The only things important to me are data integrity (a non-issue with 99% of the drives, even the cheapest ones)
I totally agree. What surprised the hell out of me was that one day (for some odd reason) I copied a large file from a USB stick to the HD twice (different names). I was totally baffled when I found out that the files didn't compare 100%. Tried it several times, and everytime I copied the file off, it was different by 5 or 6 bytes (a 64MB file or something).
This was on a 128MB PQI Intelligent Stick, which granted, should make you wonder when you see it's size.
what's most worrysome to me is that this thing fails silently...
Anyways, perhaps the OCZ will be better, because it's Extreme!
For instance, in Tokyo, one person could infect sixty to a hundred people on the ride to the Akihabara district with one sneeze. Same in New York on the A, 4/5/6, 1/2, or 7 lines.
Care to back that statement up with some references? Because I seriously question the things that you present as facts.
Are you just saying that, or do you actually _know_ that? Because I would say that the majority of cell phones sold are well below $100 to manufacture. You got to keep in mind that the majority of cell-phones sold are low end phones.
So I'll go out on a limb and say that I think the low end phones cost $25 or less to manufacture. It's very hard to find any information on this but here's a quick thesis:
You can roughly divide the cost of a cell-phone into four parts: display, battery, chipset/electronics, plastic.
The cost of the plastic is going to be negligable, as in a couple dollars at _most_, I think everyone will see that. You can get batteries on eBay (in quantities) for any phone for a few of dollars. You can buy replacement LCDs on eBay (in quantities) for a few dollars (color < $20). Can't find a source for electronics, but based on the price of electronics with similar capabilities/densities, I don't see why it would be more than $10 (minipci 802.11 card for example).
and here's a more tangible quote where the person says the BOM can be reduced by 30% to make a $20 phone possible. (which is cost the end-user, not mfg cost)
For the future of the web, this is a case you'll want Microsoft to win, ultimately.
I am going to have to disagree with you here. For the future of frivolous patents, maybe yes, but the web without browser plugins sounds like a great result to me.
There's a hell of a lot of irony in the fact that it's Microsoft being at the receiving end of the beating from a company that frivolously patented a terrible idea.
Browser plugins suck because they are native code and get as much control over the computer they run on as the user does.
Yet, I've _never_ seen the use of a plugin where it was (a) essential and (b) couldn't been done with HTML/CSS/JavaScript. Especially with XMLHttpRequest implemented in most browsers now.
So why on earth would you want to give companies like Macromedia and Real that much control? I mean, why do MP3s or AVIs have to be played inside the browser window anyway? I much prefer clicking a link and opening it with my favorite player.
I'm very interested to see the others. Even though I'm not sure yet how I feel about that logo itself, I'm really impressed by the completeness of Anton's work.
The font is awesome, IMHO, and I'd just love to have that "handbook" sit on my shelf (even though I don't run FreeBSD, for obvious reasons - it can't even stand a slash-beating! *ducks*)
It's really good to see Open Source projects take branding seriously, and even better that they are able to acquire the talent of such great graphics artists! I hope for Anton that this results in a nice amount of 'paid for work'.
One of the questions to ask seriously (and I'm not saying I know how the answer would come out, because I don't) is this: what would've happened if Bill Gates hadn't acquired all that money which he is now giving away? Where would it be? In the pockets of millions of ordinary folks, of course. And what would they have done with it?
I think people's spending behavior is one of the great mysteries of mankind, so that's a pretty damn hard thing to answer to begin with and on top of that, it turns out that history has already taken place, so the answer to "what would have happened if" is "it didn't".
People were free to exchange their money for Microsoft software, and they did. Sure, the whole monopoly thing is debatable, but it didn't stop people from buying Microsoft software and it doesn't look like the majority of people are concerned with the fact that Microsoft didn't get a punishment over it either.
All it showed was that perhaps the laws are more socialist than the majority of people care for in the US. At the end of the day, in a capitalistic society there'd be no laws against monopolies; why would there be?
Still, it's a genuine concern, although I like to phrase it differently: is it reasonable that one single person should have control over that much power (= money), especially if that person was chosen by capitalism vs. democracy?
I personally don't think so, but I have to admit that I like to see the stuff that Bill Gates does (even though being capitalistically chosen) a lot better than the stuff that the President of the US does (even though being democratically chosen; supposedly).
The big problem that I have with the situation is that tomorrow Bill Gates could wake up and decide he'd invest the rest of his money into starting the 4th Reich, all by himself, whereas democratically chosen people couldn't. They were chosen on their believes and promises, and even a minor diversion from that path could result in losing all power. (Even when about 50% of the population would have taken the blowjob, not even in the oval office, it was reason enough for impeachment...)
Unfortunately money and power are inseparable, because I'd like it much better if people could just get rich, but forget about the power. The prospect of getting rich should be enough to give people the drive to do things that are really awesome. As soon as power comes into play, it always seems that people just get nasty.
I have to say though that I have great admiration for Bill Gates. On the one hand he's pushed business as hard as one could possibly imagine (much to the chagrin of some people, but the judges have so far been on his side). On the other hand though he uses his money not as power, but to help solve real issues for the largest amount of people possible.
I presume it would be a potential target for terrorists
FUD.
Please read the constitution. Please read your bill of rights. Please get some perspective. Please understand that when people decide to build a bridge, it's very sad that the only thing you can come up with is FUD.
Obviously, your admins were not qualified to administer a Linux server like this. If it took them two weeks to get software installed and running like that, I'd fire them right away. Even if it is SAP, a complex piece of software.
Excellent! If someone doesn't get something working on Linux, then it's incompetence...
Just because you got it up and running in 2 days on Windows doesn't mean it was done right, or done securely.
... and, if someone does get something working on Windows, then that's, uh, pure luck. No wait, it's not really working, it just seems that way, and it's certainly not secure.
It takes quite a special person to be able to draw these conclusions, given the provided information. And to recommend firing people implies that you are in fact really pretty godam certain about yourself.
So how about this; what if we tried exactly what Crest was trying to do, only now YOU are responsible for the project. Let's just say that this system is worth $1M a day. Now if you can get it running in one day instead of two days, you'll get $1M. Or if it takes a day longer, it'll cost you $1M. Two days longer $2M. etc.
Considering your confidence in the matter, that sounds like easy money to me.
/sarcasm
This type of superiority is NOT what Linux needs. I mean, how hard is it really to call someone incompetent from the anonymity of your armchair? Like a 100 key strokes?
Seems to me that "the admins weren't qualified" is just a cheap appology, which hurts Linux more than it does good. To me, the argument that the problem is really with SAP and not with Linux seems far more plausible, at least in the sense that SAP is not a well behaving app. Now, knowing that, actually something constructive can be done, such as making it easier for the developers of SAP to find problems before their product is shipped.
It amazes me every time I go to the states how no signature or pin is required to buy goods on a credit card.
Well, that is pretty uncommon and you will only see it at places that have done the math and decided that it made more financial sense to take the risk.
Self-service gas stations are good example.
Not really; as someone else pointed out, the signature is only used as proof when you contest the transaction. Some companies decide to take the risk, especially if they have security cameras recording your car's license plate.
The security cameras basically make it impossible to deny a purchase for the owner of the car & card (or after a couple of times the CC company will notice how you are always denying transactions).
It is probably still the major place where people go with stolen credit cards, but it's evidently still cheaper for the gas stations to have less staff though.
What's more bothersome to me are these places that require you to provide them with every single bit of private information that you have. What's your birthdate? What's your birthplace? What's your mother's maiden name? My question is: what more information do you need before you can succesfully impersonate me?!
Think of it; you call your bank, and they ask all these questions. Sounds reasonable, you want your bank to be secure. Now some website asks the same stuff. Sounds like they take security seriously. But what about the people that have access to that information? They can now pretty much call your bank and do whatever they want.
Back to 'advancements' in the credit/debit card industry though: why is it that by far the biggest problem, which has been known for at least 10 years, has not been solved? I'm talking about how we, the customers, have no way to verify that the person charging our card is a-okay. It's very possible that the ATM/CC machine has a fake keypad and reader. There's no way to find out for us, which is crazy.
Of course the CC companies will gladly undo the charges but who the hell has time to go through every line on a statement, especially when technology apparently still hasn't made it possible to list an item other than "POS/123 SUNSET LA 0101 $11.50"
Well, I can't. People that need to _will_ find a way around that.
What I really don't understand is this desire of companies to become jury, judge and prosecuter all in one. This sounds like something that can be useful in an entirely legal manner. Imagine every device that could potentially be used to do something illegal have something like that built in.
Can't work late at night anymore because the alarm in the screwdriver will wake up the kids... Absolutely crazy...
For example, a nuclear reaction being controlled. Say, interrupt 666 triggers when something goes horribly wrong, and if you enable a safety system within 10ms, nothing bad happens. It would be good to have a system that guarantees response in less than that time.
Just wanted to comment that the requirement for real-timeness is usually a lot less spectacular then the good ole nuke example. It's usually more something like "interrupt 12 triggers when 14 out of 20 network receive buffers are full, and if you don't respond within 10 microseconds by freeing some of those up, the other 6 buffers are potentially going to be full and the network controller has no place to put incoming data, so it will drop anything coming in after that point".
That its ridiculous that RTLinux needs to run on a dual-core AMD Opteron in order to achieve those latencies ?
Yes. I think for anyone that has done embedded systems for a while that's laughable.
Before I start on my rant I will say that (a) the last time I've looked into Linux as a potential embedded OS has been a while (1-2 years) and (b) a fair amount of elitism can't be denied when it comes to talking about RTOSs.
Having said that, I never understood why people are so hot on making Linux an embedded RTOS. The kernel is NOT designed to be an RTOS. The distributions/tools are not designed for embedded.
Last time I looked at RTLinux, it would have been more accurate to call it a very small RTOS kernel that ran Linux as a sub-process. You needed to write/port your own drivers for devices that needed real-time response. The Linux kernel itself was not real-time.
The last version of the Linux kernel itself that I looked at was not designed to be re-entrant/pre-empted in a way that's required for a true RTOS. However, the multi-processor "#ifdefs" seemed to make it possible to create a kernel which locked at a much "lower" level. I think Robert Love's patches took advantage of that and from what I understand those are now incorporated into the main source tree (but I'm by no means a regular lkml reader), which IMHO was a more promising path to take. Although I still don't think it's making Linux a viable RTOS...
Actually, some the stuff you listed I _would_ call discrimination. Maybe you should look up the meaning in the dictionary because it seems like you have an urge to redefine the word to something that suits your liking.
One can discriminate based on practically anything, it isn't always color of skin... See " 3. Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice"
When you block an entire country there's certainly treatment based on category rather than individual merit, and there's certainly prejudice when you do this because of hacking.
At my company we block email based on country blacklists for countries that we don't do business with. It certainly cuts down on spam... and has no false positives.
Really? I do quite a bit of purchasing for my US based company. But I'm not originally from the US, so it happens frequently that I use my foreign email address because it's shorter/easier, and it's what I've used for many years.
Sounds to me like a false positive is definitely possible. I'm not the only person that has moved to the US and sometimes uses their home country based email.
It also sometimes happens that my email gets forwarded to a local rep abroad, even though I clearly stated our company address in the US in my email. It's fine with me, there's usually another supplier that understands that you can't make silly assumptions on the internet.
This is all fine and dandy. Until _you_ end up being blocked from a whole bunch of stuff because of some asshole in the same IP space.
Blocking based on IP range and or country is pure and simple discrimination. A lot of people don't seem to grasp why discrimination is bad until they end up on the receiving end...
Having said that; if you want to block half the world, I believe that's your right. Just don't block it for me please, I'd like to make that decision myself.
Are you serious? What's the source language you're translating from, if you don't mind me asking. I've never heard about the stuff being properly referred to as expresso in any language. It's a somewhat common mistake though, I thought it was expresso, too - when I was twelve...;)
Actually, according dictionary.reference.com expresso is "Variant of espresso.". So maybe it was originally a mistake (probably in several languages), but it seems to have been accepted, at least in English.
Slashdot Mirror
The only things important to me are data integrity (a non-issue with 99% of the drives, even the cheapest ones)
I totally agree. What surprised the hell out of me was that one day (for some odd reason) I copied a large file from a USB stick to the HD twice (different names). I was totally baffled when I found out that the files didn't compare 100%. Tried it several times, and everytime I copied the file off, it was different by 5 or 6 bytes (a 64MB file or something).
This was on a 128MB PQI Intelligent Stick, which granted, should make you wonder when you see it's size.
what's most worrysome to me is that this thing fails silently...
Anyways, perhaps the OCZ will be better, because it's Extreme!
ps. why did Rosco's post get moderated funny??
For instance, in Tokyo, one person could infect sixty to a hundred people on the ride to the Akihabara district with one sneeze. Same in New York on the A, 4/5/6, 1/2, or 7 lines.
Care to back that statement up with some references? Because I seriously question the things that you present as facts.
Most cell phones are not really sub-$100 devices.
Are you just saying that, or do you actually _know_ that? Because I would say that the majority of cell phones sold are well below $100 to manufacture. You got to keep in mind that the majority of cell-phones sold are low end phones.
So I'll go out on a limb and say that I think the low end phones cost $25 or less to manufacture. It's very hard to find any information on this but here's a quick thesis:
You can roughly divide the cost of a cell-phone into four parts: display, battery, chipset/electronics, plastic.
The cost of the plastic is going to be negligable, as in a couple dollars at _most_, I think everyone will see that. You can get batteries on eBay (in quantities) for any phone for a few of dollars. You can buy replacement LCDs on eBay (in quantities) for a few dollars (color < $20). Can't find a source for electronics, but based on the price of electronics with similar capabilities/densities, I don't see why it would be more than $10 (minipci 802.11 card for example).
here's an article that talks about cell phone MFG cost, although no current numbers...
and here's a more tangible quote where the person says the BOM can be reduced by 30% to make a $20 phone possible. (which is cost the end-user, not mfg cost)
For the future of the web, this is a case you'll want Microsoft to win, ultimately.
I am going to have to disagree with you here. For the future of frivolous patents, maybe yes, but the web without browser plugins sounds like a great result to me.
There's a hell of a lot of irony in the fact that it's Microsoft being at the receiving end of the beating from a company that frivolously patented a terrible idea.
Browser plugins suck because they are native code and get as much control over the computer they run on as the user does.
Yet, I've _never_ seen the use of a plugin where it was (a) essential and (b) couldn't been done with HTML/CSS/JavaScript. Especially with XMLHttpRequest implemented in most browsers now.
So why on earth would you want to give companies like Macromedia and Real that much control? I mean, why do MP3s or AVIs have to be played inside the browser window anyway? I much prefer clicking a link and opening it with my favorite player.
Any links to the other contenders?
I'm very interested to see the others. Even though I'm not sure yet how I feel about that logo itself, I'm really impressed by the completeness of Anton's work.
The font is awesome, IMHO, and I'd just love to have that "handbook" sit on my shelf (even though I don't run FreeBSD, for obvious reasons - it can't even stand a slash-beating! *ducks*)
It's really good to see Open Source projects take branding seriously, and even better that they are able to acquire the talent of such great graphics artists! I hope for Anton that this results in a nice amount of 'paid for work'.
One of the questions to ask seriously (and I'm not saying I know how the answer would come out, because I don't) is this: what would've happened if Bill Gates hadn't acquired all that money which he is now giving away? Where would it be? In the pockets of millions of ordinary folks, of course. And what would they have done with it?
I think people's spending behavior is one of the great mysteries of mankind, so that's a pretty damn hard thing to answer to begin with and on top of that, it turns out that history has already taken place, so the answer to "what would have happened if" is "it didn't".
People were free to exchange their money for Microsoft software, and they did. Sure, the whole monopoly thing is debatable, but it didn't stop people from buying Microsoft software and it doesn't look like the majority of people are concerned with the fact that Microsoft didn't get a punishment over it either.
All it showed was that perhaps the laws are more socialist than the majority of people care for in the US. At the end of the day, in a capitalistic society there'd be no laws against monopolies; why would there be?
Still, it's a genuine concern, although I like to phrase it differently: is it reasonable that one single person should have control over that much power (= money), especially if that person was chosen by capitalism vs. democracy?
I personally don't think so, but I have to admit that I like to see the stuff that Bill Gates does (even though being capitalistically chosen) a lot better than the stuff that the President of the US does (even though being democratically chosen; supposedly).
The big problem that I have with the situation is that tomorrow Bill Gates could wake up and decide he'd invest the rest of his money into starting the 4th Reich, all by himself, whereas democratically chosen people couldn't. They were chosen on their believes and promises, and even a minor diversion from that path could result in losing all power. (Even when about 50% of the population would have taken the blowjob, not even in the oval office, it was reason enough for impeachment...)
Unfortunately money and power are inseparable, because I'd like it much better if people could just get rich, but forget about the power. The prospect of getting rich should be enough to give people the drive to do things that are really awesome. As soon as power comes into play, it always seems that people just get nasty.
I have to say though that I have great admiration for Bill Gates. On the one hand he's pushed business as hard as one could possibly imagine (much to the chagrin of some people, but the judges have so far been on his side). On the other hand though he uses his money not as power, but to help solve real issues for the largest amount of people possible.
Try changing the tire, super man. ;)
Wow, can you imagine the trouble you'd be in getting a flat at 65nm/h?
Till they add an SUV to the lineup.
Yeah, with 20" dubs!
Ultimately the case was thrown out because they brought the radar gun into the court room and clocked a wall travelling at 4mph.
Wow, was that at the north-pole? Because in the US that wall would have probably been travelling a couple orders of magnitude faster.
I presume it would be a potential target for terrorists
FUD.
Please read the constitution. Please read your bill of rights. Please get some perspective. Please understand that when people decide to build a bridge, it's very sad that the only thing you can come up with is FUD.
Obviously, your admins were not qualified to administer a Linux server like this. If it took them two weeks to get software installed and running like that, I'd fire them right away. Even if it is SAP, a complex piece of software.
... and, if someone does get something working on Windows, then that's, uh, pure luck. No wait, it's not really working, it just seems that way, and it's certainly not secure.
/sarcasm
Excellent! If someone doesn't get something working on Linux, then it's incompetence...
Just because you got it up and running in 2 days on Windows doesn't mean it was done right, or done securely.
It takes quite a special person to be able to draw these conclusions, given the provided information. And to recommend firing people implies that you are in fact really pretty godam certain about yourself.
So how about this; what if we tried exactly what Crest was trying to do, only now YOU are responsible for the project. Let's just say that this system is worth $1M a day. Now if you can get it running in one day instead of two days, you'll get $1M. Or if it takes a day longer, it'll cost you $1M. Two days longer $2M. etc.
Considering your confidence in the matter, that sounds like easy money to me.
This type of superiority is NOT what Linux needs. I mean, how hard is it really to call someone incompetent from the anonymity of your armchair? Like a 100 key strokes?
Seems to me that "the admins weren't qualified" is just a cheap appology, which hurts Linux more than it does good. To me, the argument that the problem is really with SAP and not with Linux seems far more plausible, at least in the sense that SAP is not a well behaving app. Now, knowing that, actually something constructive can be done, such as making it easier for the developers of SAP to find problems before their product is shipped.
4.2 percent of science and engineering PhDs work outside their field of training, chiefly for financial reasons
Sounds like someone is off by an order of magnitude?
It amazes me every time I go to the states how no signature or pin is required to buy goods on a credit card.
Well, that is pretty uncommon and you will only see it at places that have done the math and decided that it made more financial sense to take the risk.
Self-service gas stations are good example.
Not really; as someone else pointed out, the signature is only used as proof when you contest the transaction. Some companies decide to take the risk, especially if they have security cameras recording your car's license plate.
The security cameras basically make it impossible to deny a purchase for the owner of the car & card (or after a couple of times the CC company will notice how you are always denying transactions).
It is probably still the major place where people go with stolen credit cards, but it's evidently still cheaper for the gas stations to have less staff though.
What's more bothersome to me are these places that require you to provide them with every single bit of private information that you have. What's your birthdate? What's your birthplace? What's your mother's maiden name? My question is: what more information do you need before you can succesfully impersonate me?!
Think of it; you call your bank, and they ask all these questions. Sounds reasonable, you want your bank to be secure. Now some website asks the same stuff. Sounds like they take security seriously. But what about the people that have access to that information? They can now pretty much call your bank and do whatever they want.
Back to 'advancements' in the credit/debit card industry though: why is it that by far the biggest problem, which has been known for at least 10 years, has not been solved? I'm talking about how we, the customers, have no way to verify that the person charging our card is a-okay. It's very possible that the ATM/CC machine has a fake keypad and reader. There's no way to find out for us, which is crazy.
Of course the CC companies will gladly undo the charges but who the hell has time to go through every line on a statement, especially when technology apparently still hasn't made it possible to list an item other than "POS/123 SUNSET LA 0101 $11.50"
I can understand their reason for doing that
Well, I can't. People that need to _will_ find a way around that.
What I really don't understand is this desire of companies to become jury, judge and prosecuter all in one. This sounds like something that can be useful in an entirely legal manner. Imagine every device that could potentially be used to do something illegal have something like that built in.
Can't work late at night anymore because the alarm in the screwdriver will wake up the kids... Absolutely crazy...
For example, a nuclear reaction being controlled. Say, interrupt 666 triggers when something goes horribly wrong, and if you enable a safety system within 10ms, nothing bad happens. It would be good to have a system that guarantees response in less than that time.
Just wanted to comment that the requirement for real-timeness is usually a lot less spectacular then the good ole nuke example. It's usually more something like "interrupt 12 triggers when 14 out of 20 network receive buffers are full, and if you don't respond within 10 microseconds by freeing some of those up, the other 6 buffers are potentially going to be full and the network controller has no place to put incoming data, so it will drop anything coming in after that point".
That its ridiculous that RTLinux needs to run on a dual-core AMD Opteron in order to achieve those latencies ?
Yes. I think for anyone that has done embedded systems for a while that's laughable.
Before I start on my rant I will say that (a) the last time I've looked into Linux as a potential embedded OS has been a while (1-2 years) and (b) a fair amount of elitism can't be denied when it comes to talking about RTOSs.
Having said that, I never understood why people are so hot on making Linux an embedded RTOS. The kernel is NOT designed to be an RTOS. The distributions/tools are not designed for embedded.
Last time I looked at RTLinux, it would have been more accurate to call it a very small RTOS kernel that ran Linux as a sub-process. You needed to write/port your own drivers for devices that needed real-time response. The Linux kernel itself was not real-time.
The last version of the Linux kernel itself that I looked at was not designed to be re-entrant/pre-empted in a way that's required for a true RTOS. However, the multi-processor "#ifdefs" seemed to make it possible to create a kernel which locked at a much "lower" level. I think Robert Love's patches took advantage of that and from what I understand those are now incorporated into the main source tree (but I'm by no means a regular lkml reader), which IMHO was a more promising path to take. Although I still don't think it's making Linux a viable RTOS...
Thanks :-)
Eh, nice strawman argument.
Actually, some the stuff you listed I _would_ call discrimination. Maybe you should look up the meaning in the dictionary because it seems like you have an urge to redefine the word to something that suits your liking.
One can discriminate based on practically anything, it isn't always color of skin... See " 3. Treatment or consideration based on class or category rather than individual merit; partiality or prejudice"
When you block an entire country there's certainly treatment based on category rather than individual merit, and there's certainly prejudice when you do this because of hacking.
At my company we block email based on country blacklists for countries that we don't do business with. It certainly cuts down on spam ... and has no false positives.
Really? I do quite a bit of purchasing for my US based company. But I'm not originally from the US, so it happens frequently that I use my foreign email address because it's shorter/easier, and it's what I've used for many years.
Sounds to me like a false positive is definitely possible. I'm not the only person that has moved to the US and sometimes uses their home country based email.
It also sometimes happens that my email gets forwarded to a local rep abroad, even though I clearly stated our company address in the US in my email. It's fine with me, there's usually another supplier that understands that you can't make silly assumptions on the internet.
This is all fine and dandy. Until _you_ end up being blocked from a whole bunch of stuff because of some asshole in the same IP space.
Blocking based on IP range and or country is pure and simple discrimination. A lot of people don't seem to grasp why discrimination is bad until they end up on the receiving end...
Having said that; if you want to block half the world, I believe that's your right. Just don't block it for me please, I'd like to make that decision myself.
Are you serious? What's the source language you're translating from, if you don't mind me asking. I've never heard about the stuff being properly referred to as expresso in any language. It's a somewhat common mistake though, I thought it was expresso, too - when I was twelve... ;)
Actually, according dictionary.reference.com expresso is "Variant of espresso.". So maybe it was originally a mistake (probably in several languages), but it seems to have been accepted, at least in English.
Espresso, not expresso.
What you need is a life, not alive.
(ps. where I'm from they call it expresso. my bad for an imperfect translation...)
Shit, I had just convinced my boss to replace the expresso machine for a wine cooler...
I want a plane where the wings are made of a single peice of some kind of high-tech polymer that changes shape when electricity is applied to it.
Like Muscle Wires, or another form of shape memory alloys.
Don't know why you got modded funny, because it doesn't seem like a crazy concept to me at all.
Aargh
If you are interested to work your ass off to have a real chance to 'make it big'.
should have read
If you are interested to work your ass off to have a real chance to 'make it big', then you may prefer a startup.