His name is Brad Pitt. And you'll have to fight the other 20 people doing the same thing.
See? Already happening. Already commonplace. Completely accepted and even encouraged by society. I'm thinking your attempt at shock and awe and putting themselves in other shoes, etc., etc. has failed because you're simply quoting S.O.P. for celebrities. _They_ know the rules.. the _real_ rules of privacy. Public is public, and privacy can never be assumed.
It's actually two cylindical (or semi-cylindrical) cabins joined together lengthwise, with a stressed interior partition framework. Kinda like a number 8 laying on its side. Pressurization isn't difficult in that case, and the interior stressed partition can be a latticework. It's not a new idea, although it's never been done for reasons of practicality, just a lot simpler to make the body a long tapered tube and be done.
Cosmic rays at 30,000 feet, plus other ionizing radiation is significantly higher than at ground level. 4 hours on a plane is something like a month's worth of ground-level exposure. Yet people still fly. I don't think this will have any impact on air travel.
I've been thinking about this lately, but I was coming at it from another angle.
Don't think flash RAM or CD/DVD. Think about just how much you can cram onto a silicon chip if all you needed to do was to create arrays of crossed wires that, at each crossover, are either connected or shorted. Send a voltage down one line and read all the cross lines sequentially. Think of the capacity of flash ram, with the read speed of SRAM. And because the features are simply straight conductors, they could be packed onto a chip, layered and stacked, very densely (thus very cheaply). These would basically be custom, hard-wired permanent memory. _Fast_ memory. "What wait state?" fast. Might not even need to be on silicon, as it's just basically an array of crossed wires, so "two dollars per gigabyte" cheap is potentially feasible.
Now imagine a consortium of industry players led by Intel and Microsoft promoting a new, open hardware standard. On the motherboard you have, say 4 regular DRAM slots, plus 4 (or 8) new SROM slots. Each SROM would be mapped to an 8 or 16 GB address space in memory and would be read just like regular memory. The socket would be easy for consumers to use, perhaps like a long Compact Flash card with 200+ pins, or similar to the newer CPU sockets but long and thin.
Microsoft then contracts with a fab to make these SROM modules with Windows 7 on them. Under the new architecture, the Win7 code is read directly from the SROM, and doesn't need to be copied into RAM. Since the SROM is much, much faster than DRAM, load times are lightning fast. The OS is _already_ in memory from the instant the computer is powered on. Since every bit of the OS appears to already be in memory, permanently, none of it ever needs to be swapped to disk. Always having the same relative location on the SROM could have advantages too. Being non-writeable, it's also not vulnerable to virus or trojan manipulation, although a mechanism for on-the-fly patching from disk would need to be present. Easily secured since the patching program could be kept on the SROM, with a hard-wired decryption key, thus only patches encoded with the other half of that key would be executed.
From Microsoft's (and Adobe's, and any other maker of expensive software packages) point of view, it's a Copyright and DRM Silver Bullet. Piracy could be nearly eliminated. Boot sector viri could be nearly eliminated. Power-on to desktop times of 10 seconds might be the new norm. Pirated software would be stuck loading from disk and executing from DRAM. Game makers would surely be delighted, and oddly enough game buyers too, since they'd be getting an improved product without onerous DRM management. Free and FOSS apps would definitely have to adapt, but in the long run they would probably embrace such a new architecture as it'd let them more easily monetize and earn money. Download your (slow) disk-based apps and OS, or buy a (profitable) SROM with Firefox, Reader, and maybe a bunch of other free apps on it. Ubuntu could easily add a dollar or two of profit to each module.
Yes, there would have to be changes made in the way programs are compiled/stored to adapt them to the new architecture, and a host of other minor challenges. But, I really, truly believe that within a few years we'll be seeing something just like the above. And for once, we actually will embrace our new DRM overlords.
Which can only be done in court. And which can only happen if the person whose account was using that IP address is known. And _that_ will only happen if copyright holders can subpoena ISPs for user identities.
Not sure if it's possible, but I'm guessing that if one added a graphics card, then the processing power of the graphics portion of the CPU could be used for other things. Granted, I wouldn't expect CUDA type performance, but I'd think a few new instructions that allowed programmers to specifically target unused graphics units for processing SIMD instructions would be welcome. Same thinking goes for the AMD chips. Basically an either-or choice: all-in-one chip, or increased computational power... which are generally markets which don't overlap.
Has anyone seen any patent filings related to something like this?
So let's change the scenario. If you don't like your electricity supplier, you switch to another one? Or if you don't like your local telephone company? Or what happens when the gas company doesn't suit you? Or when your water supply isn't pure enough, do you switch to another water supplier?
I don't think I've ever seen an article bemoaning the lack of choices in any of the above services, so why not just push for treating internet access like we do electricity? Make it a highly regulated, government controlled local monopoly so we can all stop griping. Because that's the only way it's going to get fixed, unless a wireless magic bullet comes along.
And I'm sure that government-controlled data services appeal to so many Slashdotters that there will be an overwhelming cry of "do something!" (/sarcasm)
Be careful of what you gripe about, someone might just do something about it.
It wasn't in jest. It's my understanding that solar cells are generally made using vapor deposition processes, which don't require spinning. Spin deposition is generally used for photoresist application, isn't it? I can't think of any use for photoresist on photovoltaics. You're confusing semiconductor manufacturing with solar cell manufacturing.
another problem with a highly faceted desing is going to be in making the nominally circular cells conform to odd shaped facets, and for mass producing these. If you look at conventional panels you see they cut they often circular cells into half-circles then put these down in a row laternating the directions. this allows them to make mass producable long sections that dont have as much dead space when the components are placed side by side
That's because nobody has thought to slice the silicon ingots _lengthwise_ which would yield long (although varying width) rectangular strips, which could be cut into square or rectangular shapes which would fit more densely into square panels.
For those in the know, this ever shrinking manufacturing process tech: when will it stop? Where will it stop? 10nm? Sub-1nm?
There is a hard physical limit based on the silicon and dopant distribution. On a macro scale, the silicon is very homogenous. However once you get a feature size down to the point where it encompasses only a few hundred atoms on a side, you begin to run into the real possibility that such small localised areas are over- or under-doped. Thus you have a new source of potential defects because your charge carriers are overabundant or underabundant. We've been solving the diffraction problem nicely to the point where we can project ever-smaller patterns onto the wafers, but eventually there will come a point of diminishing returns when defect rate increases negate any benefit gained from feature size shrinks.
Shrinking a process gives several benefits, but a quick general overview helps: Silicon as used in chip manufacturing is expensive. It costs a lot to grow, cut and polish. It's also a mature industry, so no real breakthroughs are likely to happen to reduce the cost of the silicon. The less silicon area you use, the more chips you can make for the same cost. Next is manufacturing. Whether you put one transistor per square millimeter or 100,000 per square millimeter, the cost is the same, or at least within a penny. Coat, expose to a masked pattern, etch, sputter, clean and repeat a few times, and voila, you have a chip. Shining a light through a mask costs the same no matter the resolution of the mask. Dunking the wafer in a chemical etch bath is the same, running a wafer through a sputterer or CVD costs the same, etc. Labor costs are basically per wafer, so more components per wafer means you get more output for the same labor (and plant infrastructure) dollar.
So, a smaller manufacturing process means: More components per wafer. Thus if you double the component density, your manufacturing costs will remain the same, and you can double output while keeping costs the same (think 32GB for the price of 16GB).
You can also make the chips smaller while keeping the same capacity (same 16GB chip uses half the silicon, thus costs 50% less to make, think 16GB for half the cost you paid last year).
Or, more capacity within given size limits. (think 64GB or 128GB SD cards, or 2 TB Compact Flash).
And why is that different? Instead of shareholders, you have owners. And they're still doubly taxed, as the profits that flow to them are still taxed again as personal income. Um, you need to take accounting 101 again, I think. If a company pays an employee, that's an expense, not a profit, and the company doesn't pay taxes on it. Just the employee. _Not_Doubly_taxed_.
"take away the tax shelters, and in exchange lower domestic corporate rates". So you want to take away the tax shelters, which benefit perhaps affect 9% of profits on GDP, and lower taxes on all of them, including the 91% of the taxable income that doesn't come from multinationals? Ok, now please tell me where you'll make up the shortfall. Your scheme, on the surface, appears to generate 50 billion in new taxable income that gets brought back from overseas, but then also loses 250 billion because all local businesses (which greatly outnumber multinationals) will pay less in taxes.
Uh, we already tried such foolishness once before. What on earth are you talking about? U.P. has nothing to do with the way companies manage profits TODAY. Again I think you fail to understand that a company only pays taxes if they bank the profit. If they spend the profit on salaries or R&D, it's an expense and _not_taxed_.
You're essentially suggesting that they escape higher taxes by never taking home the profit they make It's a choice. A company can bank its profits and pay corporate rates, or it can pay it to the employees (or sole proprietor) and let THEM ay the taxes (and have you looked at a tax table recently for high-income earners?)
Where do higher taxation rates equal more jobs, especially in the long run? Um, let's see... in the USA and Japan? Both of whom have high corporate tax rates. Both of whom are economic powerhouses. Your world of low corporate taxes: The company banks all the profits because there's no reason not to. My world of high corporate taxes: The company hires tens, hundreds or thousands of extra workers, or expands operations, because at least that way they gain assets instead of losing half to the government. "I've got 10 restaurants, do I bank a million and pay 500k in corp taxes, or do I spend 800k opening a new location and only bank 200k and pay 100k in taxes?" Yeah, most companies choose to go to eleven. Keeps money in circulation, creates new jobs, etc.
Higher rates are job killers. Even the Europeans have accepted that. Hahahahahaha, the 22% VAT is laughing at you. $5.50 a gallon gas prices are laughing too, and elbowing higher personal income tax in the ribs. The money has to come from somewhere, and if not from corporations, it comes from the populace. In Europe the companies are keeping the profits instead of giving raises to employees (or hiring more), thus squeezing the populace between lower income and higher prices. Oh, and let's see.. Spain, Poland, Germany, Greece and France all seem to have higher unemployment than the USA. Oh, and look at GDP: _No one_ in Europe beats the US (although I admit Ireland comes close).
And let's address your point directly. "Tax havens". It's a little hard to close that loophole because it involves the ability of foreign companies to do business in the US, and US companies to do business in other countries. Meanwhile if we create a law that says wholy owned subsidiaries must pay US taxes, you _WILL_ have double taxation because they'll have to pay taxes in both the US and their home country.
Aside from my reluctance to take financial wisdom seriously from someone who uses "payed" instead of "paid", (sank / sunk notwithstanding) you seem to be forgetting the huge number of corporations who _aren't_ listed on the stock exchange, and who don't pay dividends. Lowering corporate tax rates would take a huge chunk of income away from the US, and do little to encourage companies to move back from... say.. Ireland, with its 12.5% rate.
Oh, and the way most companies avoid paying taxes? They expand. Got 10 million in profit you don't want to pay taxes on? Open some new locations. Do R&D. Hire some more people. Basically incur expenses. That 40% tax rate you disparage so offhandedly is responsible for influencing decisions that generally lead to more jobs.
So someone says social networking sites are to blame, instead of the amazing coincidence that syphilis cases increased as the government stopped their public awareness campaigns against STDs. I'm thinking someone needs to expand their search for causalitis.
"These are your genitals. THESE are your genitals on Syphilis. Any questions?"
Countless hours spent on GEnie or Delphi playing a multiplayer, realtime flyer. With real physics. Emphasis on the real physics. No flying through things, no bouncing off things, no impossible maneuvers, crashing and dying if you landed too fast or forgot your gear was up, and best of all, gloating while watching your opponents burn on the way down. Of course, spending 15 minutes gaining altitude at $10 an hour was annoying, but if you had the money it was all worthwhile.
Why not look at it as a reverse-engineering of what the drive controller will actually write?
There are utilities that allow you to write to a specific sector of the drive.
You can determine which ECC/encoding scheme the drive uses from manufacturer's specs.
If you want to write a bit in a particular position within a sector, reverse the Reed-Solomon algorithm to determine what data you need to send to the hard drive in order to get the R-S output that fulfills your need written to the disk.
However, it may not be possible to generate certain patterns because of the constraints in the encoding... you won't be able to completely fill a sector with all zeroes, for example.
"And I have four wires for every two coax cables."
One of which is the shielding, and is subject to EMF interference, and one is the core, which is shielded, which would give you a potentially unbalanced system which would give you a lot of errors. Plus there's the issue of capacitance.
If speed isn't an issue, you could always put a BNC end on the coax, and pick up some 10 mbit hubs from eBay with both RG45 and a BNC coax connection. You'd be stuck at 10 mbit, but it's probably the cheapest/easiest solution.
Or as the above poster mentioned... simply regard them as your pulling wires. Attach new Cat5 and pull away.
If a company can bring 200 kilos of moon rocks back from the moon, a mission could pay for itself from sale of the rocks. Easily $2000 a gram, perhaps more if some more interesting specimens could be searched out and returned.
If one could do a shot similar to Apollo, but unmanned, several metric tons could be returned, and be quite profitable.
Ask yourself how much a kilogram of martian soil would sell for, too.
No printing, distribution, warehousing, etc. I want to pay _less_ for an ebook than a paper book, especially considering I can't easily resell an ebook. No Kindle for me, thanks.
I'm buying one to hang on the refrigerator. Saves post-its and hunting for pencils.
It works by using a charge to align LCD crystals, pressure randomizes them.
I can imagine putting an array of photodetectors behind the LCD, such that a simple circuit could read the light pattern in sufficient detail to enable it to be digitized.
And I despair of the lack of English education, specifically reading comprehension.
This isn't internal combustion, which is what your argument is based on. It uses the fact that solids expand and contract when heated and cooled, including some piezo materials.
Slashdot Mirror
His name is Brad Pitt.
And you'll have to fight the other 20 people doing the same thing.
See? Already happening. Already commonplace. Completely accepted and even encouraged by society. I'm thinking your attempt at shock and awe and putting themselves in other shoes, etc., etc. has failed because you're simply quoting S.O.P. for celebrities. _They_ know the rules.. the _real_ rules of privacy. Public is public, and privacy can never be assumed.
Einstein didn't have a lab. His lab was his brain, and his "thought experiments" were obviously productive.
It's actually two cylindical (or semi-cylindrical) cabins joined together lengthwise, with a stressed interior partition framework. Kinda like a number 8 laying on its side. Pressurization isn't difficult in that case, and the interior stressed partition can be a latticework. It's not a new idea, although it's never been done for reasons of practicality, just a lot simpler to make the body a long tapered tube and be done.
Citation:
http://www.epa.gov/radtown/cosmic.html
Try Googling cosmic ray exposure airplane flight.
Ya, my memory was off by an order of magnitude or so, 6 hours in the air is a week's worth of radiation, not a month's.
And note to self: Reply to an earlier post instead of the story, gets you so much higher up the 'food chain' that is the Slashdot comment system.
Cosmic rays at 30,000 feet, plus other ionizing radiation is significantly higher than at ground level. 4 hours on a plane is something like a month's worth of ground-level exposure. Yet people still fly. I don't think this will have any impact on air travel.
I've been thinking about this lately, but I was coming at it from another angle.
Don't think flash RAM or CD/DVD. Think about just how much you can cram onto a silicon chip if all you needed to do was to create arrays of crossed wires that, at each crossover, are either connected or shorted. Send a voltage down one line and read all the cross lines sequentially. Think of the capacity of flash ram, with the read speed of SRAM. And because the features are simply straight conductors, they could be packed onto a chip, layered and stacked, very densely (thus very cheaply). These would basically be custom, hard-wired permanent memory. _Fast_ memory. "What wait state?" fast. Might not even need to be on silicon, as it's just basically an array of crossed wires, so "two dollars per gigabyte" cheap is potentially feasible.
Now imagine a consortium of industry players led by Intel and Microsoft promoting a new, open hardware standard. On the motherboard you have, say 4 regular DRAM slots, plus 4 (or 8) new SROM slots. Each SROM would be mapped to an 8 or 16 GB address space in memory and would be read just like regular memory. The socket would be easy for consumers to use, perhaps like a long Compact Flash card with 200+ pins, or similar to the newer CPU sockets but long and thin.
Microsoft then contracts with a fab to make these SROM modules with Windows 7 on them. Under the new architecture, the Win7 code is read directly from the SROM, and doesn't need to be copied into RAM. Since the SROM is much, much faster than DRAM, load times are lightning fast. The OS is _already_ in memory from the instant the computer is powered on. Since every bit of the OS appears to already be in memory, permanently, none of it ever needs to be swapped to disk. Always having the same relative location on the SROM could have advantages too. Being non-writeable, it's also not vulnerable to virus or trojan manipulation, although a mechanism for on-the-fly patching from disk would need to be present. Easily secured since the patching program could be kept on the SROM, with a hard-wired decryption key, thus only patches encoded with the other half of that key would be executed.
From Microsoft's (and Adobe's, and any other maker of expensive software packages) point of view, it's a Copyright and DRM Silver Bullet. Piracy could be nearly eliminated. Boot sector viri could be nearly eliminated. Power-on to desktop times of 10 seconds might be the new norm. Pirated software would be stuck loading from disk and executing from DRAM. Game makers would surely be delighted, and oddly enough game buyers too, since they'd be getting an improved product without onerous DRM management. Free and FOSS apps would definitely have to adapt, but in the long run they would probably embrace such a new architecture as it'd let them more easily monetize and earn money. Download your (slow) disk-based apps and OS, or buy a (profitable) SROM with Firefox, Reader, and maybe a bunch of other free apps on it. Ubuntu could easily add a dollar or two of profit to each module.
Yes, there would have to be changes made in the way programs are compiled/stored to adapt them to the new architecture, and a host of other minor challenges. But, I really, truly believe that within a few years we'll be seeing something just like the above. And for once, we actually will embrace our new DRM overlords.
Which can only be done in court. And which can only happen if the person whose account was using that IP address is known. And _that_ will only happen if copyright holders can subpoena ISPs for user identities.
So congrats, you're getting what you want.
So passport numbers and military ID numbers don't need to be encrypted?
Not good. Not comprehensive enough. IMHO _every_ valid form of identification needs to be included, not just state-issued IDs.
Not sure if it's possible, but I'm guessing that if one added a graphics card, then the processing power of the graphics portion of the CPU could be used for other things. Granted, I wouldn't expect CUDA type performance, but I'd think a few new instructions that allowed programmers to specifically target unused graphics units for processing SIMD instructions would be welcome. Same thinking goes for the AMD chips. Basically an either-or choice: all-in-one chip, or increased computational power... which are generally markets which don't overlap.
Has anyone seen any patent filings related to something like this?
So let's change the scenario.
If you don't like your electricity supplier, you switch to another one?
Or if you don't like your local telephone company?
Or what happens when the gas company doesn't suit you?
Or when your water supply isn't pure enough, do you switch to another water supplier?
I don't think I've ever seen an article bemoaning the lack of choices in any of the above services, so why not just push for treating internet access like we do electricity? Make it a highly regulated, government controlled local monopoly so we can all stop griping. Because that's the only way it's going to get fixed, unless a wireless magic bullet comes along.
And I'm sure that government-controlled data services appeal to so many Slashdotters that there will be an overwhelming cry of "do something!" (/sarcasm)
Be careful of what you gripe about, someone might just do something about it.
It wasn't in jest. It's my understanding that solar cells are generally made using vapor deposition processes, which don't require spinning. Spin deposition is generally used for photoresist application, isn't it? I can't think of any use for photoresist on photovoltaics. You're confusing semiconductor manufacturing with solar cell manufacturing.
another problem with a highly faceted desing is going to be in making the nominally circular cells conform to odd shaped facets, and for mass producing these. If you look at conventional panels you see they cut they often circular cells into half-circles then put these down in a row laternating the directions. this allows them to make mass producable long sections that dont have as much dead space when the components are placed side by side
That's because nobody has thought to slice the silicon ingots _lengthwise_ which would yield long (although varying width) rectangular strips, which could be cut into square or rectangular shapes which would fit more densely into square panels.
For those in the know, this ever shrinking manufacturing process tech: when will it stop? Where will it stop? 10nm? Sub-1nm?
There is a hard physical limit based on the silicon and dopant distribution. On a macro scale, the silicon is very homogenous. However once you get a feature size down to the point where it encompasses only a few hundred atoms on a side, you begin to run into the real possibility that such small localised areas are over- or under-doped. Thus you have a new source of potential defects because your charge carriers are overabundant or underabundant. We've been solving the diffraction problem nicely to the point where we can project ever-smaller patterns onto the wafers, but eventually there will come a point of diminishing returns when defect rate increases negate any benefit gained from feature size shrinks.
Shrinking a process gives several benefits, but a quick general overview helps:
Silicon as used in chip manufacturing is expensive. It costs a lot to grow, cut and polish. It's also a mature industry, so no real breakthroughs are likely to happen to reduce the cost of the silicon. The less silicon area you use, the more chips you can make for the same cost. Next is manufacturing. Whether you put one transistor per square millimeter or 100,000 per square millimeter, the cost is the same, or at least within a penny. Coat, expose to a masked pattern, etch, sputter, clean and repeat a few times, and voila, you have a chip. Shining a light through a mask costs the same no matter the resolution of the mask. Dunking the wafer in a chemical etch bath is the same, running a wafer through a sputterer or CVD costs the same, etc. Labor costs are basically per wafer, so more components per wafer means you get more output for the same labor (and plant infrastructure) dollar.
So, a smaller manufacturing process means:
More components per wafer. Thus if you double the component density, your manufacturing costs will remain the same, and you can double output while keeping costs the same (think 32GB for the price of 16GB).
You can also make the chips smaller while keeping the same capacity (same 16GB chip uses half the silicon, thus costs 50% less to make, think 16GB for half the cost you paid last year).
Or, more capacity within given size limits. (think 64GB or 128GB SD cards, or 2 TB Compact Flash).
And why is that different? Instead of shareholders, you have owners. And they're still doubly taxed, as the profits that flow to them are still taxed again as personal income.
Um, you need to take accounting 101 again, I think. If a company pays an employee, that's an expense, not a profit, and the company doesn't pay taxes on it. Just the employee. _Not_Doubly_taxed_.
"take away the tax shelters, and in exchange lower domestic corporate rates".
So you want to take away the tax shelters, which benefit perhaps affect 9% of profits on GDP, and lower taxes on all of them, including the 91% of the taxable income that doesn't come from multinationals? Ok, now please tell me where you'll make up the shortfall. Your scheme, on the surface, appears to generate 50 billion in new taxable income that gets brought back from overseas, but then also loses 250 billion because all local businesses (which greatly outnumber multinationals) will pay less in taxes.
Uh, we already tried such foolishness once before.
What on earth are you talking about? U.P. has nothing to do with the way companies manage profits TODAY. Again I think you fail to understand that a company only pays taxes if they bank the profit. If they spend the profit on salaries or R&D, it's an expense and _not_taxed_.
You're essentially suggesting that they escape higher taxes by never taking home the profit they make
It's a choice. A company can bank its profits and pay corporate rates, or it can pay it to the employees (or sole proprietor) and let THEM ay the taxes (and have you looked at a tax table recently for high-income earners?)
Where do higher taxation rates equal more jobs, especially in the long run?
Um, let's see... in the USA and Japan? Both of whom have high corporate tax rates. Both of whom are economic powerhouses. Your world of low corporate taxes: The company banks all the profits because there's no reason not to. My world of high corporate taxes: The company hires tens, hundreds or thousands of extra workers, or expands operations, because at least that way they gain assets instead of losing half to the government. "I've got 10 restaurants, do I bank a million and pay 500k in corp taxes, or do I spend 800k opening a new location and only bank 200k and pay 100k in taxes?" Yeah, most companies choose to go to eleven. Keeps money in circulation, creates new jobs, etc.
Higher rates are job killers. Even the Europeans have accepted that.
Hahahahahaha, the 22% VAT is laughing at you. $5.50 a gallon gas prices are laughing too, and elbowing higher personal income tax in the ribs. The money has to come from somewhere, and if not from corporations, it comes from the populace. In Europe the companies are keeping the profits instead of giving raises to employees (or hiring more), thus squeezing the populace between lower income and higher prices. Oh, and let's see.. Spain, Poland, Germany, Greece and France all seem to have higher unemployment than the USA. Oh, and look at GDP: _No one_ in Europe beats the US (although I admit Ireland comes close).
And let's address your point directly. "Tax havens". It's a little hard to close that loophole because it involves the ability of foreign companies to do business in the US, and US companies to do business in other countries. Meanwhile if we create a law that says wholy owned subsidiaries must pay US taxes, you _WILL_ have double taxation because they'll have to pay taxes in both the US and their home country.
Aside from my reluctance to take financial wisdom seriously from someone who uses "payed" instead of "paid", (sank / sunk notwithstanding) you seem to be forgetting the huge number of corporations who _aren't_ listed on the stock exchange, and who don't pay dividends. Lowering corporate tax rates would take a huge chunk of income away from the US, and do little to encourage companies to move back from... say.. Ireland, with its 12.5% rate.
Oh, and the way most companies avoid paying taxes? They expand. Got 10 million in profit you don't want to pay taxes on? Open some new locations. Do R&D. Hire some more people. Basically incur expenses. That 40% tax rate you disparage so offhandedly is responsible for influencing decisions that generally lead to more jobs.
So someone says social networking sites are to blame, instead of the amazing coincidence that syphilis cases increased as the government stopped their public awareness campaigns against STDs. I'm thinking someone needs to expand their search for causalitis.
"These are your genitals. THESE are your genitals on Syphilis. Any questions?"
FTA:
"It works as a Wi-Fi hotspot, supporting up to 8 devices;"
Wow! That's insane, considering that laptop wireless sharing is only now just becoming mainstream.
How many people will buy this phone, and ditch dsl, cable, etc? Smaller than any dsl or cable box, uses less power too I'd bet.
Countless hours spent on GEnie or Delphi playing a multiplayer, realtime flyer. With real physics. Emphasis on the real physics. No flying through things, no bouncing off things, no impossible maneuvers, crashing and dying if you landed too fast or forgot your gear was up, and best of all, gloating while watching your opponents burn on the way down. Of course, spending 15 minutes gaining altitude at $10 an hour was annoying, but if you had the money it was all worthwhile.
Why not look at it as a reverse-engineering of what the drive controller will actually write?
There are utilities that allow you to write to a specific sector of the drive.
You can determine which ECC/encoding scheme the drive uses from manufacturer's specs.
If you want to write a bit in a particular position within a sector, reverse the Reed-Solomon algorithm to determine what data you need to send to the hard drive in order to get the R-S output that fulfills your need written to the disk.
However, it may not be possible to generate certain patterns because of the constraints in the encoding... you won't be able to completely fill a sector with all zeroes, for example.
"And I have four wires for every two coax cables."
One of which is the shielding, and is subject to EMF interference, and one is the core, which is shielded, which would give you a potentially unbalanced system which would give you a lot of errors. Plus there's the issue of capacitance.
If speed isn't an issue, you could always put a BNC end on the coax, and pick up some 10 mbit hubs from eBay with both RG45 and a BNC coax connection. You'd be stuck at 10 mbit, but it's probably the cheapest/easiest solution.
Or as the above poster mentioned... simply regard them as your pulling wires. Attach new Cat5 and pull away.
If a company can bring 200 kilos of moon rocks back from the moon, a mission could pay for itself from sale of the rocks. Easily $2000 a gram, perhaps more if some more interesting specimens could be searched out and returned.
If one could do a shot similar to Apollo, but unmanned, several metric tons could be returned, and be quite profitable.
Ask yourself how much a kilogram of martian soil would sell for, too.
No printing, distribution, warehousing, etc.
I want to pay _less_ for an ebook than a paper book, especially considering I can't easily resell an ebook.
No Kindle for me, thanks.
I'm buying one to hang on the refrigerator. Saves post-its and hunting for pencils.
It works by using a charge to align LCD crystals, pressure randomizes them.
I can imagine putting an array of photodetectors behind the LCD, such that a simple circuit could read the light pattern in sufficient detail to enable it to be digitized.
And I despair of the lack of English education, specifically reading comprehension.
This isn't internal combustion, which is what your argument is based on. It uses the fact that solids expand and contract when heated and cooled, including some piezo materials.
Please read the summary *again*.