People use to say the same thing about computers... and still do about robots. The question a rational person asks is "what is the risk vs possible return."
"But what use is a phone if you cannot.. speak" - the iPhone as a phone is absolutely shithouse, no tactile feedback like with buttons, and the pda like functionality leaves a lot to be desired, nice replacement mp3 player though
The tech unsavvy as you say are not getting any advantage out of this, what the hell do they care what something was written in so long as it functions well and serves the purpose the customer wants.
Feeding the control freaks by buying their products is an interesting thing to do, but I question whether you've thought of the larger implications.
it's fantastic; develop apps in a way apple can control, continuing to make the phone relatively bug free and easy to support
s60 has had an open model for years before the iPhone, and I use plenty of quality apps even without a central store running quality tests on it, let alone severely limiting developer freedom like apple has in the name of 'quality'. Limiting choices does not equate to better quality, time, effort and caring do.
Indeed I have thought this though, and I try to stay open-source whenever possible, but when things don't function as they should one must consider alternatives. This was especially the case when the iPhone first came out.
For instance, syncing (especially a task list) on Android use to absolutely blow. Being a bit ADD, this was extremely detrimental to my productivity. I fought it out, wasteding a ton of time fucking around with my phone trying to find a solution, until about 6 months in I finally found a hack that worked until Google got their act together.
Currently I'm overloaded and don't have time to deal with BS like this. I recently ordered an N900 and sent it back the same day once I found out it couldn't sync with Outlook 2003 / Zimbra. Moreover, there's no way I'd have time to support my Mother (who can barely send an email) on how to use something that didn't have a consistent interface that wasn't made for the simplest of minds.
I will admit though, you did call my bluff; what I said was "I'd actually consider" not that I would buy an iDevice. Chances are, especially given the current state of Android, that I would opt not to allow my self to become iLocked.
This, ladies and gents, is the perfect example of a straw man.
While the rest of what you say is actually very spot on, I think you are forgetting that the implication here is that no one can package technology for anyone else to run on an iPhone. I could never create a library or SDK or what-have-you for you to include in your iphone binary if it has any hinf of interacting with another language at any statge.
Apple's controlling nature and hatred for Flash is causing significant collateral damage and sets a terrible precedent with regards to respect for developers.
If by perfect, you mean valid example of when to use a straw man argument, then I agree; If you bought / develop for an apple product, you should expect to be locked out, nothing they have done prior has indicted a willingness to cooperate or let go of control of their OSes, and it's been this way since the concept of Mac certified software.
The precedent it sets isn't terrible at all, it's fantastic; develop apps in a way apple can control, continuing to make the phone relatively bug free and easy to support (for the tech unsavvy like my Mom), or, if you need more freedom, switch to Android or MeeGo. This is one aspect where I commend Apple for holding their ground, and would now even consider buying one of their mobile devices if it came with a keyboard.
Why is it a game a brinkmanship to create a tool to aid in creating native apps? You're logic makes sense up until you apply it to cross compiling native code. Why should I, as a developer, not get a tool to help me render animations?
A) Because that tool is inherently buggy and exploitable, and thus a security risk.
B) Because apple has built it's brand to "just work" and often when flash is ported to a new platform, it "just doesn't work" quite right, which users could confuse with apple software being poorly written.
Despite what they tell you, patriotism just makes you appear and act stupid. You might as well have said you were proud to be Purto Rican because they have a larger satellite dish than anywhere in the united states.
If it were not for the south man would not have walked on the moon.
Rocket engines? Developed and tested at Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, AL
- by Robbet Goddard, born and raised in Worcester, MA (not a place the North should be proud of either)
Apollo Rockets? Built in New Orleans, LA (among other places)
- which also killed 3 astronauts on the first try... hardly something to be "proud of"
Cape Canaveral? Southern Florida
Pennsylvania (aka Pennsyltucky) is more of a southern state than FL; there are far more Yankees in FL than Confederates.
Mission Control? Houston, TX
This choice has nothing to do with personnel; where else are you going to find a city with plenty of flat land nothing else around it then in a desert? - perfect for an airport.
Besides, you never hear of anyone retiring and moving *north*.
1) Sure I have, but I was in Australia...
2) once again, FL is not a southern (confederate) state
3) I hear just as many comments about Arizona, and Maine, and Costa Rica.
I'm not saying that the north deserves to be proud, they voted for Bush too; I'm just saying the south currently, and historically has even less to boost about and more to be ashamed of.
Don't shareholders of corporations vote with their share of the stock? Did you even think about your signature quote before trying to look cool by using it?
While it's true that shareholders get to vote once in a while, it is also true that by law a corporation has to do everything in its power to maximize shareholder profits....
... a bit trollish, but I won't flame back.
It is clear to me that the situation was a direct result of a desire to control energy resources, and why we funded the tyrants that fueled the US hatred in the first place. Further, it is clear we had no business in Iraq as there were never any weapons of mass destruction, and very little Al-Qaeda there. Nonetheless, even if you don't believe the original reason we went into Afghanistan (to retaliate against Al-Qaeda, the group responsible for 9-11) was moral, at this point it's hard to negate that our CURRENT presence there is a moral choice; if we were to leave now, the Afganistan and the US would be in a worse place than before the war started.
The problem with that example is that by some accounts, if Japan hadn't bombed pearl harbor, it's just as likely the US would have stayed out of the war entirely.
Why does this not apply to Afghanistan / Pakistan?
Sometimes going to war is the best of several bad options. It can never be any better than that, but it can indeed be a moral decision.
Note that I'm not saying this applies to our current wars, just that it does happen from time to time. And when it does, it is also a moral decision to try to reduce the attendant horror as much as possible.
It's should depend on the circumstance; Al Queda essentially unplugged one of our lazer tag packs while no one was playing (9/11), therefore if we cover our sensors, I don't see how either side could complain.
However if we were to go invade N. Korea, since they haven't done anything other than break treaties and threaten us, it would be a bit extreme for us to send in an unmanned army, and be looked down upon from the world view. Nonetheless, such scorn didn't stop Bush from getting us into the war in the wrong country over weapons of mass distraction.
As scary as unmanned armies are (I can assure you robotic police forces are coming soon), I hope it can motivate more rational people to take part in world politics...
Also as someone who was better than average at math, I found my parents actually taught me everything, and math class was a waist of time until 5th grade. Therefore, just as actual full-blown focused Science and History classes started in 5th grade (at least in my district), I'd argue math should as be a minor (but not nonexistent) part of education until then as well.
As someone who's mother now teaches 7th grade math (she taught history before I went to college), I can attest the curriculum is not the root cause of the problem, rather the government mandates (such as every child left behind) and standardized tests are tying the hands of teachers into teaching a certain way, thus causing the curriculum to be too rigid and boring.
The problem with that quote is sufficiently advanced is a relative term with respect to a technologically evolved society. For example the a working light bulb would magic for a pre-electric society, but isn't all that magical now.
This is science, not magic.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - Arthur C. Clarke
It's like Kenwood car audio head units and JBL speakers - if you buy their low cost stuff, it's all crap, but if you buy toward the top end of their lines, while a bit more pricey, you can get many things that will put similarly spec-ed high end equipment to shame. With black and decker at that range you essentially end up with re-branded dewalt tools for significantly less cost.
It's easy to take the libitarian road to lack of responsibility. However, if the consumer was unaware of the "saw stop" technology when making his purchase, as I sure many of us didn't until reading this article, then your your logic is flawed. He likely assumed all table saws were equally safe, them made his choice on other factors. This is the same thing that happened with flint bumpers on the pinto and with air-bag technology. If you are marketting to the avarage consumer, you can't assume that they have the technal knoledge to make certain safety decisions. By selling in such a market you accept the responsibility to keep up with state-of-the-art safety or risk a law suit. Whether they develop a competing technology, or license a current one is part of the cost of doing business.
And (at the time) my copy of windows ME worked awesome on my computer and didn't lack any features of the more expensive Mac OS 9; it still didn't mean that overall it wasn't a piece of crap.
Uhh, their motto is "Pro Feature affordable prices" how is this not claiming to be a professional tool? And for the prices they are charging you'd think they'd be at least better than similarly spec-ed Black and Decker model, but they NEVER are.
I have a Ryobi table saw and it's perfectly fine for what it is. Would I use it to build a house? No. It's not meant for that. Is it a good-value table saw for cutting up the odd sheet of plywood or ripping the odd 2x6? Absolutely. It's a basic, easy-to-use light-duty table saw that I use 'now and again'. You need to buy products that align with the purpose for which they're intended, and Ryobi fits that niche nicely. They're not more, nor do they claim to be.
As long as a finite amount of hydrogen can be harvested this way, any questions of efficiency are simply not relevant.
BS, if it takes more energy to produce the device than it will ever output in it's lifetime (or than other renewable energy devices would make) then efficiency is completely relevant.
You are fighting the wrong battle, you should be focusing on the device captures energy from ANY motion; which doesn't preclude it to sound. A bump in the road, the vibrations of an engine, the gust of some wind; all of these have a much larger energy input then the sound wave that is created by these events.
I'd not be too quick to judge here. I'm of course not doing a whole lot of math here, but let's apply some common sense...
Any time you apply energy to water, it generally winds up expressed as heat - so you get evaporation, and that's before we even start talking about the crystals doing the work that they do. You could of course presume you have an airtight container trapping the vapors, but now you're talking about a pressure vessel.
... and any time you add pressure you decrease waters ability to evaporate.
In either case, you're not going to get a pure hydrogen - you're going to get hydroxy *at best* because of the water vapor in the mix.
I'm not sure what water vapor has to with producing a "hydroxy" (I'm pretty sure it's nothing), but water vapor can be removed from a gas using molecular sieve; hydrogen separated from other gases by weight and a hydrogen permeable membrane, and a hydrogen permeable membrane can be used to convert it all into electricity.
Slashdot Mirror
whatcouldpossiblygowrong?
People use to say the same thing about computers... and still do about robots. The question a rational person asks is "what is the risk vs possible return."
"But what use is a phone if you cannot.. speak" - the iPhone as a phone is absolutely shithouse, no tactile feedback like with buttons, and the pda like functionality leaves a lot to be desired, nice replacement mp3 player though
The tech unsavvy as you say are not getting any advantage out of this, what the hell do they care what something was written in so long as it functions well and serves the purpose the customer wants.
Feeding the control freaks by buying their products is an interesting thing to do, but I question whether you've thought of the larger implications.
it's fantastic; develop apps in a way apple can control, continuing to make the phone relatively bug free and easy to support
s60 has had an open model for years before the iPhone, and I use plenty of quality apps even without a central store running quality tests on it, let alone severely limiting developer freedom like apple has in the name of 'quality'. Limiting choices does not equate to better quality, time, effort and caring do.
Indeed I have thought this though, and I try to stay open-source whenever possible, but when things don't function as they should one must consider alternatives. This was especially the case when the iPhone first came out.
For instance, syncing (especially a task list) on Android use to absolutely blow. Being a bit ADD, this was extremely detrimental to my productivity. I fought it out, wasteding a ton of time fucking around with my phone trying to find a solution, until about 6 months in I finally found a hack that worked until Google got their act together.
Currently I'm overloaded and don't have time to deal with BS like this. I recently ordered an N900 and sent it back the same day once I found out it couldn't sync with Outlook 2003 / Zimbra. Moreover, there's no way I'd have time to support my Mother (who can barely send an email) on how to use something that didn't have a consistent interface that wasn't made for the simplest of minds.
I will admit though, you did call my bluff; what I said was "I'd actually consider" not that I would buy an iDevice. Chances are, especially given the current state of Android, that I would opt not to allow my self to become iLocked.
Apple only went gay because Adobe has performance problems.
This, ladies and gents, is the perfect example of a straw man. While the rest of what you say is actually very spot on, I think you are forgetting that the implication here is that no one can package technology for anyone else to run on an iPhone. I could never create a library or SDK or what-have-you for you to include in your iphone binary if it has any hinf of interacting with another language at any statge. Apple's controlling nature and hatred for Flash is causing significant collateral damage and sets a terrible precedent with regards to respect for developers.
If by perfect, you mean valid example of when to use a straw man argument, then I agree; If you bought / develop for an apple product, you should expect to be locked out, nothing they have done prior has indicted a willingness to cooperate or let go of control of their OSes, and it's been this way since the concept of Mac certified software.
The precedent it sets isn't terrible at all, it's fantastic; develop apps in a way apple can control, continuing to make the phone relatively bug free and easy to support (for the tech unsavvy like my Mom), or, if you need more freedom, switch to Android or MeeGo. This is one aspect where I commend Apple for holding their ground, and would now even consider buying one of their mobile devices if it came with a keyboard.
Why is it a game a brinkmanship to create a tool to aid in creating native apps? You're logic makes sense up until you apply it to cross compiling native code. Why should I, as a developer, not get a tool to help me render animations?
A) Because that tool is inherently buggy and exploitable, and thus a security risk.
B) Because apple has built it's brand to "just work" and often when flash is ported to a new platform, it "just doesn't work" quite right, which users could confuse with apple software being poorly written.
I've never met a kid who said he'd rather never have been born altogether.
Maybe the solution then is to open up access to suicide so that it can be pleasant.
I'm not sure whether to applaud your audacity or cringe at your how insular and spurious your interactions with other humans must be.
If it were not for the south man would not have walked on the moon.
Rocket engines? Developed and tested at Redstone Arsenal, Huntsville, AL
- by Robbet Goddard, born and raised in Worcester, MA (not a place the North should be proud of either)
Apollo Rockets? Built in New Orleans, LA (among other places)
- which also killed 3 astronauts on the first try... hardly something to be "proud of"
Cape Canaveral? Southern Florida
Pennsylvania (aka Pennsyltucky) is more of a southern state than FL; there are far more Yankees in FL than Confederates.
Mission Control? Houston, TX
This choice has nothing to do with personnel; where else are you going to find a city with plenty of flat land nothing else around it then in a desert? - perfect for an airport.
Besides, you never hear of anyone retiring and moving *north*.
1) Sure I have, but I was in Australia...
2) once again, FL is not a southern (confederate) state
3) I hear just as many comments about Arizona, and Maine, and Costa Rica.
I'm not saying that the north deserves to be proud, they voted for Bush too; I'm just saying the south currently, and historically has even less to boost about and more to be ashamed of.
Don't shareholders of corporations vote with their share of the stock? Did you even think about your signature quote before trying to look cool by using it?
While it's true that shareholders get to vote once in a while, it is also true that by law a corporation has to do everything in its power to maximize shareholder profits....
... a bit trollish, but I won't flame back. It is clear to me that the situation was a direct result of a desire to control energy resources, and why we funded the tyrants that fueled the US hatred in the first place. Further, it is clear we had no business in Iraq as there were never any weapons of mass destruction, and very little Al-Qaeda there. Nonetheless, even if you don't believe the original reason we went into Afghanistan (to retaliate against Al-Qaeda, the group responsible for 9-11) was moral, at this point it's hard to negate that our CURRENT presence there is a moral choice; if we were to leave now, the Afganistan and the US would be in a worse place than before the war started.
The problem with that example is that by some accounts, if Japan hadn't bombed pearl harbor, it's just as likely the US would have stayed out of the war entirely.
....and how is your comment different than what I wrote in my second sentence?
My capabilities are far outstripped by my wife's demands.
Sometimes going to war is the best of several bad options. It can never be any better than that, but it can indeed be a moral decision.
Note that I'm not saying this applies to our current wars, just that it does happen from time to time. And when it does, it is also a moral decision to try to reduce the attendant horror as much as possible.
Given the recent reports about the problems with the airline industry, some tech transfer here might not be a bad idea.
It's should depend on the circumstance; Al Queda essentially unplugged one of our lazer tag packs while no one was playing (9/11), therefore if we cover our sensors, I don't see how either side could complain.
However if we were to go invade N. Korea, since they haven't done anything other than break treaties and threaten us, it would be a bit extreme for us to send in an unmanned army, and be looked down upon from the world view. Nonetheless, such scorn didn't stop Bush from getting us into the war in the wrong country over weapons of mass distraction.
As scary as unmanned armies are (I can assure you robotic police forces are coming soon), I hope it can motivate more rational people to take part in world politics...
Also as someone who was better than average at math, I found my parents actually taught me everything, and math class was a waist of time until 5th grade. Therefore, just as actual full-blown focused Science and History classes started in 5th grade (at least in my district), I'd argue math should as be a minor (but not nonexistent) part of education until then as well.
As someone who's mother now teaches 7th grade math (she taught history before I went to college), I can attest the curriculum is not the root cause of the problem, rather the government mandates (such as every child left behind) and standardized tests are tying the hands of teachers into teaching a certain way, thus causing the curriculum to be too rigid and boring.
I swear I've seen 2 duplicate stories a week for the past month or so: http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/03/22/175200/RNA-Loaded-Nanoparticles-Fight-Cancer?art_pos=19
This is science, not magic.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - Arthur C. Clarke
It's like Kenwood car audio head units and JBL speakers - if you buy their low cost stuff, it's all crap, but if you buy toward the top end of their lines, while a bit more pricey, you can get many things that will put similarly spec-ed high end equipment to shame. With black and decker at that range you essentially end up with re-branded dewalt tools for significantly less cost.
It's easy to take the libitarian road to lack of responsibility. However, if the consumer was unaware of the "saw stop" technology when making his purchase, as I sure many of us didn't until reading this article, then your your logic is flawed. He likely assumed all table saws were equally safe, them made his choice on other factors. This is the same thing that happened with flint bumpers on the pinto and with air-bag technology. If you are marketting to the avarage consumer, you can't assume that they have the technal knoledge to make certain safety decisions. By selling in such a market you accept the responsibility to keep up with state-of-the-art safety or risk a law suit. Whether they develop a competing technology, or license a current one is part of the cost of doing business.
And (at the time) my copy of windows ME worked awesome on my computer and didn't lack any features of the more expensive Mac OS 9; it still didn't mean that overall it wasn't a piece of crap.
I have a Ryobi table saw and it's perfectly fine for what it is. Would I use it to build a house? No. It's not meant for that. Is it a good-value table saw for cutting up the odd sheet of plywood or ripping the odd 2x6? Absolutely. It's a basic, easy-to-use light-duty table saw that I use 'now and again'. You need to buy products that align with the purpose for which they're intended, and Ryobi fits that niche nicely. They're not more, nor do they claim to be.
As long as a finite amount of hydrogen can be harvested this way, any questions of efficiency are simply not relevant.
BS, if it takes more energy to produce the device than it will ever output in it's lifetime (or than other renewable energy devices would make) then efficiency is completely relevant.
You are fighting the wrong battle, you should be focusing on the device captures energy from ANY motion; which doesn't preclude it to sound. A bump in the road, the vibrations of an engine, the gust of some wind; all of these have a much larger energy input then the sound wave that is created by these events.
I'd not be too quick to judge here. I'm of course not doing a whole lot of math here, but let's apply some common sense...
Any time you apply energy to water, it generally winds up expressed as heat - so you get evaporation, and that's before we even start talking about the crystals doing the work that they do. You could of course presume you have an airtight container trapping the vapors, but now you're talking about a pressure vessel.
... and any time you add pressure you decrease waters ability to evaporate.
In either case, you're not going to get a pure hydrogen - you're going to get hydroxy *at best* because of the water vapor in the mix.
I'm not sure what water vapor has to with producing a "hydroxy" (I'm pretty sure it's nothing), but water vapor can be removed from a gas using molecular sieve; hydrogen separated from other gases by weight and a hydrogen permeable membrane, and a hydrogen permeable membrane can be used to convert it all into electricity.
modded from AC to +3 Insightful? ...apparently M2 isn't working because there are certainly a lot of ass-hats with mod points these days!
If the parent had any insight he'd realize that bad kidneys != bad heart; bad heart != bad liver; bad liver != bad bone marrow, etc. etc. etc....