Fundamentally, I believe that scientific research is a public good
Same here. Unfortunately, the money is limited (although, where it is going to besides the public good is a whole other can of worms). I think that if we want more basic research funded (by the people and the corporations) the answer is to get better PR. This is what the APS (American Physical Society) is trying to do this year by promoting 2005 as the "World Year of Physics".
damn it, they should just pay us for being brilliant.;)
Knowledge (K) = Power (P)
P = Work (W) / time (t)
t = money ($)
therefore...
K = W / $
So, your salary is inversely proportional to how much you know:)
Not that I'm a lover of the patent system, but the scientists do not work independently of the moneymen. Government grants only go so far, but the push to patent is VERY strong in the universities. Which personally sucks for me (my field is theoretical physics), and even though I don't do patents, but I still have to justify the work to the moneymen on a regular basis:(
We're (sadly?) way past the times when a person/group who wants to do experimental work can just do their jobs without big $$ support.
I also on a side note the writter of this story doesn't really under stand the meaning of censorship. Only a government can censor a person, a private company does not have this ability. Also as a side note you cannot censor published content, you can restrict it, but the litteral word of censor is not possible to do on published content. So the government can never censor published content.
Ok now, from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition:
censor: A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.
censoring: (1) counterintelligence achieved by banning or deleting any information of value to the enemy [syn: censorship, security review] (2) deleting parts of publications or correspondence or theatrical performances [syn: censorship]
Nothing about only the gov't having the power to censor. Anyone or group can censor. See the Wikipedia for more info.
A very good point, but I do not quite share your optimisim - digital electronics will hit the endstop in your lifetime and I havent read any post with an alternative yet - though I'm still reading:-)
Classical electronic devices will hit the endstop, but quantum based devices such as resonant tunneling devides (RTDs) and molecular electronics will still be digital (SQUIDS, as you mentioned, have been suggested as a basis for quantum bits, but that's a whole other story:) )
there are no known semiconductors that are a heck of a lot better than silicon
Some are better, it finding one that is better AND cheaper;)
About that "random jumping" of electrons and their physics limitation... that is a problem when you desire the carriers to act like hard spheres and behave classically. You can use the rules of quantum mechanics to design totally predictible devices where the characteristic length is well below the tunneling length. A carrier can only tunnel if there is an acceptable place to tunnel to. Quantum dots and the like allow for single electron "turnstiles" to be build and studied.
seem to recall that there is no such thing as a quanta of magnetic flux
Phi_0, the quanta of magnetic flux, is defined by the relation h/2e, where h is Plank's constant, and e is the electron charge. It is interesting to note that conductance (inverse resistance) is also quantized.
The mm patch is the only reason I use 2.6 on my laptop since it provides the synaptics touchpad support. Yes, I was able to use an external mouse without the patch, but the idea of not being able to use the built in touchpad was really annoying.
Does anyone know why touchpad support is not included in the default 2.6 tree?
"The $32 fee applies to any embedded system regardless of whether it is a Tivo set-top box which uses embedded Linux or some models of the Sharp Zaurus which also use that kernel."
Slashdot Mirror
Fundamentally, I believe that scientific research is a public good
;)
...
:)
Same here. Unfortunately, the money is limited (although, where it is going to besides the public good is a whole other can of worms). I think that if we want more basic research funded (by the people and the corporations) the answer is to get better PR. This is what the APS (American Physical Society) is trying to do this year by promoting 2005 as the "World Year of Physics".
damn it, they should just pay us for being brilliant.
Knowledge (K) = Power (P)
P = Work (W) / time (t)
t = money ($)
therefore
K = W / $
So, your salary is inversely proportional to how much you know
Not that I'm a lover of the patent system, but the scientists do not work independently of the moneymen. Government grants only go so far, but the push to patent is VERY strong in the universities. Which personally sucks for me (my field is theoretical physics), and even though I don't do patents, but I still have to justify the work to the moneymen on a regular basis :(
We're (sadly?) way past the times when a person/group who wants to do experimental work can just do their jobs without big $$ support.
I also on a side note the writter of this story doesn't really under stand the meaning of censorship. Only a government can censor a person, a private company does not have this ability.
Also as a side note you cannot censor published content, you can restrict it, but the litteral word of censor is not possible to do on published content. So the government can never censor published content.
Ok now, from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition:
censor: A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.
censoring: (1) counterintelligence achieved by banning or deleting any information of value to the enemy [syn: censorship, security review]
(2) deleting parts of publications or correspondence or theatrical performances [syn: censorship]
Nothing about only the gov't having the power to censor. Anyone or group can censor. See the Wikipedia for more info.
A very good point, but I do not quite share your optimisim - digital electronics will hit the endstop in your lifetime and I havent read any post with an alternative yet - though I'm still reading :-)
:) )
;)
... that is a problem when you desire the carriers to act like hard spheres and behave classically. You can use the rules of quantum mechanics to design totally predictible devices where the characteristic length is well below the tunneling length. A carrier can only tunnel if there is an acceptable place to tunnel to. Quantum dots and the like allow for single electron "turnstiles" to be build and studied.
Classical electronic devices will hit the endstop, but quantum based devices such as resonant tunneling devides (RTDs) and molecular electronics will still be digital (SQUIDS, as you mentioned, have been suggested as a basis for quantum bits, but that's a whole other story
there are no known semiconductors that are a heck of a lot better than silicon
Some are better, it finding one that is better AND cheaper
About that "random jumping" of electrons and their physics limitation
seem to recall that there is no such thing as a quanta of magnetic flux
Phi_0, the quanta of magnetic flux, is defined by the relation h/2e, where h is Plank's constant, and e is the electron charge. It is interesting to note that conductance (inverse resistance) is also quantized.
The mm patch is the only reason I use 2.6 on my laptop since it provides the synaptics touchpad support. Yes, I was able to use an external mouse without the patch, but the idea of not being able to use the built in touchpad was really annoying.
Does anyone know why touchpad support is not included in the default 2.6 tree?
From the article:
"The $32 fee applies to any embedded system regardless of whether it is a Tivo set-top box which uses embedded Linux or some models of the Sharp Zaurus which also use that kernel."