In Africa, some people still kill antelope (or something similar) by running them to exhaustion. Fur sucks when you're running under the sun. Not sure how important this was in our survival, but I'm not sure the idea is ludicrous, either. Besides, at some point we had to survive well enough to allow us to evolve those big brains.
Every year these bikes have been improving, because it's not just a batteries that need improving. Lighter, more efficient motors, speed controllers, and drive trains also make a difference. Plus the experience of incorporating the components into the frame, rather than the older style of simply bolting components onto a traditional frame. If current batteries are good enough for electric cars and Segways, they're good enough for electric bikes. Batteries are only going to get better, as they have actually been doing over the years. And why isn't the middle ground between a scooter and a bike very useful, exactly?
Can you still pedal a scooter effectively when the battery is flat?
And if you think that price is expensive, then you haven't looked at many high-end mountain bikes lately. Plenty of people willing to pay a lot for a good bike.
I'm reasonably fit. However, I'm not fit enough to bike a long way, up hills, under the sun, in casual clothes, without getting uncomfortably sweaty -- that limits its use to me. I see a huge market for electric bikes. The price will come down.
As for more parts to break, that sounds like a desperate argument. There aren't that many more parts in an electric bike. Besides, a modern bike has many more parts than an old bike, yet they don't seem to be a problem. Or are you one of those crazy single-speeders who doesn't even have front brakes?
Because they require a lot of power: bigger screens, faster processors, etc.
Sorry, but designing a good GUI is as much about designing within the limitations of the environment as it is about anything else. Look at the original iPod for an example of that.
The industry only works because everybody invests in research and contributes to a common pool of expertise and people; Apple, however, isn't doing their part.
Apple just showed the industry how to make a decent smartphone. Then there are projects like WebKit. And Apple were one of the first to really push USB. Besides, I think that sentence is BS to begin with -- the industry is hardly an open place with free sharing of all technologies.
Google, IBM, Microsoft, and others hire tons of CS Ph.D. level researchers, Apple doesn't; who do you think would go to CS grad school if there were no jobs? And if nobody goes to CS grad school, who is going to write those journal publications that Apple gets its ideas from?
I just don't understand this. Those other companies still exist, right? So what's the big deal? Why should all companies operate the same way? And if Apple somehow did become the only company left, what makes you think they wouldn't do more of those things?
I just don't understand this idea that all companies must contribute something only in a specific way. Just because Apple doesn't focus on certain things, this makes them a parasite? That's absurd.
Yes, that sums it up quite well. Apple has done absolutely nothing to develop the current standards used for mobile communication, while Nokia is responsible for much of the work that went into the GSM evolution standards.
Yeah, but why should Apple have to pay more than other companies for this work?
Compared to other phones, the only thing that is novel is the interface...
You make it sound as if that's a trivial thing to do. If that's the case, then why did it take so long for someone to design a decent interface?
There is a big difference: every company in the market benefits from research, while only the funding company benefits from development.
Are you saying that consumers haven't benefited from Apple raising the bar?
Yeah, as much as I like The New York Times, I would never consider paying for it at the moment. I just don't read it that often -- I follow links to it from other places. And the really good articles that I have read in it, such as one of Michel Pollen's articles, are often available via other sources since those authors don't work exclusively for one paper to begin with.
They face a big problem because the readers are spoiled for choice and the best contributors can often be independent. As for day to day news, there are enough good public sources for that. I can't see the paywall being very successful.
You say that as if Apple doesn't have patents of its own, doesn't do its own R&D, and hasn't just shown the whole industry how to make a decent smartphone.
What about the first one? Besides, I wasn't talking about the rights that a specific country has decided to give their citizens. I'm talking about the concept of rights in general, and that there is no reason you can't make access to health care a right.
You're an idiot. I'm allergic to whey protein. It took a while to discover that it was causing me problems because I only ever noticed a reaction when I ate huge amounts of it. Yet, the small amounts that I ate all the time did real, physical damage to my digestive system.
Next time you want to test someone's food sensitivities, take them to a specialist. Don't sneak it into their food over long periods. That's equivalent to poisoning someone.
Sure you can. I'm allergic to milk protein. Do you have any idea how many products where I live contain milk solids? It's a huge amount... at least until you walk out of the isles upon isles of highly-processed food and into the meat and produce sections. Yes, it will mean you'll have to learn how to actually cook a meal, unless you're into raw food.
and to anyone who says "i will just avoid eating corn and corn products".... good luck. almost every product in the grocery store either contains corn or ate corn.
You mean like all the fruits, vegetables, and grains? Or the highly processed food products and meat that we shouldn't be eating so much of to begin with?
How is patent encumbered food products a win for environmentalism? And you're talking about how silly anti-GMO fever is in an article saying how some of these products may actually be harmful?
Where is the evidence that such reactions are just a case of hypochondria? Last time I checked, we didn't know enough about how the immune system works to be able to say that with any certainty.
Sorry, but I don't understand why it's such a big deal to make such a small accommodation that could save a person's life. Are you really saying that they should be stuck at home for the rest of their lives, just because you don't want to make the most simple of accommodations for someone?
Does that include the total space required to mine for uranium over the life of the power plant? This project is renewable energy -- once it's built, it won't require any fuel.
In the case of an insect I can't see it having sufficiently low drag to take advantage of lift.
I don't follow you here. What makes you think a dragonfly has too much drag to be able to gain enough speed to generate lift? Between the lift and the air currents, I can see how it could conserve quite a lot of energy if it knows how to ride the currents.
I've lost the count of the times I took my tablet out to take notes and the people next to me dropped their jaws when i converted it to slate mode and started writing on it.
I'm sure many of those jaws would have retracted if they had used one for an extended period of time. While those tablets might have been great for techies and niches, they're pretty clunky to use, certainly now that the iPhone has shown people how great a touchscreen interface can be.
Slashdot Mirror
In Africa, some people still kill antelope (or something similar) by running them to exhaustion. Fur sucks when you're running under the sun. Not sure how important this was in our survival, but I'm not sure the idea is ludicrous, either. Besides, at some point we had to survive well enough to allow us to evolve those big brains.
Every year these bikes have been improving, because it's not just a batteries that need improving. Lighter, more efficient motors, speed controllers, and drive trains also make a difference. Plus the experience of incorporating the components into the frame, rather than the older style of simply bolting components onto a traditional frame. If current batteries are good enough for electric cars and Segways, they're good enough for electric bikes. Batteries are only going to get better, as they have actually been doing over the years. And why isn't the middle ground between a scooter and a bike very useful, exactly?
I like separate wires for separate buses.
Are you one of those people that liked having separate mouse, keyboard, printer and serial ports?
Can you still pedal a scooter effectively when the battery is flat?
And if you think that price is expensive, then you haven't looked at many high-end mountain bikes lately. Plenty of people willing to pay a lot for a good bike.
Besides, they're still new. The price will drop.
I'm reasonably fit. However, I'm not fit enough to bike a long way, up hills, under the sun, in casual clothes, without getting uncomfortably sweaty -- that limits its use to me. I see a huge market for electric bikes. The price will come down.
As for more parts to break, that sounds like a desperate argument. There aren't that many more parts in an electric bike. Besides, a modern bike has many more parts than an old bike, yet they don't seem to be a problem. Or are you one of those crazy single-speeders who doesn't even have front brakes?
Why must it mean something?
Because they require a lot of power: bigger screens, faster processors, etc.
Sorry, but designing a good GUI is as much about designing within the limitations of the environment as it is about anything else. Look at the original iPod for an example of that.
The industry only works because everybody invests in research and contributes to a common pool of expertise and people; Apple, however, isn't doing their part.
Apple just showed the industry how to make a decent smartphone. Then there are projects like WebKit. And Apple were one of the first to really push USB. Besides, I think that sentence is BS to begin with -- the industry is hardly an open place with free sharing of all technologies.
Google, IBM, Microsoft, and others hire tons of CS Ph.D. level researchers, Apple doesn't; who do you think would go to CS grad school if there were no jobs? And if nobody goes to CS grad school, who is going to write those journal publications that Apple gets its ideas from?
I just don't understand this. Those other companies still exist, right? So what's the big deal? Why should all companies operate the same way? And if Apple somehow did become the only company left, what makes you think they wouldn't do more of those things?
I just don't understand this idea that all companies must contribute something only in a specific way. Just because Apple doesn't focus on certain things, this makes them a parasite? That's absurd.
How so?
Yes, that sums it up quite well. Apple has done absolutely nothing to develop the current standards used for mobile communication, while Nokia is responsible for much of the work that went into the GSM evolution standards.
Yeah, but why should Apple have to pay more than other companies for this work?
Compared to other phones, the only thing that is novel is the interface...
You make it sound as if that's a trivial thing to do. If that's the case, then why did it take so long for someone to design a decent interface?
There is a big difference: every company in the market benefits from research, while only the funding company benefits from development.
Are you saying that consumers haven't benefited from Apple raising the bar?
Yeah, as much as I like The New York Times, I would never consider paying for it at the moment. I just don't read it that often -- I follow links to it from other places. And the really good articles that I have read in it, such as one of Michel Pollen's articles, are often available via other sources since those authors don't work exclusively for one paper to begin with.
They face a big problem because the readers are spoiled for choice and the best contributors can often be independent. As for day to day news, there are enough good public sources for that. I can't see the paywall being very successful.
You say that as if Apple doesn't have patents of its own, doesn't do its own R&D, and hasn't just shown the whole industry how to make a decent smartphone.
What about the first one? Besides, I wasn't talking about the rights that a specific country has decided to give their citizens. I'm talking about the concept of rights in general, and that there is no reason you can't make access to health care a right.
That really depends on what the director wants to achieve. Silence in space can be more dramatic if you're looking for suspense, sure.
You're an idiot. I'm allergic to whey protein. It took a while to discover that it was causing me problems because I only ever noticed a reaction when I ate huge amounts of it. Yet, the small amounts that I ate all the time did real, physical damage to my digestive system.
Next time you want to test someone's food sensitivities, take them to a specialist. Don't sneak it into their food over long periods. That's equivalent to poisoning someone.
Then, when something comes along to help that, queue the wailing and gnashing of teeth again over herbicies and GMO.
Because maybe the real solution is not herbicides or GMO, but moving away from monocultures?
Well, that depends where you live. A right to heath care sounds like a good thing to me, and it's just as inherit as any other right.
Sure you can. I'm allergic to milk protein. Do you have any idea how many products where I live contain milk solids? It's a huge amount ... at least until you walk out of the isles upon isles of highly-processed food and into the meat and produce sections. Yes, it will mean you'll have to learn how to actually cook a meal, unless you're into raw food.
and to anyone who says "i will just avoid eating corn and corn products".... good luck. almost every product in the grocery store either contains corn or ate corn.
You mean like all the fruits, vegetables, and grains? Or the highly processed food products and meat that we shouldn't be eating so much of to begin with?
How is patent encumbered food products a win for environmentalism? And you're talking about how silly anti-GMO fever is in an article saying how some of these products may actually be harmful?
I guess that's fine if you like looking at the keyboard behind your screen, and whatever is behind you when in laptop mode.
Where is the evidence that such reactions are just a case of hypochondria? Last time I checked, we didn't know enough about how the immune system works to be able to say that with any certainty.
Sorry, but I don't understand why it's such a big deal to make such a small accommodation that could save a person's life. Are you really saying that they should be stuck at home for the rest of their lives, just because you don't want to make the most simple of accommodations for someone?
Does that include the total space required to mine for uranium over the life of the power plant? This project is renewable energy -- once it's built, it won't require any fuel.
In the case of an insect I can't see it having sufficiently low drag to take advantage of lift.
I don't follow you here. What makes you think a dragonfly has too much drag to be able to gain enough speed to generate lift? Between the lift and the air currents, I can see how it could conserve quite a lot of energy if it knows how to ride the currents.
I've lost the count of the times I took my tablet out to take notes and the people next to me dropped their jaws when i converted it to slate mode and started writing on it.
I'm sure many of those jaws would have retracted if they had used one for an extended period of time. While those tablets might have been great for techies and niches, they're pretty clunky to use, certainly now that the iPhone has shown people how great a touchscreen interface can be.