Working with.NET right now and I have to say it is far from impressive or adequate. Take mappoint for example. MS is positioning it to take over Mapquest now owned by AOL it's rival. Doing simple things like using geocodes from other engines causes it to create unpredictable results for directions and maps. Not only that,.NET appears to be crippled and doesn't allow raw socket connection or api. Everything is through http connection.
As much as I love http connection, using it for everything is both stupid and unwise. Doing complex queries through http connections is wasteful and doesn't give you any advantage. On top of that, Mappoint's geocodes can be off by.5 mile or more.
Will mappoint or.NET succeed? Probably not at first or on the third try. Moving into services may be a huge mistake for Microsoft, since it is totally different than product development. The monthly over-head in hosting, maintenance and staffing can easily burn through millions. Using HTTP connections for complex ORB processes is a huge mistake and adds extra burden. Perhaps some one else will know more about.NET and post more details. Looking at the documentation for mappoint.NET is laughable.
I work for one of the major phone companies. After the recommendation to move off IIS came out, the management started a project to do just that. Phone companies tend to like and trust Unix, since that's where unix was invented. With the recent virus', worms and trojans, microsoft has really damaged their reputation with CIO and CTO's. High level executives don't like it when they look bad, especially when there are good alternatives. Most of the support, admin people I know have been negative about the new licensing. If they don't change it, Microsoft will hurt themselves.
There are far too many senators and congressmen who don't study history, or have a clue what the people really want. Even worse, some reps know what people want and give it to them, even when it is a bad idea. There are good reps in government, but the core issue isn't "how much privacy do I have?" but "what is the right balance?"
Who cares if NSA/CIA/FBI is snooping around, trying to see who is plotting against the government. In philosophy and sociology, there's the saying, "there is no natural law." At some point people have to accept they have to work together to make the world safer. That doesn't necessarily mean encryption legislation, but it does mean a change in how things are done.
I think the deeper issue at hand is current laws do not address internet businesses and whole new models of commerce. Most of the laws reguarding zoning were created to address public works, transportation, realestate, development, property value and other physical issues. Those zoning laws were created to prevent a person from opening a store at home, since there wouldn't be sufficient parking or facilities to accomodate a large number of people. A lot of zoning laws are there for good reasons, but it doesn't stop people from using them incorrectly. Law suits like the one mentioned have been creeping up as neighborhoods become aware of what is happening. The definition of space/cyberspace is actually not relevant. No matter how much people love/hate the word. Laws surrounding commerce, and how businesses operate define what is permitted.
In the next few years, this case may become very important. If there are no visible external signs of business transaction at a location, it is hard for law enforcement to monitor/enforce. The only way a person would know a neighbor was operating an adult business from home is if they went to the website. Conservatives will always have a problem with the sale/purchase of adult services, but that doesn't give them the right to misinterpret a law and use it to their own gains. It is obvious the legal system and law enforcement doesn't know how to handle these new situations. As internet businesses continue to grow world wide, enforcing laws will becoming increasingly difficult. With great freedom comes great burden. This case has a lot more at stake than just adult entertainment. At it's core, it about culture and commerce.
The awards are funny. I especially like the Medicine, Physics and Peace awards.
MEDICINE
Willibrord Weijmar Schultz, Pek van Andel, and Eduard Mooyaart of Groningen, The Netherlands, and Ida Sabelis of Amsterdam, for their illuminating report, "Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Male and Female Genitals During Coitus and Female Sexual Arousal." [Published in British Medical Journal, vol. 319, 1999, pp 1596-1600.]
PEACE
The British Royal Navy, for ordering its sailors to stop using live cannon shells, and to instead just shout "Bang!"
PHYSICS
Andre Geim of the University of Nijmegen (the Netherlands) and Sir Michael Berry of Bristol University (UK), for using magnets to levitate a frog and a sumo wrestler. [REFERENCE: "Of Flying Frogs and Levitrons" by M.V. Berry and A.K. Geim,European Journal of Physics, v. 18, 1997, p. 307-13.]
From my understanding, producing enough hydrogen from electrolosis to power a significant percentage of the existing vehicles is not feasible. It costs more to create oxygen, than producing gasoline from petrolium. As bad as "Chain reaction" was, it did get one thing right. Finding an efficient way to create hydrogen from water that doesn't require external energy is a holy grail of hydrogen fuel research. It take more electricity to produce hydrogen than burning the fuel. The same problem exists for fusion reactors. For several decades now, scientists have tried to harness fusion energy, but they can't reach the point of chain reaction without causing a huge explosion.
Any company that tries to make hydrogen through electrolosis will never make a cent or become profitable. That along with the other issue mentioned makes hydrogen fuel impraticle. When safety, health, and ecology become more important than making a buck, hydrogen fuel may have a chance.
Where does the article say the battery emits exhaust? For a fuel cell that size, excessive exhaust could be a huge problem and suggest it was burning pretty hot. A quick search on direct conversion of methane into electricity reveals the preferred technique uses chemical reactions to create free electrons, which suggest it doesn't require combustion of gas. Further, the by product would be water and hydrogen, which doesn't smell.
Perhaps some one with more knowledge of fuel cel technology can post more details and clear up the air.
Slashdot Mirror
Working with .NET right now and I have to say it is far from impressive or adequate. Take mappoint for example. MS is positioning it to take over Mapquest now owned by AOL it's rival. Doing simple things like using geocodes from other engines causes it to create unpredictable results for directions and maps. Not only that, .NET appears to be crippled and doesn't allow raw socket connection or api. Everything is through http connection. .5 mile or more. .NET succeed? Probably not at first or on the third try. Moving into services may be a huge mistake for Microsoft, since it is totally different than product development. The monthly over-head in hosting, maintenance and staffing can easily burn through millions. Using HTTP connections for complex ORB processes is a huge mistake and adds extra burden. Perhaps some one else will know more about .NET and post more details. Looking at the documentation for mappoint.NET is laughable.
As much as I love http connection, using it for everything is both stupid and unwise. Doing complex queries through http connections is wasteful and doesn't give you any advantage. On top of that, Mappoint's geocodes can be off by
Will mappoint or
I work for one of the major phone companies. After the recommendation to move off IIS came out, the management started a project to do just that. Phone companies tend to like and trust Unix, since that's where unix was invented. With the recent virus', worms and trojans, microsoft has really damaged their reputation with CIO and CTO's. High level executives don't like it when they look bad, especially when there are good alternatives. Most of the support, admin people I know have been negative about the new licensing. If they don't change it, Microsoft will hurt themselves.
Who cares if NSA/CIA/FBI is snooping around, trying to see who is plotting against the government. In philosophy and sociology, there's the saying, "there is no natural law." At some point people have to accept they have to work together to make the world safer. That doesn't necessarily mean encryption legislation, but it does mean a change in how things are done.
I think the deeper issue at hand is current laws do not address internet businesses and whole new models of commerce. Most of the laws reguarding zoning were created to address public works, transportation, realestate, development, property value and other physical issues. Those zoning laws were created to prevent a person from opening a store at home, since there wouldn't be sufficient parking or facilities to accomodate a large number of people. A lot of zoning laws are there for good reasons, but it doesn't stop people from using them incorrectly. Law suits like the one mentioned have been creeping up as neighborhoods become aware of what is happening. The definition of space/cyberspace is actually not relevant. No matter how much people love/hate the word. Laws surrounding commerce, and how businesses operate define what is permitted.
In the next few years, this case may become very important. If there are no visible external signs of business transaction at a location, it is hard for law enforcement to monitor/enforce. The only way a person would know a neighbor was operating an adult business from home is if they went to the website. Conservatives will always have a problem with the sale/purchase of adult services, but that doesn't give them the right to misinterpret a law and use it to their own gains. It is obvious the legal system and law enforcement doesn't know how to handle these new situations. As internet businesses continue to grow world wide, enforcing laws will becoming increasingly difficult. With great freedom comes great burden. This case has a lot more at stake than just adult entertainment. At it's core, it about culture and commerce.
The awards are funny. I especially like the Medicine, Physics and Peace awards. MEDICINE Willibrord Weijmar Schultz, Pek van Andel, and Eduard Mooyaart of Groningen, The Netherlands, and Ida Sabelis of Amsterdam, for their illuminating report, "Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Male and Female Genitals During Coitus and Female Sexual Arousal." [Published in British Medical Journal, vol. 319, 1999, pp 1596-1600.] PEACE The British Royal Navy, for ordering its sailors to stop using live cannon shells, and to instead just shout "Bang!" PHYSICS Andre Geim of the University of Nijmegen (the Netherlands) and Sir Michael Berry of Bristol University (UK), for using magnets to levitate a frog and a sumo wrestler. [REFERENCE: "Of Flying Frogs and Levitrons" by M.V. Berry and A.K. Geim,European Journal of Physics, v. 18, 1997, p. 307-13.]
From my understanding, producing enough hydrogen from electrolosis to power a significant percentage of the existing vehicles is not feasible. It costs more to create oxygen, than producing gasoline from petrolium. As bad as "Chain reaction" was, it did get one thing right. Finding an efficient way to create hydrogen from water that doesn't require external energy is a holy grail of hydrogen fuel research. It take more electricity to produce hydrogen than burning the fuel. The same problem exists for fusion reactors. For several decades now, scientists have tried to harness fusion energy, but they can't reach the point of chain reaction without causing a huge explosion. Any company that tries to make hydrogen through electrolosis will never make a cent or become profitable. That along with the other issue mentioned makes hydrogen fuel impraticle. When safety, health, and ecology become more important than making a buck, hydrogen fuel may have a chance.
Where does the article say the battery emits exhaust? For a fuel cell that size, excessive exhaust could be a huge problem and suggest it was burning pretty hot. A quick search on direct conversion of methane into electricity reveals the preferred technique uses chemical reactions to create free electrons, which suggest it doesn't require combustion of gas. Further, the by product would be water and hydrogen, which doesn't smell. Perhaps some one with more knowledge of fuel cel technology can post more details and clear up the air.