I imagine something more along the lines of a malleable gel or putty that can form any shape thereby increasing contact surface area and making the grip stronger without increasing the amount of force on the object. It could hold an egg just as easily as an I-beam.
They are looking to mimic humans, but I doubt human form is the most efficient and adaptable. A blob-like form consisting of millions of nanobots working together, sometimes loosely, sometimes in a tight lattice, would make much more sense as it could take on any form and be solid or "liquid" at any given time.
In a human world where things are designed for humans with hands the most efficient thing to mimic would probably be a human hand. A nanobot blob might be the ideal holding device, but given the fact that the technology doesn't even exist it certainly isn't the most efficient.
"what's the point of a manned space flight to Mars? What can they do that robots can't?"
Actually go there.
What if all the great explorers throughout history simply sent robots (assuming they had them). We'd all be living in isolated tribes sleeping in huts.
Humans (for good and bad) physically explore.
We go places.
Send all the probes and robots you want, but if there is a rock big enough to land on and explore in our solar system my bet is that we will eventually go there.
At the moment space exploration is really limited to 1.) space stations 2.) our moon and 3.) Mars
We should be actively be making attempts at all three.
Please open source your software. Hire a bunch of developers and pay them for hundreds and thousands of man hours. Spend months, even years building up thousands of users.
Then, overnight, watch your entire dev team leave, take the code that you just finished paying for and watch them start their own company.
And we wonder why there is resistance to open source.
I'll be able to open Word, open a document, click on "Edit" then on "Find" and type in "3", set the type to "numerical" (vs text) and it will match (and highlight) "three", "3", "III", and so on.
I hope my tax dollars are not paying for someone's "adventure and excitement" when said person could use technology to get just as much work done (if not more) at a fraction of the cost.
Now if said scientist wants to go be Indiana Jones on their own dime (or the dime of a private company), I'm all for it.
NOT install any service packs or patches NOT use NTFS NOT use a sound card NOT use removable storage (CD, USB, etc) NOT use windows networking NOT use a parallel printer NOT install many applications NOT have more than 1 application open at a time NOT work with big (1MB+) files
Well WTF good is that computer then? The title of the article is "Win2000 Still Performs on 8-year-old Hardware". How is this performance?
Consolidation is not necessary if there is sufficient standardization between the distros. As a system admin I want to be able to pick and choose between RH, SuSe, Debian or whatever without a huge learning curve.
Each distro can add their flair, but the core methods for installing & configuring software and system settings should be the same.
"It is unclear as of yet how different the Mac x86 will be from a standard PC."
As such it is impossible to say that generic hardware + OSX couldn't be hacked to work together. While Apple claims that it won't work past experience with hacked Xboxes and such have shown that where there is a will there is a way.
I don't care one way or another, I'm just suggesting that since we don't have the hardware we can't discuss anything in absolutes.
"does that mean that future Mac OS can run on any Intel (and AMD?) machine? Or will it only run on an Intel specifically built for Mac?"
Possibly the question of the year once the official x86 Macs hit the market. Apple says no - their hardware only. Many people feel that unless they do something funky there will be no way they can keep OSX86 off of generic hardware.
Those are very different actions. Turning something off is one thing - removing it entirely is another.
I don't care about this issue at all but if ratings are to be taken literally then Rockstar should have completely removed the content (not disabled it) if they didn't want an AO rating.
Just tried to let IE install one of their apps and MS AntiSpyware caught it, flagging it with Moderate.
To their credit though you had to dig to find the Moderate label. The first thing a user will see is a rather largish (scary looking) red box encouraging them to block the software.
Why would Google want to produce and support an entire operating system when it can get the job done via the web? A Google operating system would be an unnecessary distraction for the company.
"well, we might not get all of their business, but we'll take what we can get." From a business standpoint, that would seem to make more sense.
What makes sense about supporting a project whose focus will make one of your core (profitable) products unnecessary?
Making Windows applications run on Linux (or whatever) won't make Linux users run out and buy Office. No, rather it will make Windows customers migrate to Linux (because they can still keep their old software).
If a bullet (or even a gun for that matter) was a highly complex device that was difficult to construct then this would have a chance of working.
But a bullet is not complex. Basic bullets can easily be made at home with very little skill or knowledge. If commercially made bullets had RFID then a black market of home-grown RFID-free bullets would crop up.
Slashdot Mirror
I imagine something more along the lines of a malleable gel or putty that can form any shape thereby increasing contact surface area and making the grip stronger without increasing the amount of force on the object. It could hold an egg just as easily as an I-beam.
They are looking to mimic humans, but I doubt human form is the most efficient and adaptable. A blob-like form consisting of millions of nanobots working together, sometimes loosely, sometimes in a tight lattice, would make much more sense as it could take on any form and be solid or "liquid" at any given time.
In a human world where things are designed for humans with hands the most efficient thing to mimic would probably be a human hand. A nanobot blob might be the ideal holding device, but given the fact that the technology doesn't even exist it certainly isn't the most efficient.
Anyone remotely concerned with the GPL needs to blackball SCO out of existance.
'cool and promoting a positive state of mind'
How about a USB slot and built in MP3 capabilities in a factory car stereo. That would be cool.
"what's the point of a manned space flight to Mars? What can they do that robots can't?"
Actually go there.
What if all the great explorers throughout history simply sent robots (assuming they had them). We'd all be living in isolated tribes sleeping in huts.
Humans (for good and bad) physically explore.
We go places.
Send all the probes and robots you want, but if there is a rock big enough to land on and explore in our solar system my bet is that we will eventually go there.
At the moment space exploration is really limited to 1.) space stations 2.) our moon and 3.) Mars
We should be actively be making attempts at all three.
(Score:-1, Flamebait)
Rad
Please open source your software. Hire a bunch of developers and pay them for hundreds and thousands of man hours. Spend months, even years building up thousands of users.
Then, overnight, watch your entire dev team leave, take the code that you just finished paying for and watch them start their own company.
And we wonder why there is resistance to open source.
I'll be able to open Word, open a document, click on "Edit" then on "Find" and type in "3", set the type to "numerical" (vs text) and it will match (and highlight) "three", "3", "III", and so on.
"Open Office is good for techs but not for normal people"
The 400+ grade school students who attend the school at which I work would disagree with you.
Until very recently they were all using the MS Office suite. We wholesale converted them to OpenOffice and none of them skipped a beat.
To them software is software, and OpenOffice was just as good as MS Office for their needs.
I hope my tax dollars are not paying for someone's "adventure and excitement" when said person could use technology to get just as much work done (if not more) at a fraction of the cost.
Now if said scientist wants to go be Indiana Jones on their own dime (or the dime of a private company), I'm all for it.
The author of that howto claims that you should:
NOT install any service packs or patches
NOT use NTFS
NOT use a sound card
NOT use removable storage (CD, USB, etc)
NOT use windows networking
NOT use a parallel printer
NOT install many applications
NOT have more than 1 application open at a time
NOT work with big (1MB+) files
Well WTF good is that computer then? The title of the article is "Win2000 Still Performs on 8-year-old Hardware". How is this performance?
Consolidation is not necessary if there is sufficient standardization between the distros. As a system admin I want to be able to pick and choose between RH, SuSe, Debian or whatever without a huge learning curve.
Each distro can add their flair, but the core methods for installing & configuring software and system settings should be the same.
"It is unclear as of yet how different the Mac x86 will be from a standard PC."
As such it is impossible to say that generic hardware + OSX couldn't be hacked to work together. While Apple claims that it won't work past experience with hacked Xboxes and such have shown that where there is a will there is a way.
I don't care one way or another, I'm just suggesting that since we don't have the hardware we can't discuss anything in absolutes.
"does that mean that future Mac OS can run on any Intel (and AMD?) machine? Or will it only run on an Intel specifically built for Mac?"
Possibly the question of the year once the official x86 Macs hit the market. Apple says no - their hardware only. Many people feel that unless they do something funky there will be no way they can keep OSX86 off of generic hardware.
"was disabled/taken out of the game"
Those are very different actions. Turning something off is one thing - removing it entirely is another.
I don't care about this issue at all but if ratings are to be taken literally then Rockstar should have completely removed the content (not disabled it) if they didn't want an AO rating.
"pineapple molecules"
Pineapples have molecules of their own?
Just tried to let IE install one of their apps and MS AntiSpyware caught it, flagging it with Moderate.
To their credit though you had to dig to find the Moderate label. The first thing a user will see is a rather largish (scary looking) red box encouraging them to block the software.
Why would Google want to produce and support an entire operating system when it can get the job done via the web? A Google operating system would be an unnecessary distraction for the company.
WTF is this:
7 &spn=0.238609,0.341263&t=k&hl=en
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=27.649498,22.50480
especially when you rely mainly on people working for free
It would be interesting to see what percentage of contributors to Linux are actually unpaid these days.
Hey, welcome to the club.
I'm sure they will charge some sort of messed up licensing fee for each virtual machine (or subset of that machine).
> 800MHz was a fantastic speed... hell, for that
> matter, 300MHz was pretty nice too depending
> on how far back you go.
Heh. I remember getting excited over a 386.
Hell, moving from my C64 to a 286 was fun but I was too young to appreciate it.
"well, we might not get all of their business, but we'll take what we can get." From a business standpoint, that would seem to make more sense.
What makes sense about supporting a project whose focus will make one of your core (profitable) products unnecessary?
Making Windows applications run on Linux (or whatever) won't make Linux users run out and buy Office. No, rather it will make Windows customers migrate to Linux (because they can still keep their old software).
If Gore did anything to convince Clinton not to sign the DMCA.
If a bullet (or even a gun for that matter) was a highly complex device that was difficult to construct then this would have a chance of working.
But a bullet is not complex. Basic bullets can easily be made at home with very little skill or knowledge. If commercially made bullets had RFID then a black market of home-grown RFID-free bullets would crop up.