If you think that even a 95% decrease in the lead in the microprocessor would have as much as 0.1% impact on the amount of lead in a desktop computer, think again!......pointing at the CPU and calling attention to it while the Intel chip is not the real problem.
I wouldn't say it is even.1% of the problem
CPU's in desktops often get pulled and used in other systems. Pulling a CPU out of socket requires no burning or chemical reaction, hence nothing is released in the enviroment.
As most if not all Desktop CPUs today are faster than 500 MHz, they can find a useful life in lower end low cost computers somewhere. Somebody does not need more than that to browse the web and check email.
Even if the CPU gets tossed in the dump somewhere, as I'm sure many 286/386/486s do, the CPU itself is embedded in a ceramic or plastic chip that will protect it from reaching the enviroment for a very long time.
As the parent has pointed out, the lead in the solder on the circuit boards is _many magnitudes_ greater in both quantity and potential exposure to the enviroment.
It seems that the biggest growing export (besides jobs) is trash, where some third world country can worry about the problem. Officials there often look the other way because they want to tax the trade.
It's not just circuit boards, but computer monitors have four pounds of lead in the CRT, which is a magnitude worst than the accompanying circuit board. The plastics used to build the cases is toxic also, especially if recyclers burn the plastic, as they often do. Don't forget all the other countless devices or e-junk (cell phones, TVs, radios, VCRs) that are more likely get tossed.
But even worse by another magnitude (as bad as this is) is car batteries
Brazil, India, several countries in Asia collect mountains of car batteries, where they sit in the open and rain water washes all the chemicals into the groundwater. They are burned and smelted, and the process pollutes the enviroment further.
So, when talking about a CPU, compared to all the other toxic junk there is, it is insignificant in the extreme.
Slashdot = Nerds; You = Nerds; Nerds = Don't get sex;
--> You = Don't get sex QED
At least Jar Jar can say he is a movie star.
Their business model doesn't allow it
on
Real Problems
·
· Score: 1
If they didn't have their "free software" generate sales leads for them, then nobody would buy it.
It's a kind of blackmail - "we are going to spam you until you buy from us" or "we are going to make it hard for you to download/use the free version - so you had better buy from us."
I'm not saying it's ok. Like everything else nowadays "it's just business".
Also, I hope these servers are protected against EMP (Electro Magnetic Pulse) bomb
With everything being "off the shelf" hardware, how much emp it can take is a good question. There are test facilities.
I can understand mil-rad hardened transistors surviving, but all that stuff clearly has to use low voltage CMOS that can be blown if there is a nearby lightning strike.
I think most worrisome is a computer glitch (not to mention a bullet) hitting the right server at the right place to cause the ship to be dead in the water because engine/navigation controls don't work.
If it could bring down an Osprey helicopter, one has to wonder about ships also.
Being the military, they probably (or should) have taken such things into account when deploying the systems.
You also have to wonder how much time they spend patching all the software.
I did not see the movie, but I think many legends tend to have a grain of truth about them.
Apple will shut you down if you try to make, say, an Aqua rip off.
I still see a lot of auqua skins for one thing or another around. Not that any of them of legal.
Microsoft is a pro at stealing IP from other companies. Sometimes they get caught (stacker), sometimes they don't (Apple GUI). It doesn't matter much to Microsoft, because they can pretty much buy their way out of any problem they have.
Their biggest headache to date is the EU decision, but I would not be surprised if they find a way to delay it for a long time or find a way to throw money at it and make it go away. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Evidently Apple did not pay enough to Xerox to stop them from suing Apple over the GUI in 1990
I think the arguement lies in how broad the concept of the GUI is. Does one company "own" the right to the phrase "my computer" and "my documents" and "recycle bin". Because that pretty much what it boils down to.
I agree the case said nothing about the validity of look and feel patents. Notice the "caveat" in my post.
Whether Microsoft will sue over this is another question entirely. I imagine that they would send a "cease and desist" letter first, if they do anything at all.
Much of the functionality that XPde copies is pretty generic. Microsoft might have a weak argument on copyright claims on certain "phrases" and "dialogue boxes", but I doubt they would get very far with patent claims. Much of the functionality that Apple pioneered in 1983/84 is in the public domain. It is twenty years old, so any patents issued would be expiring.
I think the question XPde needs to answer is what legal resources they have to fight off a lawsuit. Because if they were like Microsoft, they could afford to drag it out until it was irrelevant. But I doubt that they have those kind of resources.
The index of refraction for water is greater than that of air. So in effect, they can create "more magnification" than with air alone and standard lenses.
Isn't this similar to the reason why Apple took Microsoft to court over the similarities between Mac OS and Windows?
Yes, and they lost. So, if Microsft copied Apple (and don't forget Apple copied Xerox), what is wrong if somebody copies Microsoft?
The only thing Apple gained from the expensive lawsuit with Microsoft is a copyright on the trashcan. So that is the reason you see a different icon for "trash" on all of the different operating systems there are.
The only caveat is that the Apple vs. Microsoft was fought in the era without software patents. If it had been (like today), Apple most likely would have won.
Microsoft does have a lot of money that they can cause a lot of pain for someone they don't like. They also have software patents on many things that people would not think of getting a patent for.
But if Microsoft were to put the squeeze on somebody for making a windows look-a-like, there might be attorneys that would take the case on antitrust grounds.
It is good to finally see Linux users realizing that the Windows UI is the best one there is and adapting to use it
No, I would not say that. I also think a lot of Mac users might disagree with you.
The thing about windows is that everybody has learned to deal with all of its crazy "idiosyncracies", not that it is any better.
Taking advantage of this will help people realize that there are alternatives to the hegemony of windows, which will make computing more secure, cheaper, and better for everyone.
Why so much emphasis on Einstein's Theory all of a sudden??
First, I would not call it all of a sudden. Testing theories with experiments is one of the building blocks of science.
So much as Einsten's theories are concerned, since the very day he published his theories, other scientists have analyzed and thought of ways to test them. They have done so where possible, as technology has permitted. One example is the atomic clock and moving bodies experiments that have been done in the past.
It is necessary for a number of reasons to validate what scientists are saying. Otherwise they do not have any basis to make the asssertions that they do.
This particular experiment provides a high precision that his theories can be tested with.
Another reason to test his theories is that there are a number of critics of Einstein's theories. So with experiments we can see who is most likely right.
Science moves forward on experiments, and testing of hypotheses.
As difficult as it may first seem to see real world pratical applications of such experiments, it really does "trickle down" to other uses.
It takes quite a bit of work to put these missions in space. So while LISA looks like a fascinating experiment, there is no guarantee that it will fly.
Gravity B is the culmination of 40 years of hard work to get to this point.
No, not really. The precision of the probe is quite good, so if frame dragging occurs, this probe will measure it pretty accurately.
There are a huge number of problems with sending a probe like Gravity B to Saturn or Jupiter. Not the least of which is unknown variables that could make the test useless.
With the earth, all the variables that can affect the probe have been studied and mitigated to high degree.
Then there is all the extra cost of sending the probe to another planet.
So it doesn't make sense to send Gravity B to another planet for a number of reasons.
Not neccesarily. I bet statistical analysis along with radar data could produce the same correction data that they need for the satellites.
Also, there is some disagreement how much the theory of relativity is useful for predicting the sattellite behavior (meaning the real world departs from theory).
Slashdot Mirror
If you think that even a 95% decrease in the lead in the microprocessor would have as much as 0.1% impact on the amount of lead in a desktop computer, think again!......pointing at the CPU and calling attention to it while the Intel chip is not the real problem.
.1% of the problem
I wouldn't say it is even
CPU's in desktops often get pulled and used in other systems. Pulling a CPU out of socket requires no burning or chemical reaction, hence nothing is released in the enviroment.
As most if not all Desktop CPUs today are faster than 500 MHz, they can find a useful life in lower end low cost computers somewhere. Somebody does not need more than that to browse the web and check email.
Even if the CPU gets tossed in the dump somewhere, as I'm sure many 286/386/486s do, the CPU itself is embedded in a ceramic or plastic chip that will protect it from reaching the enviroment for a very long time.
As the parent has pointed out, the lead in the solder on the circuit boards is _many magnitudes_ greater in both quantity and potential exposure to the enviroment.
It seems that the biggest growing export (besides jobs) is trash, where some third world country can worry about the problem. Officials there often look the other way because they want to tax the trade.
It's not just circuit boards, but computer monitors have four pounds of lead in the CRT, which is a magnitude worst than the accompanying circuit board. The plastics used to build the cases is toxic also, especially if recyclers burn the plastic, as they often do. Don't forget all the other countless devices or e-junk (cell phones, TVs, radios, VCRs) that are more likely get tossed.
But even worse by another magnitude (as bad as this is) is car batteries
Brazil, India, several countries in Asia collect mountains of car batteries, where they sit in the open and rain water washes all the chemicals into the groundwater. They are burned and smelted, and the process pollutes the enviroment further.
So, when talking about a CPU, compared to all the other toxic junk there is, it is insignificant in the extreme.
Maybe that's where the WMDs are hid.
Should we go back to the moon?
Only if they can use the old sets. I don't think we should spend any money on new movie sets.
Coming at you. just right around the corner
You're gonna wish that you took the blue pill.
... when I say that it will probably suck but that I'll go anyway ;-)
Yeah, George Lucas is going to come to my house with a gun and force me to go to the movie.
I'm gonna go for sex. The answer is sex.
Slashdot = Nerds;
You = Nerds;
Nerds = Don't get sex;
--> You = Don't get sex QED
At least Jar Jar can say he is a movie star.
If they didn't have their "free software" generate sales leads for them, then nobody would buy it.
It's a kind of blackmail - "we are going to spam you until you buy from us" or "we are going to make it hard for you to download/use the free version - so you had better buy from us."
I'm not saying it's ok. Like everything else nowadays "it's just business".
Yup. I have been looking for that link for ages. Thnx.
The odd number at the end looks so...odd :)
In this case, the "7" is a "lucky number".
The 9/11 attacks were a pre-emptive strike by the Taliban against what it viewed as an imminent threat from the united states
No. They wanted to see Americans die, and their social agenda (a worldwide islamic state) furthered.
The Navy is renting this vessel for 11.4 million dollars a year (including operating costs).
For the link impaired, here is the website.
So, the only questions that remain is if the 11.4 mil includes phone support, and are they going to put the ship on ebay when they are done with it?
All of that technology, to serve what end? Killing people.......As long as there are men making weapons, there will be war.
No military weapons were involved when some islamic terrorists drove airplanes into the World Trade Centers and Pentagon killing 3000 people.
In fact, they didn't even use guns, but "box cutters".
Perhaps a more accurate statement would be "as long as there are men, there will be war".
Also, I hope these servers are protected against EMP (Electro Magnetic Pulse) bomb
With everything being "off the shelf" hardware, how much emp it can take is a good question. There are test facilities.
I can understand mil-rad hardened transistors surviving, but all that stuff clearly has to use low voltage CMOS that can be blown if there is a nearby lightning strike.
I think most worrisome is a computer glitch (not to mention a bullet) hitting the right server at the right place to cause the ship to be dead in the water because engine/navigation controls don't work.
If it could bring down an Osprey helicopter, one has to wonder about ships also.
Being the military, they probably (or should) have taken such things into account when deploying the systems.
You also have to wonder how much time they spend patching all the software.
If this guy got a $100,000 dollar award, then these guys should get a "cool" million.
They lost on a technicality. Why do people not know this?
What do they say? Being close only counts in horeshoes?
Apple had a legal right because they made a deal with Xerox to tour the facilities
Evidently Apple did not make enough of a deal because Xerox sued Apple over the GUI in 1990.
Here is a history of the case>
I did not see the movie, but I think many legends tend to have a grain of truth about them.
Apple will shut you down if you try to make, say, an Aqua rip off.
I still see a lot of auqua skins for one thing or another around. Not that any of them of legal.
Microsoft is a pro at stealing IP from other companies. Sometimes they get caught (stacker), sometimes they don't (Apple GUI). It doesn't matter much to Microsoft, because they can pretty much buy their way out of any problem they have.
Their biggest headache to date is the EU decision, but I would not be surprised if they find a way to delay it for a long time or find a way to throw money at it and make it go away. It will be interesting to see what happens.
Here is the history of Apple vs. Microsoft.
Evidently Apple did not pay enough to Xerox to stop them from suing Apple over the GUI in 1990
I think the arguement lies in how broad the concept of the GUI is. Does one company "own" the right to the phrase "my computer" and "my documents" and "recycle bin". Because that pretty much what it boils down to.
I agree the case said nothing about the validity of look and feel patents. Notice the "caveat" in my post.
Whether Microsoft will sue over this is another question entirely. I imagine that they would send a "cease and desist" letter first, if they do anything at all.
Much of the functionality that XPde copies is pretty generic. Microsoft might have a weak argument on copyright claims on certain "phrases" and "dialogue boxes", but I doubt they would get very far with patent claims. Much of the functionality that Apple pioneered in 1983/84 is in the public domain. It is twenty years old, so any patents issued would be expiring.
I think the question XPde needs to answer is what legal resources they have to fight off a lawsuit. Because if they were like Microsoft, they could afford to drag it out until it was irrelevant. But I doubt that they have those kind of resources.
it's just magnifying the wafer
There's more to it than that.
The index of refraction for water is greater than that of air. So in effect, they can create "more magnification" than with air alone and standard lenses.
Isn't this similar to the reason why Apple took Microsoft to court over the similarities between Mac OS and Windows?
Yes, and they lost. So, if Microsft copied Apple (and don't forget Apple copied Xerox), what is wrong if somebody copies Microsoft?
The only thing Apple gained from the expensive lawsuit with Microsoft is a copyright on the trashcan. So that is the reason you see a different icon for "trash" on all of the different operating systems there are.
The only caveat is that the Apple vs. Microsoft was fought in the era without software patents. If it had been (like today), Apple most likely would have won.
Microsoft does have a lot of money that they can cause a lot of pain for someone they don't like. They also have software patents on many things that people would not think of getting a patent for.
But if Microsoft were to put the squeeze on somebody for making a windows look-a-like, there might be attorneys that would take the case on antitrust grounds.
It is good to finally see Linux users realizing that the Windows UI is the best one there is and adapting to use it
No, I would not say that. I also think a lot of Mac users might disagree with you.
The thing about windows is that everybody has learned to deal with all of its crazy "idiosyncracies", not that it is any better.
Taking advantage of this will help people realize that there are alternatives to the hegemony of windows, which will make computing more secure, cheaper, and better for everyone.
Why so much emphasis on Einstein's Theory all of a sudden??
First, I would not call it all of a sudden. Testing theories with experiments is one of the building blocks of science.
So much as Einsten's theories are concerned, since the very day he published his theories, other scientists have analyzed and thought of ways to test them. They have done so where possible, as technology has permitted. One example is the atomic clock and moving bodies experiments that have been done in the past.
It is necessary for a number of reasons to validate what scientists are saying. Otherwise they do not have any basis to make the asssertions that they do.
This particular experiment provides a high precision that his theories can be tested with.
Another reason to test his theories is that there are a number of critics of Einstein's theories. So with experiments we can see who is most likely right.
Science moves forward on experiments, and testing of hypotheses.
As difficult as it may first seem to see real world pratical applications of such experiments, it really does "trickle down" to other uses.
It takes quite a bit of work to put these missions in space. So while LISA looks like a fascinating experiment, there is no guarantee that it will fly.
Gravity B is the culmination of 40 years of hard work to get to this point.
No, not really. The precision of the probe is quite good, so if frame dragging occurs, this probe will measure it pretty accurately.
There are a huge number of problems with sending a probe like Gravity B to Saturn or Jupiter. Not the least of which is unknown variables that could make the test useless.
With the earth, all the variables that can affect the probe have been studied and mitigated to high degree.
Then there is all the extra cost of sending the probe to another planet.
So it doesn't make sense to send Gravity B to another planet for a number of reasons.
Not neccesarily. I bet statistical analysis along with radar data could produce the same correction data that they need for the satellites.
Also, there is some disagreement how much the theory of relativity is useful for predicting the sattellite behavior (meaning the real world departs from theory).
HA HA HA HA Your fired!!! April Fools! NOT!!!!!
Here is the press release
This also proves that Slashdot is no longer a joke.
Oh....wait....
No way Dude!!1 Anyone can see that they have been working on this April fool's joke since last November!!