That's nothing... on Iron Chef they regularly have live shellfish that they then boil alive... and of course there is pretty much any cooking show that shows cooking of animal meat... where did that meat come from? Could have been from a pet cow that someone lovingly tended to and treated as a member of their family (for all we know).
I never did understand why cats/dogs/pets in general were given special consideration. Personally I won't eat typical pets because they aren't good eatin' which is to say that people probably already tried them out and decided they didn't taste too good. Now when I hear about dogs bred as foodstock or cats or rats.... I'm curious what they taste like as they must have some culinary quality to them for people to go to all that effort.
Humans are omnivores. We will be until some environmental pressure forces us to do otherwise... and by environmental I don't mean self-imposed restriction.
I think the parent forgot to ask the question: "If Radiohead was a no-name band with no budget for publicity, would they be able to get enough attention to garner the sort of numbers we see here?"
The answer to that question is: Yes. Radiohead is a 'good' band. Given the assumption that they would have continued to write new music and produce albums or even simply tour and play at small venues for 15 years or however long they've been around, they would certainly have become a popular band regardless of expensive marketing campaigns. Whether they would have done so or not is the next valid question... which we'll never know the answer to. Could they have continued to work day-jobs to pay for said tours, or albums while waiting to become popular? Would they have simply given up knowing that the only way to make a decent living (at the time) was to sell out to a label? Maybe.
Today is different than yesterday however and Radiohead is setting an example here for even new startup bands, proving that you can make money without a label... good money. A new band doesn't need to make millions... $50,000 for each member plus covering costs of business would be sufficient for a decent lifestyle in the US (much better in some other countries). So ay with an average band having 5 members + 3 staff people (accounting, distribution, marketing/booking/pr) + studio/equipment costs and distribution costs, you might come to $1,000,000 to support your band in a professional manner as a business.
DO that for 5 years or more and consistently produce high quality music, well you could certainly improve your bottom line to the level that Radiohead enjoys.... and if you keep your staffing small each employee could easily see 1-2 hundred thousand a year, with the members themselves receiving twice that. Do some intelligent investing and you've become quite successful in life.
There are plenty of desktop publishing houses that still have old Powermacs running Mac OS9 6 years later, just so they can run some version of Quark Xpress that they need for old files. SO what? Apple added in support for running OS9 as a virtual machine in OS X as a migration stop gap solution.
Why can't MS do the same using Virtual PC?
If they were smart about it they could provide the option of installing a compatibility layer using Intel Hypervisor and something like Parallels Coherence mode (where just the application window is displayed, instead of the entire desktop environment) and 'easily' provide support for legacy software while updating the main distribution to be non-backwards compatible.
Another option would be to provide discounted services to help those companies port their legacy code. It can't be all that hard to do. Most of those old programs do relatively simple things and the majority of the complexity is in getting the old OS to display it properly (ie: if you separate the business logic from the presentation you'll find that it isn't all that complex).
Sounds like the conflict is between those who have done research and those who haven't. There are many multiple PhDs out there in various scientific fields who are big believers in God and there are many multiple PhDs out there in theological studies who are big believers in Science. There doesn't seem to be a conflict when those two groups get together. It seems to be the people who are ignorant in one or both of the belief systems whom have the problem reconciling the tenets of their belief system or the one they have chosen to adhere to (in the case of the laymen masses who haven't really studied either Science or Religion).
This is pretty typical and it always strikes me as a big waste of time to continue arguing about it but apparently it's not the argument at stake here, it is the loyalty of the masses that is at stake.
Leaders like to have followers. The easiest way to get followers is to find a group of people you can subvert by playing upon their fears. For Religious leaders it is the fear of a world in the hands of pragmatists where there is no justification for bigotry (we are better than those other people because our belief system is better). for Scientific leaders it is the fear of a world in the hands of zealots where bigotry can not be countered by reason and logic (we are better because our way of thinking is better). These leaders don't actually care about the tenets they uphold.... they just care about getting as much of a loyalty base as they can in order to support whatever their real agenda is (money, power, fame).
The followers on the other hand get to feel comfortable in a big group of like-minded people, secure that even if their beliefs are wrong - they are not alone.
SO what did you possibly do before the Nokia? sounds like a lot of eggs in one basket if you can't easily migrate to whatever platform is better than what you've got now. Either that or it's not that big a deal anyways and you'll be more easily swayed than you lead on.... pfahhh missed the boat WAY back in september eh.... and you haven't even seen Leopard yet....
There's billions of dollars that go into embryonic stem cell research around the world. If there were amazing results being found with their use we'd be hearing about it. The US is not like some super advanced technological society that other countries and their scientists dream of becoming in centuries to come... they are just as advanced in medical science... and yet we rarely hear of break-throughs in ESCs...
So reality check. Just because you'd like it to be so, doesn't make it so. Adult stem cell research is decades ahead of embryonic stem cell research because it is easier, cheaper and works better for the patient and will probably always do so. The parent poster is correct.... ESCs are the more lucrative line of research as if/when they do solve the rejection problem it will enable mass-production of general purpose therapies.
"Available for your projects at great expense and inconvenience!"
I'd never ask you to go to great expense or inconvenience on a project.... I might even pay you something and lend you a few tools to get the job done;-p
Yes I am a cold-hearted bastard who will twist your words so far around you'll think that I was the one who came up with them and that you've somehow broken the law by repeating them.... = you can use that BTW (I *promise I won't sue) *promises made on/. are subject to change, please see my website for up-to-date legal promise terms and conditions.
'Service Pack' is the worst marketing of a version release ever. MS would have been much better off if they had used a version number and had added new features each time in addition to fixing bugs, which if they did add features in the SPs it was buried cause I only ever got the impression that they were roll-up bug fix updates.
BTW Apple actually does release SPs.... they just call them Security updates and point-point releases... ie: 10.4.11 is just around the corner for those who are not going to buy 10.5
Have you looked at DNA lately? In the ancient bacteria, fossil fishes and fungi of the world the DNA is svelte and cleanly coded.... all streamlined to do a few tasks very efficiently, then move forward a few billion years and you get rats and primates.... all bloated with junk and things like consciousness that are completely unnecessary to survival, just bells and whistles really.
I'm not sure what it is you're arguing against.. sounds like you're agreeing with parent post 100%;-p
p.s. so when is the bloat in our software going to self-actualize and become our computer's soul? I hope it's not based on Windows... what a freakin mess that would be, all freaked out about security, indecisive and completely self-conscious about being genuine... ugh it probably WILL be windows, that sounds like 99% of the people I know.
"Is it really an Adobe vulnerability? Seems more like it's an IE vulnerability that has been blame-shifted to whoever writes the plugins that might expose it for what it is."
Replies:
"From what I understand, and there isn't much in the way of technical details available, this is not an IE flaw. IE, correctly, doesn't assume that a URI is invalid just because it looks odd. This is correct, because there is no way IE can know if an URI for another protocol is valid or invalid. It is the responsibility of the target program to sanitize its input, knowing full well that it comes from an untrusted source."
Methinks some credit is due.... or maybe more troll mods? it is/.
I'm thinking that everyone is taking the avatar concept too literally... it's more like being able to translate your identity from one world to the next rather than bring in your visual representation wholesale.
Seems like you could bring over things like screen-name, currency, social network, contact info and more meta-attributes while taking on whatever physical attributes are typical in a world.... yes physical appearance is for some people a big part of their 'identity' but in a virtual community where such things can be relative to the laws of that world.... well a translation is probably the best you're going to get. In fact it would be pretty fun to see how that might occur, ie: an avatar in one world might be a 3D cartoon squirrel who is also female and then in another world the avatar would present as a tall skinny blonde chick wearing biker clothes.... and then in an all male world, maybe as a smallish nerdy guy with thick glasses or whatever... seems like part of the fun would be seeing how your character translated and then needing to do some modifications, just for that world... takes the role-playing aspect to another level as well.
Sounds like they need a soft edit contribution module, ie: a way to add commentary, thoughts, content and put it into a queue that an editor can review and incorporate if/when the contribution is useful. Additionally they could let readers vote on these additions... digg style, to promote them to the top of the queue.
This would take some of the territorialism out of the equation by giving the die-hard a role in selecting which edits make it with a back up method of identifying really useful contributions via the community.
Is it really an Adobe vulnerability? Seems more like it's an IE vulnerability that has been blame-shifted to whoever writes the plugins that might expose it for what it is.
And your swapping of operators/prepositions proves that you have little grasp of language either... it's like restating someone's equation 2+3=5 to be 2=3+5 and then declaring them to be an idiot. Insightful my @ss.
As you probably know from your project new inkjet technologies deposit multiple layers in one pass, offset... each head covers a wider portion of the printing area to do this. Picture a brick wall where you build up the staggered stacks 6 high like so:
_-
_-_- _-_-_-
This would happen for each pass of the inkjet head or using a full width inkjet it would all happen sequentially as the head moved forward across the substrate, making 'passes' by alternating which jets sprayed.
Seems to me the biggest time constraint (until they figure out a chemical method) is to array the particle layers correctly and doing it as a continuous roll across the substrate or via some sort of bath (approximately the same method) does not allow for flexible deposition patterns... multiple inkets stationed along a conveyor belt would do a great job. If they can speed up the drying process of each layer by following the head with an infrared source or similar, then each head can deposit as I've shown in my ascii diagram;-p and given the small nature of each 'dot' of material.. it could do 1000 layers at a time instead of 5, which means a full width head arrangement would only need to do 1 million passes to get you 1 millimeter of material of whatever width you have decided on (or narrower) and as long as you need it. At 1 length wise pass every 1 second (given a shortish length, say 30 centimeters or so), that would be ~12 days to get a millimeter thickness material at whatever size you required... with any sort of deposition pattern you want.... using doping agents or not.
A factory floor of these machines (in a clean room of course) could spit out at least 1000 units every two weeks. 50,000 / year. Each unit could conceivably be a custom unit as well given a fixed selection of raw material (you wouldn't want to swap out cartridge heads all the time or risk contamination between runs).
An to address another point about the injet 'ink' needing to be low-viscosity for the piezo jets to work... I've seen articles detailing the use of injets to deposit live skin cells on to a graft substrate... and many other uses... the clay particles referred to in this article are nano sized so would probably be equivalent to the dye particles in the ink itself. I think you're remembering your rubberized coating and attributing properties to the clay it doesn't have... basically if they can use the stuff in a bath and dip the substrate in it to build up nano-meter thick layers... then it can't be too viscous or else the dipping technique wouldn't work, they'd get lumps of the stuff instead of layers.
Of course i'm sure they'll find a good method to do this... if it's worth millions or billions, people figure this stuff out.
How about using an Inkjet method? You could get a good compromise between speed and flexible composition... or even with the roll-to-roll method they could use something like an ink plate to deposit just where they want the liquid to bind.... lots of good engineering research to be done there as well.
I propose and even faster more efficient method... initiate transactions ONLOAD! Simply add all items available on the page to the order when the user loads the page, process the transaction and immediately present them with the order confirmation.
No more having to make decisions about whether or not to buy... imagine the time savings for all involved. If they don't want to buy the items they can call the 1 800 number on the contact page and talk to a customer representative ("I'm sorry all our lines are busy, please hold").
I agree that accountability is needed. Who are these people who are abusing the legislation that the people have passed? Vote them out. I'd say that taxes should have a 1 year date on them.... with maybe a 2 year ramp up period to collect enough money to get something done... if they aren't being used for the intended purpose then they go away or are reduced or expanded as needed. That's how corporate budgets work (yes that also gets abused but in a different way), if you don't accomplish something useful with the budget given to you, you lose it and often lose your job at the same time.
Taxes are typically set in order for the government (State or Federal or City) to aggregate some money to DO SOMETHING. What will they DO with this money? If they will build out Municipal networks with the money, extend fibre to neighborhoods that don't currently get it because it's not profitable enough for the private company to invest, then I am FOR the taxes. If it's just going to go into a slush fund that will pay bonuses or something then I am AGAINST the taxes.
Plus you learn a bunch of jargon, meet other people who might be influential in later years AND rack up that huge debt (which in society is a good thing, cause they know you need to get a job and keep it in order to eventually pay off those loans, not a trivial fact - not quite on par with being married with children w/ a house as far as your stability goes but it's a step in the right direction).
I OTOH chose the other route... I proved myself in the field, built a solid resume of industry jobs and a good selection of references (all of whom do have degrees (several PhDs in there as well). Then again, I started working in my industry at 14 as an illustrator for Surf/Skate companies then moved in to digital design by 17, production artist at a big Ad Agency by 19, partnered with a web developer doing small eCommerce sites in the late 90s at 21, then Art/Web Director for a software company at 23, now Interactive Director at a smallish Agency working on complicated web based applications (high learning curve) starting at 27... OTOH I had an honors scholarship to MIT if I'd wanted it or a full ride to a couple Art Schools, so I may not be a great example of your typical person who didn't go to University/College.
YMMV when choosing not to go to some form of higher education. Depending on what your interests are, you may be able to set your goals and work to attain them... but you better not screw around and you better be able to explain any gaps in your employment with something interesting... cause you'll get no slack based on your degree and what the interviewer knows you had to go through to get it... you don't have that excuse, ie: that trip your planning for 6 months in another country better result in some good stories about how it has changed your life and you are now a better more well rounded individual because of it (probably a good idea even if you do have an advanced degree).
It's more than that... these were also Final round Beta Testers in a real world environment (or several hundred thousand of them if you think about it). So by pricing it high they were able to keep the number of users they needed to support down to relatively small number, ramp up both the patch release to fix bugs and manufacturing... and support the smaller number of users more effectively.
What you should have said is "What's your budget?" "$XX00.00"
"Oh, well in that case we're going to have to skip straight to Web 3.0, the leaner meaner more efficient web! More ROI ya know!" "Really? What about 2.0?" "Oh that's what the expensive Agencies want to sell you on so they can charge millions for a website. They get the marketing magazines to interview them and hype it all up. BUT we are already ahead of the curve.... we do AJAX and MVC without all the overhead of RAILS or those other big packages... it's like buying an RV when you really just want to go to the Beach;-p way to much crap to bring along."
i think that's the first intelligent thing I've ever heard come out of Steve Ballmer's mouth... wait, was that Steve or maybe some other Ballmer at MS?
Anyways... if only they'd apply that same philosophy to their marketing and product development cycles... ie: instead of promising the world in a big new release, they should maybe announce and release a new set of Features every year or so and give the product a new name or something only when a major UI change has occurred... they could even charge for them!!!??? hmmm sounds familiar (www.apple.com)
Let's say the small guy has a killer algorithm but big corps have all the patents for implementing it in a device... even though the algorithm is the only important aspect.. the rest is just cruft to access files or queue up data or something (obvious to those skilled in the art).
Current system says small guy is out of luck and must sell to big corp to make anything out of his discovery or must give it away and hope for some new idea that is less encumbered.
New system *might* allow small guy to start a big corp without being sued by everyone for trivial but factual patent infringements.
Slashdot Mirror
That's nothing... on Iron Chef they regularly have live shellfish that they then boil alive... and of course there is pretty much any cooking show that shows cooking of animal meat... where did that meat come from? Could have been from a pet cow that someone lovingly tended to and treated as a member of their family (for all we know).
I never did understand why cats/dogs/pets in general were given special consideration. Personally I won't eat typical pets because they aren't good eatin' which is to say that people probably already tried them out and decided they didn't taste too good. Now when I hear about dogs bred as foodstock or cats or rats.... I'm curious what they taste like as they must have some culinary quality to them for people to go to all that effort.
Humans are omnivores. We will be until some environmental pressure forces us to do otherwise... and by environmental I don't mean self-imposed restriction.
I think the parent forgot to ask the question: "If Radiohead was a no-name band with no budget for publicity, would they be able to get enough attention to garner the sort of numbers we see here?"
The answer to that question is: Yes. Radiohead is a 'good' band. Given the assumption that they would have continued to write new music and produce albums or even simply tour and play at small venues for 15 years or however long they've been around, they would certainly have become a popular band regardless of expensive marketing campaigns. Whether they would have done so or not is the next valid question... which we'll never know the answer to. Could they have continued to work day-jobs to pay for said tours, or albums while waiting to become popular? Would they have simply given up knowing that the only way to make a decent living (at the time) was to sell out to a label? Maybe.
Today is different than yesterday however and Radiohead is setting an example here for even new startup bands, proving that you can make money without a label... good money. A new band doesn't need to make millions... $50,000 for each member plus covering costs of business would be sufficient for a decent lifestyle in the US (much better in some other countries). So ay with an average band having 5 members + 3 staff people (accounting, distribution, marketing/booking/pr) + studio/equipment costs and distribution costs, you might come to $1,000,000 to support your band in a professional manner as a business.
DO that for 5 years or more and consistently produce high quality music, well you could certainly improve your bottom line to the level that Radiohead enjoys.... and if you keep your staffing small each employee could easily see 1-2 hundred thousand a year, with the members themselves receiving twice that. Do some intelligent investing and you've become quite successful in life.
There are plenty of desktop publishing houses that still have old Powermacs running Mac OS9 6 years later, just so they can run some version of Quark Xpress that they need for old files. SO what? Apple added in support for running OS9 as a virtual machine in OS X as a migration stop gap solution.
Why can't MS do the same using Virtual PC?
If they were smart about it they could provide the option of installing a compatibility layer using Intel Hypervisor and something like Parallels Coherence mode (where just the application window is displayed, instead of the entire desktop environment) and 'easily' provide support for legacy software while updating the main distribution to be non-backwards compatible.
Another option would be to provide discounted services to help those companies port their legacy code. It can't be all that hard to do. Most of those old programs do relatively simple things and the majority of the complexity is in getting the old OS to display it properly (ie: if you separate the business logic from the presentation you'll find that it isn't all that complex).
Sounds like the conflict is between those who have done research and those who haven't. There are many multiple PhDs out there in various scientific fields who are big believers in God and there are many multiple PhDs out there in theological studies who are big believers in Science. There doesn't seem to be a conflict when those two groups get together. It seems to be the people who are ignorant in one or both of the belief systems whom have the problem reconciling the tenets of their belief system or the one they have chosen to adhere to (in the case of the laymen masses who haven't really studied either Science or Religion).
This is pretty typical and it always strikes me as a big waste of time to continue arguing about it but apparently it's not the argument at stake here, it is the loyalty of the masses that is at stake.
Leaders like to have followers. The easiest way to get followers is to find a group of people you can subvert by playing upon their fears. For Religious leaders it is the fear of a world in the hands of pragmatists where there is no justification for bigotry (we are better than those other people because our belief system is better). for Scientific leaders it is the fear of a world in the hands of zealots where bigotry can not be countered by reason and logic (we are better because our way of thinking is better). These leaders don't actually care about the tenets they uphold.... they just care about getting as much of a loyalty base as they can in order to support whatever their real agenda is (money, power, fame).
The followers on the other hand get to feel comfortable in a big group of like-minded people, secure that even if their beliefs are wrong - they are not alone.
SO what did you possibly do before the Nokia? sounds like a lot of eggs in one basket if you can't easily migrate to whatever platform is better than what you've got now. Either that or it's not that big a deal anyways and you'll be more easily swayed than you lead on.... pfahhh missed the boat WAY back in september eh.... and you haven't even seen Leopard yet....
There's billions of dollars that go into embryonic stem cell research around the world. If there were amazing results being found with their use we'd be hearing about it. The US is not like some super advanced technological society that other countries and their scientists dream of becoming in centuries to come... they are just as advanced in medical science... and yet we rarely hear of break-throughs in ESCs...
So reality check. Just because you'd like it to be so, doesn't make it so. Adult stem cell research is decades ahead of embryonic stem cell research because it is easier, cheaper and works better for the patient and will probably always do so. The parent poster is correct.... ESCs are the more lucrative line of research as if/when they do solve the rejection problem it will enable mass-production of general purpose therapies.
"Available for your projects at great expense and inconvenience!"
;-p
/. are subject to change, please see my website for up-to-date legal promise terms and conditions.
I'd never ask you to go to great expense or inconvenience on a project.... I might even pay you something and lend you a few tools to get the job done
Yes I am a cold-hearted bastard who will twist your words so far around you'll think that I was the one who came up with them and that you've somehow broken the law by repeating them.... = you can use that BTW (I *promise I won't sue) *promises made on
'Service Pack' is the worst marketing of a version release ever. MS would have been much better off if they had used a version number and had added new features each time in addition to fixing bugs, which if they did add features in the SPs it was buried cause I only ever got the impression that they were roll-up bug fix updates.
BTW Apple actually does release SPs.... they just call them Security updates and point-point releases... ie: 10.4.11 is just around the corner for those who are not going to buy 10.5
Have you looked at DNA lately? In the ancient bacteria, fossil fishes and fungi of the world the DNA is svelte and cleanly coded.... all streamlined to do a few tasks very efficiently, then move forward a few billion years and you get rats and primates.... all bloated with junk and things like consciousness that are completely unnecessary to survival, just bells and whistles really.
;-p
I'm not sure what it is you're arguing against.. sounds like you're agreeing with parent post 100%
p.s. so when is the bloat in our software going to self-actualize and become our computer's soul? I hope it's not based on Windows... what a freakin mess that would be, all freaked out about security, indecisive and completely self-conscious about being genuine... ugh it probably WILL be windows, that sounds like 99% of the people I know.
I just stated this on the Adobe vulnerability story.... clickie to see the irony
/.
My post:
"Is it really an Adobe vulnerability? Seems more like it's an IE vulnerability that has been blame-shifted to whoever writes the plugins that might expose it for what it is."
Replies:
"From what I understand, and there isn't much in the way of technical details available, this is not an IE flaw. IE, correctly, doesn't assume that a URI is invalid just because it looks odd. This is correct, because there is no way IE can know if an URI for another protocol is valid or invalid. It is the responsibility of the target program to sanitize its input, knowing full well that it comes from an untrusted source."
Methinks some credit is due.... or maybe more troll mods? it is
I'm thinking that everyone is taking the avatar concept too literally... it's more like being able to translate your identity from one world to the next rather than bring in your visual representation wholesale.
Seems like you could bring over things like screen-name, currency, social network, contact info and more meta-attributes while taking on whatever physical attributes are typical in a world.... yes physical appearance is for some people a big part of their 'identity' but in a virtual community where such things can be relative to the laws of that world.... well a translation is probably the best you're going to get. In fact it would be pretty fun to see how that might occur, ie: an avatar in one world might be a 3D cartoon squirrel who is also female and then in another world the avatar would present as a tall skinny blonde chick wearing biker clothes.... and then in an all male world, maybe as a smallish nerdy guy with thick glasses or whatever... seems like part of the fun would be seeing how your character translated and then needing to do some modifications, just for that world... takes the role-playing aspect to another level as well.
Sounds like they need a soft edit contribution module, ie: a way to add commentary, thoughts, content and put it into a queue that an editor can review and incorporate if/when the contribution is useful. Additionally they could let readers vote on these additions... digg style, to promote them to the top of the queue.
This would take some of the territorialism out of the equation by giving the die-hard a role in selecting which edits make it with a back up method of identifying really useful contributions via the community.
Is it really an Adobe vulnerability? Seems more like it's an IE vulnerability that has been blame-shifted to whoever writes the plugins that might expose it for what it is.
And your swapping of operators/prepositions proves that you have little grasp of language either... it's like restating someone's equation 2+3=5 to be 2=3+5 and then declaring them to be an idiot. Insightful my @ss.
Maybe he's on a Mac?
As you probably know from your project new inkjet technologies deposit multiple layers in one pass, offset... each head covers a wider portion of the printing area to do this. Picture a brick wall where you build up the staggered stacks 6 high like so:
;-p and given the small nature of each 'dot' of material.. it could do 1000 layers at a time instead of 5, which means a full width head arrangement would only need to do 1 million passes to get you 1 millimeter of material of whatever width you have decided on (or narrower) and as long as you need it. At 1 length wise pass every 1 second (given a shortish length, say 30 centimeters or so), that would be ~12 days to get a millimeter thickness material at whatever size you required... with any sort of deposition pattern you want.... using doping agents or not.
_-
_-_-
_-_-_-
This would happen for each pass of the inkjet head or using a full width inkjet it would all happen sequentially as the head moved forward across the substrate, making 'passes' by alternating which jets sprayed.
Seems to me the biggest time constraint (until they figure out a chemical method) is to array the particle layers correctly and doing it as a continuous roll across the substrate or via some sort of bath (approximately the same method) does not allow for flexible deposition patterns... multiple inkets stationed along a conveyor belt would do a great job. If they can speed up the drying process of each layer by following the head with an infrared source or similar, then each head can deposit as I've shown in my ascii diagram
A factory floor of these machines (in a clean room of course) could spit out at least 1000 units every two weeks. 50,000 / year. Each unit could conceivably be a custom unit as well given a fixed selection of raw material (you wouldn't want to swap out cartridge heads all the time or risk contamination between runs).
An to address another point about the injet 'ink' needing to be low-viscosity for the piezo jets to work... I've seen articles detailing the use of injets to deposit live skin cells on to a graft substrate... and many other uses... the clay particles referred to in this article are nano sized so would probably be equivalent to the dye particles in the ink itself. I think you're remembering your rubberized coating and attributing properties to the clay it doesn't have... basically if they can use the stuff in a bath and dip the substrate in it to build up nano-meter thick layers... then it can't be too viscous or else the dipping technique wouldn't work, they'd get lumps of the stuff instead of layers.
Of course i'm sure they'll find a good method to do this... if it's worth millions or billions, people figure this stuff out.
How about using an Inkjet method? You could get a good compromise between speed and flexible composition... or even with the roll-to-roll method they could use something like an ink plate to deposit just where they want the liquid to bind.... lots of good engineering research to be done there as well.
I propose and even faster more efficient method... initiate transactions ONLOAD! Simply add all items available on the page to the order when the user loads the page, process the transaction and immediately present them with the order confirmation.
No more having to make decisions about whether or not to buy... imagine the time savings for all involved. If they don't want to buy the items they can call the 1 800 number on the contact page and talk to a customer representative ("I'm sorry all our lines are busy, please hold").
I agree that accountability is needed. Who are these people who are abusing the legislation that the people have passed? Vote them out. I'd say that taxes should have a 1 year date on them.... with maybe a 2 year ramp up period to collect enough money to get something done... if they aren't being used for the intended purpose then they go away or are reduced or expanded as needed. That's how corporate budgets work (yes that also gets abused but in a different way), if you don't accomplish something useful with the budget given to you, you lose it and often lose your job at the same time.
Taxes are typically set in order for the government (State or Federal or City) to aggregate some money to DO SOMETHING. What will they DO with this money? If they will build out Municipal networks with the money, extend fibre to neighborhoods that don't currently get it because it's not profitable enough for the private company to invest, then I am FOR the taxes. If it's just going to go into a slush fund that will pay bonuses or something then I am AGAINST the taxes.
Does anyone know what these taxes are for?
Plus you learn a bunch of jargon, meet other people who might be influential in later years AND rack up that huge debt (which in society is a good thing, cause they know you need to get a job and keep it in order to eventually pay off those loans, not a trivial fact - not quite on par with being married with children w/ a house as far as your stability goes but it's a step in the right direction).
I OTOH chose the other route... I proved myself in the field, built a solid resume of industry jobs and a good selection of references (all of whom do have degrees (several PhDs in there as well). Then again, I started working in my industry at 14 as an illustrator for Surf/Skate companies then moved in to digital design by 17, production artist at a big Ad Agency by 19, partnered with a web developer doing small eCommerce sites in the late 90s at 21, then Art/Web Director for a software company at 23, now Interactive Director at a smallish Agency working on complicated web based applications (high learning curve) starting at 27... OTOH I had an honors scholarship to MIT if I'd wanted it or a full ride to a couple Art Schools, so I may not be a great example of your typical person who didn't go to University/College.
YMMV when choosing not to go to some form of higher education. Depending on what your interests are, you may be able to set your goals and work to attain them... but you better not screw around and you better be able to explain any gaps in your employment with something interesting... cause you'll get no slack based on your degree and what the interviewer knows you had to go through to get it... you don't have that excuse, ie: that trip your planning for 6 months in another country better result in some good stories about how it has changed your life and you are now a better more well rounded individual because of it (probably a good idea even if you do have an advanced degree).
It's more than that... these were also Final round Beta Testers in a real world environment (or several hundred thousand of them if you think about it). So by pricing it high they were able to keep the number of users they needed to support down to relatively small number, ramp up both the patch release to fix bugs and manufacturing... and support the smaller number of users more effectively.
What you should have said is "What's your budget?" "$XX00.00"
;-p way to much crap to bring along."
"Oh, well in that case we're going to have to skip straight to Web 3.0, the leaner meaner more efficient web! More ROI ya know!" "Really? What about 2.0?" "Oh that's what the expensive Agencies want to sell you on so they can charge millions for a website. They get the marketing magazines to interview them and hype it all up. BUT we are already ahead of the curve.... we do AJAX and MVC without all the overhead of RAILS or those other big packages... it's like buying an RV when you really just want to go to the Beach
i think that's the first intelligent thing I've ever heard come out of Steve Ballmer's mouth... wait, was that Steve or maybe some other Ballmer at MS?
Anyways... if only they'd apply that same philosophy to their marketing and product development cycles... ie: instead of promising the world in a big new release, they should maybe announce and release a new set of Features every year or so and give the product a new name or something only when a major UI change has occurred... they could even charge for them!!!??? hmmm sounds familiar (www.apple.com)
Let's say the small guy has a killer algorithm but big corps have all the patents for implementing it in a device... even though the algorithm is the only important aspect.. the rest is just cruft to access files or queue up data or something (obvious to those skilled in the art).
Current system says small guy is out of luck and must sell to big corp to make anything out of his discovery or must give it away and hope for some new idea that is less encumbered.
New system *might* allow small guy to start a big corp without being sued by everyone for trivial but factual patent infringements.