2-and-a-half is old enough, and a EEE works fine.
on
Computer For a Child?
·
· Score: 1
I can say from experience. My daughter got her EEE for Christmas last year, she was 2-years-7-months. She hasn't broken it, and she very quickly developed the skills she needed to operate it effectively.
Teaching her was a great excuse to spend time together. It was actually good for me too -- it's instructive to have to unlearn everything to the point where you can explain to a child that young.
Now, a year later, she turns it on, waits for the red X to disappear indicating that wireless is up, starts up the browser, and then uses the address drop-down to find the site she wants to go to (she's memorized the shape of the address for each one). She goes to CBC kids, PBS kids, TotLOL, etc.
She also loves Tuxpaint.
If the Manhattan Project had used Proprietary Physics, we wouldn't be so worried about terrorists building bombs to drop on us. Problem is, all these photons and atoms and stuff are Public Domain; anybody with a calculator and a few pounds of Plutonium can make use of the technology.
Granted, there were observations that didn't jive with existing theories. The failure of Michelson-Morley (sp?) had a lot of folks wandering around scratching their heads.
But it's the predictive power of a theory that really matters. A modern example is String Theory; it explains things in a really nifty (and mathematically appealing) way, and ties up some incongruities in current theory, but until we can run the experiments to verify it, it's not much more than pretty numbers.
I though the speed of the propogation of gravitational force was equal to the speed of light. Is there something new that's been discovered that I'm not aware of?
I'm pretty sure I've heard about using lasers to power spacecraft. The idea is that, rather than having spacecraft lug around a S%$tload of expensive fuel, keep the fuel back here on earth, and beam a laser at the craft. The craft harvests the energy in the laser, probably using photovoltaic cell technology. The beatiful part is that the craft will never outrun the power source.
Chiao has published the paper describing the theory, complete with mathematical arguments that "seem to be correct." Now, he's moving on to perform the experiments that will either verify or refute the theory.
This is the way it's done! Black Holes were nothing more than a theory with mathematical arguments that "seem(ed) to be correct", until CHANDRA started supplying experimental evidence. General Relativity was a theory with mathermatical aruments that "seem(ed) to be correct", until we managed to observe light bending around the mass of the sun.
There's nothing wrong with publishing a theory that has yet to be proven; many theoretical physiscists never participate in experimentation. They publish theories.
Can anyone think of an instance in which it takes more bits to express the dollar value of data than it takes to express the data themselves?
Example: Seven bits are required to express the number 127. Add another byte to express a dollar sign (in ASCII), and you're looking at 15 bits to express $127. Has anybody ever paid more than $127 for 15 or fewer bits of info?
Slashdot Mirror
I can say from experience. My daughter got her EEE for Christmas last year, she was 2-years-7-months. She hasn't broken it, and she very quickly developed the skills she needed to operate it effectively. Teaching her was a great excuse to spend time together. It was actually good for me too -- it's instructive to have to unlearn everything to the point where you can explain to a child that young. Now, a year later, she turns it on, waits for the red X to disappear indicating that wireless is up, starts up the browser, and then uses the address drop-down to find the site she wants to go to (she's memorized the shape of the address for each one). She goes to CBC kids, PBS kids, TotLOL, etc. She also loves Tuxpaint.
They've got this fifteen year old student who has a neat idea, so they implement it to feed off the publicity generated by the issue of privacy.
"Look at us, we've got fifteen year old students building contrversial technology. Give us money."
The justification they give of helping students find each other is a crock.
If the Manhattan Project had used Proprietary Physics, we wouldn't be so worried about terrorists building bombs to drop on us. Problem is, all these photons and atoms and stuff are Public Domain; anybody with a calculator and a few pounds of Plutonium can make use of the technology.
Non-stop, twenty-four hours a day, baby seals calling in yelling and screaming:
Help! Help! There's a man coming toward me, he's got a club in his hand. Help! My co-ordinates are--humpph.
Granted, there were observations that didn't jive with existing theories. The failure of Michelson-Morley (sp?) had a lot of folks wandering around scratching their heads.
But it's the predictive power of a theory that really matters. A modern example is String Theory; it explains things in a really nifty (and mathematically appealing) way, and ties up some incongruities in current theory, but until we can run the experiments to verify it, it's not much more than pretty numbers.
I though the speed of the propogation of gravitational force was equal to the speed of light. Is there something new that's been discovered that I'm not aware of?
I'm pretty sure I've heard about using lasers to power spacecraft. The idea is that, rather than having spacecraft lug around a S%$tload of expensive fuel, keep the fuel back here on earth, and beam a laser at the craft. The craft harvests the energy in the laser, probably using photovoltaic cell technology. The beatiful part is that the craft will never outrun the power source.
Chiao has published the paper describing the theory, complete with mathematical arguments that "seem to be correct." Now, he's moving on to perform the experiments that will either verify or refute the theory. This is the way it's done! Black Holes were nothing more than a theory with mathematical arguments that "seem(ed) to be correct", until CHANDRA started supplying experimental evidence. General Relativity was a theory with mathermatical aruments that "seem(ed) to be correct", until we managed to observe light bending around the mass of the sun. There's nothing wrong with publishing a theory that has yet to be proven; many theoretical physiscists never participate in experimentation. They publish theories.
Can anyone think of an instance in which it takes more bits to express the dollar value of data than it takes to express the data themselves? Example: Seven bits are required to express the number 127. Add another byte to express a dollar sign (in ASCII), and you're looking at 15 bits to express $127. Has anybody ever paid more than $127 for 15 or fewer bits of info?
Business.com went for $8,000,000, $666,666.66 ber byte.