*nod* The Industrial Revolution changed, television changed society, the Internet changed society... what will be next?
Although just from the sound of it, a lot of the ideology of this book has been done before.... 1984 is a good example of it...
Frankly, I think ideas do have a 'life' of their own, but the concept of them of treating them as intelligent and able to control people goes a bit far. It's one thing to sink into ideology and a mob mentality, but it's another to say that the ideas took over and control humanity.
It might be a good read, but if I wanted secret masters, I would have stayed in the Illuminati...
Oh, and education can actually stop technologies from being abused, but first you have to get everyone to read and understand the User Manual.
Thing is, is this really news? I've seen copies of various flavours of Linux at Best Buy, Electronics Boutique, and I think I saw a copy at Sears. (I was kinda scared to take a second look.)
Wal-Mart is one of the bigger chains of stores. Why is it so newsworthy that they choose to carry a product that has a 5+% OS market share?
Or maybe I'm just looking at this wrong... You can already get damn near everything else at Wal-Mart. Why not OSes? (Windows only sorta counts in my book.)
When they start selling cars, let me know... I'll pick one up when they're on special...
Kierthos
Re:When is this a good thing?
on
Death March
·
· Score: 2
You mean the Dilbert reality isn't our reality?
Actually, I view this as the end product of an industry where what you're working on this week may be obsolete next week, or even in the next hour. Combine that with managers who know nothing about computers, programming, or time-management, and you get this. (You also get 50% of the Dilbert strips ever produced.)
Programmers are always going to view certain projects as "Death Marches", simply because certain projects in any corporation will always be "Death Marches". Poorly managed projects are the norm, not the exception, at least in my jaded cynical view.
And it's not just in business. Too often in college courses, assignments are given not to teach the students, but just to give the assignment. And consequently, the students don't want to spend a lot of time on the assignment because it is assigned for this reason.
This, of course, is paralleled in business, and make-work is the worst kind of "Death March", IMAO, because everyone knows that it is make-work. No one likes doing work that has no meaning. No one wants to dig post holes just to fill them in later, or ditches to bury the D.I.'s cigarette.
How are we supposed to treat this? It's really simple to say that you get rid of incompetent management, but according to the Peter Principle, "Everyone rises to his or her own level of incompetence." Or, those who can, do. Those who can't, manage. (Those who can't manage, become sales reps.) Some companies, especially those that are small enough, can have enough interaction between the levels of employees that this can be taken care of. But all too often, the major corporations cannot effectively deal with incompetent management. Hence the book. If nothing else, it gives you something to read other then Dilbert.
Okay, maybe this is a stupid question, but what keeps the molecule from "bending back" on itself and re-attaching to the same gold wire?
Also, is there any evidence that gold is the only substance that this molecule shows preference to? Sure, if it's preferential to chocolate malteds (as an oddball example) there's probably not a lot to worry about. But have they tested this against any or all of the other common materials found in the application set?
I'm sort of playing Devil's Advocate here, but I'd also be really interested if these questions (and answers) have been considered....
Smaller circuits generally generate less heat, but it really all depends on what the circuit is desgined for, how long it stays active, etc.
As for practical applications:
Umm, if you could reasonably control when the wire would melt, then you could use it to establish/re-establish electrical connections in limited-space areas without neccessarily having to crack open a case. Control the movement of the wire with micro-tools, and you're all set.
It might also be used to speed up mass production of chip-sets. Maybe. This is pretty much all guesswork on my part.
Potential failures:
What happens if it melts or re-melts at the wrong time? It seems to me that right now, this is the last thing in the world that you would want to use on anything you'd like to keep around. What if the wire melts at the wrong time or in the wrong way and establishes the wrong sort of connection? What if it re-melts later and fries something important?
Okay, now no corporation in their right mind is going to use this stuff in their current product lines. One, it's probably more expensive then using normal electrical solder (which I recall being pretty cheap). And two, with the potential failures that I listed (not to mention any other problems that could creep in), they'd be open to lawsuits real quick. And corporations hate lawsuits.
Well, since Voltage(V) = Current(I) * Resistance(R), then it really doesn't matter whether or not it's the current or voltage that causes the heat unless you have a zero resistance material. Now, since this is a self-soldering (supposedly) wire, then it seems to me that it must have some resistance, otherwise the entire length of wire would melt if enough heat is applied to one end of the wire.
Frankly, I don't want anything like this in my computer, or anything I own. I have enough problems with wires that melt (okay insulation too) when overheated already without having wires that can melt on their own.
Yup, in the Running Man (story, not bad Ahnold movie), there are scores of free TV shows, and in the poorer districts, everyone has a TV and it is required by law to be on. Subjegate those masses by turning them into couch potatoes.
Which is just what the Internet is doing to a lot of people. I can't count the number of people I know who can't wait to check their e-mail 12 times a day, or are more socially adept (usually) through IRC or other online chats. (Most of them still can't spell though.) And there's even more people who spend hours a day playing online games like Evercrack or Diablo II or NWN. This is supposed to be a sign of the spiritual growth of mankind?
Excuse me while I search for viable real-estate on Mars.... I want to get off this planet before most of mankind goes down the crapper.
I daresay that this study could theoretically also show that people who spend 20+ hours a week online also have less of a social life and get laid a lot less.
Think this through: If you're spending that much time online you're going to have less time to do everything else.
Of course, there's the other option: That if you're online that much you're not committing violent crime because you're viewing porn/committing data theft (not a violent crime but a prosecuteable one)/playing violent games (wait, that's obviously linked to violent crime, ignore that)/Slashdotting, etc.
Excuse me, but how are we waiting for anything? Remember just a few years ago, when a commercially available 1 GHz processor was a pipe dream? I'd say that appearances are definitely contrary to your position, and patents in the computer industry really don't seem to be slowing innovation at all.
If patents are being approved hand-over-fist, it means that innovations are being made hand-over-fist. Yeah, maybe some of them are trivial, maybe some of them are obvious, but it's apparent that innovations are being made.
I'm not arguing that RAMBUS isn't evil or greedy. In fact, I think it's more greed then evil. But that's not my point. My point is that their greed probably won't have a major effect. M$ has been greedy for years, and it hasn't stopped other OS's from coming out, or getting market share. In fact, M$'s greed (and stupidity) proved to be their downfall in the browser legal battle.
Deal with it. Corporations will always be looking at the bottom line. Sometimes this means having to look like the evil greedy bastard. But that's what they have to do to stay around. Is it socially acceptable among the marginal population of Slashdotters? Apparently not. But we're only a very small percentage of the people out there.
They do push for innovations. Everyone knows the process by which your invention is created. Which means that they can try to take the next step, by improving that invention. Of course, if you're smart, you're doing that as well, and hopefully, you're a step ahead, having done the work on the original patent.
Basically, it's always a game of catch-up, because we always want faster, better, neater machines. Doesn't matter how it gets here, but give me that 10 GHz processor and a hard drive the size of a quarter that holds a Terabyte! Companies in the computer industry realize that the money is where the "best" machines are. You couldn't pay 99.999% of the people to take an 8086 off your hands these days, but the Playstation 2 comes out and there's a line around the block!
Get the idea? Patents stimulate further patents. Maybe by the same greedy evil corporation that made the first patent on that tech, but there you go.
Actually, I recall that a couple of Harvard (not certain about the school though)law students patented the wheel a few years ago when they found that there was no existing patent on it. They got in the newspapers at the time, but they never got any royalties, nor did they expect to. They just wanted to see if they could do it.
Now, slightly back OT: Patents are, IIRC, awarded to "first-to-apply" which means if you beat RAMBUS (or anyone else) to applying for a patent, then you are initially awarded that patent. However, there is a system set up for "stink-patenting" which is patenting anything under the sun. I believe you have to prove that were working on the development before you are finally awarded the patent.
Now, I view what RAMBUS is doing as wrong. Corporation-wise, it's incredibly intelligent and expected, because if you don't defend your patents, you can lose them. So I expect them to do so. What irks me is the arrogance of the situation. They can't believe that anyone can come up with something in the arena that won't infringe on their patents. I am so hoping that someone finds a way around this and gives RAMBUS the finger.
Linux definitely needs more skill to keep running, as there are a greater amount of guru-types who have had to work to keep Windows running (the fun of managing an NT network in Comp Sci... what joy...).
Linux does have it's own share of problems, but stability is not one of them. Yeah, I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but at this date, what with the MS hacker-attack, why would any company choose Windows unless they already had bought the licensing agreement from the Evil One himself?
Oh yeah, and of course IBM is happy. That's 15,000 machines they don't have to worry about sitting and gathering dust somewhere. I have to wonder: If the seller of the computers had been Dell or Gateway, would it have seemed as newsworthy as it was with IBM? (Sorry, I still have this mental image of IBM as a big old dinosaur being outpaced by Dell, Gateway, et al.)
Altavista probably imposes the artificial limit to cut down on system overload, mostly because a lot more people probably see the Babelfish link on Altavista then heading to the SysTran site.
Of course, this is just speculation. It also could be that Altavista never updates anything. Which would make sense, seeing as how I still get e-mail there 3 days late. (If I wanted to want 3 days for mail, I'd use the Post Office.)
"Funny, ha-ha" or "Funny, oh my how ironic... *thud*"?
Seriously though, there is just as much of a chance that this bacteria will be harmless to the current forms of earthly life. Now, mind you, if I was one of the scientists playing with this bacteria, I sure as Hell would adopt every single precaution I could, on the simple fact that I have no idea what it could do. Then I would begin the experimenting in earnest. I'd rather some rodents die for this advance in science rather then in cosmetics testing...
Now, quite honestly, this does represent a good advance in science, because the scientists know it can be done now. One of the biggest obstacles in science is doing something that all the other scientists say can't be done.
However, it is a far cry from being able to revive a simple strain of bacteria to bringing about a dinosaur theme park. (This never made sense to me... why recreate the carnivores?)
Oh, and slightly back OT for the subject line, personally, I go with the asteroid smacking the planet theory for dinosaur death rather then some bacteria killing off all the dinos. Just a KT person, that's me...
There's also several problems, or at least considerations, to using organic compounds as components of electronics.
1) Lifetime. If a 'breed' of organic compound with a long lifespan can be utilized effectively, then it's all well and good, but no one wants a component that will have to be replaced every 30 days (as an example).
2) Production time. Are there any time-estimates not only when organic components would be commercially available? How about time-estimates for how long it would take to for a facility to produce one circuit board of organic compounds? I frankly have no idea how long it would take.
3) Disease. There's enough problems with viruses attacking the software and hardware. The last thing anyone wants is for the components to catch a cold.
4) Mutation. If it is an organic compound, there is always the possibility that it could mutate over time, degrading the performance of the component. One nice thing about inorganic components is that it is already pretty well known how they will react to most every condition we expect them to operate under.
5) Upgrading. How easily could this be done? Could it be done with a retrovirus? Would you have to buy a whole new component? Also in this vein, how susceptible would these components be to inadvertant tampering by the end users?
What also should be considered, not necessarily for the growth rate, but for the overall picture is the cost of computers over time. A computer that you can buy commerically today for $2000 would have cost 10 times that, if not more, 5 years ago.
Will IBM, Dell, Gateway, etc. stop selling computers? Of course not. They break, people want to upgrade, new businesses start, new customers enter the fold. But I tend to think, at least here in the States, that sales growth for home users, is going to decline seriously over the next decade or so. Business growth? That's different. Businesses, especially the big ones, can often afford to buy new computers for new branches, operations, or just to impress the new VP.
What the computer companies will be looking into is improving their sales in emerging markets, like 2nd world nations, and in 3rd world nations. Also, I have no doubt that the range of possible styles of peripherals, as well as the number of different peripherals will continue to grow. We have opt-mouses, DVD drives, ZIP drives, and other neat toys all commercially available within the last few years. Who knows what will be created in the next few, making what we have obsolete?
I'm assuming that they will have some sort of exercise equipment up there to avoid the loss of muscle tone while spending extended amounts of time in microgravity.
However, it should be interesting to note that the astronauts in the International Space Station will be as much guinea pig as anything else. They are going to, AFAIK, be in microgravity much longer then anyone else. The effects that this will have on the human body will most likely take years to study, the results of which will make it much 'easier' for future generations of astronauts.
Mind you, their diet while up there may have some strange effects on the body as well. I know that they are stocking food up there, but does the shuttle also empty the loo before it comes back down, or do the astronauts just let their feces shoot out of the station and burn up in re-entry? Inquiring minds... really don't want to know...
Last thing: Anyone have a tentative list of experiments that the first batch of astronauts are supposed to do while up there? Or a link to said list?
1) Once science invents a computer that can withstand blast forces and still operate with a melted processor, nuke blasts are covered.
2) Vacuum tubes are immune. The old style MiGs in the Russian Air Force were immune to the electromagnetic pulses from nuclear weapons. The U.S.A.F. planes were exceedingly vulnerable because they have every shiny nice new toy that the Air Farce wants to put in there, wherein it becomes next to impossible for one of those overpriced monsters to fly without electrical power. The MiGs didn't have the best glide ratio, but they could still operate in the bounds of the EMP.
So, if you want to make a computer that goes back to vacuum tubes and steam powered analytical engines, you could make it nuke-resistant. Either that, or slap 4 inches of lead on every side of the case, peripherals and cables.
Kierthos
Re:Field's Medal==Nobel Prizes for Mathematics
on
Nobel Prizes
·
· Score: 1
Anyone got a link to the solution to Fermat's Last Theorem?
And I wasn't aware of the age limit on the Field's Medal... have to tell someone to hurry up... he's only got 12 years left...
Very good points. And all the merchants have to do is switch to other services. This, if true, will probably lead to a loss of usage for AT&T because so many merchants will find any other service that doesn't have this asinine plan in effect.
A couple other things to consider as to why this would be a bad idea (from the AT&T POV).
1) What to do about spoofed orders? It is exceptionally easy for anyone who knows how to spoof an order on a merchant's site.
2) Credit card fraud. The customer really didn't order it. The merchant is being defrauded because most credit card companies refund fraudulent orders.
3) Lawsuits. The sales information is supposed to be protected, AFAIK, as AT&T is not the merchant and has no right to look at how much you spent at a particular merchant's site. How long before they get sued by an upset customer for being aware of how much they spent at some sex-toy site (as an example). It's one thing to have the merchant know how much you spent... it's kinda necessary. But it's another for a third-party organization who is not involved in the original transaction to be aware of it. (Note: IANAL, so take all of this with a grain of salt. For all I know, anyone can look at your credit card statement sans the card number...)
All in all, this is sounding like a really bad idea. Maybe we can get Clinton and Lazio to debate against it...:P
No reason. It's just that it is somewhat unexpected. Let's face it.... based on our incalculation by science fiction and Star Trek, which we all know to 100% verifiable in terms of science (sarcasm added), we expect anything in the depths of space to be debris-like. Not nice round planets, but rough asteroids, comets, the occassional interstellar probe, etc.
Finding a planet without a sun is just a touch odd...
Hrm... anyone know if they considered the possibility that the stars for these planets may have burned out completely long ago?
Actually, the standpoint of the guvmint lately has been to censor both...
Teaching kids that rocket launchers are the best way to get "gibs" may not be the wisest course of action, but rare exceptions aside, I doubt video games have much influence on society. Sure, we're desensitized to violence, but I got more of that from the friggin' news then from playing DOOM (which I didn't start doing until my 2nd year of college). If kids were being affected by violent games as much as Congress would purport, then we should be flooded with violence from kids as we speak. We're not. I think that proves something.
Now, which would I censor? Neither. I don't like censorship. If I had any kids, I would reccommend that they not view or listen to certain things, but I can't say that I would stop them. (Of course, if I ever have a kid, this may change...:P) So what if Jr. listens to odd music. So do I... I may install some web-browser security until I think he's of age to view certain types of sites, but if he's smart enough to get around that, more power to him...
All in all, censorship is wrong. It is the belief that someone else thinks that something is bad, so you cannot view it, no matter what you think about it. It is taking away your freedom to choose.
Slashdot Mirror
*nod* The Industrial Revolution changed, television changed society, the Internet changed society... what will be next?
Although just from the sound of it, a lot of the ideology of this book has been done before.... 1984 is a good example of it...
Frankly, I think ideas do have a 'life' of their own, but the concept of them of treating them as intelligent and able to control people goes a bit far. It's one thing to sink into ideology and a mob mentality, but it's another to say that the ideas took over and control humanity.
It might be a good read, but if I wanted secret masters, I would have stayed in the Illuminati...
Oh, and education can actually stop technologies from being abused, but first you have to get everyone to read and understand the User Manual.
Kierthos
Thing is, is this really news? I've seen copies of various flavours of Linux at Best Buy, Electronics Boutique, and I think I saw a copy at Sears. (I was kinda scared to take a second look.)
Wal-Mart is one of the bigger chains of stores. Why is it so newsworthy that they choose to carry a product that has a 5+% OS market share?
Or maybe I'm just looking at this wrong... You can already get damn near everything else at Wal-Mart. Why not OSes? (Windows only sorta counts in my book.)
When they start selling cars, let me know... I'll pick one up when they're on special...
Kierthos
You mean the Dilbert reality isn't our reality?
/.er)
Actually, I view this as the end product of an industry where what you're working on this week may be obsolete next week, or even in the next hour. Combine that with managers who know nothing about computers, programming, or time-management, and you get this. (You also get 50% of the Dilbert strips ever produced.)
Programmers are always going to view certain projects as "Death Marches", simply because certain projects in any corporation will always be "Death Marches". Poorly managed projects are the norm, not the exception, at least in my jaded cynical view.
And it's not just in business. Too often in college courses, assignments are given not to teach the students, but just to give the assignment. And consequently, the students don't want to spend a lot of time on the assignment because it is assigned for this reason.
This, of course, is paralleled in business, and make-work is the worst kind of "Death March", IMAO, because everyone knows that it is make-work. No one likes doing work that has no meaning. No one wants to dig post holes just to fill them in later, or ditches to bury the D.I.'s cigarette.
How are we supposed to treat this? It's really simple to say that you get rid of incompetent management, but according to the Peter Principle, "Everyone rises to his or her own level of incompetence." Or, those who can, do. Those who can't, manage. (Those who can't manage, become sales reps.) Some companies, especially those that are small enough, can have enough interaction between the levels of employees that this can be taken care of. But all too often, the major corporations cannot effectively deal with incompetent management. Hence the book. If nothing else, it gives you something to read other then Dilbert.
Kierthos
(Just another jaded
Okay, maybe this is a stupid question, but what keeps the molecule from "bending back" on itself and re-attaching to the same gold wire?
Also, is there any evidence that gold is the only substance that this molecule shows preference to? Sure, if it's preferential to chocolate malteds (as an oddball example) there's probably not a lot to worry about. But have they tested this against any or all of the other common materials found in the application set?
I'm sort of playing Devil's Advocate here, but I'd also be really interested if these questions (and answers) have been considered....
Kierthos
Smaller circuits generally generate less heat, but it really all depends on what the circuit is desgined for, how long it stays active, etc.
As for practical applications:
Umm, if you could reasonably control when the wire would melt, then you could use it to establish/re-establish electrical connections in limited-space areas without neccessarily having to crack open a case. Control the movement of the wire with micro-tools, and you're all set.
It might also be used to speed up mass production of chip-sets. Maybe. This is pretty much all guesswork on my part.
Potential failures:
What happens if it melts or re-melts at the wrong time? It seems to me that right now, this is the last thing in the world that you would want to use on anything you'd like to keep around. What if the wire melts at the wrong time or in the wrong way and establishes the wrong sort of connection? What if it re-melts later and fries something important?
Okay, now no corporation in their right mind is going to use this stuff in their current product lines. One, it's probably more expensive then using normal electrical solder (which I recall being pretty cheap). And two, with the potential failures that I listed (not to mention any other problems that could creep in), they'd be open to lawsuits real quick. And corporations hate lawsuits.
Just my $0.02 on this.
Kierthos
Well, since Voltage(V) = Current(I) * Resistance(R), then it really doesn't matter whether or not it's the current or voltage that causes the heat unless you have a zero resistance material. Now, since this is a self-soldering (supposedly) wire, then it seems to me that it must have some resistance, otherwise the entire length of wire would melt if enough heat is applied to one end of the wire.
Frankly, I don't want anything like this in my computer, or anything I own. I have enough problems with wires that melt (okay insulation too) when overheated already without having wires that can melt on their own.
Kierthos
Yup, in the Running Man (story, not bad Ahnold movie), there are scores of free TV shows, and in the poorer districts, everyone has a TV and it is required by law to be on. Subjegate those masses by turning them into couch potatoes.
Which is just what the Internet is doing to a lot of people. I can't count the number of people I know who can't wait to check their e-mail 12 times a day, or are more socially adept (usually) through IRC or other online chats. (Most of them still can't spell though.) And there's even more people who spend hours a day playing online games like Evercrack or Diablo II or NWN. This is supposed to be a sign of the spiritual growth of mankind?
Excuse me while I search for viable real-estate on Mars.... I want to get off this planet before most of mankind goes down the crapper.
Kierthos
I daresay that this study could theoretically also show that people who spend 20+ hours a week online also have less of a social life and get laid a lot less.
Think this through: If you're spending that much time online you're going to have less time to do everything else.
Of course, there's the other option: That if you're online that much you're not committing violent crime because you're viewing porn/committing data theft (not a violent crime but a prosecuteable one)/playing violent games (wait, that's obviously linked to violent crime, ignore that)/Slashdotting, etc.
Kierthos
Excuse me, but how are we waiting for anything? Remember just a few years ago, when a commercially available 1 GHz processor was a pipe dream? I'd say that appearances are definitely contrary to your position, and patents in the computer industry really don't seem to be slowing innovation at all.
If patents are being approved hand-over-fist, it means that innovations are being made hand-over-fist. Yeah, maybe some of them are trivial, maybe some of them are obvious, but it's apparent that innovations are being made.
I'm not arguing that RAMBUS isn't evil or greedy. In fact, I think it's more greed then evil. But that's not my point. My point is that their greed probably won't have a major effect. M$ has been greedy for years, and it hasn't stopped other OS's from coming out, or getting market share. In fact, M$'s greed (and stupidity) proved to be their downfall in the browser legal battle.
Deal with it. Corporations will always be looking at the bottom line. Sometimes this means having to look like the evil greedy bastard. But that's what they have to do to stay around. Is it socially acceptable among the marginal population of Slashdotters? Apparently not. But we're only a very small percentage of the people out there.
Kierthos
They do push for innovations. Everyone knows the process by which your invention is created. Which means that they can try to take the next step, by improving that invention. Of course, if you're smart, you're doing that as well, and hopefully, you're a step ahead, having done the work on the original patent.
Basically, it's always a game of catch-up, because we always want faster, better, neater machines. Doesn't matter how it gets here, but give me that 10 GHz processor and a hard drive the size of a quarter that holds a Terabyte! Companies in the computer industry realize that the money is where the "best" machines are. You couldn't pay 99.999% of the people to take an 8086 off your hands these days, but the Playstation 2 comes out and there's a line around the block!
Get the idea? Patents stimulate further patents. Maybe by the same greedy evil corporation that made the first patent on that tech, but there you go.
Kierthos
Actually, I recall that a couple of Harvard (not certain about the school though)law students patented the wheel a few years ago when they found that there was no existing patent on it. They got in the newspapers at the time, but they never got any royalties, nor did they expect to. They just wanted to see if they could do it.
:P (Karma-trolling)
Now, slightly back OT: Patents are, IIRC, awarded to "first-to-apply" which means if you beat RAMBUS (or anyone else) to applying for a patent, then you are initially awarded that patent. However, there is a system set up for "stink-patenting" which is patenting anything under the sun. I believe you have to prove that were working on the development before you are finally awarded the patent.
Now, I view what RAMBUS is doing as wrong. Corporation-wise, it's incredibly intelligent and expected, because if you don't defend your patents, you can lose them. So I expect them to do so. What irks me is the arrogance of the situation. They can't believe that anyone can come up with something in the arena that won't infringe on their patents. I am so hoping that someone finds a way around this and gives RAMBUS the finger.
Oh yeah, Amazon is evil too...
Kierthos
Linux definitely needs more skill to keep running, as there are a greater amount of guru-types who have had to work to keep Windows running (the fun of managing an NT network in Comp Sci... what joy...).
Linux does have it's own share of problems, but stability is not one of them. Yeah, I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but at this date, what with the MS hacker-attack, why would any company choose Windows unless they already had bought the licensing agreement from the Evil One himself?
Oh yeah, and of course IBM is happy. That's 15,000 machines they don't have to worry about sitting and gathering dust somewhere. I have to wonder: If the seller of the computers had been Dell or Gateway, would it have seemed as newsworthy as it was with IBM? (Sorry, I still have this mental image of IBM as a big old dinosaur being outpaced by Dell, Gateway, et al.)
Kierthos
... a planetoid?
Kierthos
Altavista probably imposes the artificial limit to cut down on system overload, mostly because a lot more people probably see the Babelfish link on Altavista then heading to the SysTran site.
Of course, this is just speculation. It also could be that Altavista never updates anything. Which would make sense, seeing as how I still get e-mail there 3 days late. (If I wanted to want 3 days for mail, I'd use the Post Office.)
Kierthos
"Funny, ha-ha" or "Funny, oh my how ironic... *thud*"?
Seriously though, there is just as much of a chance that this bacteria will be harmless to the current forms of earthly life. Now, mind you, if I was one of the scientists playing with this bacteria, I sure as Hell would adopt every single precaution I could, on the simple fact that I have no idea what it could do. Then I would begin the experimenting in earnest. I'd rather some rodents die for this advance in science rather then in cosmetics testing...
Now, quite honestly, this does represent a good advance in science, because the scientists know it can be done now. One of the biggest obstacles in science is doing something that all the other scientists say can't be done.
However, it is a far cry from being able to revive a simple strain of bacteria to bringing about a dinosaur theme park. (This never made sense to me... why recreate the carnivores?)
Oh, and slightly back OT for the subject line, personally, I go with the asteroid smacking the planet theory for dinosaur death rather then some bacteria killing off all the dinos. Just a KT person, that's me...
Kierthos
There's also several problems, or at least considerations, to using organic compounds as components of electronics.
1) Lifetime. If a 'breed' of organic compound with a long lifespan can be utilized effectively, then it's all well and good, but no one wants a component that will have to be replaced every 30 days (as an example).
2) Production time. Are there any time-estimates not only when organic components would be commercially available? How about time-estimates for how long it would take to for a facility to produce one circuit board of organic compounds? I frankly have no idea how long it would take.
3) Disease. There's enough problems with viruses attacking the software and hardware. The last thing anyone wants is for the components to catch a cold.
4) Mutation. If it is an organic compound, there is always the possibility that it could mutate over time, degrading the performance of the component. One nice thing about inorganic components is that it is already pretty well known how they will react to most every condition we expect them to operate under.
5) Upgrading. How easily could this be done? Could it be done with a retrovirus? Would you have to buy a whole new component? Also in this vein, how susceptible would these components be to inadvertant tampering by the end users?
Just a couple of thoughts on this...
Kierthos
What also should be considered, not necessarily for the growth rate, but for the overall picture is the cost of computers over time. A computer that you can buy commerically today for $2000 would have cost 10 times that, if not more, 5 years ago.
Will IBM, Dell, Gateway, etc. stop selling computers? Of course not. They break, people want to upgrade, new businesses start, new customers enter the fold. But I tend to think, at least here in the States, that sales growth for home users, is going to decline seriously over the next decade or so. Business growth? That's different. Businesses, especially the big ones, can often afford to buy new computers for new branches, operations, or just to impress the new VP.
What the computer companies will be looking into is improving their sales in emerging markets, like 2nd world nations, and in 3rd world nations. Also, I have no doubt that the range of possible styles of peripherals, as well as the number of different peripherals will continue to grow. We have opt-mouses, DVD drives, ZIP drives, and other neat toys all commercially available within the last few years. Who knows what will be created in the next few, making what we have obsolete?
Kierthos
I'm assuming that they will have some sort of exercise equipment up there to avoid the loss of muscle tone while spending extended amounts of time in microgravity.
However, it should be interesting to note that the astronauts in the International Space Station will be as much guinea pig as anything else. They are going to, AFAIK, be in microgravity much longer then anyone else. The effects that this will have on the human body will most likely take years to study, the results of which will make it much 'easier' for future generations of astronauts.
Mind you, their diet while up there may have some strange effects on the body as well. I know that they are stocking food up there, but does the shuttle also empty the loo before it comes back down, or do the astronauts just let their feces shoot out of the station and burn up in re-entry? Inquiring minds... really don't want to know...
Last thing: Anyone have a tentative list of experiments that the first batch of astronauts are supposed to do while up there? Or a link to said list?
Kierthos
They won't get a case of the fuzzy green Mir-an fungus going there. It would be quite bad if it had to be abandoned at this point.
Kierthos
Okay, a couple things to comment on here.
1) Once science invents a computer that can withstand blast forces and still operate with a melted processor, nuke blasts are covered.
2) Vacuum tubes are immune. The old style MiGs in the Russian Air Force were immune to the electromagnetic pulses from nuclear weapons. The U.S.A.F. planes were exceedingly vulnerable because they have every shiny nice new toy that the Air Farce wants to put in there, wherein it becomes next to impossible for one of those overpriced monsters to fly without electrical power. The MiGs didn't have the best glide ratio, but they could still operate in the bounds of the EMP.
So, if you want to make a computer that goes back to vacuum tubes and steam powered analytical engines, you could make it nuke-resistant. Either that, or slap 4 inches of lead on every side of the case, peripherals and cables.
Kierthos
Anyone got a link to the solution to Fermat's Last Theorem?
And I wasn't aware of the age limit on the Field's Medal... have to tell someone to hurry up... he's only got 12 years left...
Kierthos
Very good points. And all the merchants have to do is switch to other services. This, if true, will probably lead to a loss of usage for AT&T because so many merchants will find any other service that doesn't have this asinine plan in effect.
:P
A couple other things to consider as to why this would be a bad idea (from the AT&T POV).
1) What to do about spoofed orders? It is exceptionally easy for anyone who knows how to spoof an order on a merchant's site.
2) Credit card fraud. The customer really didn't order it. The merchant is being defrauded because most credit card companies refund fraudulent orders.
3) Lawsuits. The sales information is supposed to be protected, AFAIK, as AT&T is not the merchant and has no right to look at how much you spent at a particular merchant's site. How long before they get sued by an upset customer for being aware of how much they spent at some sex-toy site (as an example). It's one thing to have the merchant know how much you spent... it's kinda necessary. But it's another for a third-party organization who is not involved in the original transaction to be aware of it. (Note: IANAL, so take all of this with a grain of salt. For all I know, anyone can look at your credit card statement sans the card number...)
All in all, this is sounding like a really bad idea. Maybe we can get Clinton and Lazio to debate against it...
Kierthos
Well then, the answer to this must be that God is deliberately screwing with the astronomers again. :P
Kierthos
No reason. It's just that it is somewhat unexpected. Let's face it.... based on our incalculation by science fiction and Star Trek, which we all know to 100% verifiable in terms of science (sarcasm added), we expect anything in the depths of space to be debris-like. Not nice round planets, but rough asteroids, comets, the occassional interstellar probe, etc.
Finding a planet without a sun is just a touch odd...
Hrm... anyone know if they considered the possibility that the stars for these planets may have burned out completely long ago?
Kierthos
Actually, the standpoint of the guvmint lately has been to censor both...
:P) So what if Jr. listens to odd music. So do I... I may install some web-browser security until I think he's of age to view certain types of sites, but if he's smart enough to get around that, more power to him...
Teaching kids that rocket launchers are the best way to get "gibs" may not be the wisest course of action, but rare exceptions aside, I doubt video games have much influence on society. Sure, we're desensitized to violence, but I got more of that from the friggin' news then from playing DOOM (which I didn't start doing until my 2nd year of college). If kids were being affected by violent games as much as Congress would purport, then we should be flooded with violence from kids as we speak. We're not. I think that proves something.
Now, which would I censor? Neither. I don't like censorship. If I had any kids, I would reccommend that they not view or listen to certain things, but I can't say that I would stop them. (Of course, if I ever have a kid, this may change...
All in all, censorship is wrong. It is the belief that someone else thinks that something is bad, so you cannot view it, no matter what you think about it. It is taking away your freedom to choose.
Kierthos