Many, many years ago I worked as purchasing officer for a large research organisation. HP used to publish a magazine that showcased their latest equipment, usually describing the engineering that went into it in great detail. Within days of the magazine hitting the desks of our engineers we would get requests for these new gadgets, which HP was able to provide from local stock -- in Australia. That always impressed our engineers.
If you could put Linux on one it would be a sweet little machine. One of the reasons they are so expensive is the Windows requires a higher performance CPU and more memory than the other brands. This in turn pushes up the battery requirements as well as the cost. It would be nice to be able to put something more efficient on them.
I was watching a couple of youngsters trying to play with a Surface in one of our local electronics stores. It must have been that the keyboard was not connected correctly since nothing worked unless you poked at the screen. Not very impressive, and WAY too expensive compared to laptop computers.
Until very recently there was very little use for 3D for most people. Those few doing CAD, and some games were the only users, and they are not enough to bring 3D into the mainstream.
However we now have relatively low cost 3D movie cameras and 3D printers are also beginning to become common. I think 3D will finally start to take off.
Rather than yet another database application, what is needed is a database layer, much like a graphics layer. This could then be a common resource for all applications.
Part of the problem is that each application has its own database. Users want to access data from multiple applications which usually means exporting from one or more databases and importing the data into another before you can run any queries against it.
The relational model is two restrictive for the sort of things a user needs to do. Something based on RDF or OWL might be a lot more flexible and hence useful.
Once we have a means of sequestering CO2, then there is no longer much incentive to stop creating it. We will just build a lot more coal fired power stations, and probably a lot more of these plants to cope with the ever increasing demand.
Eventually all this CO2 goes back into the atmosphere, and probably very quickly.
is in the teaching of algebra, not the need for it.
The TFA starts by complaining about how so many students fail the subject, but by the end is describing all sorts of scenarios where maths is a requirements. It would appear that the problem, then, is to find a better way of teaching the subject.
The best results that I have seen come when students can work together to explain stuff to each other, and where the maths is related back to real world problems. A student that has just grasped some concept is better able to explain it than someone for whom that concept is second nature. Some practical use can make the subject seem more real and can aid in the understanding - I never really understood matrices until I started doing some 3D graphics stuff - the classes never related them to anything solid - they were just an abstraction.
I have been using Gnome 3 for a few months now, and with the extension tools available it can be made almost useable.
The two things that really need to change are the dynamic workspaces and the launcher.
The idea of dynamic workspaces is great for the casual user, but for the more experienced user we would like a set of named static workspaces. I have been able to kludge this by having a terminal session on each workspace - and making sure I never close them. This keeps the workspaces alive and fixed. GConf still has the ability to name workspaces so I use the workspace menu to switch when using the mouse (I am a developer, but I use the mouse a LOT).
The idea of always jumping to the running program when you hit a launcher is really annoying. I can see that it might be useful for some large programs, like Eclipse, but for terminal sessions or a calculator I want to stay on the current workspace and open a new instance. This needs to be made into a configuable option since different users will have different requirements for this.
Well politics is the big one, but there is also the finance/economic problem. It would be uneconomic to build such a plant unless we had a lot of reactors, and an export market. Our good friends, the USA, would not like their markets being taken by us - so its more politics.
I do note that the process is being developed by one of the existing refiners, so it will be interesting to see if it results in significantly cheaper fuel rods.
I don't think you understand the politics behind the Uranium cycle.
A couple of very smart Australian scientists have developed a laser based process for refining Uranium that is far more effective and cheaper than the existing processes. It has been buried. The reason given was that it is too dangerous because it would allow Iran, N.Korea, and others to build weapons, but my suspicion is that it would obsolete too much existing investment by the current refiners.
One of the issues that is often not mentioned by proponents of nuclear power is the need to refine the Uranium ore into fuel rods for the reactors and this can only be done in a very few places (at, I suspect, a significant cost). This is not an issue for USA or France or Russia, but for a country like Australia we would be putting our energy generation capability in the hands of overseas providers.
I agree with most of your points, and that for northern Europe, and much of USA nuclear might be a better answer than solar. However, for places like South Africa (the topic of the article) and Australia we should be able to get massive amounts of solar power up and running long before the first reactor even gets approval to look for a site.
As a one off it is almost economical - if we make all that parts in China and set it up in outback Australia (where the land cost is minimal and there is a lot more sunshine than in Spain) we should be able to supply the entire worlds energy. (I know, transportation is an issue, but one problem at a time.)
Except of course that it takes about a decade* to get a nuclear power station up and running, but you could power from one of these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Tres_Power_Tower inside of two years.
* Assuming you can get on the list to get a containment vessel - they can only make about 10 per year.
If I had to bet on the replacement for the keyboard it would be something like the Leap Motion paired with sign language - perhaps a one handed version.
The marketing peolple are looking at the rapid rise in tablet sales, rather than the actual numbers sold which is still tiny in comparison to sales of PCs.
However, while the first computer for most people is likely to be a laptop, (and later we may get little servers like the FreedomBox idea), I can see a use for several tablets if the price is low enough. For example, one to use in the kitchen for recipies, one for the lounge to surf the web, and one for the bedroom for reading, or watching a movie.
A more likely killer for the PC is the smartphone. If Google mandated a specific connector and protocol for docking then businesses (and even consumers) would invest in fitting out their offices with docking stations confident that they would be useful for a reasonable period of time. Similarly there would be a rush of docks hitting the market.
Computers can have free speech when that speech is theirs and not something algorithmically derived from what some human has said or written and when they independently demand that they have the right.
Slashdot Mirror
Many, many years ago I worked as purchasing officer for a large research organisation. HP used to publish a magazine that showcased their latest equipment, usually describing the engineering that went into it in great detail. Within days of the magazine hitting the desks of our engineers we would get requests for these new gadgets, which HP was able to provide from local stock -- in Australia. That always impressed our engineers.
If you could put Linux on one it would be a sweet little machine. One of the reasons they are so expensive is the Windows requires a higher performance CPU and more memory than the other brands. This in turn pushes up the battery requirements as well as the cost. It would be nice to be able to put something more efficient on them.
To quote from the referenced article:
"The specific value can't be permanently altered on devices enabled with Secure Boot"
So not much use really.
I was watching a couple of youngsters trying to play with a Surface in one of our local electronics stores. It must have been that the keyboard was not connected correctly since nothing worked unless you poked at the screen. Not very impressive, and WAY too expensive compared to laptop computers.
Since its locked down so it can only run Windows RT, and the App Store would probably be shut down, what are you going to do with it?
The only way these could have succeeded was to price them below Android and recover the losses from the App Store.
The way these are heading, we will see Microsoft soon abandon them and because of their locked down nature they will be consigned to landfill.
There has been no spike in sales because PC sales are in decline overall.
However I purchased this W7 machine to avoid any W8 problems putting Linux on it.
Until very recently there was very little use for 3D for most people. Those few doing CAD, and some games were the only users, and they are not enough to bring 3D into the mainstream.
However we now have relatively low cost 3D movie cameras and 3D printers are also beginning to become common. I think 3D will finally start to take off.
Rather than yet another database application, what is needed is a database layer, much like a graphics layer. This could then be a common resource for all applications.
Part of the problem is that each application has its own database. Users want to access data from multiple applications which usually means exporting from one or more databases and importing the data into another before you can run any queries against it.
The relational model is two restrictive for the sort of things a user needs to do. Something based on RDF or OWL might be a lot more flexible and hence useful.
Agree completely.
Once we have a means of sequestering CO2, then there is no longer much incentive to stop creating it. We will just build a lot more coal fired power stations, and probably a lot more of these plants to cope with the ever increasing demand.
Eventually all this CO2 goes back into the atmosphere, and probably very quickly.
is in the teaching of algebra, not the need for it.
The TFA starts by complaining about how so many students fail the subject, but by the end is describing all sorts of scenarios where maths is a requirements. It would appear that the problem, then, is to find a better way of teaching the subject.
The best results that I have seen come when students can work together to explain stuff to each other, and where the maths is related back to real world problems. A student that has just grasped some concept is better able to explain it than someone for whom that concept is second nature. Some practical use can make the subject seem more real and can aid in the understanding - I never really understood matrices until I started doing some 3D graphics stuff - the classes never related them to anything solid - they were just an abstraction.
I have been using Gnome 3 for a few months now, and with the extension tools available it can be made almost useable.
The two things that really need to change are the dynamic workspaces and the launcher.
The idea of dynamic workspaces is great for the casual user, but for the more experienced user we would like a set of named static workspaces. I have been able to kludge this by having a terminal session on each workspace - and making sure I never close them. This keeps the workspaces alive and fixed. GConf still has the ability to name workspaces so I use the workspace menu to switch when using the mouse (I am a developer, but I use the mouse a LOT).
The idea of always jumping to the running program when you hit a launcher is really annoying. I can see that it might be useful for some large programs, like Eclipse, but for terminal sessions or a calculator I want to stay on the current workspace and open a new instance. This needs to be made into a configuable option since different users will have different requirements for this.
Those two changes and it would be a viable DE.
Well politics is the big one, but there is also the finance/economic problem. It would be uneconomic to build such a plant unless we had a lot of reactors, and an export market. Our good friends, the USA, would not like their markets being taken by us - so its more politics.
You are quite correct. I based my original comment on a TV news story that I vaguely remembered: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-04-13/australian-laser-threatens-nuclear-security/2570568.
I do note that the process is being developed by one of the existing refiners, so it will be interesting to see if it results in significantly cheaper fuel rods.
Some estimates are that inside of 400 years, if we continue at the present rate of increase, should see us nicely toasted.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-07-21/home/29979154_1_growth-trend-energy-growth-solar-panels
I don't think you understand the politics behind the Uranium cycle.
A couple of very smart Australian scientists have developed a laser based process for refining Uranium that is far more effective and cheaper than the existing processes. It has been buried. The reason given was that it is too dangerous because it would allow Iran, N.Korea, and others to build weapons, but my suspicion is that it would obsolete too much existing investment by the current refiners.
One of the issues that is often not mentioned by proponents of nuclear power is the need to refine the Uranium ore into fuel rods for the reactors and this can only be done in a very few places (at, I suspect, a significant cost). This is not an issue for USA or France or Russia, but for a country like Australia we would be putting our energy generation capability in the hands of overseas providers.
I agree with most of your points, and that for northern Europe, and much of USA nuclear might be a better answer than solar. However, for places like South Africa (the topic of the article) and Australia we should be able to get massive amounts of solar power up and running long before the first reactor even gets approval to look for a site.
Well parhaps we could start mass-producing these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Tres_Power_Tower
As a one off it is almost economical - if we make all that parts in China and set it up in outback Australia (where the land cost is minimal and there is a lot more sunshine than in Spain) we should be able to supply the entire worlds energy. (I know, transportation is an issue, but one problem at a time.)
Except of course that it takes about a decade* to get a nuclear power station up and running, but you could power from one of these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_Tres_Power_Tower inside of two years.
* Assuming you can get on the list to get a containment vessel - they can only make about 10 per year.
If I had to bet on the replacement for the keyboard it would be something like the Leap Motion paired with sign language - perhaps a one handed version.
and the mess when they finally do go down is going to be catastrophic for those industries.
Books like this are at least a warning to managers that putting all their eggs in a single basket might not be the best strategy.
I guess a cluster of RaspberryPis is going to be the desktop computer in the not too distant future.
I agree completely with your analysis.
The marketing peolple are looking at the rapid rise in tablet sales, rather than the actual numbers sold which is still tiny in comparison to sales of PCs.
However, while the first computer for most people is likely to be a laptop, (and later we may get little servers like the FreedomBox idea), I can see a use for several tablets if the price is low enough. For example, one to use in the kitchen for recipies, one for the lounge to surf the web, and one for the bedroom for reading, or watching a movie.
A more likely killer for the PC is the smartphone. If Google mandated a specific connector and protocol for docking then businesses (and even consumers) would invest in fitting out their offices with docking stations confident that they would be useful for a reasonable period of time. Similarly there would be a rush of docks hitting the market.
Computers can have free speech when that speech is theirs and not something algorithmically derived from what some human has said or written and when they independently demand that they have the right.