Many men that have created great things also had crackpot ideas. And many men that created great things went on to do it again. And this guy has all the earmarks of a man who can shake things up. He's a respected researcher of a major corporation that is known for innovative products, working in his field of expertise, engaging in research that in some way builds on his previous research, using technology that is either already in place today or is feasible with today's technology. Now, questions of scalability, reliability and such will have to be addressed, but this is by no means a black box or snake oil. If I were to place bets, I would be expecting the next innovative storage technology to be coming from a guy like him, and not some dark horse who stumbled onto something in his spare time.
...I did pull those numbers out of my A... Remember, when pulling numbers out of your ass (it's okay to swear here), try to avoid the pointy ones. 0, 1, and 8 are pretty safe. 3, 6, and 9 can be tricky. 2, 4, 5, and 7 are just asking for trouble. I also find it disturbing that you chose 4 twice.
Congratulations on not reading the (very short) article. Also, congratulations on not even reading the URL. It's hosted on OLPC News - it's going to be positive. And they address every complaint/question you raised. Especially amusing since you went and looked at the pictures.
...one good thing outweighs loads of bad things... *looks at user name...mdielmann*
You either meant to say "one bad thing outweighs loads of good things", or you're talking about Americans. Either way, this makes it impossible for me to take your post seriously. If this kind of failure happens again, I'll have to add you to my foes list and relegate you to The Abyss.
Perhaps not, but you're gonna have a hard time regulating it since they're used everywhere. We may just have to accept that there are stupid people out there who do stupid things and deal with them as they come along. Besides, which do you think is more dangerous in most settings - a knife or a laser pointer? Yet we sell knives everywhere...
No more so than the fact that trees make pointy sticks, rocks hurt when they whack into your head, or kids tend to find every sharp corner the old-fashioned way. So should we burn all the trees, turn all the rocks into powder, and round off every corner in the world? Or should we just provide education to the risks involved and penalize the people who are too stupid to realize that something is dangerous?
Honestly, how is this more dangerous than a car? It's certainly not as useful for the average person, but we've dealt with this in different realms before. I stand by the model rocket comparison. Sure, they're dangerous if used improperly, and shouldn't be used by people under a certain age without supervision, but can also be a valuable learning and entertainment experience.
Okay, you're killing me here. I'm gonna tell you a secret - a magnifying glass is a lens. They can be pretty big, too. The things I've seen done with a magnifying glass are almost unbelievable. Let's be serious here. The biggest risk this thing poses is if you shine it at someone's eye. Put it against your skin, and it's no worse than a magnifying glass. And yes, if you shine it in your eyes, all kinds of bad things will happen, from blindness to other issues. Look up stories about lasers and spy cameras for some ideas of how debilitating this can be. But it's still no more dangerous than model rocketry.
When did the world get so nervous about doing anything that involved the least amount of risk?
Let me take a moment to point you towards Baen Books. They not only sell current books online, they sell them in an couple open formats (html, rtf), as well as some that aren't so open (Rocket, Palm, MS Reader). They even have a section for free books. If you like their material, support them by buying their books. If you don't like ebook formats, buy hard copy. They'll still appreciate your service. This is the most forward-thinking of the traditional publishers (the founder was in the business for over 35 years - traditional enough for me). I'm not surprised of the genre they're in. They're even getting traction with other sci-fi/fantasy publishers, like Del Rey and Tor.
...nobody keeps their internet offerings up-to-date 24/7. (Or that such a thing is impossible.) Not only is it possible, I work with a system that does so (in-house and online systems feed off the same database). That said, there are a lot of businesses where having such a thing isn't cost-effective. But there are large businesses that do it, and some smaller ones. I also doubt any of them integrate with auction sites well, if at all.
I'm really interested, but I can't participate. Corporate policy is currently for IE 6. I'm guessing so we can keep testing the firewall, and keep us off of/. One out of two ain't bad....wait, surf from home? You mean people actually come here when they aren't (supposed to be) working?
I still look back on the day when I realized that MS Office had no support to read files from MSWorks 95. Nothing like lock-in for your lowest-end office application... *goes to check his install of Excel 2003*...Yep, still limited as MS Works 2.0. A new record for shooting yourself in the foot. Can anyone tell me if there's support for that disaster of an application in OOo? My parents (and, therefore, I) would greatly appreciate knowing. Something that can convert files from that abomination into something read by a real office package in an automated fashion would be a godsend.
The only problem in your statements is that it's impossible to measure those who have been deterred from crime due to the penalties of being caught if they decide it isn't worth it before they even start. In all the various aspects of the law, not just violent crimes and theft, the number could well be the whole population of an area. For instance, I don't speed where cameras are, but I've been known to go well over 30 km/h over the speed limit where I know there are no cameras and the police are rarely there. The deterrent keeps me from speeding, in areas where I know I'll get caught.
Actually, from what I've heard, reduced sentences usually mean you didn't do anything too horrible while in jail, and not much else. Given the nature of the spammer's crimes, he'll probably be out in 10. And despite the horrific nature of the child murderer's crimes, the fact that he's already killed that many kids, and is probably incorrigible, he'll probably be out in 10 years of less, too. So it won't do enough for public safety, and it certainly won't deter those who would go around harming total innocents.
Personally, I think Windows peaked with 2000. I don't quite agree. I think Win2k was really close, and I think WinXP is too, just on other sides of the peak. Which is closer to that fabled peak is hard for me to say. And I personally see no reason to switch to Vista. I certainly can't call it an upgrade.
This reminds me of a parable I heard once about the difficulty of taking back thoughtless words. The perpetrator of the story was told to take a feather pillow to the top of a hill and pour out the feathers. Then she (yes, it's not politically correct) was told to pick them back up. That's how hard it is to take back thoughtless words. I expect in the Internet Age, it would be not unlike pouring the feathers out of a pillow during a hurricane.
I said "except perhaps the end user". I'm not sure they would lose, but I haven't thought about that part of the equation, just the corporate elements.
Keep in mind that "handles the MS-Novell deal" could be interpreted as "marginalizes the MS-Novell deal". Most vouchers have a certain amount of wiggle room in them, to allow for vendors to substitute similar items or restrict the voucher for similar items that they refuse to carry. If I were running MS, I would avoid the GPL v3, too. Not because I'm sure that the restrictions are legally sound, but because it's not going to be cheap to test that and putting pressure on the competing community is good for business. So, allow GPL v2 stuff, disallow GPL v3 stuff, and risk having to refund vouchers. MS isn't going into unknown territory and GPL v3 is still accomplishing its purpose. Everyone wins, except perhaps the end user.
Wow, I think a lot of people totally missed it, so I'll try to help out. The sarcasm meters must be blown. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Worst-case scenario, wearing the suit brings your internal pressure to 2 atmospheres - something you can easily withstand in a (very thin) diving suit. Unless you spend a long time wearing the suit in full atmosphere, and the atmosphere hasn't been adjusted to not have gasses that increase your risk of the bends, you will soon be out in space and back to 1 atmosphere. You may not want to live in the suit full-time, but they don't do that right now. Why would you assume they would with this one?
If you'd read the article, you would have noticed that they said the target pressure is 30 kPa, about 1/3 atmosphere. That means wearing the suit full-time in the ship would put you at 1.3 atmospheres, which isn't huge. This site notes that 33 feet of water acts as 2 atmospheres, so we're talking like being under 10 feet of water on a long-term basis. Now, there's still the 1-atmosphere drop when you do an EVA, but this should be able to be handled with a decent decompression chamber (a.k.a. airlock), if it's even necessary.
To the original poster: commendations on a witty and relevant comment.
Paid-for studies are one thing, but virtually every scientist has to compete for outside funding, whether that be for jobs at a major corporation, or grants, or access to special facilities. Yet we rarely question scientists research, unless it says "our products are incredibly good" or "our competitors products are bad". Yes, there are the exceptions of global warming, etc., where there is a vocal minority who disagree. Peer review compensates for this, and I think you'll see a fair number of reviews from the public if anything subtle or egregious gets submitted to wikipedia.
What exactly gave you the impression that the POV of someone who is paid is less valid than the POV of someone who isn't? Note also that scientists already publish as part of their jobs, just not in such an accessible forum. They also seem to be quite concerned about their reputations in their fields of expertise, almost as if their sources of funding were tied to the quality of their work and their publishing history. The only problem I see with this idea is that not enough people who fund scientists are promoting it.
I recall an article on/. years ago (and am not inclined to find it for someone who can't leave his name) where the BSD License was described as "open but not free". Note that RMS makes a point about "free software", and started the Free Software Foundation, not the Open Source Foundation. He also has the issues you've raised about Open Source vs. Free Software, but he's aware that they're different terms.
Slashdot Mirror
If I were to place bets, I would be expecting the next innovative storage technology to be coming from a guy like him, and not some dark horse who stumbled onto something in his spare time.
...I did pull those numbers out of my A... Remember, when pulling numbers out of your ass (it's okay to swear here), try to avoid the pointy ones. 0, 1, and 8 are pretty safe. 3, 6, and 9 can be tricky. 2, 4, 5, and 7 are just asking for trouble. I also find it disturbing that you chose 4 twice.And we're currently investigating methods to charge for dumb looks. There are unfathomable amounts of profit to be had there.
AKA, most rap/hip-hop after it's been censored for foul language and inappropriate content. Maybe they'll finally get some of my money.
Congratulations on not reading the (very short) article. Also, congratulations on not even reading the URL. It's hosted on OLPC News - it's going to be positive. And they address every complaint/question you raised. Especially amusing since you went and looked at the pictures.
...one good thing outweighs loads of bad things... *looks at user name...mdielmann*You either meant to say "one bad thing outweighs loads of good things", or you're talking about Americans. Either way, this makes it impossible for me to take your post seriously. If this kind of failure happens again, I'll have to add you to my foes list and relegate you to The Abyss.
Perhaps not, but you're gonna have a hard time regulating it since they're used everywhere. We may just have to accept that there are stupid people out there who do stupid things and deal with them as they come along. Besides, which do you think is more dangerous in most settings - a knife or a laser pointer? Yet we sell knives everywhere...
No more so than the fact that trees make pointy sticks, rocks hurt when they whack into your head, or kids tend to find every sharp corner the old-fashioned way. So should we burn all the trees, turn all the rocks into powder, and round off every corner in the world? Or should we just provide education to the risks involved and penalize the people who are too stupid to realize that something is dangerous?
Honestly, how is this more dangerous than a car? It's certainly not as useful for the average person, but we've dealt with this in different realms before. I stand by the model rocket comparison. Sure, they're dangerous if used improperly, and shouldn't be used by people under a certain age without supervision, but can also be a valuable learning and entertainment experience.
Okay, you're killing me here. I'm gonna tell you a secret - a magnifying glass is a lens. They can be pretty big, too. The things I've seen done with a magnifying glass are almost unbelievable. Let's be serious here. The biggest risk this thing poses is if you shine it at someone's eye. Put it against your skin, and it's no worse than a magnifying glass. And yes, if you shine it in your eyes, all kinds of bad things will happen, from blindness to other issues. Look up stories about lasers and spy cameras for some ideas of how debilitating this can be. But it's still no more dangerous than model rocketry.
When did the world get so nervous about doing anything that involved the least amount of risk?
Let me take a moment to point you towards Baen Books. They not only sell current books online, they sell them in an couple open formats (html, rtf), as well as some that aren't so open (Rocket, Palm, MS Reader). They even have a section for free books. If you like their material, support them by buying their books. If you don't like ebook formats, buy hard copy. They'll still appreciate your service. This is the most forward-thinking of the traditional publishers (the founder was in the business for over 35 years - traditional enough for me). I'm not surprised of the genre they're in. They're even getting traction with other sci-fi/fantasy publishers, like Del Rey and Tor.
...and it's still at least $75 more than it's worth.
...nobody keeps their internet offerings up-to-date 24/7. (Or that such a thing is impossible.) Not only is it possible, I work with a system that does so (in-house and online systems feed off the same database). That said, there are a lot of businesses where having such a thing isn't cost-effective. But there are large businesses that do it, and some smaller ones. I also doubt any of them integrate with auction sites well, if at all.I'm really interested, but I can't participate. Corporate policy is currently for IE 6. I'm guessing so we can keep testing the firewall, and keep us off of /. One out of two ain't bad. ...wait, surf from home? You mean people actually come here when they aren't (supposed to be) working?
I still look back on the day when I realized that MS Office had no support to read files from MSWorks 95. Nothing like lock-in for your lowest-end office application... *goes to check his install of Excel 2003* ...Yep, still limited as MS Works 2.0. A new record for shooting yourself in the foot. Can anyone tell me if there's support for that disaster of an application in OOo? My parents (and, therefore, I) would greatly appreciate knowing. Something that can convert files from that abomination into something read by a real office package in an automated fashion would be a godsend.
The only problem in your statements is that it's impossible to measure those who have been deterred from crime due to the penalties of being caught if they decide it isn't worth it before they even start. In all the various aspects of the law, not just violent crimes and theft, the number could well be the whole population of an area. For instance, I don't speed where cameras are, but I've been known to go well over 30 km/h over the speed limit where I know there are no cameras and the police are rarely there. The deterrent keeps me from speeding, in areas where I know I'll get caught.
Actually, from what I've heard, reduced sentences usually mean you didn't do anything too horrible while in jail, and not much else. Given the nature of the spammer's crimes, he'll probably be out in 10. And despite the horrific nature of the child murderer's crimes, the fact that he's already killed that many kids, and is probably incorrigible, he'll probably be out in 10 years of less, too. So it won't do enough for public safety, and it certainly won't deter those who would go around harming total innocents.
While I understand your intention, I have no idea what waterfowl have to do with it.
This reminds me of a parable I heard once about the difficulty of taking back thoughtless words. The perpetrator of the story was told to take a feather pillow to the top of a hill and pour out the feathers. Then she (yes, it's not politically correct) was told to pick them back up. That's how hard it is to take back thoughtless words.
I expect in the Internet Age, it would be not unlike pouring the feathers out of a pillow during a hurricane.
I said "except perhaps the end user". I'm not sure they would lose, but I haven't thought about that part of the equation, just the corporate elements.
Keep in mind that "handles the MS-Novell deal" could be interpreted as "marginalizes the MS-Novell deal". Most vouchers have a certain amount of wiggle room in them, to allow for vendors to substitute similar items or restrict the voucher for similar items that they refuse to carry. If I were running MS, I would avoid the GPL v3, too. Not because I'm sure that the restrictions are legally sound, but because it's not going to be cheap to test that and putting pressure on the competing community is good for business. So, allow GPL v2 stuff, disallow GPL v3 stuff, and risk having to refund vouchers. MS isn't going into unknown territory and GPL v3 is still accomplishing its purpose. Everyone wins, except perhaps the end user.
Wow, I think a lot of people totally missed it, so I'll try to help out. The sarcasm meters must be blown. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
Worst-case scenario, wearing the suit brings your internal pressure to 2 atmospheres - something you can easily withstand in a (very thin) diving suit. Unless you spend a long time wearing the suit in full atmosphere, and the atmosphere hasn't been adjusted to not have gasses that increase your risk of the bends, you will soon be out in space and back to 1 atmosphere. You may not want to live in the suit full-time, but they don't do that right now. Why would you assume they would with this one?
If you'd read the article, you would have noticed that they said the target pressure is 30 kPa, about 1/3 atmosphere. That means wearing the suit full-time in the ship would put you at 1.3 atmospheres, which isn't huge. This site notes that 33 feet of water acts as 2 atmospheres, so we're talking like being under 10 feet of water on a long-term basis. Now, there's still the 1-atmosphere drop when you do an EVA, but this should be able to be handled with a decent decompression chamber (a.k.a. airlock), if it's even necessary.
To the original poster: commendations on a witty and relevant comment.
Paid-for studies are one thing, but virtually every scientist has to compete for outside funding, whether that be for jobs at a major corporation, or grants, or access to special facilities. Yet we rarely question scientists research, unless it says "our products are incredibly good" or "our competitors products are bad". Yes, there are the exceptions of global warming, etc., where there is a vocal minority who disagree. Peer review compensates for this, and I think you'll see a fair number of reviews from the public if anything subtle or egregious gets submitted to wikipedia.
What exactly gave you the impression that the POV of someone who is paid is less valid than the POV of someone who isn't? Note also that scientists already publish as part of their jobs, just not in such an accessible forum. They also seem to be quite concerned about their reputations in their fields of expertise, almost as if their sources of funding were tied to the quality of their work and their publishing history.
The only problem I see with this idea is that not enough people who fund scientists are promoting it.
I recall an article on /. years ago (and am not inclined to find it for someone who can't leave his name) where the BSD License was described as "open but not free". Note that RMS makes a point about "free software", and started the Free Software Foundation, not the Open Source Foundation. He also has the issues you've raised about Open Source vs. Free Software, but he's aware that they're different terms.