The cost to build will be slashed enormously, given the elimination of hourly immigrant labor, but somehow, somehow the price to the buyer will be the same as stick-built, or slightly lower. The savings will be passed on to the builder -- always.
You are ignoring the enormous R&D expenses that have to be paid for *before* that first home is built. The developers are going to pay quite a bit for those first robots. It's not necessarily that the robot inventor/manufacturer is trying to rip off developers. The inventor/manufacturer may only have 3-5 years before competitors have their own robots, they may need to recoup that R&D quickly.
These robots aren't trying to address 3rd world housing. As many others have pointed out the robots need more expensive materials than human workers and human workers are cheaper than the robots. These robots are being developed for manned space missions, to construct habitats on the moon and mars. Anything that happens in the 3rd world is a side effect, not a real goal. It's also a liability issue, in case they fall down in tens years and harm someone.
... for some reason there's no numbers on MMOGCharts possibly because you don't pay for a monthly subscription...
The developer/publisher says it is not a MMORG. Also note that the multiplayer is not on a massive scale, it is instanced. It is more like Diablo II than WoW in this particular respect. It is an awesome game, but it is not a MMORG.
"October" means it is not related to the old E3, that is too late for buyers, press, etc. This will probably be more like your local computer swapmeet/fair, but more focused, and without any good deals on prices. Developers/Publishers are not going to sell anything below suggested retail. Whoever is putting money up for this expo should have just gone to Las Vegas, played roulette, and bet on green.
The Power architecture was known for its better performance per clock
Performance per clock is not as practical as actual performance. The problem, which has been rehashed endlessly in the better PC vs Mac debates of old, is that the x86 of old had far more clocks and more than made up for the PowerPC's efficiency. More recently x86 became better performing per clock, so it is a moot point.
FWIW, I am not slamming PowerPC. I believe Motorola and IBM took some unfair criticism with respect to PowerPC performance. While PowerPC may not have progressed as fast as expected, the real reason for the x86/PowerPC gap was that x86 progressed far more than anyone ever imagined. Intel and AMD are miracle workers.
How did the old "version 2 or later" cause a problem then? All this does is restrict people from applying GPLv3 terms if they want to. It doesn't help anyone.
Removing "or later" protects an author's rights, it makes sure that the terms of the license matches their goals, the goals GPL v2 embodied. "Or later" is a blank check, author's have no guarantee that the license will not go in an undesirable direction and embrace ideas they do not support. Removing "or later" also provides balance, it gives some negotiating power to author's when it comes time to develop that new version of the license.
No, it gives the FSF a blank check, blank checks are not a good idea. You are *assuming* that future versions of the GPL uphold the rights you currently support and avoids overly restrictive requirements you do not support. You have no such guarantee with the "or later" wording, and you have little negotiating room when future licenses are developed. Basically if you only use a specific license you have bargaining power, you have rights.
Instrusive? Why do you expect privacy on a *public* street, or in public areas of a public store, where any other person in the area can eyeball you? Now public bathrooms, public changing rooms, are a different story. They "flunk" the eyeball test.
I'd go along with "creepy", but that is merely because it is something new, one-way versus the two-way that I am used to. So, asymetrical, yes. Instrusuve, no, you never had privacy on the street.
Back in the 80's, I was a restaurant manager... I fired an innocent gal based on that shit.
Pardon me for being blunt, but you are the problem, not the polygraph. The fact that a user does not know how to use the data from an instrument does not make the instrument bad. The physiological reactions the instrument records correlates with lying, it does not prove it. If you understood the instrument then you poly the people who had access to the money. The results should be used to, *at most*, rank who warrants more attention. Or maybe if you are going to be more aggressive confront the employees and try to bluff a confession. To fire a person merely on poly results is highly negligent, you are the problem, not the machine. Get over your denial, face this fact, and accept your failure. Don't try to scapegoat the machine. OK, that was harsh, maybe you received ignorant and negligent instructions from your supervisor. I apologize if that was the case, I'm suspecting it is not since you seem to be blaming the machine 100% and don't mention corporate or supervisory direction.
The idea is to convince people to *believe* that the polygraph machine is scientific...
Err, excuse me, the polygraph is absolutely scientific. It yields data the *correlates* with lying. The fact that the correlation is not 100% does not make the instrument unscientific. Detective work involves a lot of statistics, for example if you have a dead young woman statistics says look at the husband or boyfriend first. Is it always the husband or boyfriend? No. Now if there is a leak at a high security facility, look at those who flunk the polygraph first. Does the polygraph tell you who is guilty? No. However when there is no other evidence, statistics, science, says its a reasonable place to start, to sort that list of people you are going to look at.
There is certainly pork on the coasts, but it's also well-documented that federal money by and large flows from coasts inland rather than the other way around.
You are not separating those projects that benefit the coasts (food, water, energy, transportation, military, etc.) from those that do not.
Also, the coasts are where international trade occurs and this would inflate the revenue collected in these regions. Are your numbers strictly individual income tax, or are revenues from interstate and international entities also included? OK, a somewhat rhetorical question, my real point is that it is far more difficult to discern where a dollar is made or earned than to determine where it is collected.
"The software does not analyze an entire population and toss out names of suspect terrorists, rather one person comes to the attention of law enforcement through conventional means and the data mining analyzes those who have contact with that person."
What you are saying is that data-mining is useful when you already know who you should be suspicious of and want to research them.
But that's not what the passenger name record data mining is about - in fact, it is precisely an attempt to "analyzing the entire population" of flyers and "toss out names of suspect terrorists." A job which it sucks at mightily.
By "population" I am referring to an entire nation or region, not flyers. The later being a far more manageable group. The passenger's associates are compared with the associates of those already under suspicion not the entire nation/region. Again, the problem is far smaller than was originally suggested.
If votes spoke louder, then I wouldn't have to compete with big corporations to get my elected representatives to represent me.
The error in your logic is that you assume what is important to you is important to the majority. Politicians only get away with what the people *allow* them to get away with. The problem is that we are less demanding, it is not the corporations. The corporations are the scapegoats. They are also at our mercy, we choose where we spend our money. For example, *we* are responsible for the environment, *we* buy the Hummers, the corporations do not force them upon us. *We* promote outsourcing of manufacturing by only considering price, not where a product is made. *We* promote seat shops through the same behavior. The people control politicians with their votes and corporation with their spending, blame your neighbors for what is going wrong.
You are absolutely correct.
...And more specifically, votes in the middle of the country. [snipped long winded nonsensical attacks on midwesterners]
Now you go off the deep end. As someone who has lived in dense urban areas of the east coast and the west coast I can testify that there is no shortage of dumb-ass sheep showing up at the polls, there is no shortage of pork projects (civil and military), etc. You merely seem to prefer your sheep of one political orientation over the other. Secondly, you seem woefully ignorant when discussing strategic military issues. Your suggestion that putting military assets in the middle of the country has no strategic value is nonsensical. The center of a nation *is* a strategic point, coastal assets are far more vulnerable. Finally, while pork projects certainly do exists bases in the midwest are not inherently pork. Coastal land has always been far more expensive to acquire, and selling such expensive land and relocating to inexpensive land makes financial sense. I'd say some local bases have stayed in coastal states as pork. In short, I think the pork is fairly evenly distributed across the nation.
Knee-jerkers like you always leave off the most important qualifier when talking about "taking precautions" - namely that of effectiveness. All the data-mining in the world won't stop terrorism because the characteristics that you can mine for produce way too many false positives to be effective.
Actually both Interpol and the FBI have software that has been quite successful at data mining and developing associations between organizations and individuals. It has been helpful in unraveling the communications and finances. In such systems the more data it processes the more these connections stand out from the noise. Hence the voracious appetite for more data.
The problem is not as big as you suggest. The software does not analyze an entire population and toss out names of suspect terrorists, rather one person comes to the attention of law enforcement through conventional means and the data mining analyzes those who have contact with that person.
Yes. And I look forward to seeing measures taken that will prevent this sort of thing from happening. I just don't think tracking all this information helps.
Actually law enforcement in the US and Europe have been quite successful at such data mining operations with respect to developing associations between people, developing an understanding of how communications and money flows with criminal and terrorist organizations.
Whatever we do over the next two years- just ignore it. This is not America.
Nonsense. The Democrats are no better, John F. Kennedy even spied on the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr, a civil right leader! Whatever administration is in power will be pretty motivated to make sure nothing happens on their watch, *especially* if the current administration is successful at keeping the crazy bombers busy overseas.
I'm surprised if you can tell me with any certainty what a company like Dell or Sony is paying Microsoft per copy for windows. Price for an OEM copy of windows generally varies from around $100 to $170.
A couple of years ago I paid $135 for a single copy of OEM WinXP Pro, that would be an upper bound appropriate for calculations. Dell or Sony would certainly pay less, but the unit cost for a single OEM version of Windows would be an appropriate comparison for the unit cost of a single OEM CPU from Intel/AMD, motherboard., video etc. The percentage of overall cost will be close enough.
Neither does the fact that it's difficult to buy a computer without windows make it any cheaper.
I don't think the original poster was addressing that point itself. In any case a new computer from Dell or Sony with or without the Microsoft tax would be too much for the "poor". Using the word "poor" loosely of course. The truly poor don't rank browsing an EU committee website from their home very highly on their list of problems. It is a highly flawed argument.
I really has been done. A friend at work showed us a warning from the manual that came with a rifle. It literally said to not load the rifle since severe bodily injury or death could result.
Let me think... might the low number of Linux visits probably be related to the bad Linux support? You know, if it doesn't work for them, they're less likely to return for another visit?
When I started reading that I honestly thought you were going to refer to the number of people who try Linux out of curiosity and find it too troublesome and return to Windows. If a person is trying to go Linux, then web pages are going to be a relatively minor problem. 1 in 250 is a pretty believable adoption rate, a pretty good one IMHO.
Just because the consumer can't find out what proportion of the price of a new PC is for the MS software doesn't automatically imply that it's not expensive. What a silly suggestion.
Actually he was arguing that they already paid the Microsoft tax and were entitled to run Windows, and having already paid the Microsoft tax there is no initial cost saving when choosing to go Linux. Also, the price of an OEM version of Windows has been well documented for many years, there is no mystery regarding the price.
Slashdot Mirror
"This is why they reccommend when you have a fever you drink Gatorade or some other sport drink."
;-)
Gatorade for a fever? That's a new one for me. I always thought it was chicken soup.
Maybe the "they" in the GP is PepsiCo?
The cost to build will be slashed enormously, given the elimination of hourly immigrant labor, but somehow, somehow the price to the buyer will be the same as stick-built, or slightly lower. The savings will be passed on to the builder -- always.
You are ignoring the enormous R&D expenses that have to be paid for *before* that first home is built. The developers are going to pay quite a bit for those first robots. It's not necessarily that the robot inventor/manufacturer is trying to rip off developers. The inventor/manufacturer may only have 3-5 years before competitors have their own robots, they may need to recoup that R&D quickly.
These robots are being developed to build habitats on the Moon and Mars. Any terrestrial use is a side effect of this.
These robots aren't trying to address 3rd world housing. As many others have pointed out the robots need more expensive materials than human workers and human workers are cheaper than the robots. These robots are being developed for manned space missions, to construct habitats on the moon and mars. Anything that happens in the 3rd world is a side effect, not a real goal. It's also a liability issue, in case they fall down in tens years and harm someone.
... for some reason there's no numbers on MMOGCharts possibly because you don't pay for a monthly subscription ...
The developer/publisher says it is not a MMORG. Also note that the multiplayer is not on a massive scale, it is instanced. It is more like Diablo II than WoW in this particular respect. It is an awesome game, but it is not a MMORG.
http://games.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=215280&c id=17496916
"October" means it is not related to the old E3, that is too late for buyers, press, etc. This will probably be more like your local computer swapmeet/fair, but more focused, and without any good deals on prices. Developers/Publishers are not going to sell anything below suggested retail. Whoever is putting money up for this expo should have just gone to Las Vegas, played roulette, and bet on green.
... if the FSF does something you don't like with GPL3 just keep using it under GPL2. It's just a choice for you, use either one.
You have forfeited that right to a degree if you had used the "or else" option, the project may fork away from you.
The Power architecture was known for its better performance per clock
Performance per clock is not as practical as actual performance. The problem, which has been rehashed endlessly in the better PC vs Mac debates of old, is that the x86 of old had far more clocks and more than made up for the PowerPC's efficiency. More recently x86 became better performing per clock, so it is a moot point.
FWIW, I am not slamming PowerPC. I believe Motorola and IBM took some unfair criticism with respect to PowerPC performance. While PowerPC may not have progressed as fast as expected, the real reason for the x86/PowerPC gap was that x86 progressed far more than anyone ever imagined. Intel and AMD are miracle workers.
How did the old "version 2 or later" cause a problem then? All this does is restrict people from applying GPLv3 terms if they want to. It doesn't help anyone.
Removing "or later" protects an author's rights, it makes sure that the terms of the license matches their goals, the goals GPL v2 embodied. "Or later" is a blank check, author's have no guarantee that the license will not go in an undesirable direction and embrace ideas they do not support. Removing "or later" also provides balance, it gives some negotiating power to author's when it comes time to develop that new version of the license.
It gives more freedom to the code.
No, it gives the FSF a blank check, blank checks are not a good idea. You are *assuming* that future versions of the GPL uphold the rights you currently support and avoids overly restrictive requirements you do not support. You have no such guarantee with the "or later" wording, and you have little negotiating room when future licenses are developed. Basically if you only use a specific license you have bargaining power, you have rights.
Instrusive? Why do you expect privacy on a *public* street, or in public areas of a public store, where any other person in the area can eyeball you? Now public bathrooms, public changing rooms, are a different story. They "flunk" the eyeball test.
I'd go along with "creepy", but that is merely because it is something new, one-way versus the two-way that I am used to. So, asymetrical, yes. Instrusuve, no, you never had privacy on the street.
Back in the 80's, I was a restaurant manager ... I fired an innocent gal based on that shit.
Pardon me for being blunt, but you are the problem, not the polygraph. The fact that a user does not know how to use the data from an instrument does not make the instrument bad. The physiological reactions the instrument records correlates with lying, it does not prove it. If you understood the instrument then you poly the people who had access to the money. The results should be used to, *at most*, rank who warrants more attention. Or maybe if you are going to be more aggressive confront the employees and try to bluff a confession. To fire a person merely on poly results is highly negligent, you are the problem, not the machine. Get over your denial, face this fact, and accept your failure. Don't try to scapegoat the machine. OK, that was harsh, maybe you received ignorant and negligent instructions from your supervisor. I apologize if that was the case, I'm suspecting it is not since you seem to be blaming the machine 100% and don't mention corporate or supervisory direction.
The idea is to convince people to *believe* that the polygraph machine is scientific ...
Err, excuse me, the polygraph is absolutely scientific. It yields data the *correlates* with lying. The fact that the correlation is not 100% does not make the instrument unscientific. Detective work involves a lot of statistics, for example if you have a dead young woman statistics says look at the husband or boyfriend first. Is it always the husband or boyfriend? No. Now if there is a leak at a high security facility, look at those who flunk the polygraph first. Does the polygraph tell you who is guilty? No. However when there is no other evidence, statistics, science, says its a reasonable place to start, to sort that list of people you are going to look at.
There is certainly pork on the coasts, but it's also well-documented that federal money by and large flows from coasts inland rather than the other way around.
You are not separating those projects that benefit the coasts (food, water, energy, transportation, military, etc.) from those that do not.
Also, the coasts are where international trade occurs and this would inflate the revenue collected in these regions. Are your numbers strictly individual income tax, or are revenues from interstate and international entities also included? OK, a somewhat rhetorical question, my real point is that it is far more difficult to discern where a dollar is made or earned than to determine where it is collected.
"The software does not analyze an entire population and toss out names of suspect terrorists, rather one person comes to the attention of law enforcement through conventional means and the data mining analyzes those who have contact with that person."
What you are saying is that data-mining is useful when you already know who you should be suspicious of and want to research them. But that's not what the passenger name record data mining is about - in fact, it is precisely an attempt to "analyzing the entire population" of flyers and "toss out names of suspect terrorists." A job which it sucks at mightily.
By "population" I am referring to an entire nation or region, not flyers. The later being a far more manageable group. The passenger's associates are compared with the associates of those already under suspicion not the entire nation/region. Again, the problem is far smaller than was originally suggested.
If votes spoke louder, then I wouldn't have to compete with big corporations to get my elected representatives to represent me.
The error in your logic is that you assume what is important to you is important to the majority. Politicians only get away with what the people *allow* them to get away with. The problem is that we are less demanding, it is not the corporations. The corporations are the scapegoats. They are also at our mercy, we choose where we spend our money. For example, *we* are responsible for the environment, *we* buy the Hummers, the corporations do not force them upon us. *We* promote outsourcing of manufacturing by only considering price, not where a product is made. *We* promote seat shops through the same behavior. The people control politicians with their votes and corporation with their spending, blame your neighbors for what is going wrong.
"Dollars speak louder than anything else."
...
...And more specifically, votes in the middle of the country. [snipped long winded nonsensical attacks on midwesterners]
No they don't. Votes do.
You are absolutely correct.
Now you go off the deep end. As someone who has lived in dense urban areas of the east coast and the west coast I can testify that there is no shortage of dumb-ass sheep showing up at the polls, there is no shortage of pork projects (civil and military), etc. You merely seem to prefer your sheep of one political orientation over the other. Secondly, you seem woefully ignorant when discussing strategic military issues. Your suggestion that putting military assets in the middle of the country has no strategic value is nonsensical. The center of a nation *is* a strategic point, coastal assets are far more vulnerable. Finally, while pork projects certainly do exists bases in the midwest are not inherently pork. Coastal land has always been far more expensive to acquire, and selling such expensive land and relocating to inexpensive land makes financial sense. I'd say some local bases have stayed in coastal states as pork. In short, I think the pork is fairly evenly distributed across the nation.
Knee-jerkers like you always leave off the most important qualifier when talking about "taking precautions" - namely that of effectiveness. All the data-mining in the world won't stop terrorism because the characteristics that you can mine for produce way too many false positives to be effective.
Actually both Interpol and the FBI have software that has been quite successful at data mining and developing associations between organizations and individuals. It has been helpful in unraveling the communications and finances. In such systems the more data it processes the more these connections stand out from the noise. Hence the voracious appetite for more data.
The problem is not as big as you suggest. The software does not analyze an entire population and toss out names of suspect terrorists, rather one person comes to the attention of law enforcement through conventional means and the data mining analyzes those who have contact with that person.
Yes. And I look forward to seeing measures taken that will prevent this sort of thing from happening. I just don't think tracking all this information helps.
Actually law enforcement in the US and Europe have been quite successful at such data mining operations with respect to developing associations between people, developing an understanding of how communications and money flows with criminal and terrorist organizations.
Whatever we do over the next two years- just ignore it. This is not America.
Nonsense. The Democrats are no better, John F. Kennedy even spied on the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr, a civil right leader! Whatever administration is in power will be pretty motivated to make sure nothing happens on their watch, *especially* if the current administration is successful at keeping the crazy bombers busy overseas.
I'm surprised if you can tell me with any certainty what a company like Dell or Sony is paying Microsoft per copy for windows. Price for an OEM copy of windows generally varies from around $100 to $170.
A couple of years ago I paid $135 for a single copy of OEM WinXP Pro, that would be an upper bound appropriate for calculations. Dell or Sony would certainly pay less, but the unit cost for a single OEM version of Windows would be an appropriate comparison for the unit cost of a single OEM CPU from Intel/AMD, motherboard., video etc. The percentage of overall cost will be close enough.
Neither does the fact that it's difficult to buy a computer without windows make it any cheaper.
I don't think the original poster was addressing that point itself. In any case a new computer from Dell or Sony with or without the Microsoft tax would be too much for the "poor". Using the word "poor" loosely of course. The truly poor don't rank browsing an EU committee website from their home very highly on their list of problems. It is a highly flawed argument.
I really has been done. A friend at work showed us a warning from the manual that came with a rifle. It literally said to not load the rifle since severe bodily injury or death could result.
Let me think... might the low number of Linux visits probably be related to the bad Linux support? You know, if it doesn't work for them, they're less likely to return for another visit?
When I started reading that I honestly thought you were going to refer to the number of people who try Linux out of curiosity and find it too troublesome and return to Windows. If a person is trying to go Linux, then web pages are going to be a relatively minor problem. 1 in 250 is a pretty believable adoption rate, a pretty good one IMHO.
Just because the consumer can't find out what proportion of the price of a new PC is for the MS software doesn't automatically imply that it's not expensive. What a silly suggestion.
Actually he was arguing that they already paid the Microsoft tax and were entitled to run Windows, and having already paid the Microsoft tax there is no initial cost saving when choosing to go Linux. Also, the price of an OEM version of Windows has been well documented for many years, there is no mystery regarding the price.