Actually, seeing +5 even though I screwed up the slashcode format has bolstered my faith in the moderation system, as people moderating are obviously intelligent enough to realize my mistake, and corrected for it. Smart people are moderating, and that's good. Now I know why I rarely get mod points:-)
Whoops! Color me an idiot for those bad links, and thankee for reposting correct ones. I don't know why but I do this every time, although I usually catch it in a preview. I think it's because in the example on the posting screen, there's a slash before the closing sign, which makes sense in a 'close your damned tags' sort of way to me.
356 km is about 200 miles, or 2/3 of my numers. Likewise 54 kwh is about 2/3 of 75 kwh. So I don't think my numbers are all that far off, it's just that your numbers are equivalent to a 30 mpg gas car with a 7 gallon tank. And comparing a car with no air conditioner, no heat and no 'creature comforts', that you can't use to get your groceries back from the market because there's no room, that has a low profile thus a low aerodynamic drag, with what would actually work as a 'family car' is disingenuous.
Most of my numbers were aimed at arriving at the size of the cable needed to handle the current, as most people can't visualize what 400 amps, or 3000 amps means, but they do get 'big wire'. Although I guess I could suggest they look at their electrical breaker box and the size of the wires leading into it, figuring on 100 amps per wire. It's just a visualization thing. And my 500 volt number is a simple rule of thumb, as the highest voltage you'll find in most consumer applications is 480v.
Of course, this is only necessary if you need to take a pit stop during a long journey Exactly. Just refuting the minor bit in the parent post about how you can fill up an electric car in the same time as a gas car. I can put 10 gallons in a tank in 3 minutes, including paying and putting the gas cap back on, and in a 40 MPG car that gets me 400 miles. Versus 2 pit stops in an electric in your scenario, that take much longer and require the vehicle to be designed to handle rapid charging.
You buy a new car. With a new battery. With a range of 300 miles. You use the car for a month, recharging at home. You take a trip, and hit a 'swap station' on the way.
You get home with your 'new' battery, only to discover that your range has dropped to 150 miles, because the battery is a year and a half old and near the end of its useful life. Don't forget that lithium batteries only have a useful life of about 1.5 years.
Yeah, you could solve that problem by having car dealers install used batteries, but there's another issue. How much will a 'fill up' cost? Considering each battery will have a different capacity, you'll never know how much range you'll get from a swap.
You'll also need multiple batteries, as the needs for a 2 seat Smart ForTwo are different than for an electric Hummer.
As for safer, two points: Easily removable batteries means easy accessibility to the battery compartment, which implies less safety in an accident. It also replaces gas siphoning with battery theft.
Standard sized batteries also leave less room for car designers to work.
I could see it potentially working with a dealer-based swap system, but not with widespread adoption.
You won't see a trailer with a running generator and fuel supply on it like you describe, as it would kill efficiency and be inconvenient. Much simpler to just rent a gas powered car. However, I'm guessing that soon there'll be hybrids with a low power (10 HP), constant RPM (max 2500 RPM) diesel generator on board. Park the hybrid and let the engine keep running to charge the battery pack. Full battery pack plus 7500 watts of generating capacity would amount to about a 500 mile range, and allow you to recharge anywhere that isn't an enclosed space, or slow charge overnight from an outlet.
giving it the sort of charge time and range as a gasoline vehicle
Stop and think for a second, or do some math, because electric cars will *never* 'fill up' as fast as a chemically powered car. Instead of pouring in gasoline, imagine that gasoline powering a flamethrower which you point into your gas tank, and you'll have a better grasp of what it means to transfer energy directly (as in electricity) versus high density potential (like gas).
Assume your electric car needs only 20 horsepower to maintain 60 mph. One horsepower is about 750 watts, assuming perfect efficiency. That's 15 kilowatts to keep the car going 60 mph. To make the numbers easy, figure 300 mile range. That means you need to drive for 5 hours. 5 hours times 15 kilowatts is 75 kilowatt-hours. Now let's assume the 'electric station' supplies electricity to charge your car at 500 volts. 75000 watt-hours divided by 500 volts equals 150 amps. For an hour. Assuming perfect charging. To get to a 3 minute charge time (one twentieth of an hour) you need 20x the amperage, or 3000 amps.
To carry 3000 amps of current for 3 minutes without melting insulation, my numbers show you'd need copper wire about 2.5 inches in diameter (and you'd still get a temperature rise of 90 degrees farenheit over ambient). And note to electricians who may think the numbers are off, don't forget you're charging with DC voltage, not AC, so you're gonna need about 5000 circular mils worth of wire.
I cannot imagine Joe Average plugging TWO wires, each of which is thicker than his wrist, into his car for a 3 minute recharge.
And yeah, you could drop it to 300 amps, but then you're talking 5000 volts.
So basically... you're never, ever going to see a 'gas station' for electric cars. They'll always be charged for long periods at home, or at 'charging garages'.
First of all, Nanosolar HOPES to make the cells at $1/W, they are nowhere near that cheap yet, and this is the price their marketing department HOPES to achieve
Minor information injection here: Nanosolar _is_ making solar 'sheets' now... no wishful thinking involved. They've contracted with a German company who has ordered roughly 600 megawatts worth of sheets....at.... drumroll please..... 90 cents per watt.
The sheets will be mounted in panels in a factory near Berlin, and used in Germany, which because of favorable laws requiring utilities to buy back power from customers, is experiencing a HUGE demand for renewable energy sources for the homeowner.
My 'ideal' hybrid drive would have DRAM, Flash *and* magnetic platters.
2GB or so of DRAM as a buffer and as a/temp filesystem for things like internet cache, swap and other stuff that can (and maybe should) be cleared/erased on a reboot. Flash for the hardest hit bits, like FAT tables and disk indeces so the heads on the platters don't have to jump around as much, and magnetic media because it's cheap.
Downside is, you'd really need an OS that could 'tag' writes as volaitile/io priority/standard data, and some smarts built into the drive itself to take advantage of the tags.
Tram line 21 runs east to west. Tram line 19 runs east to west on 21's tracks, then turns onto a north-south track heading south.
Driver of 19 sets his left-straight-right turn lever to broadcast "right". Kid overrides with a left, lead car turns left. Kid stops overriding, the junction again sees the signal on the tram to switch to turn right, and the second car goes right, causing a derailment.
In the US, most remote junction switches have a fail-safe that prevents the tracks from switching if there's a car over the junction, thus preventing driver error or malicious external elements from causing a derailment by making the train go in 2 directions at once. Apparently no such fail-safe is present on the systems in Lodz (pronounced 'woodj' in Polish).
Not sure if you've ever actually driven a motorcycle, after reading your arguments.
The primary safety factors built into motorcycles is their power to weight ratio, maneuverability, and braking ability.
Power to weight has very little to do with safety. The only circumstance in which it's truly valid is if you're standing still and need to accelerate away from an oncoming vehicle. Going from coasting to full throttle in a motorcycle (or car with a high power to weight ratio) might get you one vehicle length further along than you would have been after 3/4 of a second. In avoidance terms, your brakes will always outperform your engine, so to displace your future position the most, use the brakes.
Motorcycles are less maneuverable in terms of the abiity to make sudden directional changes than cars. Jerk the steering wheel in a car, and it immediately responds by going in another direction. Jerk the handlebars of a bike and you'll fall off, because *you must lean before you turn*. Avoiding tight spots is driver skill and the ability to see a bad situation developing, *not* maneuverability. Ever try to change direction quickly on a bike with a passenger? Right... by the time they figure out which way to lean, you've either overbalanced or hit what you were trying to avoid.
Ever try to brake hard on a bike while making a right turn? Like when a pedestrian steps off the curb into your path. You'll skid, which means you'll lay the bike down. And to avoid a skid, you have very little choice other than to steer straighter because your decreasing speed can't maintain the force keeping the bike from laying down. Ever try to maintain control of a bike with the front wheel in a skid? Ever try to slow down quickly with just the back brakes? In typical American driving, slamming on your brakes, no matter what the vehicle you're driving, will get you rear-ended. That's simply because most drivers follow too closely. Slamming on your brakes on a bike is no different than a car in that respect.
In general, any four wheeled vehicle will beat a two wheeled vehicle in terms of sudden maneuvering response, and while a car's performance isn't much affected by a passenger, a motorcycle's is, to a large degree.
Before him, they had nothing. Correct, because there *was* nothing offered. I believe the general consensus of industry was "If we make a really inexpensive, low power, low feature laptop that can't run Windows, and offer it on the cheap with a non-MS OS, no one would buy enough to have made the R&D profitable."
Then, Negroponte turned corporate logic upside down by showing that there was, indeed, a demand for such a product. Not just a heartwarming, globe-hugging 'think of the children' type of demand, but a corporate attention getting 'potential market of 2 million units or more per year', 'best selling computer product (worldwide) ever' kind of demand.
Now, pardon me for turning your argument around against you, but aren't you effectively saying that these third world countries are somewhat at fault because they have the temerity to actually *want* (desire, demand), a more powerful computer that more closely conforms to the de-facto MS/x86 standard?
meaning that fewer children will get access to an educational machine But your argument missed the 'you get what you pay for' angle. More quantity at lower (perceived) quality is what you're advocating,then? Imagine for a moment if you will the decision-making process: 120,000 OLPCs - Hard to control mesh network with no real control points, allowing subversive or disrupting communications in near-complete anonymity, meaning SPAM and child-exploitation would be difficult or impossible to trace and stop, and the possibility of a new generation of government overthrowing revolutionaries. OS and apps that won't give them the experience to work in a developed country (how many HR personnel do you know that would hire someone with no Windows or Office experience nowadays, in a white-collar job?). 70,000 MS/x86 (Wintel) PCs- Just like all the developed countries have, just a little slower. The kids can always install Linux if they want, in addition to Windows. Might be less kids getting computers, but those that do will have a better chance of getting a job with an international company.
100,000 mopeds, or 40,000 VW Beetles would be a similar choice decision. Do you pick the higher volume of less capable devices, or the lower volume of more versaitile devices? I'm not privvy to the thought processes behind the decisions made by country leaders, but I respect their ability to make a decision *given choices from which to pick*.
rehash free market dogma You mean the dogma where consumers get to choose what they perceive to be the best product for their needs? Or do you know what they need better than they do? Not everyone's needs are met by the cheapest product, which is why Mercedes has market share (to use another car analogy).
undermining a non profit charity 6 million bucks in contributions is hardly 'undermining'. Selling laptops to developing countries specifically for deployment to their kids is exactly identical to the purpose of the OLPC project.
It's the 'one laptop' per child project, not the 'one and only laptop' per child project.
Yes, they're a norma corporation. With a moral, legal and ethical responsibility to make money for their stockholders.
And Negroponte apparently believes, from everything I've read, that he and the OLPC deserve a monopoly on low cost laptops for por countries.
Also, from everything I've read, the *supposed* purpose of the OLPC project is to get as many laptops into the hands of children everywhere.
Intel appears to be doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing. Negroponte, however, appears to be trying to limit consumer choices and stifle competition.
Let me repeat that: Neroponte appears to be trying to limit consumer choices and stifle competition.
Every other company that has tried to do that has earned my disdain, and from past reading, the disdain of a majority of Slashdotters, as noted by the Bill Gates 'Borg' graphic.
Negroponte seems to have become sidetracked from the original goal. In fact, I'd wager that if asked what percentage of kids in 3rd world contries have computer access now, as compared to a year ago, he wouldn't know.
Sorry for the flamebait folks, but my opinion of OLPC 'management' has sunk.
It looks like you've entered some sort of partnership with Grub http://www.grub.org/. If so, kudos... Grub's been languishing in not-ready-for-primetime land for far too long, and the ability to crawl your own site to keep results current is a bonus, too.
It's a data exchange format that *all* health care insurers and providers must accept or provide when exchanging patient data. It's trivial to add to the spec rules for additional subloops containing text. There are codes and modifiers enough to cover damned near any medical situation.
Many small doctors avoided electronic data altogether by doing as they'd done for years, namely keep paper records. That is until insurance companies began deprecating paper... by not accepting paper claims at all, charging a premium for processing paper forms, or cutting staff levels in their data entry pool which has the effect of seriously delaying payment to the physician.
Remember that great idea you had, that you took to your boss, and then your boss pitched it as his own idea and got all the credit and payday for it?
If you never had an idea like that, then IP won't mean anything to you. If the above has happened to you, then you know the value of IP. Without IP it cannot have been *your* idea, as you couldn't have 'owned' your own idea.
IP is all about credit where credit is due, no more, no less.
I budgeted $5500/year for all of the above under the bit "assuming those 7u cost you $5500 a year". Roughly equivalent to $500/month for lightly managed co-location. Not worth it for just one movie backup, although economies of scale would quickly make it profitable.
The DPX format commonly used for digital post production uses about 35 megabytes *per frame*. My calculator says a 2 hour movie at 24 frames/sec will have about 175,000 frames. A few more button presses tell me that's a bit north of 6 terabytes of data. Let's quadruple that to include all the cut scenes and unused footage, to 25 terabytes.
TB drives are available now for $400 or so each. They use under 10 watts idle. Building a 30 drive RAID would thus cost $12,000, and require perhaps 500 watts if run constantly, including cooling. Let's bump that to $15,000 to pay for controllers and chassis. Three such arrays (in case of earthquakes, etc... keep 'em at opposite ends of the continent) would cost an initial $45,000, take up perhaps 7u of rack space, and need 50 kWh per day for all three. At 30 cents per kWh, that's 15 bucks a day, or $5500 per year. Let's double that, assuming those 7u cost you $5500 a year.
So... my numbers, triply redundant, come to an initial investment of $60,000 (profit, hey!), and a yearly cost of $20,000 (more profit!).
How the hell they came up with $208k is beyond me. I'm thinking I should start a company that does this for the studios, it's looking quite lucrative.
There's still another holiday shopping season, and another 'Superbowl'(can I legally say that word anymore?) TV buying season between now and then. I'm sure you'll be seeing lots of advertising starting next November about the upcoming cutoff. No reason to buy a TV now when the one you've got is working, and will continue to receive for the next 14 months.
Aparently they're 'merely' integrating it into materials and structures in new ways of late, but they were putting it on F-16 tailfin mockups 8 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, seeing +5 even though I screwed up the slashcode format has bolstered my faith in the moderation system, as people moderating are obviously intelligent enough to realize my mistake, and corrected for it. Smart people are moderating, and that's good. Now I know why I rarely get mod points :-)
Whoops! Color me an idiot for those bad links, and thankee for reposting correct ones. I don't know why but I do this every time, although I usually catch it in a preview. I think it's because in the example on the posting screen, there's a slash before the closing sign, which makes sense in a 'close your damned tags' sort of way to me.
356 km is about 200 miles, or 2/3 of my numers. Likewise 54 kwh is about 2/3 of 75 kwh. So I don't think my numbers are all that far off, it's just that your numbers are equivalent to a 30 mpg gas car with a 7 gallon tank. And comparing a car with no air conditioner, no heat and no 'creature comforts', that you can't use to get your groceries back from the market because there's no room, that has a low profile thus a low aerodynamic drag, with what would actually work as a 'family car' is disingenuous.
Most of my numbers were aimed at arriving at the size of the cable needed to handle the current, as most people can't visualize what 400 amps, or 3000 amps means, but they do get 'big wire'. Although I guess I could suggest they look at their electrical breaker box and the size of the wires leading into it, figuring on 100 amps per wire. It's just a visualization thing. And my 500 volt number is a simple rule of thumb, as the highest voltage you'll find in most consumer applications is 480v.
Of course, this is only necessary if you need to take a pit stop during a long journey
Exactly. Just refuting the minor bit in the parent post about how you can fill up an electric car in the same time as a gas car. I can put 10 gallons in a tank in 3 minutes, including paying and putting the gas cap back on, and in a 40 MPG car that gets me 400 miles. Versus 2 pit stops in an electric in your scenario, that take much longer and require the vehicle to be designed to handle rapid charging.
just to exchange it for a fully charged one
You buy a new car. With a new battery. With a range of 300 miles.
You use the car for a month, recharging at home.
You take a trip, and hit a 'swap station' on the way.
You get home with your 'new' battery, only to discover that your range has dropped to 150 miles, because the battery is a year and a half old and near the end of its useful life. Don't forget that lithium batteries only have a useful life of about 1.5 years.
Yeah, you could solve that problem by having car dealers install used batteries, but there's another issue. How much will a 'fill up' cost? Considering each battery will have a different capacity, you'll never know how much range you'll get from a swap.
You'll also need multiple batteries, as the needs for a 2 seat Smart ForTwo are different than for an electric Hummer.
As for safer, two points:
Easily removable batteries means easy accessibility to the battery compartment, which implies less safety in an accident. It also replaces gas siphoning with battery theft.
Standard sized batteries also leave less room for car designers to work.
I could see it potentially working with a dealer-based swap system, but not with widespread adoption.
Bob Holmes' website:
http://ari.home.mchsi.com/index.htm/
List of asteroids discovered this school year:
http://ari.home.mchsi.com/mp_discoveries_table_2007.htm/
And some info on the telescope he uses to capture images:
http://bi-staff.beckman.uiuc.edu/~melockwo/telescopes/holmes32/holmes32.html/
Same deal as this article. He uploads pics for students at participating schools to work with.
You won't see a trailer with a running generator and fuel supply on it like you describe, as it would kill efficiency and be inconvenient. Much simpler to just rent a gas powered car. However, I'm guessing that soon there'll be hybrids with a low power (10 HP), constant RPM (max 2500 RPM) diesel generator on board. Park the hybrid and let the engine keep running to charge the battery pack. Full battery pack plus 7500 watts of generating capacity would amount to about a 500 mile range, and allow you to recharge anywhere that isn't an enclosed space, or slow charge overnight from an outlet.
giving it the sort of charge time and range as a gasoline vehicle
Stop and think for a second, or do some math, because electric cars will *never* 'fill up' as fast as a chemically powered car. Instead of pouring in gasoline, imagine that gasoline powering a flamethrower which you point into your gas tank, and you'll have a better grasp of what it means to transfer energy directly (as in electricity) versus high density potential (like gas).
Assume your electric car needs only 20 horsepower to maintain 60 mph.
One horsepower is about 750 watts, assuming perfect efficiency.
That's 15 kilowatts to keep the car going 60 mph.
To make the numbers easy, figure 300 mile range. That means you need to drive for 5 hours.
5 hours times 15 kilowatts is 75 kilowatt-hours.
Now let's assume the 'electric station' supplies electricity to charge your car at 500 volts.
75000 watt-hours divided by 500 volts equals 150 amps.
For an hour. Assuming perfect charging.
To get to a 3 minute charge time (one twentieth of an hour) you need 20x the amperage, or 3000 amps.
To carry 3000 amps of current for 3 minutes without melting insulation, my numbers show you'd need copper wire about 2.5 inches in diameter (and you'd still get a temperature rise of 90 degrees farenheit over ambient). And note to electricians who may think the numbers are off, don't forget you're charging with DC voltage, not AC, so you're gonna need about 5000 circular mils worth of wire.
I cannot imagine Joe Average plugging TWO wires, each of which is thicker than his wrist, into his car for a 3 minute recharge.
And yeah, you could drop it to 300 amps, but then you're talking 5000 volts.
So basically... you're never, ever going to see a 'gas station' for electric cars. They'll always be charged for long periods at home, or at 'charging garages'.
First of all, Nanosolar HOPES to make the cells at $1/W, they are nowhere near that cheap yet, and this is the price their marketing department HOPES to achieve
....at.... drumroll please..... 90 cents per watt.
Minor information injection here:
Nanosolar _is_ making solar 'sheets' now... no wishful thinking involved.
They've contracted with a German company who has ordered roughly 600 megawatts worth of sheets
The sheets will be mounted in panels in a factory near Berlin, and used in Germany, which because of favorable laws requiring utilities to buy back power from customers, is experiencing a HUGE demand for renewable energy sources for the homeowner.
My 'ideal' hybrid drive would have DRAM, Flash *and* magnetic platters.
/temp filesystem for things like internet cache, swap and other stuff that can (and maybe should) be cleared/erased on a reboot. Flash for the hardest hit bits, like FAT tables and disk indeces so the heads on the platters don't have to jump around as much, and magnetic media because it's cheap.
2GB or so of DRAM as a buffer and as a
Downside is, you'd really need an OS that could 'tag' writes as volaitile/io priority/standard data, and some smarts built into the drive itself to take advantage of the tags.
Tram line 21 runs east to west.
Tram line 19 runs east to west on 21's tracks, then turns onto a north-south track heading south.
Driver of 19 sets his left-straight-right turn lever to broadcast "right".
Kid overrides with a left, lead car turns left.
Kid stops overriding, the junction again sees the signal on the tram to switch to turn right, and the second car goes right, causing a derailment.
In the US, most remote junction switches have a fail-safe that prevents the tracks from switching if there's a car over the junction, thus preventing driver error or malicious external elements from causing a derailment by making the train go in 2 directions at once. Apparently no such fail-safe is present on the systems in Lodz (pronounced 'woodj' in Polish).
Not sure if you've ever actually driven a motorcycle, after reading your arguments.
The primary safety factors built into motorcycles is their power to weight ratio, maneuverability, and braking ability.
Power to weight has very little to do with safety. The only circumstance in which it's truly valid is if you're standing still and need to accelerate away from an oncoming vehicle. Going from coasting to full throttle in a motorcycle (or car with a high power to weight ratio) might get you one vehicle length further along than you would have been after 3/4 of a second. In avoidance terms, your brakes will always outperform your engine, so to displace your future position the most, use the brakes.
Motorcycles are less maneuverable in terms of the abiity to make sudden directional changes than cars. Jerk the steering wheel in a car, and it immediately responds by going in another direction. Jerk the handlebars of a bike and you'll fall off, because *you must lean before you turn*. Avoiding tight spots is driver skill and the ability to see a bad situation developing, *not* maneuverability. Ever try to change direction quickly on a bike with a passenger? Right... by the time they figure out which way to lean, you've either overbalanced or hit what you were trying to avoid.
Ever try to brake hard on a bike while making a right turn? Like when a pedestrian steps off the curb into your path. You'll skid, which means you'll lay the bike down. And to avoid a skid, you have very little choice other than to steer straighter because your decreasing speed can't maintain the force keeping the bike from laying down. Ever try to maintain control of a bike with the front wheel in a skid? Ever try to slow down quickly with just the back brakes? In typical American driving, slamming on your brakes, no matter what the vehicle you're driving, will get you rear-ended. That's simply because most drivers follow too closely. Slamming on your brakes on a bike is no different than a car in that respect.
In general, any four wheeled vehicle will beat a two wheeled vehicle in terms of sudden maneuvering response, and while a car's performance isn't much affected by a passenger, a motorcycle's is, to a large degree.
From TFA:
The popular MySQL open source database was not included in the scans for reasons that were not immediately evident.
Any suggestions as to why MySQL has no results? I'm stumped and wondering why one whole corner of a LAMP foundation was left unchecked.
Before him, they had nothing.
Correct, because there *was* nothing offered. I believe the general consensus of industry was "If we make a really inexpensive, low power, low feature laptop that can't run Windows, and offer it on the cheap with a non-MS OS, no one would buy enough to have made the R&D profitable."
Then, Negroponte turned corporate logic upside down by showing that there was, indeed, a demand for such a product. Not just a heartwarming, globe-hugging 'think of the children' type of demand, but a corporate attention getting 'potential market of 2 million units or more per year', 'best selling computer product (worldwide) ever' kind of demand.
Now, pardon me for turning your argument around against you, but aren't you effectively saying that these third world countries are somewhat at fault because they have the temerity to actually *want* (desire, demand), a more powerful computer that more closely conforms to the de-facto MS/x86 standard?
meaning that fewer children will get access to an educational machine
But your argument missed the 'you get what you pay for' angle. More quantity at lower (perceived) quality is what you're advocating,then? Imagine for a moment if you will the decision-making process:
120,000 OLPCs -
Hard to control mesh network with no real control points, allowing subversive or disrupting communications in near-complete anonymity, meaning SPAM and child-exploitation would be difficult or impossible to trace and stop, and the possibility of a new generation of government overthrowing revolutionaries. OS and apps that won't give them the experience to work in a developed country (how many HR personnel do you know that would hire someone with no Windows or Office experience nowadays, in a white-collar job?).
70,000 MS/x86 (Wintel) PCs-
Just like all the developed countries have, just a little slower. The kids can always install Linux if they want, in addition to Windows. Might be less kids getting computers, but those that do will have a better chance of getting a job with an international company.
100,000 mopeds, or 40,000 VW Beetles would be a similar choice decision. Do you pick the higher volume of less capable devices, or the lower volume of more versaitile devices? I'm not privvy to the thought processes behind the decisions made by country leaders, but I respect their ability to make a decision *given choices from which to pick*.
rehash free market dogma
You mean the dogma where consumers get to choose what they perceive to be the best product for their needs? Or do you know what they need better than they do? Not everyone's needs are met by the cheapest product, which is why Mercedes has market share (to use another car analogy).
undermining a non profit charity
6 million bucks in contributions is hardly 'undermining'. Selling laptops to developing countries specifically for deployment to their kids is exactly identical to the purpose of the OLPC project.
It's the 'one laptop' per child project, not the 'one and only laptop' per child project.
Yes, they're a norma corporation. With a moral, legal and ethical responsibility to make money for their stockholders.
And Negroponte apparently believes, from everything I've read, that he and the OLPC deserve a monopoly on low cost laptops for por countries.
Also, from everything I've read, the *supposed* purpose of the OLPC project is to get as many laptops into the hands of children everywhere.
Intel appears to be doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing.
Negroponte, however, appears to be trying to limit consumer choices and stifle competition.
Let me repeat that:
Neroponte appears to be trying to limit consumer choices and stifle competition.
Every other company that has tried to do that has earned my disdain, and from past reading, the disdain of a majority of Slashdotters, as noted by the Bill Gates 'Borg' graphic.
Negroponte seems to have become sidetracked from the original goal. In fact, I'd wager that if asked what percentage of kids in 3rd world contries have computer access now, as compared to a year ago, he wouldn't know.
Sorry for the flamebait folks, but my opinion of OLPC 'management' has sunk.
Or the ImagiNation network in the 90's. I think they eventually became or merged with Sierra Online. INN had plenty of card games.
Hopefully the industry will learn a broader lesson about proprietary formats, including physical ones.
It looks like you've entered some sort of partnership with Grub http://www.grub.org/.
If so, kudos... Grub's been languishing in not-ready-for-primetime land for far too long, and the ability to crawl your own site to keep results current is a bonus, too.
Google "HIPAA" and/or X12 EDI
It's a data exchange format that *all* health care insurers and providers must accept or provide when exchanging patient data. It's trivial to add to the spec rules for additional subloops containing text. There are codes and modifiers enough to cover damned near any medical situation.
Many small doctors avoided electronic data altogether by doing as they'd done for years, namely keep paper records. That is until insurance companies began deprecating paper... by not accepting paper claims at all, charging a premium for processing paper forms, or cutting staff levels in their data entry pool which has the effect of seriously delaying payment to the physician.
Looks like they thought TMI meant 'too many interuptions'.
And yet another 'costs our economy' number. I wonder how they come up with those numbers.
Remember that great idea you had, that you took to your boss, and then your boss pitched it as his own idea and got all the credit and payday for it?
If you never had an idea like that, then IP won't mean anything to you.
If the above has happened to you, then you know the value of IP. Without IP it cannot have been *your* idea, as you couldn't have 'owned' your own idea.
IP is all about credit where credit is due, no more, no less.
I budgeted $5500/year for all of the above under the bit "assuming those 7u cost you $5500 a year". Roughly equivalent to $500/month for lightly managed co-location. Not worth it for just one movie backup, although economies of scale would quickly make it profitable.
Typical post production is done in DPX format.
It uses 20 to 50 megabytes _per frame_. 24-30 frames/sec.
The DPX format commonly used for digital post production uses about 35 megabytes *per frame*.
My calculator says a 2 hour movie at 24 frames/sec will have about 175,000 frames.
A few more button presses tell me that's a bit north of 6 terabytes of data.
Let's quadruple that to include all the cut scenes and unused footage, to 25 terabytes.
TB drives are available now for $400 or so each. They use under 10 watts idle.
Building a 30 drive RAID would thus cost $12,000, and require perhaps 500 watts if run constantly, including cooling. Let's bump that to $15,000 to pay for controllers and chassis.
Three such arrays (in case of earthquakes, etc... keep 'em at opposite ends of the continent) would cost an initial $45,000, take up perhaps 7u of rack space, and need 50 kWh per day for all three. At 30 cents per kWh, that's 15 bucks a day, or $5500 per year. Let's double that, assuming those 7u cost you $5500 a year.
So... my numbers, triply redundant, come to an initial investment of $60,000 (profit, hey!), and a yearly cost of $20,000 (more profit!).
How the hell they came up with $208k is beyond me. I'm thinking I should start a company that does this for the studios, it's looking quite lucrative.
There's still another holiday shopping season, and another 'Superbowl'(can I legally say that word anymore?) TV buying season between now and then. I'm sure you'll be seeing lots of advertising starting next November about the upcoming cutoff. No reason to buy a TV now when the one you've got is working, and will continue to receive for the next 14 months.
This material has been around since 1999 - 2000.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=955561&id=10&qs=No%3D10%26Ntt%3Dmfc%26Ntk%3Dall%26Ntx%3Dmode%2520matchall%26Ns%3DArchiveName%7C0%26N%3D0
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=924195&id=8&qs=No%3D10%26Ntt%3Dmfc%26Ntk%3Dall%26Ntx%3Dmode%2520matchall%26Ns%3DArchiveName%7C0%26N%3D0
2004:
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=572569&id=3&qs=No%3D0%26Ntt%3Dmfc%26Ntk%3Dall%26Ntx%3Dmode%2520matchall%26N%3D0%26Ns%3DArchiveName%7C0
Aparently they're 'merely' integrating it into materials and structures in new ways of late, but they were putting it on F-16 tailfin mockups 8 years ago.