Add up IE6, 7 and 8 and they're still dominating the market share. Don't forget that every time you mistype a URL it routes it through Microsoft (and thus Bing) too. =Smidge=
Placebo is the wonder drug! It can be used to treat EVERYTHING - albeit not always as effectively - at a fraction of the cost and with roughly the same (often much fewer) side effects.
Placebo Extra Strength: Now available without a prescription! =Smidge=
3) Direct all search traffic from all sites even remotely Microsoft affiliated through Bing
So what we would expect is everyone who just uses whatever is in front of them to start using Bing, because that's what Microsoft is putting in front of them. =Smidge=
If the video is legitimately your creative content, you would be justified in filing a DMCA notice against people who re-upload your content without permission. It's even an option in the web form ("My YouTube video was reuploaded by another user").
If the video you uploaded is not your property to begin with, or you had no permission to post it, then you're SOL. Whatever right (or lack thereof) you had to post it, they have as well.
If you're just a third party, then the best you can do is notify the original uploader. It's up to them to enforce their property rights.
Re: Searching for your own posts
Yeah, they would be kinda nice... a history of comments would be useful providing it was (at least as an option) kept private. =Smidge=
A false DMCA claim is not the same as a baseless DMCA claim.
A false DMCA claim is when you file a complaint without actually owning any of the intellectual property involved. You are NOT the copyright holder and therefore it IS perjury.
A baseless DMCA claim is when you DO own the intellectual property involved, but the DMCA is not applicable. (e.g. the fair use clause)
One is fraud and perjury, the other is just being a dick about it. There's a difference. =Smidge=
It's not so much that I blame YouTube for the DMCA flagging system - I understand fully that it is the only reasonable way to comply with the law. (And clearly the law itself needs revision, but that's another topic)
However, getting too many DMCAs filed against you results in automatic suspension of your account. There is NO penalty for filing a false DMCA.
Filing a claim and filing a counterclaim results in exposing your personal information to the other party, but it is absolutely trivial to falsify this information when filing a notice, making the process essentially anonymous (or even malicious if you implicate someone else). I don't know if you have the same opportunity to falsify your identity when counterclaiming... though you probably do.
The bottom line is the current system greatly favors those who want to abuse the system over those on the receiving end, while not really benefiting legitimate DMCA cases either way.
In fact it was just the past week that someone (allegedly) filed about 200 false DMCAs in total with absolutely no ramifications for it at all... at least from YouTube. Without getting too specific some of the affected users managed to get in touch with the guy's parents and shut him down that way. It shouldn't have to come to that.
I say allegedly because I haven't been able to verify them all... =Smidge=
Making fraudulent DMCA claims is ALSO against the law. YouTube is also allowing people to violate the DMCA by allowing anonymous, fully automated, no-accountability reporting of content.
Sending fake DMCA claims is itself against the law. This is part of the problem - it's not just people effectively getting censored by some random fuckwit, it's that YouTube's current system actually facilitates violating the DMCA from the side of the claimant. There is absolutely zero accountability and filing a counterclaim exposes the victim's personal information to the accuser. Entire accounts can be permanently suspended by filing multiple false DMCAs against it in quick succession but there is absolutely no ramification for the account that does so, even if every single claim is challenged and shown to be false.
As for trying to show there's a problem, there's already a group trying to prod YouTube into action and I've been trying (admittedly with great difficulty so far) to catalog abuses as I become aware of them. =Smidge=
You are either greatly underestimating the generation and delivery capacity of the nation's electrical grid, or you are greatly overestimating the load electric cars would add to it.
Show your math so I know which one it is. =Smidge=
And this is exactly why heat pumps are not rated by efficiency but by coefficient of performance (COP).
Of course nobody seems to have noticed that the 40% claim is completely unrelated to the headline story and seems to have been needlessly tacked on by the editor. =Smidge=
I don't have time now to RTA but if one was to use say a non conductive, non corrosive refrigerant one could make use of the lower vapor point to more efficantly remove the heat AND even better lower the operating temperature considerably.
Direct boiling is less than ideal because you get hot spots at the bubble nucleation sites. Using a phase change cooling scheme does not have any specific heat removal advantages. All phase change does it guarantee the temperature of the cooling medium - it makes no guarantees on heat flux or temperature of the object being cooled.
And such an environment virtually guarantees non-serviceability of the components.
Hey we run hundreds of hp high voltage motors immersed in refrigerant every day in industrial settings.
Do we now? If you're referring to hermetically sealed compressors (such as in a refrigerator or AC unit) then the motor itself is most certainly not "immersed in the refrigerant." I'd be curious to know if you have any specific examples, though.
Just using the benefits of the more efficient heat transfer
Again, such is not guaranteed.
I personally like the idea of the extremely low operating temps that could be used to enhance performance.
Low operating temps do not automatically equate to higher performance. They allow you to run hardware over spec without frying it - but at the cost of stability. I don't think too many commercial server farms would be willing to make that trade.
Lowering the temp of the hardware also begins to work against you, economically. The farther the temp of the hardware gets below the ambient temp you ultimately reject the heat to, the more work you have to do. This should be self-evident: dQ/dT = h*a*(T1-T2). Maintaining a temperature gradient of 30C at 100 watts takes a third of the work of maintaining a gradient of 90C at 100 watts.
Maintaining a temperature gradient is, after all, exactly what cooling is all about. =Smidge=
Well what I had in mind is a flat plate (say, aluminum) with water channels in it. On this plate there are two or three protrusions that match the main chip locations that need cooling that are milled to physically contact the chips just like discreet heat sinks would.
You attach the mainboard to this plate like you would attach it to the inside of a normal computer case, only backwards. eg; the screws go through from the back side instead of the component side. This puts the components very close to, if not directly contacting, the cooling body.
Put the whole thing in an air/moisture tight enclosure (maybe with some desiccant to dehumidify?) to keep out moisture and dust.
The whole "sandwich" assembly could still be a blade form factor. It's basically exactly the same setup as proposed in the article except the water block makes physical contact with the board components rather than using a fluid intermediary. =Smidge=
Very little, since you're dealing with very low quality heat. The hottest temp in your system is going to be the hardware itself (unless you're expending energy to pump it - then what's the point of trying to generate power from it?)
So if your max hardware temp is, say, 38C (100F) that's not good enough to generate any appreciable power from.
On the other hand, you probably will be pumping the heat to chill the system, and the rejected heat temp may be quite a bit higher - maybe as high as 75C. You can use that to heat your building's occupied spaces. =Smidge=
The idea that the mainboard components are sealed inside a liquid-filled compartment seems like a major point against the system. Extra proprietary vendor lock-in components mean extra costs of owning and operating, which probably offset any savings from cooling... if any.
I'm skeptical that it will significantly reduce cooling costs (Compared to, say, a chilled cabinet system) because the total cooling load stays the same. If you're generating a billion BTUs of heat you still need to remove a billion BTUs of heat. Any savings will only be from the higher energy densities water allows versus air and maybe initial installation.
Plus, based on their exploded view, there is no less than three heat exchanges before it even gets out of the cabinet: Chip to liquid (via heat sink), submersion liquid to module liquid, module liquid to system liquid. Each time to go through an exchange your temperature gradient goes up.
What they need is a system that is compatible with commodity components to leverage low cost hardware against lower cost cooling. Why not fit water blocks directly to existing mainboard layouts and circulate chilled water from the main loop directly through them via manifolds and pump at each rack? You can still enclose the mainbaord and cooling block in a sealed, insulated compartment to eliminate condensation problems, but not being submerged means you can actually repair/upgrade the modules. =Smidge=
On the other hand, there's no real ethical or legal excuse for pirating something, simply because you don't like the price of it. If you don't like the quality of the offering at the price it is offered, then don't buy it. It's quite simple.
This ignores the possibility that piracy exists in a market vacuum left by a bad business model.
It's true that there will always be some people who prefer to leech, but how much of the pirating is done because the market is improperly or under served?
Maybe it's not just about quality or price, but also convenience and availability. =Smidge=
"Appliances" that don't use a ground/earth pin are typically things like lamps and small DC wall-wart adapters. National electric code allows for listed and labeled appliances with double insulation "or equivalent" to forgo a grounding pin. (NEC section 250.114 if you care...) This would cover nearly all consumer grade electronics like TVs as well as small counter top kitchen appliances like toasters.
Basically there is a tradeoff: If the device can be demonstrated to have little or no risk of posing a shock hazard, it does not need to be grounded.
It is also my understanding that some appliances in the UK are also ungrounded - the earth pin is either not connected to anything or made of plastic.
It is also against NEC to install new outlets that do not have a ground pin. Essentially any house built since the 1970s or so will have 3-pin outlets. Those adapters (which are recommended against by anyone with half a brain) are for those rare occasions when you're in an old building, and used properly are still fairly safe.
I've been told the new edition of the NEC also specify Arc-fault interruption (AFCI) outlets for residences - if that's any consolation.
> I also notice that no appliance I own in the USA uses insulation on the live pins of the plug to prevent accidental shocks when the plug is slightly out of the socket
I have only ever heard anecdotal evidence of people getting shocked like this. Generally speaking, if the plug is out far enough to get your finger on the pins it's too far out to be making contact. (Maybe I just have fat fingers?) Regardless, few people seem to be in the habit of gripping the plugs in a way that would make this an issue: you only need your thumb and forefinger.
> IMO the British home electrical system is much better than the USA system and I have tried to view it impartially over the years.
It strikes me, jokingly, that the UK outlets are all baby-proof because the UK is full of babies. We call it the Nanny State for a reason:) =Smidge=
> Severe health issues can happen - the question is, what are the chances of it happening?
Pretty low. Almost universally, for all influenza vaccinations, "severe health issues" are limited to those caused by the real infection itself (but less severe) and specific allergic reactions to the vaccine. While it is too soon to really tell - it takes at least a year for significant amounts of data for *any* influenza vaccination to be evaluated - there are no indications the Swine Flu shot is any more dangerous than any other produced in the last fifty years or so, and there is no reason to believe it will be.
> Again, even if I had it, there is only a probability of it being spread to others. Has anyone figured this number out?
How many people do you come into contact with on a daily basis? Probably more than you think.
The fact that Swine Flu reached pandemic status (which is only a measure of contagiousness, not harmfulness) just two months after discovery is pretty telling how easy it spreads.
> Putting your interests above others is not insane. We're not talking about a plague here, so please stop fearmongering.
Who's fearmongering: The one who says it's stupid to get an inexpensive vaccine that overall has a very sound safety record because you might end up being a carrier, or the one who makes all the unqualified (and sometimes outright false) remarks about the possible dangers while downplaying the historically demonstrated dangers of pandemic disease? =Smidge=
I'm not a huge phone person (all I care about is making calls...) but a quick Google turned up the Nokia N95, HTC Touch Pro and Samsung Omnia HD.
Apple didn't invent the cell phone, y'know, and comparatively speaking the iPhone is a lump of shit (unless you pay extra for the feature-adding software). Anyone seriously looking for these features would be able to find something in a heartbeat. =Smidge=
You realize that if you live int he US, you're paying state and federal taxes too, right? A portion of that money already came out of your pocket, and you've already paid for someone else's project.
There's nothing wrong with applying for tax-subsidized funding if you're already a taxpayer. That's kind of the point. =Smidge=
I'd still think an external cast/brace is preferable to the surgery required to implant such a device, so long as the injury is not so series as to require surgery in the first place.
You got 27 half-hour sessions. At least three of these should be spent on basics if the students haven't already had them, such as soldering & desoldering, basic principles of electrical/electronics (including reading diagrams) and using a multimeter... one that measures capacitance, frequency and temperature if you can afford it.
And basic safety, of course.
From there it's really a matter of what, exactly, you want your students to take away from your class.
The multitouch display is neat but the bulk of it is programming; do your students have any programming experience? Do you have time to teach them?
Homebrew robotics can be pretty straightforward and inexpensive. A few stepper motor drivers (Allegro used to give free samples of their 5804 controller...), some stepper motors of course (Easily salvaged from dead scanners/printers), a spare PC power supply, an old PC with a parallel port and adequate amounts of wire can make a pretty versatile robot platform.
If you want something more digital, microcontroller projects might be a bit of an initial investment but are also pretty cheap in the long run. Build robotic platforms, embedded data loggers, "smart" appliances, etc.
$20 worth of properly rated relays and isolation components will turn a PC into a crude home automation system. Add in photo sensors, temperature sensors (thermistor + ADC chip), motion sensors, etc for a more complete system.
Keep is simple, keep it cheap, keep it interesting. =Smidge=
Slashdot Mirror
"Most popular browser version"
Add up IE6, 7 and 8 and they're still dominating the market share. Don't forget that every time you mistype a URL it routes it through Microsoft (and thus Bing) too.
=Smidge=
Placebo is the wonder drug! It can be used to treat EVERYTHING - albeit not always as effectively - at a fraction of the cost and with roughly the same (often much fewer) side effects.
Placebo Extra Strength: Now available without a prescription!
=Smidge=
Gaining market share for Bing is easy when you:
1) Already have the market for browsers (IE)
2) Make Bing the default search for said browsers
3) Direct all search traffic from all sites even remotely Microsoft affiliated through Bing
So what we would expect is everyone who just uses whatever is in front of them to start using Bing, because that's what Microsoft is putting in front of them.
=Smidge=
Re: Duplicate videos
If the video is legitimately your creative content, you would be justified in filing a DMCA notice against people who re-upload your content without permission. It's even an option in the web form ("My YouTube video was reuploaded by another user").
If the video you uploaded is not your property to begin with, or you had no permission to post it, then you're SOL. Whatever right (or lack thereof) you had to post it, they have as well.
If you're just a third party, then the best you can do is notify the original uploader. It's up to them to enforce their property rights.
Re: Searching for your own posts
Yeah, they would be kinda nice... a history of comments would be useful providing it was (at least as an option) kept private.
=Smidge=
A false DMCA claim is not the same as a baseless DMCA claim.
A false DMCA claim is when you file a complaint without actually owning any of the intellectual property involved. You are NOT the copyright holder and therefore it IS perjury.
A baseless DMCA claim is when you DO own the intellectual property involved, but the DMCA is not applicable. (e.g. the fair use clause)
One is fraud and perjury, the other is just being a dick about it. There's a difference.
=Smidge=
It's not so much that I blame YouTube for the DMCA flagging system - I understand fully that it is the only reasonable way to comply with the law. (And clearly the law itself needs revision, but that's another topic)
However, getting too many DMCAs filed against you results in automatic suspension of your account. There is NO penalty for filing a false DMCA.
Filing a claim and filing a counterclaim results in exposing your personal information to the other party, but it is absolutely trivial to falsify this information when filing a notice, making the process essentially anonymous (or even malicious if you implicate someone else). I don't know if you have the same opportunity to falsify your identity when counterclaiming... though you probably do.
The bottom line is the current system greatly favors those who want to abuse the system over those on the receiving end, while not really benefiting legitimate DMCA cases either way.
In fact it was just the past week that someone (allegedly) filed about 200 false DMCAs in total with absolutely no ramifications for it at all... at least from YouTube. Without getting too specific some of the affected users managed to get in touch with the guy's parents and shut him down that way. It shouldn't have to come to that.
I say allegedly because I haven't been able to verify them all...
=Smidge=
Making fraudulent DMCA claims is ALSO against the law. YouTube is also allowing people to violate the DMCA by allowing anonymous, fully automated, no-accountability reporting of content.
=Smidge=
Sending fake DMCA claims is itself against the law. This is part of the problem - it's not just people effectively getting censored by some random fuckwit, it's that YouTube's current system actually facilitates violating the DMCA from the side of the claimant. There is absolutely zero accountability and filing a counterclaim exposes the victim's personal information to the accuser. Entire accounts can be permanently suspended by filing multiple false DMCAs against it in quick succession but there is absolutely no ramification for the account that does so, even if every single claim is challenged and shown to be false.
As for trying to show there's a problem, there's already a group trying to prod YouTube into action and I've been trying (admittedly with great difficulty so far) to catalog abuses as I become aware of them.
=Smidge=
You are either greatly underestimating the generation and delivery capacity of the nation's electrical grid, or you are greatly overestimating the load electric cars would add to it.
Show your math so I know which one it is.
=Smidge=
And this is exactly why heat pumps are not rated by efficiency but by coefficient of performance (COP).
Of course nobody seems to have noticed that the 40% claim is completely unrelated to the headline story and seems to have been needlessly tacked on by the editor.
=Smidge=
I don't have time now to RTA but if one was to use say a non conductive, non corrosive refrigerant one could make use of the lower vapor point to more efficantly remove the heat AND even better lower the operating temperature considerably.
Direct boiling is less than ideal because you get hot spots at the bubble nucleation sites. Using a phase change cooling scheme does not have any specific heat removal advantages. All phase change does it guarantee the temperature of the cooling medium - it makes no guarantees on heat flux or temperature of the object being cooled.
And such an environment virtually guarantees non-serviceability of the components.
Hey we run hundreds of hp high voltage motors immersed in refrigerant every day in industrial settings.
Do we now? If you're referring to hermetically sealed compressors (such as in a refrigerator or AC unit) then the motor itself is most certainly not "immersed in the refrigerant." I'd be curious to know if you have any specific examples, though.
Just using the benefits of the more efficient heat transfer
Again, such is not guaranteed.
I personally like the idea of the extremely low operating temps that could be used to enhance performance.
Low operating temps do not automatically equate to higher performance. They allow you to run hardware over spec without frying it - but at the cost of stability. I don't think too many commercial server farms would be willing to make that trade.
Lowering the temp of the hardware also begins to work against you, economically. The farther the temp of the hardware gets below the ambient temp you ultimately reject the heat to, the more work you have to do. This should be self-evident: dQ/dT = h*a*(T1-T2). Maintaining a temperature gradient of 30C at 100 watts takes a third of the work of maintaining a gradient of 90C at 100 watts.
Maintaining a temperature gradient is, after all, exactly what cooling is all about.
=Smidge=
Well what I had in mind is a flat plate (say, aluminum) with water channels in it. On this plate there are two or three protrusions that match the main chip locations that need cooling that are milled to physically contact the chips just like discreet heat sinks would.
You attach the mainboard to this plate like you would attach it to the inside of a normal computer case, only backwards. eg; the screws go through from the back side instead of the component side. This puts the components very close to, if not directly contacting, the cooling body.
Put the whole thing in an air/moisture tight enclosure (maybe with some desiccant to dehumidify?) to keep out moisture and dust.
The whole "sandwich" assembly could still be a blade form factor. It's basically exactly the same setup as proposed in the article except the water block makes physical contact with the board components rather than using a fluid intermediary.
=Smidge=
Very little, since you're dealing with very low quality heat. The hottest temp in your system is going to be the hardware itself (unless you're expending energy to pump it - then what's the point of trying to generate power from it?)
So if your max hardware temp is, say, 38C (100F) that's not good enough to generate any appreciable power from.
On the other hand, you probably will be pumping the heat to chill the system, and the rejected heat temp may be quite a bit higher - maybe as high as 75C. You can use that to heat your building's occupied spaces.
=Smidge=
The idea that the mainboard components are sealed inside a liquid-filled compartment seems like a major point against the system. Extra proprietary vendor lock-in components mean extra costs of owning and operating, which probably offset any savings from cooling... if any.
I'm skeptical that it will significantly reduce cooling costs (Compared to, say, a chilled cabinet system) because the total cooling load stays the same. If you're generating a billion BTUs of heat you still need to remove a billion BTUs of heat. Any savings will only be from the higher energy densities water allows versus air and maybe initial installation.
Plus, based on their exploded view, there is no less than three heat exchanges before it even gets out of the cabinet: Chip to liquid (via heat sink), submersion liquid to module liquid, module liquid to system liquid. Each time to go through an exchange your temperature gradient goes up.
What they need is a system that is compatible with commodity components to leverage low cost hardware against lower cost cooling. Why not fit water blocks directly to existing mainboard layouts and circulate chilled water from the main loop directly through them via manifolds and pump at each rack? You can still enclose the mainbaord and cooling block in a sealed, insulated compartment to eliminate condensation problems, but not being submerged means you can actually repair/upgrade the modules.
=Smidge=
On the other hand, there's no real ethical or legal excuse for pirating something, simply because you don't like the price of it. If you don't like the quality of the offering at the price it is offered, then don't buy it. It's quite simple.
This ignores the possibility that piracy exists in a market vacuum left by a bad business model.
It's true that there will always be some people who prefer to leech, but how much of the pirating is done because the market is improperly or under served?
Maybe it's not just about quality or price, but also convenience and availability.
=Smidge=
"Appliances" that don't use a ground/earth pin are typically things like lamps and small DC wall-wart adapters. National electric code allows for listed and labeled appliances with double insulation "or equivalent" to forgo a grounding pin. (NEC section 250.114 if you care...) This would cover nearly all consumer grade electronics like TVs as well as small counter top kitchen appliances like toasters.
Basically there is a tradeoff: If the device can be demonstrated to have little or no risk of posing a shock hazard, it does not need to be grounded.
It is also my understanding that some appliances in the UK are also ungrounded - the earth pin is either not connected to anything or made of plastic.
It is also against NEC to install new outlets that do not have a ground pin. Essentially any house built since the 1970s or so will have 3-pin outlets. Those adapters (which are recommended against by anyone with half a brain) are for those rare occasions when you're in an old building, and used properly are still fairly safe.
I've been told the new edition of the NEC also specify Arc-fault interruption (AFCI) outlets for residences - if that's any consolation.
> I also notice that no appliance I own in the USA uses insulation on the live pins of the plug to prevent accidental shocks when the plug is slightly out of the socket
I have only ever heard anecdotal evidence of people getting shocked like this. Generally speaking, if the plug is out far enough to get your finger on the pins it's too far out to be making contact. (Maybe I just have fat fingers?) Regardless, few people seem to be in the habit of gripping the plugs in a way that would make this an issue: you only need your thumb and forefinger.
> IMO the British home electrical system is much better than the USA system and I have tried to view it impartially over the years.
It strikes me, jokingly, that the UK outlets are all baby-proof because the UK is full of babies. We call it the Nanny State for a reason :)
=Smidge=
They were probably stalling for time while they read over the source code to remove all the swear words and personal attacks against coworkers...
=Smidge=
> Severe health issues can happen - the question is, what are the chances of it happening?
Pretty low. Almost universally, for all influenza vaccinations, "severe health issues" are limited to those caused by the real infection itself (but less severe) and specific allergic reactions to the vaccine. While it is too soon to really tell - it takes at least a year for significant amounts of data for *any* influenza vaccination to be evaluated - there are no indications the Swine Flu shot is any more dangerous than any other produced in the last fifty years or so, and there is no reason to believe it will be.
> Again, even if I had it, there is only a probability of it being spread to others. Has anyone figured this number out?
How many people do you come into contact with on a daily basis? Probably more than you think.
The fact that Swine Flu reached pandemic status (which is only a measure of contagiousness, not harmfulness) just two months after discovery is pretty telling how easy it spreads.
> Putting your interests above others is not insane. We're not talking about a plague here, so please stop fearmongering.
Who's fearmongering: The one who says it's stupid to get an inexpensive vaccine that overall has a very sound safety record because you might end up being a carrier, or the one who makes all the unqualified (and sometimes outright false) remarks about the possible dangers while downplaying the historically demonstrated dangers of pandemic disease?
=Smidge=
> Let's not go throwing a strawman situation around. We're talking about a strain of influenza.
Fine, fine.
"Humanity got through 1918 Flu Epidemic just fine without a vaccine."
That better?
=Smidge=
I'm not a huge phone person (all I care about is making calls...) but a quick Google turned up the Nokia N95, HTC Touch Pro and Samsung Omnia HD.
Apple didn't invent the cell phone, y'know, and comparatively speaking the iPhone is a lump of shit (unless you pay extra for the feature-adding software). Anyone seriously looking for these features would be able to find something in a heartbeat.
=Smidge=
> Is there any sort of open form factor that vendors could use to be EITHER a GPS, a WikiReader, MP3 player, etc? Stop the gadget proliferation !!
Good news! You can get one gadget that's all that PLUS a phone!
=Smidge=
You realize that if you live int he US, you're paying state and federal taxes too, right? A portion of that money already came out of your pocket, and you've already paid for someone else's project.
There's nothing wrong with applying for tax-subsidized funding if you're already a taxpayer. That's kind of the point.
=Smidge=
series? serious...
I'd still think an external cast/brace is preferable to the surgery required to implant such a device, so long as the injury is not so series as to require surgery in the first place.
To say nothing of the costs...
=Smidge=
You got 27 half-hour sessions. At least three of these should be spent on basics if the students haven't already had them, such as soldering & desoldering, basic principles of electrical/electronics (including reading diagrams) and using a multimeter... one that measures capacitance, frequency and temperature if you can afford it.
And basic safety, of course.
From there it's really a matter of what, exactly, you want your students to take away from your class.
The multitouch display is neat but the bulk of it is programming; do your students have any programming experience? Do you have time to teach them?
Homebrew robotics can be pretty straightforward and inexpensive. A few stepper motor drivers (Allegro used to give free samples of their 5804 controller...), some stepper motors of course (Easily salvaged from dead scanners/printers), a spare PC power supply, an old PC with a parallel port and adequate amounts of wire can make a pretty versatile robot platform.
If you want something more digital, microcontroller projects might be a bit of an initial investment but are also pretty cheap in the long run. Build robotic platforms, embedded data loggers, "smart" appliances, etc.
$20 worth of properly rated relays and isolation components will turn a PC into a crude home automation system. Add in photo sensors, temperature sensors (thermistor + ADC chip), motion sensors, etc for a more complete system.
Keep is simple, keep it cheap, keep it interesting.
=Smidge=