Some people (I don't know if there are any known estimates) who have a predilection for pedophilia actually do want help. Unfortunately, in many state and municipalities the system is set up against them.
Due to various laws and legal requirements, counselors and therapists are required to report an individual to law enforcement if they suspect the individual to be abusing a child. Many of these people, who would otherwise be helping these individuals, instead turn their names over to LE regardless, just to cover their asses and play it safe, just in case, you see - because they could become liable (ie, jail time, loss of license to practice, civil suits, etc) if they didn't report it.
Said pedophile then enters the system instead of getting the help they need. Maybe all they end up getting caught with is some "questionable" (or real) child pornography they downloaded off the net. No matter, they will at least land in jail until their trial. Law enforcement, being the caring people they are to these suspects (they are supposedly innocent until proven guilty, right?), book them, places them in the general population of the holding area or whatever, then let's it "slip" to that self-same population that the guy they just put in there is a (suspected, but they leave that part out) pedophile - wink, wink...nudge, nudge. Then they walk away, and the CCTV system has a "glitch", and guards don't respond as the rest of the population act like animals and beat the guy (and/or rape him). If the guy is lucky, he survives with a little (or a lot) of brain damage, maybe a perforated colon (from rape), some (or a lot) of broken bones, etc. More often than not, he is killed in jail before he even makes it to trial.
All because he attempted to honestly get help before he "went too far". Do you honestly think that people who actually want help for this condition, knowing what the possible outcome will actually be from the system, will actually seek help? Don't bet on it...
They could have been partially nude transvestite furries in 50,000 watt blinken' LED jock straps, fire coming out of the asses shooting 200 feet in the air, grinding each other while dancin' to hippy-trippin' house music stoked on E, all the while a huge-ass Tesla coil shoots off crackling 20 foot bolts of lighting - and maybe, just maybe...
I would look and smile, and think "Hell, that's nothing - wait until Saturday, when the Man burns..." - and still be disapointed because last year was just "so much bettah"...
You are the primary breadwinner and you have to do all of the household chores? WTF is your husband doing? Get him to share more of the household load, so you have some more free time to catch up on your learning needs...
Sure, Aibo and Qrio are cool robots, but in the grand scheme of things, will it really matter?
I would be willing to bet that you could easily build either one of these robots off-the-shelf using parts from LynxMotion, for half the cost or less. They aren't the only supplier, either - Pick up an issue of Servo Magazine and you will find several suppliers of similar kits and parts. Most use standard RC servos. Several companies have also introduced special robotics digital servos with 2-way communications buses. Also, I know of at least one company which produced an "Aibo-like" styrene shell into which standard servos could be fitted. Hobby robotics (and robotics in general) have come a long way in a very short time (I credit much of the kick-up in interest to the culture of combat robotics, as well as Lego Mindstorms).
So, where is the problem? Ah - that is issue - the problem lies not in hardware availability, but in control software. The solutions to solving dynamic walking, on a quadrupedal or bipedal frame, are far from completely solved. When you build your own system, you are lucky if you get some form of pattern playback software. Such software works well for stable multi-leg systems (octo or hexapod), on relatively flat surfaces, but when you move to lesser number of legs, balance becomes key, even on flat surfaces. Add in directional control and a dynamic terrain environment, and the software quickly becomes a hairy problem.
Sony had an OK solution to this with both the Aibo and Qrio, and people were using both platforms to explore other methods and algorithms (mostly in RoboCup Soccer). I would bet that Sony, while they may be stopping the manufacture of the robots, will continue to develop this software, as it is a valuable piece of the puzzle to developing useful humanoid "helper robots" for the elderly (which is an area a lot of robotics research is being done for in Japan). Whether they use this software for their own products or license it is anyone's guess.
As far as hobby robotics for quad and bipedal platforms are concerned: I wouldn't worry. The hardware is there, the software is too (to a lesser extent - it will only grow). Other options exist, so don't mourn Sony's decision. Instead, focus on those other options...
Can you tell me what pornography is? Can you tell me what it isn't? I can guarantee you that if you asked 1000 random people from all over the world, you will likely get 1000 different answers! Humanity is unable to agree upon what pornography is, simply because something isn't pornographic unless we perceive it as such. Since each individual's perceptions are different...
To some people (admittedly, they are in a minority), images of women crushing wine glasses while wearing high heels are pornographic. Others like automobile accident images. Where is the pornographic element? In the viewers mind! There are probably hundreds of variations on this same theme, that of images which to one person look odd at best, but to others bring about orgasmic excitement.
Let's look at this issue of pornography in a different manner. Why is it that (in America, at least), most people in our society think of nudity as tittlating, perhaps even pornographic? Why is it that nudity is frowned upon? Could it be because we aren't exposed to it enough?
Think about it: If you were exposed to nudity in a 24/7 context, what would be pornographic and frowned upon? Wearing clothing or otherwise covering up the body? Would such situations and images be considered pornographic by that hypothetical society?
The sad thing is that much of this "used up" copper is sitting in landfills (current and former). It's not just copper, either. There is a ton of material in our landfills, thanks to the environment (buried in dirt, sealed from air and the water table, lack of oxygen), doesn't break down over time, whether the material is organic or not.
I tend to wonder if some day, perhaps sooner than we think, it will be profitable to mine these landfills (many currently golf courses and home sites!) for that "wasted" material, for recycling purposes. Furthermore, I think about the tons of organic material (yard and landscaping waste, mostly) which is in our landfills (and more going in every day) which could be reclaimed, recycled, and then fed into thermodepolymerization plants tuned for the feedstock, allowing us to gain fuels and other useful materials from stuff that is just being thrown away.
Think about all the organic material from New Orleans which was simply bulldozed into landfills? Could that material have been run through a TDP process and used to offset, in whatever percentage, the fuel shortages caused by Katrina? Why do we throw this stuff away, when we can use it for other purposes?
Fortunately, most metals are recycled already, but there is still a lot of useful stuff in our landfills (including a lot of metals), just waiting for the day to be used again (unfortunately, in order to get at the stuff with any measure of safety, these landfills would have to be strip-mined)...
If proteins can be crystalized (albeit with some difficulty), in order to study structure and makeup, then is the reverse true? That is, could some proteins be created from a crystal matrix?
I know this isn't a new idea. I don't have references handy to prove it isn't, I just know that I have read arguments about it. This theory is used to explain the origins of life (distinct from the theory of evolution). Basically, you have the whole "early earth molecular soup mix with electrical activity providing the spark-o-life" (Miller-Urey Experiment), forming organic compounds, which are then (in some manner) "processed" by crystal structures forming later (?).
It makes me wonder if it wouldn't be possible to study crystals in a similar manner to see whether they could (in some manner) aid the formation of the organic compounds formed by the Miller-Urey (and other similar) experiments into early proteins or protein-like structures? Does anyone know if such a study has already been undertaken? Or, is this idea nothing more than baseless speculation with no foundation in reality? I am sincerely curious...
Unfortunately, I don't have any good suggestions for an alternative - I agree, all the compact keyboards I have seen seem to suck in one way or another. I suppose that is the tradeoff you make.
My wife recently asked me about getting her a smaller keyboard - basically, she wants a full set of keys (number pad and all - she knows 10 keying, and uses it all the time), just a smaller keyboard, to help save space and to fit her hands better as they are smaller than average. If they made a keyboard where all the keys were 2/3s to 3/4s the size of the keys on a regular keyboard, it would probably be perfect. I tend to wonder if such a keyboard would be good for younger kids? Anyhow, I told her I would look into it, but I am not expecting a revelation - and if I find something, it will likely be very expensive (same as her other request - she would seriously like to get an LCD monitor for her computer smaller than 15" - while such monitors exist, they are for niche applications, like point-of-sale terminals. As such they are very expensive).
I am also looking for a wireless keyboard for an HTPC-type application. Ideally, it would be small (no keypad needed), with a built in mouse pointing system (no separate mouse). It would also be nice if there was a separate wireless remote control-like controller included (for times where you just want to point-n-click, no typing needed). I don't hold out much hope finding that, either...
So one question that arises is: how do we actually value our work? That is, how much money are we actually saving the company, and how do we demonstrate it to them? How do we value the contributions of each IT staff member (say, for a bonus or raise) in an objective, quantifiable manner?
The only real way you can do this is to document the hell out of everything you do in the IT department. You can do this on paper, but it is infinitely easier to do this with a customised software suite, consisting of job tracking, asset management, employee scheduling, and reporting modules (among others). If you don't have an integrated suite of such software (and it must be well integrated, otherwise it is useless), you are going to find that to obtain such software will be an expensive task (there is a reason Oracle bought Peoplesoft - not that I would reccommend Peoplesoft as a solution). There are some open-source solutions that handle portions of those tasks, but none (that I am currently aware of) that perform all four at once. Furthermore, regardless of the source of the solution, each installation is different, and generally requires custom modifications to handle differences in workflow, which won't be cheap regardless of platform. Designing such a system is a possibility, if you have the staff, but I must warn you that it is a complicated task, and you may end up spending as much on a in-house solution as you do with a pre-built (and customised) one. Which is why, if you don't have one, I reccommend getting a system working on paper first, just so you can see how your process works before encoding it (or having it encoded) in software (in fact, if all businesses did this, they would be better off, but I digress).
Basically, you want to first track all of the company's IT assets - what they are, where they are located, how they depend on each other, who are using them, notes about problems (or suspected problems), serial and model numbers, depreciated value, replacement cost, history of service and what for, etc. You want to keep an up-to-date network block diagram (which you should have if you don't already). Ideally, this diagram would be an inherent property of the asset tracking module, so it can be generated on the fly from information stored about the assets. The asset tracking module thus serves as a record of the IT assets, for security and value purposes (serial numbers and images of equipment for police, value and replacement costs allow for calculations for insurance purposes), as well as for tracking a history of costs associated with servicing that equipment. These costs should be stored in both real costs (ie, costs from the budget for new parts or equipment), as well as "hidden" costs (ie, how much it would have cost to have it serviced by an outside company vs doing it in-house). If you can show that over the course of a month, that your department is spending less to service and keep the assets running than it would cost via an outside source (and you must use realistic numbers here), then you can show the value of those actions. Furthermore, having the inventory of assets will show your managers and other higher-ups in the company just how much money (in terms of assets) they have invested in IT. It may also show you where there are unecessary and redundant assets, which can be trimmed (and/or repurposed) to save (or even make) the company money.
Once you have this system down, you need to then be able to track jobs (problems and tasks) relating to those assets. These are things which are submitted to your department (or that you find yourself - it is important to self-schedule jobs as well, even if they affect IT only!) as problems in the IT system, or as new developments. Whether it is somebody's computer that is spontaneously rebooting, or someone that needs a piece of software installed, or a new printer is needed, or the copier is jammed, etc - you need to track this. You need to track which asset(s) the job affects, who is assigned to the job (one or more people), what the t
I would be willing to bet this is just another case of "big company" vs. "little guy" - in this case, the "little guy" is a smaller (much smaller than Toyota) business. In many instances, the "little guy" is just that, some lone garage inventor.
Basically, it works like this:
Little Guy comes up with cool invention "foo", spending his savings/retirement patenting it (and renewing it), much to the consternation of his significant other
Big Company comes around, thinks up similar invention, does a patent search and finds Little Guy's patent. Alternatively, Big Company doesn't do the search, except maybe in their home market, and patents it in their home market, but not in Little Guy's market
Big Company sells a lot of a product incorporating "their" invention in home market, then expands marketing
Little Guy is wondering "Why isn't anybody seeking to license my patent?" or "How can I market this thing?" or "Will I be able to afford next month's house payment?", etc
Big Company starts to sell the product which incorporates "their" invention in Little Guy's market
Time passes, maybe years, all during which Big Company is making money, Little Guy is lucky if he still has his house and wife (and sanity), and he barely has time to relax because he is working hard to be able to build new savings, etc
Big Company continues to sell the product, and make money, basically playing the odds that no one (read: Little Guy, which they may or may not know about) in other markets will find out about the device in question
Little Guy continues to wonder "Why isn't anybody licensing this thing? Big Company at least should be able to use it?"
At this point, it becomes interesting. If Little Guy doesn't investigate the system Big Company is using, he may never realize his patent is being infringed upon (especially in the case of where the item in question is a very small, but necessary piece in the design - like a special buried sensor, or new screw, or something). Big Company is banking on the fact that if they can sell the product for a long enough period of time, they may be able to sell it until the patent expires (either via natural expiration, or when the Little Guy inventor no longer can afford the maintenance/renewal fees, which are pretty large), and nobody catches on. If Big Company is fairly lucky, they get to sell it for a long while, until they get caught by Little Guy (or someone on his behalf), and a settlement is reached. In this case, Big Company still "wins", as they have the distinction of being the ones who brought it to market first (in the public's mind), despite what the history books read (ie, the Tesla vs. Edison/Marconi, if you will - or P.T. Farnsworth vs. RCA). Little Guy's name fades, Big Company's name continues on...
It is all a game to Big Company's - the game being to rake in the most cash, and damn any consequences, because ultimately they have the cash to get out of really paying any form of a real price. In some cases, what they do is build the product with said invention included, patent it internationally (because Little Guy generally can only afford to patent his invention in his home country - yeah, I know there is the Berne Convention or whatever which covers international patents and such, but it don't really mean much in the "real world" which Big Companys play in), and sell it internationally (except in the other Little Guy patent holder's home countries) - raking in the profit further (if they can sell it in China and India, they have almost half the world market right there). Worst case scenario is the product makes its way over here via third-party distributors (not automobiles, but other items, typically smaller things like toys, auto accessories, etc) - and the third-party distributor is taken to court by Little Guy (if he can afford it), and if he is lucky, he gets a settlement, or something - which may cover his expenses of the attorney, maybe a little more.
Unfortunately, this is how the world works. I have seen it in action (in my case, my brother-in-law had to defend a couple of his patents which he has held since the mid-1970's). It sucks, if you are the Little Guy...
I might be missing a step here, but I think a transportation system could be built that would be reduce emmissions output to zero (or near enough).
Start with a vehicle that burns the biodiesel. Capture the emmisions into some substrate(s) to sequester the CO, CO2, and NOX. Add a system which monitors this and displays it on the dashboard. When you go to fuel up your tank, depending on the level of the emmision capture modules, you can trade them in for new, empty modules (what would be even cooler is if the substrate was liquid based, then the pump system could vaccuum out and store the used stuff, and replace it with new). So far, so good, right?
The used modules (or substrate liquid, etc) get sent back to the processing plant, which takes the modules/substance, and using a combination of heat/chemical processing, causes the substrate to release its load of CO, CO2, and NOX which is then bubbled (or sprayed, as another poster noted) through the algea tanks, which with sunlight, create more biodiesel. The used substrate/modules, after they have emptied, are then recycled into new substrate/modules (and sent back to the filling stations for reuse).
Could this work? Seems like it is too simple for it to work. I imagine that it wouldn't be perfectly emmissions free (best case scenario is you will have at least some waste once you have processed/reused the substrate/modules enough). Have I missed any steps?
Others eat brains of defeated enemies to steal their warcraft.
You know, this is true (this particular form of cannibalism), but when thought about logically, it doesn't make sense. Why eat the brains of an enemy who, using all the skills and knowledge he had to try and defeat you, failed in that task? What would be the point? You have already proven yourself to be the superior in both mind and body, as he is the dead one, and you are the one who is alive, correct?
Furthermore, don't tell me that they couldn't have reasoned this as well, because they obviously were able to reason to the opposite (albeit logically wrong) conclusion.
What this ultimately indicates, though, I am uncertain of...
While kuru was spread by a form of cannibalism, it must be noted that the method of cannibalism wasn't "going out, killing a neighboring village and eating the victims". In the vast majority of kuru cases, the disease occurred when a (usually) male member of the village died (of whatever cause), and then the (usually family and female) members of the village would eat parts of the body of the victim, in a form of religious ancestor worship. Of course, when a person died of kuru...
I would make sure your kid knows that smoking pot sometimes is OK, but becoming a drug addict is not.
AC, your advice would be fine in a country where smoking pot was legal, but in most countries, it isn't.
In the United States, for instance, in most places, if the police get a search warrant (for whatever reason), toss your house (and they really do toss it - cabinet doors ripped off hinges and everything), and find evidence of drugs and/or drug usage (regardless of who has it - child or adult) - they can "legally" confiscate your property (house and everything in it, if they want), you go to jail (along with anyone else in the house), and your life is pretty much over and done. If you are lucky, you get out, and get some of your stuff back - maybe even your house (maybe). Most of the time, if you aren't the owner/user of the drugs, and there wasn't enough to slap on an "intent to sell" charge, you will just be lucky not to be in jail.
This isn't paranoia talking - this is the truth. Many, many people in this country have lost nearly everything simply because a son/daughter/renter/housemate was using/selling drugs within the house they were occuppying. It isn't even SOP, even within a police department/jurisdiction - sometimes they grab everything, sometimes they just remove the offender and evidence. Sometimes, something in the middle occurs. It seems completely random, and in a way, I bet this is the way it is meant to be - to control the populace by fear, uncertainty, and doubt - in our illustrious and oh-so-effective "War on (some) Drugs".
With that said, even if it was legal to use pot, it would probably be restricted to adults only. As a parent he would probably be best to teach his kid proper drug use, and explain why it is only for adults (effects on growing brains, responsible usage, etc). He shouldn't get too whigged out if he catches his kid doing it, but there should be punishment.
However, in the majority of the 1st world (and most of the rest, as well), illegal drug usage is, well, illegal. Plus, as I have noted above, in the United States, in some random cases, you might be better off (legally and prison sentence length) raping or killing someone than to be caught with drugs. Yes, sadly, our great American society is that fucked up...
By the size of your rant, you're obviously one of those anglo-saxon property rights zealot. Your rant also is totally off-the-mark, so I will not even bother busting neurons reading it.
I am not sure what you mean by " anglo-saxon property rights zealot" - if you would take the time and do some research on "Right to Travel", driver's licenses, and the Constitution, you might learn something new instead of dismissing me off hand without even examining what is available. Furthermore, as I noted, I am not even certain that the arguments I have seen are correct or legal. I was hoping you (or others) might examine the arguments, and if the claims were baseless, post back counter arguments and examples as to why. As it stands, and as I have noted, the arguments I have read regarding this issue seem pretty solid, and I haven't come across much in the way of counter-argument.
I will however bust all your arguments with the following:
so, since there is "no limits on the means of conveyance", it's perfectly okay to travel by using a mechanical copy of Godzilla which merrily goes about squashing roads, cars, electric/telephone wires and buildings.
The average reader will then have no problem getting the futility of your argument.
Of course I never meant anything in the way of the absurd example you provide! However, provided that my convenyance of choice and ownership poses no threats to others (either bodily or to their property), then why should I be limited to using them? Yes - if my conveyance destroys property, or through my action (or otherwise) I cause injury or death to another person, then I should have to accept responsibility for that. If that means paying a fine, having the conveyance destroyed (or taken away), or being put in jail, so be it. However, according to the argument of "Right to Travel", it is unconstitutional for there to be apriori limits placed upon what I choose to travel in.
Please, quit posting knee-jerk responses, take the time to research the issue a little bit, and then post back to me the arguments against it...
From what I understand from the argument, and from what I have read (granted, my understanding and knowledge comes only from what I have read on the internet), what the "Right to Travel" is about is that drivers licenses are an illegal restriction on the Constitutional "Right to Travel", which has no limits on the means of conveyance.
There is also something about it regarding that the states issue these driver licenses because most people don't actually own their vehicles, even after they pay off their loans (if they have one), because they don't have the actual "Manufacturer's Statement of Origin" (MSO), which is the real invoice that only comes from the manufacturer. The dealer has that, they send a copy to the state (and to the crediting bank). The invoice you get as a buyer is a dealer invoice, not the invoice from the manufacturer. There is also some argument regarding "free men of a country owning property" and the limits these paper shenanigans perpetuate, so even after you pay off your loan, you never get that MSO back from the state - so who really owns the vehicle? The state, and they license you to operate it.
Contrast this with if you bought the vehicle (paid with cash) for your own personal use on your own land (say a large tract of land), direct from the manufacturer - you would get the MSO. From what I have read, if you have the actual MSO with you, and you carry a copy of the Constitution with you plus another piece of paper with some blurb about the "Right to Travel", if you get pulled over, you can present these to the officer. You will then get ticketed (of course, because the officer likely has no clue or cares about this), and/or possibly hauled into jail. Whereupon you should have presented him with the information, and then got your phone call to your friendly Constitutional lawyer (these people do exist), sat in jail (or at home) for a while, then got your trial before a judge as to why you were driving without a license.
From what I have read, you have to go through a lot of rigamarole with the court on this (via the lawyer and such), and due to prior decisions (supposedly, other trials and case law have already been done regarding "Right to Travel", so there is precedent), the judge likely gets very pissed. From what I understand, it is essentially the same kind of "how dare you" type thing that goes on if you so much as utter (as a juror) that you know and understand what FIJA is (Fully Informed Jury) - which is also your Constitutional right. So, you go through all of this, and if you are lucky, you get let off, and likely you get to go back to what you were doing - at least until you get picked up again for driving without a license. Due to all the crap you have to go through, though, most people, even those who really want to fight this, don't go through with it, because it chews up money, and there is no guarantee you will win, you just piss off judges and the system, etc. It is crazy, because all you are doing is what is supposed to be Constitutionally guaranteed (supposedly)!
Like I said, I don't know how legally far any of this goes - what the real truth is. I do know that FIJA is still a juror's right, always has been, it is Constitutionally protected. At one time, judges used to inform juries about this, but not any longer. It isn't because it is illegal (it is a Constitutionally protected means of protesting unjust laws), it is because they (the system) don't want juries to know this anymore, because so many laws have been overturned because of it (many of them laws aimed at restrictions on black people in the 60's, but also for drug laws and similar).
In a similar manner, there is also the history on federal income tax - if you look at the history of income tax, it was meant to be a temporary thing, and is technically against the Constitution, as originally written. So, an ammendment was needed. Based on everything I have read about the passing of this ammendment, the 2/3 legal majority of states DID NOT ratify the ammendment (there was some kind of
Interesting link - at first, the jacks looked like 4-pin RJ-11 (phone) jacks, I was figuring 4 wire. I thought maybe some form of dongle for older motors/sensors would be a later feature, with a 4 peg electrical plate on one end, the plug on the other (Lego has been one of the most backwards compatible sets out there - I can't imagine they would change that). I do understand that the new servos are heaps better over the old motors, with the feedback system and such. I can already imagine a nice NXT-based styrofoam/balsa CNC machine (or pick/place robot). Hopefully maybe those ports will all be bidirectional, and you can use them for whatever you want (so if you want more motors, or more sensors, then you can pick). Maybe those ports can be used for networking multiple controller bricks? Or the bluetooth communications for the same thing (if the bluetooth communications were for an inter-controller type network, perhaps multiple robots could communicate with each other for cheap swarm robotics experimenting)? Or, maybe the ports can be configured in such a manner to allow for the closed-loop NXT servos, and in another manner to allow 2 or 3 open-loop Lego motor control? It seems all speculative, right now - hopefully all my previous speculation is wrong, and August will bring a surprise...
Yes, that is the one - I spent a lot of time building that crane, it was a great kit. Then, tearing it apart (after playing with it), and building a ton of other stuff - thanks for the link!
We have a right not to be censored by the government, but this does not extend to private practice.
This would be all well and good, if it weren't for the fact that it seems like increasingly corporations (and thus our employers) are becoming our government by proxy, with our actual supposedly elected government being a puppet to their corporate masters (or at best, in collusion with them). When corporations are our actual government (and/or are in collusion with the government), but without the protections of the Constitution (speaking from a US perspective, but this could easily apply to any nation), from where do the laws of our land come from? Furthermore, do we have any representation in this system?
To whom can we turn to for redress of grievances? The truthful answer is ourselves, because ultimately the power of the government comes from the people, because the government (of whatever form it takes) is composed of the people. However, society as a whole has seem to have forgotten (or have been misled to disbelieve) this truth, and instead views the government as a separate entity of which they have no control over. We are left with an US vs THEM attitude, coupled with despair, anger, and it seems we are on the downward slope toward acceptance.
We the People are forgetting from whom government gains its powers, so let's instead all bow down to our corporate overlords!
Granted, all of the links I linked to deal mainly with voting rights and felon(y) disenfranchisement, and not with gun ownership/usage by felons. Even so, as it was originally written, the Constitution of the United States DID NOT prohibit either, it was only later additions to the Constitution (then backed up by Supreme Court rulings) that has entrenched this into the modern US social psyche.
With regards to voting rights, it is strange because the arguments used against felons are similar to arguments which have been used to deny voting rights for other segments of the population, most notably women and blacks. What is sickening is that while true that felons have done something bad, they have no voice after the fact and after they get out of jail, and those who would stand up for their rights after jail are few and far in number. This leads to lack of support for changes to the punishment structure which could arguably make prison more rehabilitative, and less of an institution for state-sanctioned revenge (such as, for instance, elimination of prison rape).
Of course, it isn't over yet, so maybe we'll see something?
I think what would really make a splash at CES (or at anytime, for that matter), would be an easy to set up box that would have networking capability (802.11x or wired ethernet, or both), a hard drive, a remote control, and television outputs. You would hook this thing up to your TV and network (it could look like a regular set-top box), have it configure via DHCP (or input IP addresses if that is your thing), and it would use an RSS feed (with published format?) from the company that sells it to allow it to aggregate video content from places like Google Video and other video sharing services (and video blogs), in some easy to browse format. Maybe add in picture surfing/slide shows from sites like LiveJournal or such. Allow the ability to "save" the video/image to the harddrive for later viewing (or queue up for watching later ala Tivo). Perhaps even allow podcast downloads?
Something like this might revolutionize how we "watch" TV - how TV is created, distributed. We will probably never see something like this, at least anytime soon, since it could undermine the cable company's purpose. I would just like to have an ISP provide me the feed, and me get my content from all over the internet. We already have this in a haphazard form with a web-browser and PC, but if it was available in an easy to use box for the TV (maybe add a DVD-RW drive in it as well, to allow movie watching and archiving of things downloaded/streamed) - it could be interesting.
As it is, I am figuring since this is something I want, it is going to have to be something I make myself...
I currently own an RIS, and I rarely mess with it (mainly because I have waaaay too many other projects to do so). I love Lego, ever since I was a child (one of my first real Lego kits was the Expert Builder crane - can't remember the number right now). When the RIS came out, I had to have it, so I bought it, and then later bought a couple of upgrade kits (the remote control/sensor pack and the expansion parts kits). But something always disappointed me, and the NXT seems to be the same way:
Not enough I/O ports!
On the NXT, if you look closely, you are still limited to three motor outputs (that fourth port on the controller at the "top" is for USB). As for inputs, there still seems to be a limit of 3 general purpose inputs, plus one extra "special" ultrasonic input (it is strange - they mark the other inputs on the controller brick, but leave the ultrasonic unmarked - I have to assume that it is meant for the ultrasonic sensor only).
What if you want to hook up more sensors, or more motors? What if you want to hook up old sensors and motors, how do you do that? From what it appears, you can't - you can only hook up the same number of motors and sensors as the old RIS (minus the special ultrasonic sensor).
This is what makes me wonder whether Lego is paying attention at all to the market they created. For anyone who has perused the websites of Lego RIS creators, they will quickly learn that there are a few things that these people want: more motor outputs and more sensor inputs (witness the number of people creating numerous schemes to allow multiplexing of the I/O space), a greater variety of sensor types (witness the number of people making and selling custom sensors), and an easy/efficient way to network the controller bricks.
I will go further to say that there are many people who would love to see more than just motors - I know of some builders who have taken miniature pneumatic solenoid switches and converted them to allow them to control Lego pneumatics. How about a real Lego pneumatic pump (instead of having to build one from parts - although there are a ton of ingenious designs)? How about a Lego linear actuator (I have seen people build these too from Lego mini-motors and worm gears)? Why not a Lego stepper motor?
Furthermore, all of this could have been built into the same four-stud plate electrical connector - even the new motors with their in-built rotation sensors could have used this (two wires for power, one or two for the sensor). You would have to maybe round/notch the corner of the plate to indicate "pin 1" (like an IC chip), and you would need to add some additional protection (maybe diodes or something) for n00bi3s who connect the lines wrong, but it could be done. Standardize the motor output pins on the place (and sensor input pins) to be the same as current motors and sensor hookups. If done right, all the old stuff could work with this system, and new parts, like the new motors and sensors, could be added as well. Or, go with the current RJ jacks, and add dongles to connect old sensors/motors (maybe they will do this - I can assure you if they don't, someone else will).
Ultimately, at the minimum, they really need more I/O jacks for more motors and sensors, and a way to easily network the controller bricks. Perhaps the USB port will facilitate the networking of the controllers (?) - we won't know until people start playing with them. If Lego was smart, they would release a "super-controller" that had more I/O for those who want it and need it. It seems strange that the original Lego controllers developed at MIT had way more I/O capability than this new controller. There is no valid excuse, unless they just want to avoid confusion (which I can't understand, because they don't seem to understand that young kids are not really their target market for Mindstorms).
For myself, I am finding that if I want to do any kind of real development of robotics, it is just best to stick to breadboards, a soldering iron, PIC controllers and/or BASIC Stamps, hobby R/C se
you can change the audio track to your language of choice(if it was on the dvd of course!),
What %age of people do this?
Actually, the percentage is probably low, but I know I have done it.
I have a copy of Perfect Collection (Serial Experiments: Lain) that I prefer to watch with Japanese language w/ English subtitles (default is English language and no subtitles). Although this is mainly because I first owned a VCD copy of Lain which was in that format, so I am biased to watch it in that manner.
Even so, it was nice to see that this DVD allowed it - I purchased the DVD knowing it was in English, but then when I went to start watching it, it disconcerted me (it just wasn't the same) - I was glad the option was there to switch it over to what I was used to watching...
Slashdot Mirror
Due to various laws and legal requirements, counselors and therapists are required to report an individual to law enforcement if they suspect the individual to be abusing a child. Many of these people, who would otherwise be helping these individuals, instead turn their names over to LE regardless, just to cover their asses and play it safe, just in case, you see - because they could become liable (ie, jail time, loss of license to practice, civil suits, etc) if they didn't report it.
Said pedophile then enters the system instead of getting the help they need. Maybe all they end up getting caught with is some "questionable" (or real) child pornography they downloaded off the net. No matter, they will at least land in jail until their trial. Law enforcement, being the caring people they are to these suspects (they are supposedly innocent until proven guilty, right?), book them, places them in the general population of the holding area or whatever, then let's it "slip" to that self-same population that the guy they just put in there is a (suspected, but they leave that part out) pedophile - wink, wink...nudge, nudge. Then they walk away, and the CCTV system has a "glitch", and guards don't respond as the rest of the population act like animals and beat the guy (and/or rape him). If the guy is lucky, he survives with a little (or a lot) of brain damage, maybe a perforated colon (from rape), some (or a lot) of broken bones, etc. More often than not, he is killed in jail before he even makes it to trial.
All because he attempted to honestly get help before he "went too far". Do you honestly think that people who actually want help for this condition, knowing what the possible outcome will actually be from the system, will actually seek help? Don't bet on it...
It's Wozniak - somebody who truely seems to care about the world, about the people on it, and helping children learn with technology...
PSHAW!!!
They could have been partially nude transvestite furries in 50,000 watt blinken' LED jock straps, fire coming out of the asses shooting 200 feet in the air, grinding each other while dancin' to hippy-trippin' house music stoked on E, all the while a huge-ass Tesla coil shoots off crackling 20 foot bolts of lighting - and maybe, just maybe...
I would look and smile, and think "Hell, that's nothing - wait until Saturday, when the Man burns..." - and still be disapointed because last year was just "so much bettah"...
Meh - Save the Man!
You are the primary breadwinner and you have to do all of the household chores? WTF is your husband doing? Get him to share more of the household load, so you have some more free time to catch up on your learning needs...
I would be willing to bet that you could easily build either one of these robots off-the-shelf using parts from LynxMotion, for half the cost or less. They aren't the only supplier, either - Pick up an issue of Servo Magazine and you will find several suppliers of similar kits and parts. Most use standard RC servos. Several companies have also introduced special robotics digital servos with 2-way communications buses. Also, I know of at least one company which produced an "Aibo-like" styrene shell into which standard servos could be fitted. Hobby robotics (and robotics in general) have come a long way in a very short time (I credit much of the kick-up in interest to the culture of combat robotics, as well as Lego Mindstorms).
So, where is the problem? Ah - that is issue - the problem lies not in hardware availability, but in control software. The solutions to solving dynamic walking, on a quadrupedal or bipedal frame, are far from completely solved. When you build your own system, you are lucky if you get some form of pattern playback software. Such software works well for stable multi-leg systems (octo or hexapod), on relatively flat surfaces, but when you move to lesser number of legs, balance becomes key, even on flat surfaces. Add in directional control and a dynamic terrain environment, and the software quickly becomes a hairy problem.
Sony had an OK solution to this with both the Aibo and Qrio, and people were using both platforms to explore other methods and algorithms (mostly in RoboCup Soccer). I would bet that Sony, while they may be stopping the manufacture of the robots, will continue to develop this software, as it is a valuable piece of the puzzle to developing useful humanoid "helper robots" for the elderly (which is an area a lot of robotics research is being done for in Japan). Whether they use this software for their own products or license it is anyone's guess.
As far as hobby robotics for quad and bipedal platforms are concerned: I wouldn't worry. The hardware is there, the software is too (to a lesser extent - it will only grow). Other options exist, so don't mourn Sony's decision. Instead, focus on those other options...
To some people (admittedly, they are in a minority), images of women crushing wine glasses while wearing high heels are pornographic. Others like automobile accident images. Where is the pornographic element? In the viewers mind! There are probably hundreds of variations on this same theme, that of images which to one person look odd at best, but to others bring about orgasmic excitement.
Let's look at this issue of pornography in a different manner. Why is it that (in America, at least), most people in our society think of nudity as tittlating, perhaps even pornographic? Why is it that nudity is frowned upon? Could it be because we aren't exposed to it enough?
Think about it: If you were exposed to nudity in a 24/7 context, what would be pornographic and frowned upon? Wearing clothing or otherwise covering up the body? Would such situations and images be considered pornographic by that hypothetical society?
I tend to wonder if some day, perhaps sooner than we think, it will be profitable to mine these landfills (many currently golf courses and home sites!) for that "wasted" material, for recycling purposes. Furthermore, I think about the tons of organic material (yard and landscaping waste, mostly) which is in our landfills (and more going in every day) which could be reclaimed, recycled, and then fed into thermodepolymerization plants tuned for the feedstock, allowing us to gain fuels and other useful materials from stuff that is just being thrown away.
Think about all the organic material from New Orleans which was simply bulldozed into landfills? Could that material have been run through a TDP process and used to offset, in whatever percentage, the fuel shortages caused by Katrina? Why do we throw this stuff away, when we can use it for other purposes?
Fortunately, most metals are recycled already, but there is still a lot of useful stuff in our landfills (including a lot of metals), just waiting for the day to be used again (unfortunately, in order to get at the stuff with any measure of safety, these landfills would have to be strip-mined)...
I know this isn't a new idea. I don't have references handy to prove it isn't, I just know that I have read arguments about it. This theory is used to explain the origins of life (distinct from the theory of evolution). Basically, you have the whole "early earth molecular soup mix with electrical activity providing the spark-o-life" (Miller-Urey Experiment), forming organic compounds, which are then (in some manner) "processed" by crystal structures forming later (?).
It makes me wonder if it wouldn't be possible to study crystals in a similar manner to see whether they could (in some manner) aid the formation of the organic compounds formed by the Miller-Urey (and other similar) experiments into early proteins or protein-like structures? Does anyone know if such a study has already been undertaken? Or, is this idea nothing more than baseless speculation with no foundation in reality? I am sincerely curious...
My wife recently asked me about getting her a smaller keyboard - basically, she wants a full set of keys (number pad and all - she knows 10 keying, and uses it all the time), just a smaller keyboard, to help save space and to fit her hands better as they are smaller than average. If they made a keyboard where all the keys were 2/3s to 3/4s the size of the keys on a regular keyboard, it would probably be perfect. I tend to wonder if such a keyboard would be good for younger kids? Anyhow, I told her I would look into it, but I am not expecting a revelation - and if I find something, it will likely be very expensive (same as her other request - she would seriously like to get an LCD monitor for her computer smaller than 15" - while such monitors exist, they are for niche applications, like point-of-sale terminals. As such they are very expensive).
I am also looking for a wireless keyboard for an HTPC-type application. Ideally, it would be small (no keypad needed), with a built in mouse pointing system (no separate mouse). It would also be nice if there was a separate wireless remote control-like controller included (for times where you just want to point-n-click, no typing needed). I don't hold out much hope finding that, either...
The only real way you can do this is to document the hell out of everything you do in the IT department. You can do this on paper, but it is infinitely easier to do this with a customised software suite, consisting of job tracking, asset management, employee scheduling, and reporting modules (among others). If you don't have an integrated suite of such software (and it must be well integrated, otherwise it is useless), you are going to find that to obtain such software will be an expensive task (there is a reason Oracle bought Peoplesoft - not that I would reccommend Peoplesoft as a solution). There are some open-source solutions that handle portions of those tasks, but none (that I am currently aware of) that perform all four at once. Furthermore, regardless of the source of the solution, each installation is different, and generally requires custom modifications to handle differences in workflow, which won't be cheap regardless of platform. Designing such a system is a possibility, if you have the staff, but I must warn you that it is a complicated task, and you may end up spending as much on a in-house solution as you do with a pre-built (and customised) one. Which is why, if you don't have one, I reccommend getting a system working on paper first, just so you can see how your process works before encoding it (or having it encoded) in software (in fact, if all businesses did this, they would be better off, but I digress).
Basically, you want to first track all of the company's IT assets - what they are, where they are located, how they depend on each other, who are using them, notes about problems (or suspected problems), serial and model numbers, depreciated value, replacement cost, history of service and what for, etc. You want to keep an up-to-date network block diagram (which you should have if you don't already). Ideally, this diagram would be an inherent property of the asset tracking module, so it can be generated on the fly from information stored about the assets. The asset tracking module thus serves as a record of the IT assets, for security and value purposes (serial numbers and images of equipment for police, value and replacement costs allow for calculations for insurance purposes), as well as for tracking a history of costs associated with servicing that equipment. These costs should be stored in both real costs (ie, costs from the budget for new parts or equipment), as well as "hidden" costs (ie, how much it would have cost to have it serviced by an outside company vs doing it in-house). If you can show that over the course of a month, that your department is spending less to service and keep the assets running than it would cost via an outside source (and you must use realistic numbers here), then you can show the value of those actions. Furthermore, having the inventory of assets will show your managers and other higher-ups in the company just how much money (in terms of assets) they have invested in IT. It may also show you where there are unecessary and redundant assets, which can be trimmed (and/or repurposed) to save (or even make) the company money.
Once you have this system down, you need to then be able to track jobs (problems and tasks) relating to those assets. These are things which are submitted to your department (or that you find yourself - it is important to self-schedule jobs as well, even if they affect IT only!) as problems in the IT system, or as new developments. Whether it is somebody's computer that is spontaneously rebooting, or someone that needs a piece of software installed, or a new printer is needed, or the copier is jammed, etc - you need to track this. You need to track which asset(s) the job affects, who is assigned to the job (one or more people), what the t
Basically, it works like this:
At this point, it becomes interesting. If Little Guy doesn't investigate the system Big Company is using, he may never realize his patent is being infringed upon (especially in the case of where the item in question is a very small, but necessary piece in the design - like a special buried sensor, or new screw, or something). Big Company is banking on the fact that if they can sell the product for a long enough period of time, they may be able to sell it until the patent expires (either via natural expiration, or when the Little Guy inventor no longer can afford the maintenance/renewal fees, which are pretty large), and nobody catches on. If Big Company is fairly lucky, they get to sell it for a long while, until they get caught by Little Guy (or someone on his behalf), and a settlement is reached. In this case, Big Company still "wins", as they have the distinction of being the ones who brought it to market first (in the public's mind), despite what the history books read (ie, the Tesla vs. Edison/Marconi, if you will - or P.T. Farnsworth vs. RCA). Little Guy's name fades, Big Company's name continues on...
It is all a game to Big Company's - the game being to rake in the most cash, and damn any consequences, because ultimately they have the cash to get out of really paying any form of a real price. In some cases, what they do is build the product with said invention included, patent it internationally (because Little Guy generally can only afford to patent his invention in his home country - yeah, I know there is the Berne Convention or whatever which covers international patents and such, but it don't really mean much in the "real world" which Big Companys play in), and sell it internationally (except in the other Little Guy patent holder's home countries) - raking in the profit further (if they can sell it in China and India, they have almost half the world market right there). Worst case scenario is the product makes its way over here via third-party distributors (not automobiles, but other items, typically smaller things like toys, auto accessories, etc) - and the third-party distributor is taken to court by Little Guy (if he can afford it), and if he is lucky, he gets a settlement, or something - which may cover his expenses of the attorney, maybe a little more.
Unfortunately, this is how the world works. I have seen it in action (in my case, my brother-in-law had to defend a couple of his patents which he has held since the mid-1970's). It sucks, if you are the Little Guy...
Start with a vehicle that burns the biodiesel. Capture the emmisions into some substrate(s) to sequester the CO, CO2, and NOX. Add a system which monitors this and displays it on the dashboard. When you go to fuel up your tank, depending on the level of the emmision capture modules, you can trade them in for new, empty modules (what would be even cooler is if the substrate was liquid based, then the pump system could vaccuum out and store the used stuff, and replace it with new). So far, so good, right?
The used modules (or substrate liquid, etc) get sent back to the processing plant, which takes the modules/substance, and using a combination of heat/chemical processing, causes the substrate to release its load of CO, CO2, and NOX which is then bubbled (or sprayed, as another poster noted) through the algea tanks, which with sunlight, create more biodiesel. The used substrate/modules, after they have emptied, are then recycled into new substrate/modules (and sent back to the filling stations for reuse).
Could this work? Seems like it is too simple for it to work. I imagine that it wouldn't be perfectly emmissions free (best case scenario is you will have at least some waste once you have processed/reused the substrate/modules enough). Have I missed any steps?
You know, this is true (this particular form of cannibalism), but when thought about logically, it doesn't make sense. Why eat the brains of an enemy who, using all the skills and knowledge he had to try and defeat you, failed in that task? What would be the point? You have already proven yourself to be the superior in both mind and body, as he is the dead one, and you are the one who is alive, correct?
Furthermore, don't tell me that they couldn't have reasoned this as well, because they obviously were able to reason to the opposite (albeit logically wrong) conclusion.
What this ultimately indicates, though, I am uncertain of...
While kuru was spread by a form of cannibalism, it must be noted that the method of cannibalism wasn't "going out, killing a neighboring village and eating the victims". In the vast majority of kuru cases, the disease occurred when a (usually) male member of the village died (of whatever cause), and then the (usually family and female) members of the village would eat parts of the body of the victim, in a form of religious ancestor worship. Of course, when a person died of kuru...
AC, your advice would be fine in a country where smoking pot was legal, but in most countries, it isn't.
In the United States, for instance, in most places, if the police get a search warrant (for whatever reason), toss your house (and they really do toss it - cabinet doors ripped off hinges and everything), and find evidence of drugs and/or drug usage (regardless of who has it - child or adult) - they can "legally" confiscate your property (house and everything in it, if they want), you go to jail (along with anyone else in the house), and your life is pretty much over and done. If you are lucky, you get out, and get some of your stuff back - maybe even your house (maybe). Most of the time, if you aren't the owner/user of the drugs, and there wasn't enough to slap on an "intent to sell" charge, you will just be lucky not to be in jail.
This isn't paranoia talking - this is the truth. Many, many people in this country have lost nearly everything simply because a son/daughter/renter/housemate was using/selling drugs within the house they were occuppying. It isn't even SOP, even within a police department/jurisdiction - sometimes they grab everything, sometimes they just remove the offender and evidence. Sometimes, something in the middle occurs. It seems completely random, and in a way, I bet this is the way it is meant to be - to control the populace by fear, uncertainty, and doubt - in our illustrious and oh-so-effective "War on (some) Drugs".
With that said, even if it was legal to use pot, it would probably be restricted to adults only. As a parent he would probably be best to teach his kid proper drug use, and explain why it is only for adults (effects on growing brains, responsible usage, etc). He shouldn't get too whigged out if he catches his kid doing it, but there should be punishment.
However, in the majority of the 1st world (and most of the rest, as well), illegal drug usage is, well, illegal. Plus, as I have noted above, in the United States, in some random cases, you might be better off (legally and prison sentence length) raping or killing someone than to be caught with drugs. Yes, sadly, our great American society is that fucked up...
I am not sure what you mean by " anglo-saxon property rights zealot" - if you would take the time and do some research on "Right to Travel", driver's licenses, and the Constitution, you might learn something new instead of dismissing me off hand without even examining what is available. Furthermore, as I noted, I am not even certain that the arguments I have seen are correct or legal. I was hoping you (or others) might examine the arguments, and if the claims were baseless, post back counter arguments and examples as to why. As it stands, and as I have noted, the arguments I have read regarding this issue seem pretty solid, and I haven't come across much in the way of counter-argument.
I will however bust all your arguments with the following:
so, since there is "no limits on the means of conveyance", it's perfectly okay to travel by using a mechanical copy of Godzilla which merrily goes about squashing roads, cars, electric/telephone wires and buildings.
The average reader will then have no problem getting the futility of your argument.
Of course I never meant anything in the way of the absurd example you provide! However, provided that my convenyance of choice and ownership poses no threats to others (either bodily or to their property), then why should I be limited to using them? Yes - if my conveyance destroys property, or through my action (or otherwise) I cause injury or death to another person, then I should have to accept responsibility for that. If that means paying a fine, having the conveyance destroyed (or taken away), or being put in jail, so be it. However, according to the argument of "Right to Travel", it is unconstitutional for there to be apriori limits placed upon what I choose to travel in.
Please, quit posting knee-jerk responses, take the time to research the issue a little bit, and then post back to me the arguments against it...
There is also something about it regarding that the states issue these driver licenses because most people don't actually own their vehicles, even after they pay off their loans (if they have one), because they don't have the actual "Manufacturer's Statement of Origin" (MSO), which is the real invoice that only comes from the manufacturer. The dealer has that, they send a copy to the state (and to the crediting bank). The invoice you get as a buyer is a dealer invoice, not the invoice from the manufacturer. There is also some argument regarding "free men of a country owning property" and the limits these paper shenanigans perpetuate, so even after you pay off your loan, you never get that MSO back from the state - so who really owns the vehicle? The state, and they license you to operate it.
Contrast this with if you bought the vehicle (paid with cash) for your own personal use on your own land (say a large tract of land), direct from the manufacturer - you would get the MSO. From what I have read, if you have the actual MSO with you, and you carry a copy of the Constitution with you plus another piece of paper with some blurb about the "Right to Travel", if you get pulled over, you can present these to the officer. You will then get ticketed (of course, because the officer likely has no clue or cares about this), and/or possibly hauled into jail. Whereupon you should have presented him with the information, and then got your phone call to your friendly Constitutional lawyer (these people do exist), sat in jail (or at home) for a while, then got your trial before a judge as to why you were driving without a license.
From what I have read, you have to go through a lot of rigamarole with the court on this (via the lawyer and such), and due to prior decisions (supposedly, other trials and case law have already been done regarding "Right to Travel", so there is precedent), the judge likely gets very pissed. From what I understand, it is essentially the same kind of "how dare you" type thing that goes on if you so much as utter (as a juror) that you know and understand what FIJA is (Fully Informed Jury) - which is also your Constitutional right. So, you go through all of this, and if you are lucky, you get let off, and likely you get to go back to what you were doing - at least until you get picked up again for driving without a license. Due to all the crap you have to go through, though, most people, even those who really want to fight this, don't go through with it, because it chews up money, and there is no guarantee you will win, you just piss off judges and the system, etc. It is crazy, because all you are doing is what is supposed to be Constitutionally guaranteed (supposedly)!
Like I said, I don't know how legally far any of this goes - what the real truth is. I do know that FIJA is still a juror's right, always has been, it is Constitutionally protected. At one time, judges used to inform juries about this, but not any longer. It isn't because it is illegal (it is a Constitutionally protected means of protesting unjust laws), it is because they (the system) don't want juries to know this anymore, because so many laws have been overturned because of it (many of them laws aimed at restrictions on black people in the 60's, but also for drug laws and similar).
In a similar manner, there is also the history on federal income tax - if you look at the history of income tax, it was meant to be a temporary thing, and is technically against the Constitution, as originally written. So, an ammendment was needed. Based on everything I have read about the passing of this ammendment, the 2/3 legal majority of states DID NOT ratify the ammendment (there was some kind of
Interesting link - at first, the jacks looked like 4-pin RJ-11 (phone) jacks, I was figuring 4 wire. I thought maybe some form of dongle for older motors/sensors would be a later feature, with a 4 peg electrical plate on one end, the plug on the other (Lego has been one of the most backwards compatible sets out there - I can't imagine they would change that). I do understand that the new servos are heaps better over the old motors, with the feedback system and such. I can already imagine a nice NXT-based styrofoam/balsa CNC machine (or pick/place robot). Hopefully maybe those ports will all be bidirectional, and you can use them for whatever you want (so if you want more motors, or more sensors, then you can pick). Maybe those ports can be used for networking multiple controller bricks? Or the bluetooth communications for the same thing (if the bluetooth communications were for an inter-controller type network, perhaps multiple robots could communicate with each other for cheap swarm robotics experimenting)? Or, maybe the ports can be configured in such a manner to allow for the closed-loop NXT servos, and in another manner to allow 2 or 3 open-loop Lego motor control? It seems all speculative, right now - hopefully all my previous speculation is wrong, and August will bring a surprise...
Yes, that is the one - I spent a lot of time building that crane, it was a great kit. Then, tearing it apart (after playing with it), and building a ton of other stuff - thanks for the link!
This would be all well and good, if it weren't for the fact that it seems like increasingly corporations (and thus our employers) are becoming our government by proxy, with our actual supposedly elected government being a puppet to their corporate masters (or at best, in collusion with them). When corporations are our actual government (and/or are in collusion with the government), but without the protections of the Constitution (speaking from a US perspective, but this could easily apply to any nation), from where do the laws of our land come from? Furthermore, do we have any representation in this system?
To whom can we turn to for redress of grievances? The truthful answer is ourselves, because ultimately the power of the government comes from the people, because the government (of whatever form it takes) is composed of the people. However, society as a whole has seem to have forgotten (or have been misled to disbelieve) this truth, and instead views the government as a separate entity of which they have no control over. We are left with an US vs THEM attitude, coupled with despair, anger, and it seems we are on the downward slope toward acceptance.
We the People are forgetting from whom government gains its powers, so let's instead all bow down to our corporate overlords!
You may want to review the history of automobile licenses, and the Right to Travel - not that I expect anything to change...
Some would argue it does...
Granted, all of the links I linked to deal mainly with voting rights and felon(y) disenfranchisement, and not with gun ownership/usage by felons. Even so, as it was originally written, the Constitution of the United States DID NOT prohibit either, it was only later additions to the Constitution (then backed up by Supreme Court rulings) that has entrenched this into the modern US social psyche.
With regards to voting rights, it is strange because the arguments used against felons are similar to arguments which have been used to deny voting rights for other segments of the population, most notably women and blacks. What is sickening is that while true that felons have done something bad, they have no voice after the fact and after they get out of jail, and those who would stand up for their rights after jail are few and far in number. This leads to lack of support for changes to the punishment structure which could arguably make prison more rehabilitative, and less of an institution for state-sanctioned revenge (such as, for instance, elimination of prison rape).
I think what would really make a splash at CES (or at anytime, for that matter), would be an easy to set up box that would have networking capability (802.11x or wired ethernet, or both), a hard drive, a remote control, and television outputs. You would hook this thing up to your TV and network (it could look like a regular set-top box), have it configure via DHCP (or input IP addresses if that is your thing), and it would use an RSS feed (with published format?) from the company that sells it to allow it to aggregate video content from places like Google Video and other video sharing services (and video blogs), in some easy to browse format. Maybe add in picture surfing/slide shows from sites like LiveJournal or such. Allow the ability to "save" the video/image to the harddrive for later viewing (or queue up for watching later ala Tivo). Perhaps even allow podcast downloads?
Something like this might revolutionize how we "watch" TV - how TV is created, distributed. We will probably never see something like this, at least anytime soon, since it could undermine the cable company's purpose. I would just like to have an ISP provide me the feed, and me get my content from all over the internet. We already have this in a haphazard form with a web-browser and PC, but if it was available in an easy to use box for the TV (maybe add a DVD-RW drive in it as well, to allow movie watching and archiving of things downloaded/streamed) - it could be interesting.
As it is, I am figuring since this is something I want, it is going to have to be something I make myself...
Not enough I/O ports!
On the NXT, if you look closely, you are still limited to three motor outputs (that fourth port on the controller at the "top" is for USB). As for inputs, there still seems to be a limit of 3 general purpose inputs, plus one extra "special" ultrasonic input (it is strange - they mark the other inputs on the controller brick, but leave the ultrasonic unmarked - I have to assume that it is meant for the ultrasonic sensor only).
What if you want to hook up more sensors, or more motors? What if you want to hook up old sensors and motors, how do you do that? From what it appears, you can't - you can only hook up the same number of motors and sensors as the old RIS (minus the special ultrasonic sensor).
This is what makes me wonder whether Lego is paying attention at all to the market they created. For anyone who has perused the websites of Lego RIS creators, they will quickly learn that there are a few things that these people want: more motor outputs and more sensor inputs (witness the number of people creating numerous schemes to allow multiplexing of the I/O space), a greater variety of sensor types (witness the number of people making and selling custom sensors), and an easy/efficient way to network the controller bricks.
I will go further to say that there are many people who would love to see more than just motors - I know of some builders who have taken miniature pneumatic solenoid switches and converted them to allow them to control Lego pneumatics. How about a real Lego pneumatic pump (instead of having to build one from parts - although there are a ton of ingenious designs)? How about a Lego linear actuator (I have seen people build these too from Lego mini-motors and worm gears)? Why not a Lego stepper motor?
Furthermore, all of this could have been built into the same four-stud plate electrical connector - even the new motors with their in-built rotation sensors could have used this (two wires for power, one or two for the sensor). You would have to maybe round/notch the corner of the plate to indicate "pin 1" (like an IC chip), and you would need to add some additional protection (maybe diodes or something) for n00bi3s who connect the lines wrong, but it could be done. Standardize the motor output pins on the place (and sensor input pins) to be the same as current motors and sensor hookups. If done right, all the old stuff could work with this system, and new parts, like the new motors and sensors, could be added as well. Or, go with the current RJ jacks, and add dongles to connect old sensors/motors (maybe they will do this - I can assure you if they don't, someone else will).
Ultimately, at the minimum, they really need more I/O jacks for more motors and sensors, and a way to easily network the controller bricks. Perhaps the USB port will facilitate the networking of the controllers (?) - we won't know until people start playing with them. If Lego was smart, they would release a "super-controller" that had more I/O for those who want it and need it. It seems strange that the original Lego controllers developed at MIT had way more I/O capability than this new controller. There is no valid excuse, unless they just want to avoid confusion (which I can't understand, because they don't seem to understand that young kids are not really their target market for Mindstorms).
For myself, I am finding that if I want to do any kind of real development of robotics, it is just best to stick to breadboards, a soldering iron, PIC controllers and/or BASIC Stamps, hobby R/C se
What %age of people do this?
Actually, the percentage is probably low, but I know I have done it.
I have a copy of Perfect Collection (Serial Experiments: Lain) that I prefer to watch with Japanese language w/ English subtitles (default is English language and no subtitles). Although this is mainly because I first owned a VCD copy of Lain which was in that format, so I am biased to watch it in that manner.
Even so, it was nice to see that this DVD allowed it - I purchased the DVD knowing it was in English, but then when I went to start watching it, it disconcerted me (it just wasn't the same) - I was glad the option was there to switch it over to what I was used to watching...