The foil kayak is proven to be extremely hard to paddle, stability-wise. You also need to generate a hell of a lot of speed before it rises out of the water. As far as record breaking goes, it does well but you're screwed if you want to paddle it competively as it doesn't fit any any restricted category.
Having been paddling for several years competitively I can make the following observations:
1. Yes paddling on flat water is different to paddling on ocean/sea conditions. Generally it is harder and slower paddling in choppy water, however if you are experienced you will know how to best make use of the wind and weather conditions in order to increase your speed. Depending on the swell and wind direction you can quite often get equal speed compared to flat water and sometimes much greater speeds if assisted by good swell.
2. Carbon fibre is nothing flashy in a kayak; most competition kayaks, and increasing numbers of recreational kayaks are made with carbon fibre.
3. US$5000 is way too much to spend on something that is so ugly and slow as this kayak. You can easily pick up a K1 racing kayak weighing around 20-25 pounds which would go much faster for around US$2000-2500. And THAT is expensive.
4. Judging by the content of the article, and despite the author being a novice, you would expect an amazingly fast kayak to be faster than the reported time. Much cheaper and probably stabler kayaks are faster and cost less (and are less ugly).
I could go on and on. The whole article and indeed the kayak itself are all wrong.
We use the Barracuda system. Strictly it is a COTS CRM system so it won't suit everybody, but it allows you to log a job when someone rings in, describe the problem in as much detail as you want, assign priority, schedule the request, track its current status, and log as many service entries and items used as you want per service call.
It is only for Windows however at this stage, and uses an Access database backend. They are developing an SQL backend though, and there is already an http frontend for it (through IIS of course).
about the article in my opinion was the part saying that we are nearing the limit of miniaturisation of electronic components.
I mean, think about it.
If we're going to reach the limit of how small we can make these transistors by say 2020 (by which time we'll most likely be up to around 30Ghz processors), that's a major limitation in this industry.
The way I see it, it could go one of two ways:
1. We reach an inescapable limit of electronics, and the entire computer semiconductor industry implodes because it can't keep up with it's own reputation for performance increases.
2. Before that deadline occurs, some new fantastic and mindblowing technology is created. By this I don't mean some 'chip-stacking-bastardisation' of electronics but some true breakthrough.
Whichever way it goes, it's going to be very exciting, and I'm glad I'll be around to see it. Considering how much our lives are impacted by electronics these days, it could be the modern-day equivalent of the industrial revolution.
>Consumer use of the internet will still get most content from America
I think your logic is a bit flawed
I stand by my statement that most Consumer use comes from access to U.S. sites. Notice I said *MOST*. I have no doubt that *some* traffic along this pipe is to be routed to other countries outside of the U.S., but if you can't see that an overwhelming proportion of consumer-content on the internet is hosted in the U.S., well, I'm sorry.
the internet is still U.S.-centric. Perhaps what you yanks don't realise is is that most well developed countries actually have decent internal networks, but since the lion's share of Internet content is hosted in America, this is irrelevant, since it is the pipe to the U.S. that matters.
The diagram shows this - the two U.S. pipes are at around 30-50% utilisation (and are the smallest of the network), while the giant internal linkups are around 1-2%. What this says to me is that research typically doesn't use the bandwidth that they've provided for with this project. Consumer use of the internet will still get most content from America.
But I guess there is always merit in planning for the future, and we can always benefit from making the internet less 'any-one-particular-country'-centric (despite it's origins in ARPA etc).
natural progression of technology via miniaturisation and improvements in power consumption. We've already witnessed essentially the SNES being shrunk into the Gameboy Advance. The next handheld will surely be a shrunken version of the N64, and so on.
We're only really up to the second generation of portable consoles, so these things are naturally surprising to us. Not that I'm putting it down - I think we'll see a lot more power in portable gaming/computing units in future. I think the issue that needs to be addressed now is battery life.
Perhaps combining those technologies that provide power from body movement (eg, rapidly moving thumbs) with these handhelds is the answer...
I *am* a system admin. Talking from my own experience, and the collective experience of others, the general knowledge level in this area needs to have the bar raised.
You wouldn't expect anybody to buy a house with the latest security system and locks, and then not have the understanding to lock the windows, and turn on the security system. People rely too much on the technology doing the work for them, and this is where problems start.
As for overworked SA's, well, that's just the problem. Not enough experienced and educated folk (notice, not "certified") to go around. Unfortunately, not every MD or IT manager can afford enough of their time to fix problems themselves.
P.S. Sneaking in after hours (or remotely) to patch things up is part of the fun!
I am all too familiar with the tricky 'agreements' they make you sign before getting broadband service. They are typefied by fairly sketchy and vague descriptions of how good the service will be.
However, they do make certain guarantees of the service, and let's face it - their job is to keep the system working, whether it be Code Red virus, or scheduled repairs. Home users who lost a lot of time due to this should be compensated for the loss.
On the other hand, people using DSL for business purposes should know better. I've had clients complaining "why has my cable been down for a week... I'm using this for a business!!!".
Cheapskates like this deserve downtime. DSL and cable are not mature enough products (esp. DSL) to warrant business use. It is cheap, and that attracts a lot of people, but it just doesn't have the stability businesses need.
Learn a lesson or two... if you're entrusting your ENTIRE business to online presence or connectivity, spend a bit of money and get at least an ISDN connection. You have to spend money to make money. Frankly I don't know why people rely on the internet so much anyway. It is a *convenience*, not a staple.
I don't think this is really focusing on the real problem at hand. I've seen it all too many times before... you can have the best OS, with the most security features, but if the stupidest person is running the show, well... game over.
I think spending $3000 on an OS, albeit secured to *some* extent (there will always be new flaws found out) is a bit much, especially in the Linux world. Anyone with a decent knowledge of security and access to the net can build a pretty secure Linux server system.
So basically what I am saying is, the emphasis should be more on the people running the things, rather than the OS itself. It will make people slack in the efforts to secure their servers, especially in the business market where this is crucial.
"Oh wow! We're going to put a product on to the internet which'll be really cool and people can buy said product anytime they want. And here's the cool thing! We don't even know if said product is useful!"
I seem to recall an old concept in IS software production - an idea is only going to be successful if it is useful to the user. It may be technically brilliant, but if people can't use it - it will fail.
I'm not too sure about the technically brilliant bit (it seems like they've been watching a few too many futuristic sci-fi movies and got all excited), but it sure is a lot easier just to rent a DVD from down the shops.
Honestly it's like they're doing it just for the sake of doing it, or fulfilling some sort of broadcasting dream. I don't think it'll happen for quite a while yet.
I'm not sure if they can just declare game playing to be detrimental to the brain... however, to the GROWING brain is another matter.
When we are young, our minds thrive on stimulus, and this is a main factor in our development and intellect as an adult later in life. As kids already develop motor coordination and other skills associated with fast computer games in other activities such as school sports, it is probably detrimental because that time could be better used developing other areas that require attention.
I have nothing against game playing, and agree that some types such as strategies can develop the intellect, but kids don't care about their own development. It would be better to develop the same brain skills by playing basketball than a computer simulation of it.
Anyway that's for the growing minds of children. I'm still a fat slob who can get a three-point shot from the baseline just using the b-button on the control pad.
On another note, this is my first post. Yay! Hopefully subsequent posts won't be as retarded as this one.:)
Slashdot Mirror
The foil kayak is proven to be extremely hard to paddle, stability-wise. You also need to generate a hell of a lot of speed before it rises out of the water. As far as record breaking goes, it does well but you're screwed if you want to paddle it competively as it doesn't fit any any restricted category.
Having been paddling for several years competitively I can make the following observations:
1. Yes paddling on flat water is different to paddling on ocean/sea conditions. Generally it is harder and slower paddling in choppy water, however if you are experienced you will know how to best make use of the wind and weather conditions in order to increase your speed. Depending on the swell and wind direction you can quite often get equal speed compared to flat water and sometimes much greater speeds if assisted by good swell.
2. Carbon fibre is nothing flashy in a kayak; most competition kayaks, and increasing numbers of recreational kayaks are made with carbon fibre.
3. US$5000 is way too much to spend on something that is so ugly and slow as this kayak. You can easily pick up a K1 racing kayak weighing around 20-25 pounds which would go much faster for around US$2000-2500. And THAT is expensive.
4. Judging by the content of the article, and despite the author being a novice, you would expect an amazingly fast kayak to be faster than the reported time. Much cheaper and probably stabler kayaks are faster and cost less (and are less ugly).
I could go on and on. The whole article and indeed the kayak itself are all wrong.
We use the Barracuda system. Strictly it is a COTS CRM system so it won't suit everybody, but it allows you to log a job when someone rings in, describe the problem in as much detail as you want, assign priority, schedule the request, track its current status, and log as many service entries and items used as you want per service call.
It is only for Windows however at this stage, and uses an Access database backend. They are developing an SQL backend though, and there is already an http frontend for it (through IIS of course).
about the article in my opinion was the part saying that we are nearing the limit of miniaturisation of electronic components.
I mean, think about it.
If we're going to reach the limit of how small we can make these transistors by say 2020 (by which time we'll most likely be up to around 30Ghz processors), that's a major limitation in this industry.
The way I see it, it could go one of two ways:
1. We reach an inescapable limit of electronics, and the entire computer semiconductor industry implodes because it can't keep up with it's own reputation for performance increases.
2. Before that deadline occurs, some new fantastic and mindblowing technology is created. By this I don't mean some 'chip-stacking-bastardisation' of electronics but some true breakthrough.
Whichever way it goes, it's going to be very exciting, and I'm glad I'll be around to see it. Considering how much our lives are impacted by electronics these days, it could be the modern-day equivalent of the industrial revolution.
>Consumer use of the internet will still get most content from America I think your logic is a bit flawed
I stand by my statement that most Consumer use comes from access to U.S. sites. Notice I said *MOST*. I have no doubt that *some* traffic along this pipe is to be routed to other countries outside of the U.S., but if you can't see that an overwhelming proportion of consumer-content on the internet is hosted in the U.S., well, I'm sorry.
the internet is still U.S.-centric. Perhaps what you yanks don't realise is is that most well developed countries actually have decent internal networks, but since the lion's share of Internet content is hosted in America, this is irrelevant, since it is the pipe to the U.S. that matters.
The diagram shows this - the two U.S. pipes are at around 30-50% utilisation (and are the smallest of the network), while the giant internal linkups are around 1-2%. What this says to me is that research typically doesn't use the bandwidth that they've provided for with this project. Consumer use of the internet will still get most content from America.
But I guess there is always merit in planning for the future, and we can always benefit from making the internet less 'any-one-particular-country'-centric (despite it's origins in ARPA etc).
natural progression of technology via miniaturisation and improvements in power consumption. We've already witnessed essentially the SNES being shrunk into the Gameboy Advance. The next handheld will surely be a shrunken version of the N64, and so on.
We're only really up to the second generation of portable consoles, so these things are naturally surprising to us. Not that I'm putting it down - I think we'll see a lot more power in portable gaming/computing units in future. I think the issue that needs to be addressed now is battery life.
Perhaps combining those technologies that provide power from body movement (eg, rapidly moving thumbs) with these handhelds is the answer...
...that a post on proper indentation hasn't turned into a flame war :)
I *am* a system admin. Talking from my own experience, and the collective experience of others, the general knowledge level in this area needs to have the bar raised.
You wouldn't expect anybody to buy a house with the latest security system and locks, and then not have the understanding to lock the windows, and turn on the security system. People rely too much on the technology doing the work for them, and this is where problems start.
As for overworked SA's, well, that's just the problem. Not enough experienced and educated folk (notice, not "certified") to go around. Unfortunately, not every MD or IT manager can afford enough of their time to fix problems themselves.
P.S. Sneaking in after hours (or remotely) to patch things up is part of the fun!
I am all too familiar with the tricky 'agreements' they make you sign before getting broadband service. They are typefied by fairly sketchy and vague descriptions of how good the service will be.
However, they do make certain guarantees of the service, and let's face it - their job is to keep the system working, whether it be Code Red virus, or scheduled repairs. Home users who lost a lot of time due to this should be compensated for the loss.
On the other hand, people using DSL for business purposes should know better. I've had clients complaining "why has my cable been down for a week... I'm using this for a business!!!".
Cheapskates like this deserve downtime. DSL and cable are not mature enough products (esp. DSL) to warrant business use. It is cheap, and that attracts a lot of people, but it just doesn't have the stability businesses need.
Learn a lesson or two... if you're entrusting your ENTIRE business to online presence or connectivity, spend a bit of money and get at least an ISDN connection. You have to spend money to make money. Frankly I don't know why people rely on the internet so much anyway. It is a *convenience*, not a staple.
I don't think this is really focusing on the real problem at hand. I've seen it all too many times before... you can have the best OS, with the most security features, but if the stupidest person is running the show, well... game over.
I think spending $3000 on an OS, albeit secured to *some* extent (there will always be new flaws found out) is a bit much, especially in the Linux world. Anyone with a decent knowledge of security and access to the net can build a pretty secure Linux server system.
So basically what I am saying is, the emphasis should be more on the people running the things, rather than the OS itself. It will make people slack in the efforts to secure their servers, especially in the business market where this is crucial.
I seem to recall an old concept in IS software production - an idea is only going to be successful if it is useful to the user. It may be technically brilliant, but if people can't use it - it will fail.
I'm not too sure about the technically brilliant bit (it seems like they've been watching a few too many futuristic sci-fi movies and got all excited), but it sure is a lot easier just to rent a DVD from down the shops.
Honestly it's like they're doing it just for the sake of doing it, or fulfilling some sort of broadcasting dream. I don't think it'll happen for quite a while yet.
I'm not sure if they can just declare game playing to be detrimental to the brain... however, to the GROWING brain is another matter.
:)
When we are young, our minds thrive on stimulus, and this is a main factor in our development and intellect as an adult later in life. As kids already develop motor coordination and other skills associated with fast computer games in other activities such as school sports, it is probably detrimental because that time could be better used developing other areas that require attention.
I have nothing against game playing, and agree that some types such as strategies can develop the intellect, but kids don't care about their own development. It would be better to develop the same brain skills by playing basketball than a computer simulation of it.
Anyway that's for the growing minds of children. I'm still a fat slob who can get a three-point shot from the baseline just using the b-button on the control pad.
On another note, this is my first post. Yay! Hopefully subsequent posts won't be as retarded as this one.