This is just one of the many neurofeedback systems that use some kind of game to keep the patient involved. How is this unique? The whole article seems to be just a press release from the company in question. NASA technology? This stuff is being researched all over the world for years. In principle, it is the equivalent of whacking somebody when their eyes stray, only more precise, faster and more humane. Pavlov anyone?
This seems to like some Xerox exec saying: "Who is ever going to need this mouse thingy? Graphical User Interfaces only eat up resources". In other words, you are totally ignoring a new(ish) GUI paradigm shift, with a rapidly growing adaptation, from a resource saving standpoint.
These aren't the 80's anymore, you're not baking your own memory banks from silicon. Even my laptop has 2 Gig's of memory now. I've lured people into buying Mac's for some time now, and guess what the first thing is they all start (and keep) configuring? For daily use, a Dashboard like function is ideal.
So don't give me this resource nonsense, or start ripping out peoples' car stereos for a better weight/performance ratio.
Yes, think of a batch of these things acting as: - your table - your walls - self regulating ducts - cross-building wiring And there are even more far-fetched uses, like a hunting trap (or should that be predator?). Just imagine some hundred of them ensnaring a rabbit...
However, it is still questionable whether systems like ERP could be developed successfully as OSS projects.
I could be mistaken, but isn't Compiere an established OSS ERP implementation?
I think the questin shouldn't be: 'Can software like ERP be developed as OSS?' But rather: 'Are there enough people in the OSS community interested enough to develop this kind of software without any form of financial support?' I think the answer has turned out to be 'no'. The same goes for things like (good) financial software, and anything that would require heaps of work, high precision and coordination, but no spectaculair result for the common man to brag about.
Whether or not one should be able to trademark a mathematical concept he/she invented, is not even the question here. If he first coined the term while on university payroll, that would automatically make it public domain. As this should be easy to find out and prove, I don't think they'll have a problem. As a side note, you CAN patent mathematical concepts, thus preventing even the private use of them by unlicensed persons. A number of succesfully patented algorithms spring to mind.
Re:Certainly a typo
on
G5 in an iMac
·
· Score: 2, Funny
Newly announced line at MacWorld: - iSee Express, 'Blind even got blinder.' - iSee Pro, 'I see dead people' - i, i, i, And a bottle of iRum. - iFuckedup (Microsoft simulator) - iSpy (voluntary spyware for the Mac) - iGuess (If you really must run Microsoft Office) - iWon't (i386) - iCan (because I...) - iCowboyNeal
I know most here think you need either a significant drop or a fast moving body of water. But wouldn't simply increasing the intake of your plumbing solve this? Suppose you would use the entire width of the river, say 10 meters, by placing a series of intakes in parallel, about 20 cm high, with enough plumbing to lead it all to one central tube next to the river, say 10 meters downstream. This would mean a 45 degree diagonal from the outermost intake to the central tube. I have no idea how fast this river is flowing, but lets say 1 meter per minute. (that's pretty conservative, isn't it?) That amounts to about 2 cubic meters of water per minute. Thats 2000 liters/min, or something like 500 gallons/minute. Acoording to realgoods.com, that could power up to a 20 nozzle system generating a lot of juice! A 20cm rise on the bottom would probably even go unnoticed. Sure, a lot of plumbing, but then clogging would be less of a problem. Any thoughts/reality checks?
Is this man insane? Not to be advocating any particular OS (I've used Win and Linux for years, Mac recently), but this guy tries to prove the superiority of Gnome by saying that a lack of options equals a good GUI design. This is clearly untrue, a good GUI should only show the NEEDED options, but ommitting half of the functionality only means simplifying the design obstacles for the developers. As an example, he shows screenshots comparing the 'save as' dialogs, where the Gnome version is missing current directory contents, then says this is a 'cleaner' interface. Sure, but it also misses the main advantage of having a GUI; contextual views. Then he compares the Epiphany settings screen with that of IE. The first has only the 'home page' option, where the latter has some more. But that's a functionality choice, not a usability one! Maybe Epiphany users never need to manage their history and cookies, but these would seem to be the only other periodical actions for browser settings, so their placement in the IE screen would actually be a better choice. Finally, he calls the iTunes screen bloated and shows it, displaying a 30+ songs playlist and with additional equalizer screen (who uses that?) besides Muine, sporting a playlist of... 5 songs! Wow, well, that's indeed much smaller, congrats. He states that iTunes has an inconsistent GUI and non-standard widgets. Which ones, exactly? Does he mean the play, stop and shuffle widgets? Very non-standard indeed. He muses about Muines ability to scan folders and whack everything in one giant playlist, which iTunes also does, apart from providing 'smart' playlists and album/artist/style browsing. Really, simply ommitting functionality does not equal good GUI design, it's just easier.
Maybe I'm missing something, but could you not achieve the same effect by whacking in two wifi cards and using some loadbalancing scheme in software? I don't see why this would be any slower than a hardware implemented solution, I think the CPU cycles spent are hardly the bottleneck here. Having said that, I think this is a silly solution that only wrecks the whole shared spectrum idea of wifi. If I were a wlan network admin, I would find (packet analyze) and block these guys. (not applicable on public networks ofcourse).
IT professionals are not exactly the most hardened worker bees I've encountered. They're usually very conscious about their unique talents and knowledge and would often consider dull repetitive work to be beneath them. Or maybe IT really is a very stressfull sector. I wouldn't know, I've never worked outside it and have no intention to do so.
For one, VirtualPC does not even function on the G5 type PPC, because of the lack of little-endian emulating hardware. But even if it did - or when it will - it lacks all performance needed for decent gaming, on a speedy 1Ghz PPC it's like working with a pretty slow Pentium II. And lastly, why would you want to emulate x86 architecture when you have a limited number of developers who will gladly learn to code for this platform?
This is quite comparable to the travel times from England to the New-World and Australian colonies in 1600.
While this is true, I must point out that the conditions under which the colonization from 1492 onwards took place were well known by then. Long periods on the seas were nothing new for the sailers then. Long periods in deep space are almost a complete unknown to us. But ofcourse, then as well as now, there has to be a first!
Most people would agree it's far better to hire somebody to install the right server solution than to buy special hardware/software for the sole purpose of making it easier for yourself to do it.
These people then obviously have no clue about the difference in costs between those two options.
Don't get me wrong, I think this is another great achievement in the space exploration program, but are these pictures the best resolution they can manage? I seem to recall the same kind of quality from the sojourner project and was expecting a little bit more detail. (ok, actually a lot more) I guess this isn't a limitation of the onboard hardware, but rather of the available bandwith directly or via MO and GS. So can we expect even higher resolutions over the coming months as they use even finer grained image-tiles? On the other hand, it would probably make more sense to them to produce more up-close pictures instead, panoramic views have little scientific relevance other than to secure funding/audience appreciation. Also, what strikes me as funny is how the rovers production process was all-cleanroom/rubber suits, only to expose these things to one of the most dusty surroundings known to man. (I think that's how I am going to define Mars from now on) Maybe the Russian approach of 'when it breaks during production, it wasn't strong enough anyway', would be more suitable to high stress environments. Then again, making these babies indestructible would probably cost much more than simply building swarms of them. (Yes, that's what I want!)
What? Are they really looking for trouble? A mission called 'Deep Impact' is going to provoke a comet by smashing into it? Let's see who has the final say; us or it.
HyperSoar would also have twice the fuel efficiency of commercial airliners, be three to five times more efficient in putting satellites in space than today's launch systems
Wouldn't the first automatically imply the second? Afterall, airline flights aren't exactly in the same order of magnitude of as rocket launches, are they?
GOOD developers are, in fact, the top of the computing pyramid, as they develop the new generations of systems. But you won't hear good developers whine about the above mentioned limitations of their powers, they accept it as a necessity and appreciate the work admins put in to keep their machines running. Likewise, you never hear racecar drivers complain that their engineers won't let them use nox or nitro, because they understand that it's their job to keep the car from exploding.
Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of any organization whose stated goal is the violent overthrow of the United States government? Big deal, I have to answer that question every time I visit the US. I guess it's standard for anyone applying for a tourist visum. Or maybe not, in which case; forget I mentioned it...
You don't really expect content providers to use xDSL, do you? Ofcourse, with a bandwidth this big, content will almost certainly be on a 'subscriber' model basis. xDSL only needs to have that speed once, which I think will be a safe bet within the next 8 years. (what kind of bandwidth did you have 8 years ago?)
Ok, I live in The Netherlands, maybe I'm priviliged, I pay 85 Euros for a 8Mbit connection. But still, I'm sure France isn't far behind. Maybe in a year or so, you'll have the same prices in the high-population areas.
Slashdot Mirror
This is just one of the many neurofeedback systems that use some kind of game to keep the patient involved. How is this unique? The whole article seems to be just a press release from the company in question. NASA technology? This stuff is being researched all over the world for years. In principle, it is the equivalent of whacking somebody when their eyes stray, only more precise, faster and more humane. Pavlov anyone?
This seems to like some Xerox exec saying: "Who is ever going to need this mouse thingy? Graphical User Interfaces only eat up resources". In other words, you are totally ignoring a new(ish) GUI paradigm shift, with a rapidly growing adaptation, from a resource saving standpoint.
These aren't the 80's anymore, you're not baking your own memory banks from silicon. Even my laptop has 2 Gig's of memory now. I've lured people into buying Mac's for some time now, and guess what the first thing is they all start (and keep) configuring? For daily use, a Dashboard like function is ideal.
So don't give me this resource nonsense, or start ripping out peoples' car stereos for a better weight/performance ratio.
Yes, think of a batch of these things acting as:
- your table
- your walls
- self regulating ducts
- cross-building wiring
And there are even more far-fetched uses, like a hunting trap (or should that be predator?). Just imagine some hundred of them ensnaring a rabbit...
However, it is still questionable whether systems like ERP could be developed successfully as OSS projects.
I could be mistaken, but isn't Compiere an established OSS ERP implementation?
I think the questin shouldn't be: 'Can software like ERP be developed as OSS?' But rather: 'Are there enough people in the OSS community interested enough to develop this kind of software without any form of financial support?' I think the answer has turned out to be 'no'. The same goes for things like (good) financial software, and anything that would require heaps of work, high precision and coordination, but no spectaculair result for the common man to brag about.
Shrek and Fiona get ready to interact with fluids in this homage to From Here to Eternity.
Is it just me or does that have a dirty ring to it?
Whether or not one should be able to trademark a mathematical concept he/she invented, is not even the question here. If he first coined the term while on university payroll, that would automatically make it public domain. As this should be easy to find out and prove, I don't think they'll have a problem.
As a side note, you CAN patent mathematical concepts, thus preventing even the private use of them by unlicensed persons. A number of succesfully patented algorithms spring to mind.
Newly announced line at MacWorld:
- iSee Express, 'Blind even got blinder.'
- iSee Pro, 'I see dead people'
- i, i, i, And a bottle of iRum.
- iFuckedup (Microsoft simulator)
- iSpy (voluntary spyware for the Mac)
- iGuess (If you really must run Microsoft Office)
- iWon't (i386)
- iCan (because I...)
- iCowboyNeal
Ok, this really got me enthousiastic. This guy is truly a hydroelectric hacker. Check out those system charts, amazing!
I know most here think you need either a significant drop or a fast moving body of water. But wouldn't simply increasing the intake of your plumbing solve this? Suppose you would use the entire width of the river, say 10 meters, by placing a series of intakes in parallel, about 20 cm high, with enough plumbing to lead it all to one central tube next to the river, say 10 meters downstream. This would mean a 45 degree diagonal from the outermost intake to the central tube. I have no idea how fast this river is flowing, but lets say 1 meter per minute. (that's pretty conservative, isn't it?) That amounts to about 2 cubic meters of water per minute. Thats 2000 liters/min, or something like 500 gallons/minute. Acoording to realgoods.com, that could power up to a 20 nozzle system generating a lot of juice! A 20cm rise on the bottom would probably even go unnoticed. Sure, a lot of plumbing, but then clogging would be less of a problem. Any thoughts/reality checks?
how do you keep your river driven system in sync with the 60 cycle grid
The same way they adjust nuclear reactor cores to have the steam generators rotate at 60 cycles?
This is what I like to call progress.
Is this man insane?
Not to be advocating any particular OS (I've used Win and Linux for years, Mac recently), but this guy tries to prove the superiority of Gnome by saying that a lack of options equals a good GUI design. This is clearly untrue, a good GUI should only show the NEEDED options, but ommitting half of the functionality only means simplifying the design obstacles for the developers.
As an example, he shows screenshots comparing the 'save as' dialogs, where the Gnome version is missing current directory contents, then says this is a 'cleaner' interface. Sure, but it also misses the main advantage of having a GUI; contextual views. Then he compares the Epiphany settings screen with that of IE. The first has only the 'home page' option, where the latter has some more. But that's a functionality choice, not a usability one! Maybe Epiphany users never need to manage their history and cookies, but these would seem to be the only other periodical actions for browser settings, so their placement in the IE screen would actually be a better choice. Finally, he calls the iTunes screen bloated and shows it, displaying a 30+ songs playlist and with additional equalizer screen (who uses that?) besides Muine, sporting a playlist of... 5 songs!
Wow, well, that's indeed much smaller, congrats. He states that iTunes has an inconsistent GUI and non-standard widgets. Which ones, exactly? Does he mean the play, stop and shuffle widgets? Very non-standard indeed. He muses about Muines ability to scan folders and whack everything in one giant playlist, which iTunes also does, apart from providing 'smart' playlists and album/artist/style browsing. Really, simply ommitting functionality does not equal good GUI design, it's just easier.
Maybe I'm missing something, but could you not achieve the same effect by whacking in two wifi cards and using some loadbalancing scheme in software? I don't see why this would be any slower than a hardware implemented solution, I think the CPU cycles spent are hardly the bottleneck here. Having said that, I think this is a silly solution that only wrecks the whole shared spectrum idea of wifi. If I were a wlan network admin, I would find (packet analyze) and block these guys. (not applicable on public networks ofcourse).
Almost correct. The thing is called a design document or paper design and it is in use in nearly every engineering field, except for one...
IT professionals are not exactly the most hardened worker bees I've encountered. They're usually very conscious about their unique talents and knowledge and would often consider dull repetitive work to be beneath them.
Or maybe IT really is a very stressfull sector. I wouldn't know, I've never worked outside it and have no intention to do so.
For one, VirtualPC does not even function on the G5 type PPC, because of the lack of little-endian emulating hardware. But even if it did - or when it will - it lacks all performance needed for decent gaming, on a speedy 1Ghz PPC it's like working with a pretty slow Pentium II.
And lastly, why would you want to emulate x86 architecture when you have a limited number of developers who will gladly learn to code for this platform?
This is quite comparable to the travel times from England to the New-World and Australian colonies in 1600.
While this is true, I must point out that the conditions under which the colonization from 1492 onwards took place were well known by then. Long periods on the seas were nothing new for the sailers then. Long periods in deep space are almost a complete unknown to us. But ofcourse, then as well as now, there has to be a first!
Most people would agree it's far better to hire somebody to install the right server solution than to buy special hardware/software for the sole purpose of making it easier for yourself to do it.
These people then obviously have no clue about the difference in costs between those two options.
Don't get me wrong, I think this is another great achievement in the space exploration program, but are these pictures the best resolution they can manage? I seem to recall the same kind of quality from the sojourner project and was expecting a little bit more detail. (ok, actually a lot more) I guess this isn't a limitation of the onboard hardware, but rather of the available bandwith directly or via MO and GS. So can we expect even higher resolutions over the coming months as they use even finer grained image-tiles? On the other hand, it would probably make more sense to them to produce more up-close pictures instead, panoramic views have little scientific relevance other than to secure funding/audience appreciation.
Also, what strikes me as funny is how the rovers production process was all-cleanroom/rubber suits, only to expose these things to one of the most dusty surroundings known to man. (I think that's how I am going to define Mars from now on) Maybe the Russian approach of 'when it breaks during production, it wasn't strong enough anyway', would be more suitable to high stress environments. Then again, making these babies indestructible would probably cost much more than simply building swarms of them. (Yes, that's what I want!)
What? Are they really looking for trouble? A mission called 'Deep Impact' is going to provoke a comet by smashing into it? Let's see who has the final say; us or it.
from the hypersoar website:
HyperSoar would also have twice the fuel efficiency of commercial airliners, be three to five times more efficient in putting satellites in space than today's launch systems
Wouldn't the first automatically imply the second? Afterall, airline flights aren't exactly in the same order of magnitude of as rocket launches, are they?
GOOD developers are, in fact, the top of the computing pyramid, as they develop the new generations of systems. But you won't hear good developers whine about the above mentioned limitations of their powers, they accept it as a necessity and appreciate the work admins put in to keep their machines running. Likewise, you never hear racecar drivers complain that their engineers won't let them use nox or nitro, because they understand that it's their job to keep the car from exploding.
Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of any organization whose stated goal is the violent overthrow of the United States government?
Big deal, I have to answer that question every time I visit the US. I guess it's standard for anyone applying for a tourist visum. Or maybe not, in which case; forget I mentioned it...
You don't really expect content providers to use xDSL, do you? Ofcourse, with a bandwidth this big, content will almost certainly be on a 'subscriber' model basis. xDSL only needs to have that speed once, which I think will be a safe bet within the next 8 years. (what kind of bandwidth did you have 8 years ago?)
Ok, I live in The Netherlands, maybe I'm priviliged, I pay 85 Euros for a 8Mbit connection. But still, I'm sure France isn't far behind. Maybe in a year or so, you'll have the same prices in the high-population areas.