yes, but you get the full version of the software for that $129/$79. Try that with XP, where the full version of the real OS (XP Pro) is $299. It's even more cost-effective for multiple systems on the Apple side, where you can get 5-pack OS license for the full version for only $199. MS doesn't even _offer_ such licensing.
Plus, there's just the two reboots for the install. One to get the OS on the machine, the second to patch it. As opposed to XP, where it's OS/reboot/patches to enable the patching/reboot/more patches/reboot/SP2/reboot/final patch round/reboot.
But a robot isn't a Turing machine. It's a neural network (sure, sure, no details about positronic brains), and doesn't have any of the trappings of Turing's concept.
Okay, there are a few, but they're insignificant when attempting to describe the emergent properties of such a complex interaction. Robots are very much self-aware, this point is made evident throughout Asimov's work. In fact, one of the stories involves a politician who gets assasinated by a robot, because he himself was a robot, only without knowing it, thus becoming capable of violating the first law. (IIRC, it's been a while.)
No, they're not. Vista is supposed to be able to boot on EFI systems. TFA makes it sound like they're dleiberately breaking this functionality to prevent people from running Windows on Apple hardware. While they're well within their purview to do so, it's a bad decision, because all it does is reduce the number of customers to whom they can sell computers.
Think of it this way, I"m buying a Mac because I want to update my six-year-old PC. There's stuff I really want to run, that's Windows-only. OSX looks cool, and I might want to play with that, and see what all the hype is about. I"m choosing Apple hardware because of all the integration, etc. However, since I absolutely cannot run Windows on it (something that Apple gets for free, having switched to Intel parts), I"m forced to ignore Apple as an option, and buy a cheap low-end PC instead. This is stupid on Apple's part. They're effectively barring themselve from moving hardware, and they're actually spending time and effort to do so. It's hubris at it's worst.
Why would Apple deliberately screw customers who would buy Macs to run Windows? It's not like they'd have to support the OS at all. I mean, it's such a trivial thing to boot Windows it's a wonder why Apple is actually spending R&D dollars to prevent it. It's disgusting. I guess Apple really isn't in the business of selling computers anymore.
No, it doesn't. Mass is lost, it's just that since the energies involved in burning wood are so low, that the mass equivalence is almost nonexistant. The mass itself comes from the chemical bonds in the wood breaking to reform with oxygen producing fire. There's ever so tiny an amount of mass converted to energy, and that's what matters. The numbers get much better when you're converting protons and neutrons (well, really gluons) to energy, as they've much higher mass than chemical bonds.
because neutral iron has one spare electron in it's outer shell. therefore, based on the spin of that electron's orbit, the iron atom becomes a tiny magnet. In normal iron, these atoms point every which way, largely cancelling each other. When they get lined up, they become very strong.
Once it's in a plasma, all bets are off. However, there's a nifty effect that could be at work here. IN the presence of very strong (5gigagauss or better) magnetic fields, the electron energy levels in the plasma become highly quantized. Since the rest of the ions (the reactants for the fusion process) can't possibly pass their energy to the electrons anymore, (or will do so only rarely, 10^-19 or so), you effectively eliminate fusion power losses due to electron heating or brehmstralung, making the reaction much more efficient. There's a very sharp point where the field strength is high enough to make this happen, and if Sandia's setup is past that, yay! net fusion power. It's the holy grail, here, guys. We're going to go turn all the lights on.
ultimately, what the government doesn't know about can't hurt you. I take the same view in this country: technically, anything, anything I sell to another party must have sales tax submitted to the Powers That Be, and it's the responsibility of the person receiving the money to do so. In practice, nobody does it, unless it's something large, like a car, or house, or land. In this case, it's probably only an issue if you actually tell the government.
Ah, it would seem that in truth, it's only for electrical safety guidelines, kind of like when the UL requires a recall for faulty/dangerous components...
Sounds like a great way to accomplish exactly what bunches of content owners (note I didn't say "producers") have been screaming at Congress about. Seriously, what better way to guarantee obsolescence and quick turnover for technology if you have to rebuy everything every five years because the old tech is straight up illegal? Maybe I read this wrong, but it seems like a huge windfall for consumer electronics manufacturers if/when this goes into effect...
Oh good lord. You do realize that all the parts you mention are FREELY AVAILABLE VIA APPLE'S OPEN SOURCE LICENSE. You can d/l the source, or the binaries, for both PPC and x86. Hell, hack the OS to run on whatever you want. The ONLY part that's not in there are the parts that Apple owns outright, like the appserver, the windowserver and all the API bits for the rest of the OS (cocoa, carbon, etc.) They have every right to keep a lock on their work.
Go ahead, bitch about price. A fully-spec'd PM Quad will run you just as much as a top-of-the-line x86 quad from any major vendor. You wanna build it yourself? go ahead. Just be prepared for the hell of managing the maintenance/warranty on every single part in that system. I suspect that for a home machine (that will probably spend most of it's time playing games) the reliability that a piecemeal system provides will be perfectly sufficient. However, for those of us needing a workstation, from a reputable vendor, well, Apple's the single largest Unix workstation vendor in the world.
Asking about health problems in an interview for employment is illegal in New Zealand but it appears that, in an interview for an interview, it is not.
If this is really illegal in your home country, alert the authorities. Be warned, though, that this might get your name on someone's blacklist.
Ultimately, we must all be willing to die on that hill if we're to effect change.
My point was simply that the parent comment's assertion that right-to-work laws somehow give employees the ability to bargin away their right to a safe workplace
Ah, but there's the rub, eh? They might not today, but those laws are created by legislators that get influenced by paid lobbyists, and corporations have a habit of spending money to influence government. I know this is a "slippery slope," but the possibility needs to be addressed.
Okay, but what's the metric here? "Unsafeness?" How "unsafe" is getting an RFID implant? Is it then safe to assume that if something was sufficiently risk-free, that a potential employer could get away with making the employee submit to their wishes? How far might that go? And most importantly, who's deciding what's unsafe, and where's their money come from?
You're not even really improving the security at all. Most of these types of devices get a short burst of RF at the reader which serves two purposes, one to provide raw power for the device (a la crystal radios), and one to signal the device to request it's ID. The device gets just enough power from the input signal to do a lookup and squirt back it's code just before it dies. The trick is, so long as you're willing to wait for someone to use the door, a directional antenna will pick up the conversation nicely. Once you've got a sample of the door's signal (they broadcast continuously), you can use the same directional to trigger the victim's ID unit remotely. Since normal badged users won't have the badge on them at all times, you couldn't get the code by following them in public. The RFID guy on the other hand, well, he's a different story. you could snag codes from him all day by just hanging nearby as he goes in/out of stores, Wal-Mart, etc.
So in the end, the RFID makes things worse by imcreasing the level of access to the device itself.
Actually, they didn't leave it out, and I did read the article. My comment was a question of the logical extention of this policy. More to the point, if they're only going to allow access to RFID-enabled employees, doesn't it seem kinda necessary that either 1) you will be implanted if your responsibilities include accessing the video library, or 2) you're going to lose that responsibility. I can't see the latter being a positive career move.
And will the company cover the costs of extraction if you're separated from them in any way (fired, RIF, you quit, etc.) I can just imagine some poor dead schmuck's widow getting a bill for a $300 implantable RFID...
Well, the same could be said about most ID badges that have some form of electronic identifier in them. Motorola makes the kit we use at the office. Pretty standard tech, and both systems can be defeated with directional antennas and patience. The only thing the implantation buys you is a slightly greater chance of getting hacked, as the employee will always have the badge on them, leaving them open to scanning just about any time.
Isn't this illegal? I was under the impression that forced surgery as a requirement for employment was against OSHA. Maybe I'm wrong. Altho, if you're in a right-to-work state, I can't see why they can't force this on workers. If you agree to it in a contract, well, you had your opportunity to decide against it.
At the same time, where does this take us? More importantly, what new kinds of abuse will this bring about? I'm a bit spooked.
That's just it. To the observer in the relativistic ship, light leaves the front of the ship just as fast as always, "c," and the light isn't shifted at all for them, only for the "stationary" observer. Furthermore, the observer in the ship sees the universe shorten by as much as 60% (at.9c) in the direction of travel. This accounts for how the observer (with the associated time dilation) doesn't appear to exceed lightspeed (given that he's covering 4.3LY in 2.1 years).
Now, everything in the direction of travel is going to be horridly blueshifted, and distorted towards the direction of travel as well. Imagine a giant "tunnel vision" effect, front and rear. However, the amount of shift at.9c is only deep blue to near ultraviolet. Light shielding, and observation windows made of quartz should suffice to limit the more energetic photons. To get a shift into gamma, you'd be travelling a significant fraction of the speed of light, by that I mean.99999999c (or better). This should be sufficient to produce the ten orders of magnitude shift necessary to take red visible light into hard gamma. Of course, you'll have converted the Solar system to energy to get just your body moving this fast, so the time dilation won't matter so much as you ended the rest of the species to get here:P Plus, in the 15 seconds you have in naked space, you'll get between 500 and 4800 light years out before you croaked!
You should probably look up right-of-way and access guarantees made by your municipality to the local utilities. They can use your yard as long as it's for maintenance or public works improvement.
Hey, Thorne, if you don't like the idea that Google's traffic transits the Verizon network w/o Google having to pay for it, then sell them some direct connectivity. Whining that they're getting to use the network for free is a result of Verizon's piss-poor planning. You guys built this giant network, with the plan to sell connectivity to customers. Somewhere in this process there should have been a cost/benefit study. Like, we'll have X million customers, and to service them, we need $Y hardware. The whole thing costs $y/X per customer, so we should charge them a bit more than that per month, that way we make money!
This is how business works. Making shit up, and suddenly realizing that you've done your study and research wrong does not constitute a problem on the part of the customer. You're selling Internet Access. That means the Whole Internet, not just the Verizon part.
Again, if you want to make money off Google, send some salespeople and get Google to buy Verizon's services. Balkanization of the Internet is a bad thing, and if you guys try it, the customers will get pissed and leave.
Okay, whatever. Mod me down. Motorola is a pain to deal with, and I'm venting. Fine. You may think I'm being overly critical, but all the way around, the results of people's experiences in dealing with them paints a pretty clear picture of a company floundering. They've been deliberately obtuse about product defects, don't communicate critical information to their developers (APIs, anyone?), and generally make things difficult for their customers. My point was that they've brought this on themselves, and eventually it will make them a bit player in all markets, not just mobile phones.
Motorola generally doesn't have a single clue about what they're doing. They peaked in cell phones back in the 90's with the StarTAC, and haven't really done anything compelling since. The products suck, the support sucks, the tools suck, all the way around they have the most amazing feature-packed phones that deliver nothing less than total mediocrity. They throw away CPU time in favor of battery life, in such a way that it doesn't actually help. You know those ringtones they sell? Well, a frickin' 64kbps MP3 won't even play without constant stuttering and dropout, and this is on a V551. Sure, the RAZR will play just fine, but it's still a clunky, power-hungry monster. Don't even get me started on poor interface design. Mystery-meat navigation anyone? Screwball configuration options? How about bugs, that the cell carriers won't help to address? And incompatibility? Christ, it's a bluetooth phone, but I can't sync my contacts with it? I can read all the damned media on the phone all day long over the BT link, but, noooo, no contacts or anything actually useful. For that I gotta drop another fifty bucks for the PC connection kit (a cable, and poorly written Windows trashware that maybe will do what it purports) just to get my address book set up.
Screw Motorola. They deserve the bad press they get.
Slashdot Mirror
yes, but you get the full version of the software for that $129/$79. Try that with XP, where the full version of the real OS (XP Pro) is $299. It's even more cost-effective for multiple systems on the Apple side, where you can get 5-pack OS license for the full version for only $199. MS doesn't even _offer_ such licensing.
Plus, there's just the two reboots for the install. One to get the OS on the machine, the second to patch it. As opposed to XP, where it's OS/reboot/patches to enable the patching/reboot/more patches/reboot/SP2/reboot/final patch round/reboot.
CNET's just trying to be relevant again...
But a robot isn't a Turing machine. It's a neural network (sure, sure, no details about positronic brains), and doesn't have any of the trappings of Turing's concept.
Okay, there are a few, but they're insignificant when attempting to describe the emergent properties of such a complex interaction. Robots are very much self-aware, this point is made evident throughout Asimov's work. In fact, one of the stories involves a politician who gets assasinated by a robot, because he himself was a robot, only without knowing it, thus becoming capable of violating the first law. (IIRC, it's been a while.)
No, they're not. Vista is supposed to be able to boot on EFI systems. TFA makes it sound like they're dleiberately breaking this functionality to prevent people from running Windows on Apple hardware. While they're well within their purview to do so, it's a bad decision, because all it does is reduce the number of customers to whom they can sell computers.
Think of it this way, I"m buying a Mac because I want to update my six-year-old PC. There's stuff I really want to run, that's Windows-only. OSX looks cool, and I might want to play with that, and see what all the hype is about. I"m choosing Apple hardware because of all the integration, etc. However, since I absolutely cannot run Windows on it (something that Apple gets for free, having switched to Intel parts), I"m forced to ignore Apple as an option, and buy a cheap low-end PC instead. This is stupid on Apple's part. They're effectively barring themselve from moving hardware, and they're actually spending time and effort to do so. It's hubris at it's worst.
Why would Apple deliberately screw customers who would buy Macs to run Windows? It's not like they'd have to support the OS at all. I mean, it's such a trivial thing to boot Windows it's a wonder why Apple is actually spending R&D dollars to prevent it. It's disgusting. I guess Apple really isn't in the business of selling computers anymore.
No, it doesn't. Mass is lost, it's just that since the energies involved in burning wood are so low, that the mass equivalence is almost nonexistant. The mass itself comes from the chemical bonds in the wood breaking to reform with oxygen producing fire. There's ever so tiny an amount of mass converted to energy, and that's what matters. The numbers get much better when you're converting protons and neutrons (well, really gluons) to energy, as they've much higher mass than chemical bonds.
because neutral iron has one spare electron in it's outer shell. therefore, based on the spin of that electron's orbit, the iron atom becomes a tiny magnet. In normal iron, these atoms point every which way, largely cancelling each other. When they get lined up, they become very strong.
Once it's in a plasma, all bets are off. However, there's a nifty effect that could be at work here. IN the presence of very strong (5gigagauss or better) magnetic fields, the electron energy levels in the plasma become highly quantized. Since the rest of the ions (the reactants for the fusion process) can't possibly pass their energy to the electrons anymore, (or will do so only rarely, 10^-19 or so), you effectively eliminate fusion power losses due to electron heating or brehmstralung, making the reaction much more efficient. There's a very sharp point where the field strength is high enough to make this happen, and if Sandia's setup is past that, yay! net fusion power. It's the holy grail, here, guys. We're going to go turn all the lights on.
ultimately, what the government doesn't know about can't hurt you. I take the same view in this country: technically, anything, anything I sell to another party must have sales tax submitted to the Powers That Be, and it's the responsibility of the person receiving the money to do so. In practice, nobody does it, unless it's something large, like a car, or house, or land. In this case, it's probably only an issue if you actually tell the government.
Ah, it would seem that in truth, it's only for electrical safety guidelines, kind of like when the UL requires a recall for faulty/dangerous components...
Sounds like a great way to accomplish exactly what bunches of content owners (note I didn't say "producers") have been screaming at Congress about. Seriously, what better way to guarantee obsolescence and quick turnover for technology if you have to rebuy everything every five years because the old tech is straight up illegal? Maybe I read this wrong, but it seems like a huge windfall for consumer electronics manufacturers if/when this goes into effect...
Oh good lord. You do realize that all the parts you mention are FREELY AVAILABLE VIA APPLE'S OPEN SOURCE LICENSE. You can d/l the source, or the binaries, for both PPC and x86. Hell, hack the OS to run on whatever you want. The ONLY part that's not in there are the parts that Apple owns outright, like the appserver, the windowserver and all the API bits for the rest of the OS (cocoa, carbon, etc.) They have every right to keep a lock on their work.
Go ahead, bitch about price. A fully-spec'd PM Quad will run you just as much as a top-of-the-line x86 quad from any major vendor. You wanna build it yourself? go ahead. Just be prepared for the hell of managing the maintenance/warranty on every single part in that system. I suspect that for a home machine (that will probably spend most of it's time playing games) the reliability that a piecemeal system provides will be perfectly sufficient. However, for those of us needing a workstation, from a reputable vendor, well, Apple's the single largest Unix workstation vendor in the world.
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with tape backups."
Asking about health problems in an interview for employment is illegal in New Zealand but it appears that, in an interview for an interview, it is not.
If this is really illegal in your home country, alert the authorities. Be warned, though, that this might get your name on someone's blacklist.
Ultimately, we must all be willing to die on that hill if we're to effect change.
My point was simply that the parent comment's assertion that right-to-work laws somehow give employees the ability to bargin away their right to a safe workplace
Ah, but there's the rub, eh? They might not today, but those laws are created by legislators that get influenced by paid lobbyists, and corporations have a habit of spending money to influence government. I know this is a "slippery slope," but the possibility needs to be addressed.
Okay, but what's the metric here? "Unsafeness?" How "unsafe" is getting an RFID implant? Is it then safe to assume that if something was sufficiently risk-free, that a potential employer could get away with making the employee submit to their wishes? How far might that go? And most importantly, who's deciding what's unsafe, and where's their money come from?
You're not even really improving the security at all. Most of these types of devices get a short burst of RF at the reader which serves two purposes, one to provide raw power for the device (a la crystal radios), and one to signal the device to request it's ID. The device gets just enough power from the input signal to do a lookup and squirt back it's code just before it dies. The trick is, so long as you're willing to wait for someone to use the door, a directional antenna will pick up the conversation nicely. Once you've got a sample of the door's signal (they broadcast continuously), you can use the same directional to trigger the victim's ID unit remotely. Since normal badged users won't have the badge on them at all times, you couldn't get the code by following them in public. The RFID guy on the other hand, well, he's a different story. you could snag codes from him all day by just hanging nearby as he goes in/out of stores, Wal-Mart, etc.
So in the end, the RFID makes things worse by imcreasing the level of access to the device itself.
Actually, they didn't leave it out, and I did read the article. My comment was a question of the logical extention of this policy. More to the point, if they're only going to allow access to RFID-enabled employees, doesn't it seem kinda necessary that either 1) you will be implanted if your responsibilities include accessing the video library, or 2) you're going to lose that responsibility. I can't see the latter being a positive career move.
And will the company cover the costs of extraction if you're separated from them in any way (fired, RIF, you quit, etc.) I can just imagine some poor dead schmuck's widow getting a bill for a $300 implantable RFID...
Well, the same could be said about most ID badges that have some form of electronic identifier in them. Motorola makes the kit we use at the office. Pretty standard tech, and both systems can be defeated with directional antennas and patience. The only thing the implantation buys you is a slightly greater chance of getting hacked, as the employee will always have the badge on them, leaving them open to scanning just about any time.
Isn't this illegal? I was under the impression that forced surgery as a requirement for employment was against OSHA. Maybe I'm wrong. Altho, if you're in a right-to-work state, I can't see why they can't force this on workers. If you agree to it in a contract, well, you had your opportunity to decide against it.
At the same time, where does this take us? More importantly, what new kinds of abuse will this bring about? I'm a bit spooked.
Our planet orbits it's sun at a mean speed of 18.5mph
uh, I think you mean 18.5miles per second.
and more to the point, there's no such thing as "speed" as compared to "relative speed." It's all "relative speed."
arg... nonononononoooooo...
.9c) in the direction of travel. This accounts for how the observer (with the associated time dilation) doesn't appear to exceed lightspeed (given that he's covering 4.3LY in 2.1 years).
.9c is only deep blue to near ultraviolet. Light shielding, and observation windows made of quartz should suffice to limit the more energetic photons. To get a shift into gamma, you'd be travelling a significant fraction of the speed of light, by that I mean .99999999c (or better). This should be sufficient to produce the ten orders of magnitude shift necessary to take red visible light into hard gamma. Of course, you'll have converted the Solar system to energy to get just your body moving this fast, so the time dilation won't matter so much as you ended the rest of the species to get here :P Plus, in the 15 seconds you have in naked space, you'll get between 500 and 4800 light years out before you croaked!
That's just it. To the observer in the relativistic ship, light leaves the front of the ship just as fast as always, "c," and the light isn't shifted at all for them, only for the "stationary" observer. Furthermore, the observer in the ship sees the universe shorten by as much as 60% (at
Now, everything in the direction of travel is going to be horridly blueshifted, and distorted towards the direction of travel as well. Imagine a giant "tunnel vision" effect, front and rear. However, the amount of shift at
You should probably look up right-of-way and access guarantees made by your municipality to the local utilities. They can use your yard as long as it's for maintenance or public works improvement.
Hey, Thorne, if you don't like the idea that Google's traffic transits the Verizon network w/o Google having to pay for it, then sell them some direct connectivity. Whining that they're getting to use the network for free is a result of Verizon's piss-poor planning. You guys built this giant network, with the plan to sell connectivity to customers. Somewhere in this process there should have been a cost/benefit study. Like, we'll have X million customers, and to service them, we need $Y hardware. The whole thing costs $y/X per customer, so we should charge them a bit more than that per month, that way we make money!
This is how business works. Making shit up, and suddenly realizing that you've done your study and research wrong does not constitute a problem on the part of the customer. You're selling Internet Access. That means the Whole Internet, not just the Verizon part.
Again, if you want to make money off Google, send some salespeople and get Google to buy Verizon's services. Balkanization of the Internet is a bad thing, and if you guys try it, the customers will get pissed and leave.
Okay, whatever. Mod me down. Motorola is a pain to deal with, and I'm venting. Fine. You may think I'm being overly critical, but all the way around, the results of people's experiences in dealing with them paints a pretty clear picture of a company floundering. They've been deliberately obtuse about product defects, don't communicate critical information to their developers (APIs, anyone?), and generally make things difficult for their customers. My point was that they've brought this on themselves, and eventually it will make them a bit player in all markets, not just mobile phones.
Motorola generally doesn't have a single clue about what they're doing. They peaked in cell phones back in the 90's with the StarTAC, and haven't really done anything compelling since. The products suck, the support sucks, the tools suck, all the way around they have the most amazing feature-packed phones that deliver nothing less than total mediocrity. They throw away CPU time in favor of battery life, in such a way that it doesn't actually help. You know those ringtones they sell? Well, a frickin' 64kbps MP3 won't even play without constant stuttering and dropout, and this is on a V551. Sure, the RAZR will play just fine, but it's still a clunky, power-hungry monster. Don't even get me started on poor interface design. Mystery-meat navigation anyone? Screwball configuration options? How about bugs, that the cell carriers won't help to address? And incompatibility? Christ, it's a bluetooth phone, but I can't sync my contacts with it? I can read all the damned media on the phone all day long over the BT link, but, noooo, no contacts or anything actually useful. For that I gotta drop another fifty bucks for the PC connection kit (a cable, and poorly written Windows trashware that maybe will do what it purports) just to get my address book set up.
Screw Motorola. They deserve the bad press they get.