I lived in Germany the biggest part of my life. Sometimes in 1998 i decided that the quality of the TVC program has dropped so much that it is a waste of time and space in my room. I go to cinemas often and rent DVDs. Overall i would say that in the last 8 years i approximately watched 30 Movies per year in the cinema and maybe added another 20 Movies per year watching on DVD. Since a few years I enjoy to watch some video news on the internet and i can only say that this perfectly fits my needs. I was hoping for a long time now for online movie services, but they either dont work on linux or have a really crappy selection of b-movies. I am willing to pay, however the service should work around the world (right now i am in Japan).
I do not understand why a thing like DVB exists. Multicast procotols in the internet have exactly the same advanages as cable digital television, but on the long term they will be cheaper. So i strongy hope that there will be a "IP over DVB" standard soon, because i will preferably buy services, which provide me an internet access of some kind, even if it is restricted and only uses IP this would be fine for me.
In my opinion Television as we know it anyway is as dead as it can be. Look at the media consumption among young people.
Hmm normally the placebo effect is considered to be a quite strong effect, stronger than some medications. IMHO it is ok to allow homeopathy to reahc patientw with the placebo effect which otherwise would not benefit from it. In scientific discussion, however, this should be considered the main effect of homeopathy.
Yes, but the articles where about Optics, and I said "other implementations" But you are right, that is what is usually said....
But controllable Microcavities in photonical crystal may help to solve the scalability problem, if i understand it correctly...
that it will be a really long time before QC are cheaper in terms of factorizing numbers than the equivalent classical machine. If they work at all. The common beliefs about the different QC other implementations in the field usually are said to be
-NMR: Most advanced no decoherence, but severe scalability problems. Nobody knows if they can ever put more than 10 qubits ( -Quantum Dots: Nice but Semiconductors have a hell of excitaions and decoherence -Spintronics: Interesting, but it will take a time until it is under control -Ions: well advanced, good control, some scalability problem (not necessarily IMHO) -Atoms: advancing (-> Atom Chip), could be fine -Superconducting qubits: Right now decoherence problems, which may be solved.
i have to make a comment. Let's assume we have amplifiers and signal generators avaiable which have at each time a certain "eqi-cost" line in the "power consumption" vs "noise level" plane in the bandwidth you are interested in. If you couple these by an really good directed radio link, you can get over a few meters up to a few dB if you are good. Hovever lets assume fo the second that having a parabolic antenna on you laptop is less handy than an ethernet cable. Thus, leaving aside obstacles, wou will definitely have less power at the receiver for the same power send. now here comes the problem. Less power means lower signal/noise ratio, which directly reduces your BW. So no matter how the wireless standard looks like, if you take it literally you can always use it on a network cable, and you will get a much higher rate and an ultimately directed transmission. Nowadays etherenet standard does not use the full bandwidth of the cables. WOuld one use the wireless transmission methods on a cable, one could get substentially more troughput.
O did i forget? eqi-cost can also be translated to "cheaper modules" at the same rate.
After hours of research for a product, clicking hundreds of times, or, browsing the current list of top-selling books at amazon to read the summaies (tens of clicks), please do not tell me that 5 clicks which enable you to have a quick check on the final sum of money, the product, and the shipping address are anyhow disturbing you!
That is the right spirit. I like to have a choice and i think linux can only get better by being in a more direct comparison with solaris. However, since i am conservative i will run linux on my laptop for some more years and i believe many other will do the same.
Yea. thanks. People like you make it necessary to think about licenses so much.
I repeat. Lets assume I write code, and say: let develop together openly. Just if a vendor in the end decides in the final leaf of the development tree no to publish something, he shall have the right. on the other hand you may use the code, even if you embed it in a product where the vendoe MUST present the code in the end.
I think it is a fair deal, because the leaf will never make it back into the development stream. So it is pretty unlikely that the change will be more than an adaption to a specific case or HW (no discussions, i also hate proprietary HW, but sometimes it exists, either because of customer requests or due to historical reasons - and i wont force my opinion on other people).
Now you know, it is about collaborating, that works well if both sides honour the terms. If you do not like to collaborate, well then dont. But if pull off an action like removing a license in a way which would make the changes which you want to keep in the main branch inaccessible to me, why should i collaborate? It may even be that i may not modify my own file after that. Imagine you work for a company, which relies on BSD licensing. If you change sth in the GPL code you not put it back to your code, because that would be stealing, because the persoine who modified the GPL-only file may not agree that changes based on their work go into a BSD-like project. If such things happen more often, it would be fucking bad, because as a matter of fact sometime you need a clean room implementation of something. A BSD developer looking at bug reports in a modified driver of his own with the BSD removed is in problems. If he fixes a bug in the GPL only code there is no way back, because it is very likely that his fix in his own tree will look very similar. If somebody else fixes a bug it is even worse, because it may block the path to this solution for him. So if I would be responsible I would require that the programmers do not look on mailing lists of GPL-only code which was dual-licensed once and is under BSD license in the own company.
I summrize my view
-developer develops code and is kind enough to say that people may use this code in GPL way or in BSD way.
-Linux developer derives work fron this code, take away BSD licensing terms, and by that the rights of the people who wanted to use the code and derived works under BSD license.
If I, as a developer, for whatever reason, license code under my copyright to somebody, I demand that he agrees with the terms of the licence which I put, because after all I am still the copyright holder. Since GPL and BSD mainly collide in the handling of derivative works in respect to dristributing final products, it would seem to me that only the distributor in the end may chose not to distribute the source code of the device. And since the linux developer cut this right when he removed the license from the file, he is definetly violating the spirit of the dual licensed approach. The dual licensed apporach in nothing else but a "keeping both doors open" policy. While I wont comment on the legal terms i find this behaviour rude. When developing cond in our lab i several times encountered a similar spirit. People who do not honour the idea under which I gave them code which they modified (sometime actually causing work for me).
If i give code to anybody it is not an invitation to missionate me into any license
I think you got my point wrong. My point is: there are a hell lot of things which i whish to see in linux. I also praise the capabilities of the leaders of the development process to steer the larger projects. However i believe that the linux development process right now is going a good way. Let's just say that larger and larger shops open on the bazar and they adress things which they (and me) whished to see addressed. Actually it seems that a real lot of companies found different roles in linux and are doing well in focusing on their specific small part of the problem. Let's take e.g. Desktop Support: Even and old command line freak like me, whos last system operated mainly by GUI was OS/2 found it effective and simple to use the GUI for nearly everything under Ubuntu (please no fundamentalist discussions about the incoherence of Linux GUI programming). So obvioulsy the development refocused itself. Take the kernel-related issues of that (the Scheduler), and they are adressed. My experience is: the more "belief on focused" deveopment was present in the community, becaused in some projects development power was wasted on things which just where no accepted afterwards.
The right question would not have been "how would you refocus", but "what is most annoying to you", because i do neither believe in my own capability to anwer the first question nor in a large parts of the slasdot reader capability to do so.
and so should al large part of the slahsdot readers. I think the Bazar is a good development model. Without doubt "devoting a large number of devolopers to a task" is the opposite of that. Again thing which have a factor of 100 in man-years will show up in the lists of the readers.
-Number of incidents: Indicates how well maintained your systems are in general. -Incidents handling using draconic measures (e.g. total network shutdowns, more fileservers going down than affected): Tells you if the interdependency and redundancy architecture (from the IT viewpoint and organizational viewpoint) are ok. -Response time to incidents: Indicates if the team is trained well enough and has anough diversification. -Happiness of the users: Indicates if your team helps the users without hassle. -Thrust of the users: Can you set a policy an the users believe that it will help them to help you. Do they tell you about the beginning of problems or do they wait until the last moment? -Last but not least: Documentation.
Once upon a time (1995), i started to study. I took an introductory unix course and was, dor a few years very happy with using my network drive on the Computing centre's fileserver, connected by only 10Mbit/second. Everything was running and whichever Pizza-box in the comptuing centre i used, my data was there. I could access it from everywhere, and since the size of a floopy was 1.4Mb, people where pretty careful about their document sizes. Nobody said somethin like "oh i scanned the newspaper Article in 300x300dpi and 24bit color, because quality can never be high enough". My Documents (50Mb quota by then) where stored at exactly one place, which was located behind a steel door whith access control (only computing center Employes could enter). The room has a proper climate control and a backup power system.
A few years later i started to work at a chair where people where using floppies to transport around data from the measurement computers to the next room. I was a little bit puzzled, but due to the complete Network incompetence of everyone this practice continued when thumbdrives appeared. It got worse. before everybody took care about document sizes, but now there was no stopping anymore. Everybody created ppt files wirh bitmap-graphics overkill, hard to edit with the argument "it fits on the USB-Stick, doesnt it.
We are now in a even worse Situation. Security issues are getting harder and the bounty-hunters appreciate that sneaker-nets are impossible to control. Who would argue with the hard working employe who takes the spreasheet home to work on it? In the meantime "Sorry i had to do it" counts as an excuse for "i was too lazy to listen to the admin how to acces the Network from home".
My opinion: Give your employes or Students an available, reliable, backupped, web-accessible network drive and good support and the use of thumb-drives will decline *strongly*.
> And, he argues, important process expressions do not qualify as algorithms. "A logic circuit is not a sequence of operations. An
But it can be simulated by one. And actually it sometimes is a sequence of operations.
> operating system is not supposed to terminate, nor does it yield a singular solution. An operating system cannot be deterministic
The operating System i use is supposed to terminate. upon a specific input, it should halt the system.
> because it must relate to uncoordinated inputs from the outside world. Any program utilising random input to carry out its process,
Yupp. determinisctic to me only means that upon the same "uncoordinated inputs" the Machine produces the same result. that is also something i expect (in a weak, applied form) from an OS.
And i refuse to think about a specific scheme of magnets or wires flying around in funny schemes. If you move something magnetic into a magnetic field, the energy content of the field changes. You either put Energy into it or the Field decreases, if the magnet is dragged into it. One way to put energy back in the field is by increasing a coil current, the other is mechanical work you have to do by removing the magnetic thing from the field. To say it clearly: As long as we assume a homogeneus time of the whole space, invariant c, then there is no way to gain energy from a H=|B|^2+|E|^2 field. If the magnet wiggles to fast you will lose energy.
BTW: As long as they have the fucking scheme of them selecting the scientists and still no Peer review (a peer revie includes that you can not select who evalutes you work) nor are willing to publish, selecting scientists is just a PR hoax. No serious physicist would work under these conditions. Usually finding the flaws in a perpetuum mobile is a good exercise for first semester students.
I am more pessimistic about catching a signal from a technological source. 200 Years ago there were no artificial sources of EM radiation, and as far as i see it, since beginning of the 20 century we shifted the (commonly) used spectrum from a few kHz to a few GHz. We currently can resolve in science up to a few hundred GHz, which may be exceeded by commoly used tech already in 2100. I believe that LW and MW radio stations will be turned of by then. this leave a total obsevation window of 200 Years.
Yes! The Users get what they want. I was more than once in a situation when I wanted, as an administrator, a decision from my boss about somthing which clearly is a decision he has to make (e.g. how long should we keep archives/backups. Who should have access to our systems?). Instead of asking me to explain what he needs to decide he gave me the "freedom" to decide.
As long as the users avoid even principal responsibility to their system, but make buying decisions based on the color of the default background of the gui, they will get the same crappy software which they get now.
To me it's like they would buy cars without brakes just because there are nice colors for the seats. Finally it's the users who accept the crap instead of going back to the shop slamming it to the desk an shouting to the person who sold this smilingly while explaing that there will be no problems.
The alien lifeforms however seem not to adapt to the googlar emmitting entropic pulses of electromagnetic radiation in the near infrared. The linea doti perimeter confines their brain by the colorful object in front of each.
Excuse me, i laughed my ass off, but my comment was on topic. If a 15 year old technology seem to you like star trek, i am not sure what you would say to the things investigated now....
Not even electronically detected or generates this is the highrest frequency. Superconducting SIS mixers and Jopsephson junction local oscillators achieve a phase-locked operation up to 500GHz.
I also prefer to use transliterated input, for hiragana (just learning japanese right now) as well as for cyrillic letters. I would definitely not trade, for the reasons you cited, a hypothetical minor speed advantage for not being albe to use any keyboard. Actually i am switching to US-keyboard also on my home computer, even if I am from Germany.
Slashdot Mirror
-you can harden your security by populating the user-id space sparsely. Somebody who is guessing for an user id will have an hard time.
-It can make things easier to have your user groups organized according to geographic location, company issuing th id (e.g. local branch), etc.
-Multiple log ins. Who knows. maybe it is easier to associate internally several uids with each uid (could make things more static).
So let's say:
10 bit for segmentation
20 for checksumming
4 for multiple logins
leaves only 29 bit as payload
Or somebody was just dumb and wanted to make sure he is not fired until all applicaitons are switched
I lived in Germany the biggest part of my life. Sometimes in 1998 i decided that the quality of the TVC program has dropped so much that it is a waste of time and space in my room. I go to cinemas often and rent DVDs. Overall i would say that in the last 8 years i approximately watched 30 Movies per year in the cinema and maybe added another 20 Movies per year watching on DVD. Since a few years I enjoy to watch some video news on the internet and i can only say that this perfectly fits my needs. I was hoping for a long time now for online movie services, but they either dont work on linux or have a really crappy selection of b-movies.
I am willing to pay, however the service should work around the world (right now i am in Japan).
I do not understand why a thing like DVB exists. Multicast procotols in the internet have exactly the same advanages as cable digital television, but on the long term they will be cheaper. So i strongy hope that there will be a "IP over DVB" standard soon, because i will preferably buy services, which provide me an internet access of some kind, even if it is restricted and only uses IP this would be fine for me.
In my opinion Television as we know it anyway is as dead as it can be. Look at the media consumption among young people.
Hmm normally the placebo effect is considered to be a quite strong effect, stronger than some medications. IMHO it is ok to allow homeopathy to reahc patientw with the placebo effect which otherwise would not benefit from it. In scientific discussion, however, this should be considered the main effect of homeopathy.
-Emacs vs. vi
-Reiderfs vs. ext3 (obsolete)
-GPLv3 vs GPLv2
-GPL vs BSD
and now:
Scheduler wars!
Yes, but the articles where about Optics, and I said "other implementations" But you are right, that is what is usually said.... But controllable Microcavities in photonical crystal may help to solve the scalability problem, if i understand it correctly...
that it will be a really long time before QC are cheaper in terms of factorizing numbers than the equivalent classical machine. If they work at all. The common beliefs about the different QC other implementations in the field usually are said to be
-NMR: Most advanced no decoherence, but severe scalability problems. Nobody knows if they can ever put more than 10 qubits (
-Quantum Dots: Nice but Semiconductors have a hell of excitaions and decoherence
-Spintronics: Interesting, but it will take a time until it is under control
-Ions: well advanced, good control, some scalability problem (not necessarily IMHO)
-Atoms: advancing (-> Atom Chip), could be fine
-Superconducting qubits: Right now decoherence problems, which may be solved.
i have to make a comment. Let's assume we have amplifiers and signal generators avaiable which have at each time a certain "eqi-cost" line in the "power consumption" vs "noise level" plane in the bandwidth you are interested in. If you couple these by an really good directed radio link, you can get over a few meters up to a few dB if you are good. Hovever lets assume fo the second that having a parabolic antenna on you laptop is less handy than an ethernet cable. Thus, leaving aside obstacles, wou will definitely have less power at the receiver for the same power send. now here comes the problem. Less power means lower signal/noise ratio, which directly reduces your BW. So no matter how the wireless standard looks like, if you take it literally you can always use it on a network cable, and you will get a much higher rate and an ultimately directed transmission. Nowadays etherenet standard does not use the full bandwidth of the cables. WOuld one use the wireless transmission methods on a cable, one could get substentially more troughput.
O did i forget? eqi-cost can also be translated to "cheaper modules" at the same rate.
After hours of research for a product, clicking hundreds of times, or, browsing the current list of top-selling books at amazon to read the summaies (tens of clicks), please do not tell me that 5 clicks which enable you to have a quick check on the final sum of money, the product, and the shipping address are anyhow disturbing you!
That is the right spirit. I like to have a choice and i think linux can only get better by being in a more direct comparison with solaris. However, since i am conservative i will run linux on my laptop for some more years and i believe many other will do the same.
Yea. thanks. People like you make it necessary to think about licenses so much.
I repeat. Lets assume I write code, and say: let develop together openly. Just if a vendor in the end decides in the final leaf of the development tree no to publish something, he shall have the right. on the other hand you may use the code, even if you embed it in a product where the vendoe MUST present the code in the end.
I think it is a fair deal, because the leaf will never make it back into the development stream. So it is pretty unlikely that the change will be more than an adaption to a specific case or HW (no discussions, i also hate proprietary HW, but sometimes it exists, either because of customer requests or due to historical reasons - and i wont force my opinion on other people).
Now you know, it is about collaborating, that works well if both sides honour the terms. If you do not like to collaborate, well then dont. But if pull off an action like removing a license in a way which would make the changes which you want to keep in the main branch inaccessible to me, why should i collaborate? It may even be that i may not modify my own file after that. Imagine you work for a company, which relies on BSD licensing. If you change sth in the GPL code you not put it back to your code, because that would be stealing, because the persoine who modified the GPL-only file may not agree that changes based on their work go into a BSD-like project. If such things happen more often, it would be fucking bad, because as a matter of fact sometime you need a clean room implementation of something. A BSD developer looking at bug reports in a modified driver of his own with the BSD removed is in problems. If he fixes a bug in the GPL only code there is no way back, because it is very likely that his fix in his own tree will look very similar. If somebody else fixes a bug it is even worse, because it may block the path to this solution for him. So if I would be responsible I would require that the programmers do not look on mailing lists of GPL-only code which was dual-licensed once and is under BSD license in the own company.
I summrize my view -developer develops code and is kind enough to say that people may use this code in GPL way or in BSD way. -Linux developer derives work fron this code, take away BSD licensing terms, and by that the rights of the people who wanted to use the code and derived works under BSD license. If I, as a developer, for whatever reason, license code under my copyright to somebody, I demand that he agrees with the terms of the licence which I put, because after all I am still the copyright holder. Since GPL and BSD mainly collide in the handling of derivative works in respect to dristributing final products, it would seem to me that only the distributor in the end may chose not to distribute the source code of the device. And since the linux developer cut this right when he removed the license from the file, he is definetly violating the spirit of the dual licensed approach. The dual licensed apporach in nothing else but a "keeping both doors open" policy. While I wont comment on the legal terms i find this behaviour rude. When developing cond in our lab i several times encountered a similar spirit. People who do not honour the idea under which I gave them code which they modified (sometime actually causing work for me). If i give code to anybody it is not an invitation to missionate me into any license
I think you got my point wrong. My point is: there are a hell lot of things which i whish to see in linux. I also praise the capabilities of the leaders of the development process to steer the larger projects. However i believe that the linux development process right now is going a good way. Let's just say that larger and larger shops open on the bazar and they adress things which they (and me) whished to see addressed. Actually it seems that a real lot of companies found different roles in linux and are doing well in focusing on their specific small part of the problem. Let's take e.g. Desktop Support: Even and old command line freak like me, whos last system operated mainly by GUI was OS/2 found it effective and simple to use the GUI for nearly everything under Ubuntu (please no fundamentalist discussions about the incoherence of Linux GUI programming). So obvioulsy the development refocused itself. Take the kernel-related issues of that (the Scheduler), and they are adressed. My experience is: the more "belief on focused" deveopment was present in the community, becaused in some projects development power was wasted on things which just where no accepted afterwards.
The right question would not have been "how would you refocus", but "what is most annoying to you", because i do neither believe in my own capability to anwer the first question nor in a large parts of the slasdot reader capability to do so.
and so should al large part of the slahsdot readers. I think the Bazar is a good development model. Without doubt "devoting a large number of devolopers to a task" is the opposite of that. Again thing which have a factor of 100 in man-years will show up in the lists of the readers.
I agree. if you need something more elaborate:
-Number of incidents: Indicates how well maintained your systems are in general.
-Incidents handling using draconic measures (e.g. total network shutdowns, more fileservers going down than affected): Tells you if the interdependency and redundancy architecture (from the IT viewpoint and organizational viewpoint) are ok.
-Response time to incidents: Indicates if the team is trained well enough and has anough diversification.
-Happiness of the users: Indicates if your team helps the users without hassle.
-Thrust of the users: Can you set a policy an the users believe that it will help them to help you. Do they tell you about the beginning of problems or do they wait until the last moment?
-Last but not least: Documentation.
Once upon a time (1995), i started to study. I took an introductory unix course and was, dor a few years very happy with using my network drive on the Computing centre's fileserver, connected by only 10Mbit/second. Everything was running and whichever Pizza-box in the comptuing centre i used, my data was there. I could access it from everywhere, and since the size of a floopy was 1.4Mb, people where pretty careful about their document sizes. Nobody said somethin like "oh i scanned the newspaper Article in 300x300dpi and 24bit color, because quality can never be high enough". My Documents (50Mb quota by then) where stored at exactly one place, which was located behind a steel door whith access control (only computing center Employes could enter). The room has a proper climate control and a backup power system.
A few years later i started to work at a chair where people where using floppies to transport around data from the measurement computers to the next room. I was a little bit puzzled, but due to the complete Network incompetence of everyone this practice continued when thumbdrives appeared. It got worse. before everybody took care about document sizes, but now there was no stopping anymore. Everybody created ppt files wirh bitmap-graphics overkill, hard to edit with the argument "it fits on the USB-Stick, doesnt it.
We are now in a even worse Situation. Security issues are getting harder and the bounty-hunters appreciate that sneaker-nets are impossible to control. Who would argue with the hard working employe who takes the spreasheet home to work on it? In the meantime "Sorry i had to do it" counts as an excuse for "i was too lazy to listen to the admin how to acces the Network from home".
My opinion: Give your employes or Students an available, reliable, backupped, web-accessible network drive and good support and the use of thumb-drives will decline *strongly*.
I cite from the linked article:
> And, he argues, important process expressions do not qualify as algorithms. "A logic circuit is not a sequence of operations. An
But it can be simulated by one. And actually it sometimes is a sequence of operations.
> operating system is not supposed to terminate, nor does it yield a singular solution. An operating system cannot be deterministic
The operating System i use is supposed to terminate. upon a specific input, it should halt the system.
> because it must relate to uncoordinated inputs from the outside world. Any program utilising random input to carry out its process,
Yupp. determinisctic to me only means that upon the same "uncoordinated inputs" the Machine produces the same result. that is also something i expect (in a weak, applied form) from an OS.
> such...is not an algorithm."
QED or what? A I forgot, no math today,,,
And i refuse to think about a specific scheme of magnets or wires flying around in funny schemes. If you move something magnetic into a magnetic field, the energy content of the field changes. You either put Energy into it or the Field decreases, if the magnet is dragged into it. One way to put energy back in the field is by increasing a coil current, the other is mechanical work you have to do by removing the magnetic thing from the field. To say it clearly: As long as we assume a homogeneus time of the whole space, invariant c, then there is no way to gain energy from a H=|B|^2+|E|^2 field. If the magnet wiggles to fast you will lose energy.
BTW: As long as they have the fucking scheme of them selecting the scientists and still no Peer review (a peer revie includes that you can not select who evalutes you work) nor are willing to publish, selecting scientists is just a PR hoax. No serious physicist would work under these conditions. Usually finding the flaws in a perpetuum mobile is a good exercise for first semester students.
DONT dissapoint HER. Your math teacher LONGS so much for good students. Instant ring finger enlargement now!
Sounds like the Authors have been fishing for coincidences
I am more pessimistic about catching a signal from a technological source. 200 Years ago there were no artificial sources of EM radiation, and as far as i see it, since beginning of the 20 century we shifted the (commonly) used spectrum from a few kHz to a few GHz. We currently can resolve in science up to a few hundred GHz, which may be exceeded by commoly used tech already in 2100. I believe that LW and MW radio stations will be turned of by then. this leave a total obsevation window of 200 Years.
Yes! The Users get what they want. I was more than once in a situation when I wanted, as an administrator, a decision from my boss about somthing which clearly is a decision he has to make (e.g. how long should we keep archives/backups. Who should have access to our systems?). Instead of asking me to explain what he needs to decide he gave me the "freedom" to decide.
As long as the users avoid even principal responsibility to their system, but make buying decisions based on the color of the default background of the gui, they will get the same crappy software which they get now.
To me it's like they would buy cars without brakes just because there are nice colors for the seats. Finally it's the users who accept the crap instead of going back to the shop slamming it to the desk an shouting to the person who sold this smilingly while explaing that there will be no problems.
The alien lifeforms however seem not to adapt to the googlar emmitting entropic pulses of electromagnetic radiation in the near infrared. The linea doti perimeter confines their brain by the colorful object in front of each.
Excuse me, i laughed my ass off, but my comment was on topic. If a 15 year old technology seem to you like star trek, i am not sure what you would say to the things investigated now....
Not even electronically detected or generates this is the highrest frequency. Superconducting SIS mixers and Jopsephson junction local oscillators achieve a phase-locked operation up to 500GHz.
I also prefer to use transliterated input, for hiragana (just learning japanese right now) as well as for cyrillic letters. I would definitely not trade, for the reasons you cited, a hypothetical minor speed advantage for not being albe to use any keyboard. Actually i am switching to US-keyboard also on my home computer, even if I am from Germany.
Excuse me, the statment that you where at an event where 7 of 9 people used DVORAK keyboards IMHO qualifies you as a nerd.
I have never seen a dvorak keyboard before, i do not know anybody who uses it. Maybe i am just to old (32) or something....