The responsibility vs authority thing is exactly the same for IT as it is for just about any other activity involving many people.
When I was in the army 20 years ago I had the "responsibility" to get a bunch of guys to move some furniture. Unfortunately I did not have authority over these troops since they belonged to another division.
So far the dummy books deal with non-lethal issues. The thought of encouraging a dummy-level person to dick with the steering, braking and engine of a lethal killing machine does not help one sleep well at night. I hope, but I doubt, that the book has only one page: "If you're a dummy then don't dick with your car!"
Economics is an academic occupation that does not reflect the real world.
The simple truth of low income countries is that when they are faced with unaffordable medical systems (including medicines and medical procedures etc) they simply die.
The only reason to use x86 is Windows. If you're going to use WinCE or Linux then you may as well use some other smaller/faster/cheaper/lower wattage CPU like an ARM, MIPS or SH4 or something.
Considering that the weight (if one could call it that) of WinCE is behind ARM, the use of WinCE for this product is pretty dopey.
These Geode tablets have been promoted since Nat Semi owned Geode (a few years back). Geode has pretty much gone nowhere and does not look like it will change. I'm quite suprised that AMD didn't rather put their effort into their MIPS device or license ARM and make an ARM device.
It is interesting to note that AMD is one of very few major CPU vendors that does not use ARM for their mobile/low-power 32-bit stuff.
Uou entirely miss my point. The user (and, by proxy, Dell, Gateway etc) see that they're selling a $2000 computer of which WinXP is only say 10% of the cost. In the case of the $800 computer, WinXp is only 20% of the cost. It is hardly worth fighting MS (by switching to Linux etc) to reduce the cost by 10%.
If, however, the cost of the computer came down to say $300 of which $200 was software, the picture changes completely. Now by switching to say Linux you'd be able to get your computer for a third of the cost.
For a lot of lower income countries (India, China, etc), the difference between a $1800 and $2000 price tag is academic, it is still too expensive. For an IT department buying computers 10% here or there is not a huge deal. However a $100 computer is obviously far more easy for the lower income earner to buy than a $300 computer. Similarly a 60%+ saving will make a huge difference to the IT department.
Ballmer must be nuts! A low cost computer will kill MS.
In the old days of mini-computers, sellers would charge more for the minicomputer version of software than for the PC version, even when less people were using the PC version (ie. there was no volume discount argument). The reason they could get away with this was that people who'd paid for a $10k computer would balk less at paying more for the software.
Turning this around, while MS charges a fraction of the cost of a new PC, people are prepared to see it as a relatively insignificant expense (eg here in NZ, I'd pay probably NZD1K retain for a computer (inc monitor etc and WinXP)) and WinXP is only say NZD200 of this.
If however the computer price came down to say NZD400, of which WinXP was half that, then I'd have a much harder time brushing the WinXP cost under the carpet.
Lower PC costs will force lower software prices.
Now I have RTFA, but Ballmer probably has it in his head that people will pay NZD1K for a computer and if the hardware costs only NZD200 then he can put NZD800 in his pocket. People are not as dumb as that.
The car was one of the original targets for WinCE V 1.0... about 6 or so years back now. There was a CD-player size thing called the Clarion or some such that never really made any impact.
Since then they have made glossies for an automotive version (along side their PDA version, Smartphone edition etc), though it isn't apparent that they've got many customers onboard.
So long as they stay the hell away from brakes and engine control I'm not too worried.
So you think MS is going to own every piece of hardware/software between the studio and the viewer? No doubt WinCE running on all the routers, remote controls etc....
Given that MS even has a reboot button on their latest mouse, I can see this MS-HDTVoIP scenario being what one might call "sub-fun". Sounds like there are going to be a lot more non-TV-watchers in the future.
It is your duty to consume, want more, but more etc
I don't watch any TV (no reception:-)), but I can see a similarity to those people who said "But why would I want CD quality? Tape or LP is fine!". I guess after watching HDTV for a while, going back to old NTSC/PAL will be hard on the eyes.
There was a project some while ago to get NT running on PPC. AFAIK, some of this kernel work was used to get the PPC port of WinCE working.
The biggest question that MS would ask is "why". ie. How would it hurt them to keep on their current x86 platforms? The only area where I can see non-x86 making a significnat impact is with low power (wattage) devices. For these, MS would likely back a new ARM-based platform.
Essentially you're sying that so long as I don't swallow a lump big enough to hit critical mass and blow myself up I can consume as much plutonium as I want. If you believe this, I have some plutonium underpants to sell you. Your kids will be able to count to 16 on their fingers.
Sure caffeeine is a toxin, but the body can process it and remove it in sub-lethal quanities. Swallow/inhale some caffiene and wait a few days and it is out of your system. I doubt plutoniam particles in the lungs will be ejected quickly.
I hunch that all we have here is some drivvling over the dictionary meaning of "toxic". Asbestos is not toxic (you could swallow a lump of it, nor is sand or carbon. But when these materials get into the wrong part of your body (eg lungs) in the wrong form (eg. asbestos fibres, fine dust, coal dust) your body will not appreciate it. Plutonium is the same, but the amounts required are far lower.
All the FDA are probably doing is test that the RFID devices have no negative impact on your body. ie. they don't emit RF that will cause cancer and the plastic they are made of doesn't cause you to get sick.
I don't believe the FDA has a mandate to set any moral guidelines (ie saying RFIDs are a "good thing" or a "bad thing"). Same deal when they check abortion drugs etc.
Saying whether to allow RFID as a "good thing" or "bad thing" and should be legal or not is something that congress or whatever do.
There are probably well over a thousand individual contributors. How can anyone haggle as to what % they should get ??on a per line basis??: "My code is more complicated than yours...").
There is no single legal entity that can negotiate on behalf of everyone, so there cannot be an agreement on the $50K. Getting everyone together and agreeing on amount would cost a bundle.
If almost everyone agree but, say, 1% of the people refuse then you get into a hostage situation. ie. 99% will take their slice of the $50k and the last 1% say no, or say they want more. Now what? OK, you could in theory rewrite those sections and throw those people out, but that is not realistic. It would cost more than $50k to rewrite that 1% of the code.
At the end of the day the whole idea is broken and is as meaningless as trying to sell/buy the sky.
The value cannot be expressed in dollar terms because there can not be (realisticly) any seller.
The Linux code is owned by, perhaps, thousands of people [the individual contributors/copyrightholders]. Each of these could sell you non-GPL rights to their code, but not to anyone elses.
Linus "owns" probably less than 10% of the code. That'a a much bigger share than the 0.05% or so that I've written, but he still can't sell it.
Funny how you say that they don't understand genetics, yet that is what they do for a living.
I'm not saying that people are acting in bad faith or that we should kill research. What I am concerned with is the "trust me, I'm a scientist" attitude that you are promoting. Even when applying the best knowledge at the time, people make mistakes. Some mistakes are easy to reverse and some are not. The scientists of the day construct models and work to those models. The scientists of tomorrow will debunk those theories and models and make new ones.
Studies showed Thalidamide (sp?) was OK. Doctors prescribed it because it was a very useful drug. Suddenly deformed people started being born.
Thirty years ago the flavour of the day treatment for a variety of many mental illnesses was shock therapy. It is now frowned upon. The people applying it were not witchdoctors or alternative healers, they were the scientists of the day.
The dumb-ass that brought possums and rabbits to NZ or snakes to that pacific island (some US base, I forget which)did it with the best of intentions. Now those animals cause havoc because there are no natural preditors.
All the scientists involved did this as their life's work. They understood the science of the day and acted accordingly. They still made the wrong actions though.
GM can perhaps be controlled in the lab, but remember that pollen is genetic material and some pollen can travel thousands of miles to contaminate other crops. Once the genie is out of the bottle it is impossible to control.
Likening GM to GPL is really stupid. Humans have control over GPL, but they don't have control over genetic material once it is released into the wild.
I'm not religious, so I'm not saying "Don't play God", but it is the height of arrogance for scientists to say they understand genetics sufficiently to control GM.
Some GM stuff in labs can perhaps be controlled, but once modified geness are released into the RealWorld they are very difficult to control. The risk of doing bad things is great. We already see the effects of cross contamination of crops etc.
If this goes more widespread (eg. GM trees for paper production) we can expect weird things happening (eg. say we remove some substance from trees to make them easier to process but that gene provides disease resistance etc. If that crosses into wild populations then we end up with sick forests etc).
Agriculture and food production are regulated and controlled (well to a degree anyway), industrial stuff less so. It concerns me that all the GM bads we see in agriculture will be far worse in the industrial sector.
Yes, very true. However very few of these places are going to have an IP capable infrastructure that will carry VoIP calls internationally so I think you're argument is moot.
Most telephony roll-out into third world and rural areas is based on digital. Approx 15 years back now I worked at Plessey. One of the projects there was making microwave-based phone links with the idea of being able to place a network phone booths in 3 world villages without having to roll wire etc. Apart from the cost of actually laying wire, there was a huge problem with the wire ending up being sold as scrap metal.
There is no real reason why international dial-up calls have to be expensive and VoIP ones cheap. Once dial-up calls hit the first exchange (in most places) they turn into digital soup anyway. Having dedicated switching that is suited to dial up (isochorous etc) means you can stuff more dial up calls through a given wire than IP calls (which must carry all the extra IP crap). Extra capacity in those wires can be used to shift IP traffic.
The days of high cost international calls are limited. Here in New Zealand I can use my Vodafone mobile to call various countries (Australia, Canada, US, UK, Ireland) at the same rate as a local call.
So far, VoIP's main attraction has been lower cost calls. THis won't last and VoIP will have to find a better way to justify its existence.
Probably likely to be the inefficient burning in Soweto and high motor vehicle use too.
I expect that altitude and distance from the sea are also contributors. Burning at altitude probably produces a higher reading than at sea level since there's less gas around to dilute and there's less complete combustion. I expect the sea would have a moderating effect too (perhaps why places like LA and Mexico City don't show up).
NB all the "I expects" because I hunch that this is what happening and I have no scientific backup.
There is much sense to what you say here. After all, it is easier to write/ modify/ debug/model a bunch of things on planet earth than it is to do this with a little itty-bitty piece of software running in a probe.
However, to do such modelling etc on the ground typically means pumping a hell of a lot of diagnostic trace stuff to earth for analysis. Likely more than can be accomodated on the link. For this reason, some AI stuff could help to identify the problems faster and allow further in-depth debugging of what is wrong.
The skeptical view is also that the AI group has got to fly something to justify their budget.
Slashdot Mirror
When I was in the army 20 years ago I had the "responsibility" to get a bunch of guys to move some furniture. Unfortunately I did not have authority over these troops since they belonged to another division.
After a few years, if you're lucky, she becomes useful for more mundane tasks like shopping etc. After even longer you won't even know she's there.
Now we know why there isn't a fourth part of the series.
Intel does not own ARM. ARM do. Intel licenses from ARM.
The simple truth of low income countries is that when they are faced with unaffordable medical systems (including medicines and medical procedures etc) they simply die.
Considering that the weight (if one could call it that) of WinCE is behind ARM, the use of WinCE for this product is pretty dopey.
These Geode tablets have been promoted since Nat Semi owned Geode (a few years back). Geode has pretty much gone nowhere and does not look like it will change. I'm quite suprised that AMD didn't rather put their effort into their MIPS device or license ARM and make an ARM device.
It is interesting to note that AMD is one of very few major CPU vendors that does not use ARM for their mobile/low-power 32-bit stuff.
If, however, the cost of the computer came down to say $300 of which $200 was software, the picture changes completely. Now by switching to say Linux you'd be able to get your computer for a third of the cost.
For a lot of lower income countries (India, China, etc), the difference between a $1800 and $2000 price tag is academic, it is still too expensive. For an IT department buying computers 10% here or there is not a huge deal. However a $100 computer is obviously far more easy for the lower income earner to buy than a $300 computer. Similarly a 60%+ saving will make a huge difference to the IT department.
Ballmer must be nuts! A low cost computer will kill MS.
In the old days of mini-computers, sellers would charge more for the minicomputer version of software than for the PC version, even when less people were using the PC version (ie. there was no volume discount argument). The reason they could get away with this was that people who'd paid for a $10k computer would balk less at paying more for the software.
Turning this around, while MS charges a fraction of the cost of a new PC, people are prepared to see it as a relatively insignificant expense (eg here in NZ, I'd pay probably NZD1K retain for a computer (inc monitor etc and WinXP)) and WinXP is only say NZD200 of this.
If however the computer price came down to say NZD400, of which WinXP was half that, then I'd have a much harder time brushing the WinXP cost under the carpet.
Lower PC costs will force lower software prices.
Now I have RTFA, but Ballmer probably has it in his head that people will pay NZD1K for a computer and if the hardware costs only NZD200 then he can put NZD800 in his pocket. People are not as dumb as that.
Since then they have made glossies for an automotive version (along side their PDA version, Smartphone edition etc), though it isn't apparent that they've got many customers onboard.
So long as they stay the hell away from brakes and engine control I'm not too worried.
Given that MS even has a reboot button on their latest mouse, I can see this MS-HDTVoIP scenario being what one might call "sub-fun". Sounds like there are going to be a lot more non-TV-watchers in the future.
I don't watch any TV (no reception :-)), but I can see a similarity to those people who said "But why would I want CD quality? Tape or LP is fine!". I guess after watching HDTV for a while, going back to old NTSC/PAL will be hard on the eyes.
Given the problems involved in doing VoIP, the mind boggles as HDTVoIP with its far bigger hunger for hbandwidth.
The biggest question that MS would ask is "why". ie. How would it hurt them to keep on their current x86 platforms? The only area where I can see non-x86 making a significnat impact is with low power (wattage) devices. For these, MS would likely back a new ARM-based platform.
Sure caffeeine is a toxin, but the body can process it and remove it in sub-lethal quanities. Swallow/inhale some caffiene and wait a few days and it is out of your system. I doubt plutoniam particles in the lungs will be ejected quickly.
I hunch that all we have here is some drivvling over the dictionary meaning of "toxic". Asbestos is not toxic (you could swallow a lump of it, nor is sand or carbon. But when these materials get into the wrong part of your body (eg lungs) in the wrong form (eg. asbestos fibres, fine dust, coal dust) your body will not appreciate it. Plutonium is the same, but the amounts required are far lower.
I don't believe the FDA has a mandate to set any moral guidelines (ie saying RFIDs are a "good thing" or a "bad thing"). Same deal when they check abortion drugs etc.
Saying whether to allow RFID as a "good thing" or "bad thing" and should be legal or not is something that congress or whatever do.
There are probably well over a thousand individual contributors. How can anyone haggle as to what % they should get ??on a per line basis??: "My code is more complicated than yours...").
There is no single legal entity that can negotiate on behalf of everyone, so there cannot be an agreement on the $50K. Getting everyone together and agreeing on amount would cost a bundle.
If almost everyone agree but, say, 1% of the people refuse then you get into a hostage situation. ie. 99% will take their slice of the $50k and the last 1% say no, or say they want more. Now what? OK, you could in theory rewrite those sections and throw those people out, but that is not realistic. It would cost more than $50k to rewrite that 1% of the code.
At the end of the day the whole idea is broken and is as meaningless as trying to sell/buy the sky.
The Linux code is owned by, perhaps, thousands of people [the individual contributors/copyrightholders]. Each of these could sell you non-GPL rights to their code, but not to anyone elses.
Linus "owns" probably less than 10% of the code. That'a a much bigger share than the 0.05% or so that I've written, but he still can't sell it.
I'm not saying that people are acting in bad faith or that we should kill research. What I am concerned with is the "trust me, I'm a scientist" attitude that you are promoting. Even when applying the best knowledge at the time, people make mistakes. Some mistakes are easy to reverse and some are not. The scientists of the day construct models and work to those models. The scientists of tomorrow will debunk those theories and models and make new ones.
Studies showed Thalidamide (sp?) was OK. Doctors prescribed it because it was a very useful drug. Suddenly deformed people started being born.
Thirty years ago the flavour of the day treatment for a variety of many mental illnesses was shock therapy. It is now frowned upon. The people applying it were not witchdoctors or alternative healers, they were the scientists of the day.
The dumb-ass that brought possums and rabbits to NZ or snakes to that pacific island (some US base, I forget which)did it with the best of intentions. Now those animals cause havoc because there are no natural preditors.
All the scientists involved did this as their life's work. They understood the science of the day and acted accordingly. They still made the wrong actions though.
GM can perhaps be controlled in the lab, but remember that pollen is genetic material and some pollen can travel thousands of miles to contaminate other crops. Once the genie is out of the bottle it is impossible to control.
Likening GM to GPL is really stupid. Humans have control over GPL, but they don't have control over genetic material once it is released into the wild.
Some GM stuff in labs can perhaps be controlled, but once modified geness are released into the RealWorld they are very difficult to control. The risk of doing bad things is great. We already see the effects of cross contamination of crops etc.
If this goes more widespread (eg. GM trees for paper production) we can expect weird things happening (eg. say we remove some substance from trees to make them easier to process but that gene provides disease resistance etc. If that crosses into wild populations then we end up with sick forests etc).
Agriculture and food production are regulated and controlled (well to a degree anyway), industrial stuff less so. It concerns me that all the GM bads we see in agriculture will be far worse in the industrial sector.
Most telephony roll-out into third world and rural areas is based on digital. Approx 15 years back now I worked at Plessey. One of the projects there was making microwave-based phone links with the idea of being able to place a network phone booths in 3 world villages without having to roll wire etc. Apart from the cost of actually laying wire, there was a huge problem with the wire ending up being sold as scrap metal.
The days of high cost international calls are limited. Here in New Zealand I can use my Vodafone mobile to call various countries (Australia, Canada, US, UK, Ireland) at the same rate as a local call.
So far, VoIP's main attraction has been lower cost calls. THis won't last and VoIP will have to find a better way to justify its existence.
I expect that altitude and distance from the sea are also contributors. Burning at altitude probably produces a higher reading than at sea level since there's less gas around to dilute and there's less complete combustion. I expect the sea would have a moderating effect too (perhaps why places like LA and Mexico City don't show up).
NB all the "I expects" because I hunch that this is what happening and I have no scientific backup.
LEAVE THE LAPTOP BEHIND!
However, to do such modelling etc on the ground typically means pumping a hell of a lot of diagnostic trace stuff to earth for analysis. Likely more than can be accomodated on the link. For this reason, some AI stuff could help to identify the problems faster and allow further in-depth debugging of what is wrong.
The skeptical view is also that the AI group has got to fly something to justify their budget.