The comp sci students on the other hand did a couple classes of C++ and that was about it for IT-related experience. They mostly focused on design (hardware and software) rather than implementation or maintenance.
The same year I started college, they cut baseball, track and field, and a couple other sports (all of which had competitive records) to fund a larger football stadium (the football team averages less than 4 wins per year). It turns out their $5 million "stadium" is actually a bunch of new bleachers and an ugly 900 square foot concrete building.
At the school I went to, computer science degrees were part of the school of liberal arts and sciences (in the same building as astronomy, physics and math) and IT degrees were part of the school of business. It worked fairly well as there wasn't much overlap between the two and the CS students (a very small program compared to IT) benefited from being close to the math and physics departments.
I remember from a Natl Geo article a few years ago that aluminum is being considered as rocket fuel because once you get it down to around 10nm, it's quite explosive.
As evidenced by their "I'm a Mac" commercials, Apple used the formula "PC = Windows based personal computer" even though Macs are/technically/ PCs as well.
Linux does have significant marketshare in the server and smartphone arenas. Servers are generally more secure than desktop machines (not to mention better maintained), so there's naturally fewer points of vulnerability - this holds true for Windows servers as well. As for smartphones, I've seen a lot of articles about Android malware recently although I haven't personally encountered any.
500 miles at an average 60mph is a bit over 8 hours... the vast majority of drivers will make at least one 30 minute stop for food, rest, etc sometime over an 8+ hour trip so if this goes mainstream, the applications it won't work well for would be more an exception than the rule. Hell, you could go NY to LA and only stop to charge 7 or 8 times... I'd have to stop for gas more often than that.
Based on your link and the summary, it looks like the theoretical energy density maximum of Li-air is about six times the theoretical energy density of Al-air. Most of the other issues mentioned in your link have already been solved and it looks like they're still being actively developed for use in portable electronics (IE: laptops).
Odds are it doesn't release enough oxygen to make a huge difference with most common flammables. Even if it does, it can be solved with a cheap and easy weekend project to add an exhaust vent to your garage... something you may want to invest in anyway. Likewise, the mass gained by discharging it is probably a small fraction of the overall battery weight and won't make any noticeable difference - go pick up an air compressor that's empty. Now fill it up to max rated and pick it up. There's a weight gain, but not a lot compared to the dead weight of the non-air components.
Slashdot Mirror
So every time I give out business cards to friends so they have my contact info, it's a business transaction?
This is why my minions will all have stylish uniforms. It gives them legitimacy.
Ok, here's the comparison:
OS/2 was once great, but was a little ahead of its time so it ended up slowly fading away. It's still used and will likely be used for time to come even after support has completely dried up.
Blackberry was once great, but was a little ahead of the smartphone curve so now it's slowly fading away. It's still used and will likely be used for time to come even after support has completely dried up.
My phone (LG Optimus Slider, 6 months old) is probably too insensitive for it to register as well, but some of the higher end Android phones I've played with have shown an amazing level of sensitivity and accuracy. Within a year or two, that will likely trickle down to the lower end models so that all new smartphones are sensitive enough for this to work.
It's not a perfect attack, but it doesn't need to be successful against every single user on every single phone. Most modern smartphones don't require physical abuse to register motion and most smartphone users don't put the phone down, put the password in, then pick it back up every single time. How about an analogy? Let's say there's a PC virus that exploits the wheel function of a USB mouse. Not every PC will have a USB mouse with a wheel, and even among those that do, not every user will use it. However, there's still enough vulnerable PCs that this theoretical virus could be highly successful.
Blackberry is the OS/2 of the mobile world.
I would think a blind judge would know it better than a deaf judge.
Every technology that sees huge improvements over short timespans will begin to plateau eventually. There's only so much you can do before you start bumping into major constraints, such as the laws of physics.
Sounds a little like Microsoft's method.
Win 95 - Tock
Win 98 - Tick
Win Me - Sproing
Win 2000 - Tock
Win XP - Tock
XP SP1 - Tick
XP SP2 - Tock
XP SP3 - Tick
Vista - Tock sprooooing
Win 7 - Tick
Win 8 - Tock (maybe)
You really don't need to know the physics behind how a processor works in order to administer servers. You don't need to know how Python directly affects bits to write a script. Do you think every mechanic has a deep understanding of thermodynamics before they begin working on cars? Or carpenters understand the molecular biology of different wood species? It helps to understand the basics, but you don't need the same in depth knowledge it takes to design things from scratch.
Call it what you will, but it's given me a great edge in getting decent jobs rather than starting at the ground floor. Isn't that what really counts in a degree anyway?
The way it broke down is CS degrees are for getting a job designing hardware at Intel or software at one of the big software vendors. IT degrees are aimed at supporting enterprise IT infrastructure, not creating a product.
My degree is in Network Administration, so we were very heavy on hands-on with Cisco gear, but we also needed experience with programming (either VB.NET or Java), BASH scripting, batch files/Powershell, HTML, Linux (CentOS was required for one class, Fedora for another and other classes let you choose your own distro) and Windows server administration, hardware (class was loosely based around A+ cert), database administration, project management, technical writing, etc. Likewise, all of the programming students still needed some server administration and networking classes.
The comp sci students on the other hand did a couple classes of C++ and that was about it for IT-related experience. They mostly focused on design (hardware and software) rather than implementation or maintenance.
The same year I started college, they cut baseball, track and field, and a couple other sports (all of which had competitive records) to fund a larger football stadium (the football team averages less than 4 wins per year). It turns out their $5 million "stadium" is actually a bunch of new bleachers and an ugly 900 square foot concrete building.
At the school I went to, computer science degrees were part of the school of liberal arts and sciences (in the same building as astronomy, physics and math) and IT degrees were part of the school of business. It worked fairly well as there wasn't much overlap between the two and the CS students (a very small program compared to IT) benefited from being close to the math and physics departments.
I remember from a Natl Geo article a few years ago that aluminum is being considered as rocket fuel because once you get it down to around 10nm, it's quite explosive.
As evidenced by their "I'm a Mac" commercials, Apple used the formula "PC = Windows based personal computer" even though Macs are /technically/ PCs as well.
Linux does have significant marketshare in the server and smartphone arenas. Servers are generally more secure than desktop machines (not to mention better maintained), so there's naturally fewer points of vulnerability - this holds true for Windows servers as well. As for smartphones, I've seen a lot of articles about Android malware recently although I haven't personally encountered any.
How exactly is OSX more secure than Windows 7, assuming both are patched and not used by total morons that click Yes to everything?
So what you're saying is the fact that Apple overcharges for Macs is actually a factor in the increase in Mac malware? Oddly enough, makes sense.
Which is why one of the selling points for Macs on Apple's website is that they're immune to "Windows viruses"
Only if we combine it with toasters.
500 miles at an average 60mph is a bit over 8 hours... the vast majority of drivers will make at least one 30 minute stop for food, rest, etc sometime over an 8+ hour trip so if this goes mainstream, the applications it won't work well for would be more an exception than the rule. Hell, you could go NY to LA and only stop to charge 7 or 8 times... I'd have to stop for gas more often than that.
Based on your link and the summary, it looks like the theoretical energy density maximum of Li-air is about six times the theoretical energy density of Al-air. Most of the other issues mentioned in your link have already been solved and it looks like they're still being actively developed for use in portable electronics (IE: laptops).
Odds are it doesn't release enough oxygen to make a huge difference with most common flammables. Even if it does, it can be solved with a cheap and easy weekend project to add an exhaust vent to your garage... something you may want to invest in anyway. Likewise, the mass gained by discharging it is probably a small fraction of the overall battery weight and won't make any noticeable difference - go pick up an air compressor that's empty. Now fill it up to max rated and pick it up. There's a weight gain, but not a lot compared to the dead weight of the non-air components.