The iPhone 4 (no 's') is also on sale over that time period. I wonder if that might also be part of the numbers - iPhone sales were split between several models, including upcoming models. (Though the fact that an Android phone was right up there is still news.)
It probably would be profitable, in small sections. (The original 'Dyson Fleet' version.) If you have the tech to put up orbital solar at reasonable cost, it's probably profitable to put up more and more orbital solar plants as your race grows.
Dyson's original proposal wasn't they built it all at once, or even that it was solid piece: Building ever more solar energy collectors and putting them into different orbits will eventually do the same job, and put out the same signature radiation.
Basically, the assumption is that the one true limiter on growth/productivity is energy (a reasonable assumption looking at human history) and that eventually a growing race will capture all the energy they have available to them.
The main problem that the phrase attempts to solve these days is with data-mining. If you have a huge dataset, and start pulling random trends out of it, there's a decent likelihood that some of those trends will correlate. But you have no real evidence that one caused the other - the correlation is just as likely to be random chance. You didn't start by finding a problem which you need to find a cause for: you started with 'What's going on?' You found that out, but it's tempting to start assigning problems, causes, and solutions because you think you can.
It's not the software design which is being closed-sourced. (At least, not alone.) It's the design of the box itself - previous Makerbots you could download the plans for every part, get them printed/lasercut/etc. whereever you choose, and build one yourself. Or submit changes to make it work better, which many did.
Rooting it is irrelevant, really - the software on the box can be flashed over, no problem, IIUC. You still don't have access to the design work for the device itself - which was possible before.
The interesting difference here is the barrier to entry: The Replicator 2 is a physical object. It needs a supply chain, and shipping arrangements, and a manufacturing base to fork it. (Instead of in pure software where the only thing besides the people you need is some web hosting.) So, it'll take others quite some time to set up a fork of reasonable size and quality, and a fair amount of money.
Should be interesting to watch the fallout of this.
Choice of lighting, positioning, focus, shutter speed, filters used, etc. all can have a significant difference to how a photograph turns out, and that's before you do anything drastic. It's not hard to show that there's a lot of creative effort involved in a good photograph.
There will probably never be a MacOS XI. That's a confusion of the marketing name and the version number. The marketing name for the series is 'Mac(OS) X 10.' (Where the part in parens is optional.) They are currently on version 8 of the series, and I'm fully expecting them to go past version 10.
The reason for the X/10 is because version 1 was the successor to MacOS 9, which was an entirely different product.
Apple's animal names started as internal code names (intended to obscure what was being worked on), that leaked out. Rumor sites would talk about the upcoming project 'Puma', not really knowing much about it, and then it became apparent that this was the next version of the OS, so the same sites would continue to refer to it as 'Puma' to keep things consistent.
Repeat again with 'Jaguar', but this time Apple's marketing department noticed that people liked the name, and decided to continue using it themselves. The next code name was then chosen with marketing's involvement....
But the violence - or at least visible violence, only happened in the large-scale experiments, or at least was/is much less prevalent in the small scale ones. (Communes.) It was more a symptom than a cause. The cause is trying to make it work, because you think it must be better, rather than letting it work, because it's time has come.
It's time hasn't come yet. We probably won't even recognize when it does - the change will happen in bits and spurts, where and when it fits.
I agree in many ways - no system completely supersedes the older, it just replaces parts of it. Nor is there any 'one true system': each has it's own advantages. And that issue with the incentives/rewards/feedback is well-placed - and exactly what I mean by them trying to force it. If you are imposing a community structure from the top down, the top also has to implement the feedback mechanisms to keep people honest. We are evolving mechanisms bottom-up (or at least peer-to-peer) to expand this feedback on a larger-than-local scale, or at least we are in my opinion. As those mechanisms are tested and expand, the system can change on top of it. But you can't change the systems until the new mechanisms are in place and expected - and once you have, the change will happen on it's own.
I know you are joking, but I think Karl Marx was probably more right on that than we'd think - and that open source, crowdsourcing, and others are the tip of that.
The problem with his image is that people tried to force it, and changes like that can't be forced, they have to come because society has changed to the point where they are necessary. Trying to force it just means you'll get it wrong, as the structures needed to even understand what you are doing correctly haven't been built yet.
Which means what we'll get is nothing like what tried to imitate it, and probably nothing like what we'd imagine it to be.
You have to enable it, which can be done on a per-filesystem basis. Once it's on, any new data written to that filesystem will be deduplicated. If you then turn it off, new data will not be deduplicated but data already on disk will remain deduplicated. (Unless it gets modified, of course. Then it's new data.)
PC-BSD installs onto ZFS by default if you have over 4GB or so of ram, but won't turn on deduplication automatically. Dedup is costly: it requires a dedup table which has 320 bytes per (variably sized) block, which must be consulted on every write. (A quick estimate based on an average 64K block size for the case above results in a 24 GB dedup table.) So, if you can't fit that table into ram or onto a SSD cache drive, writes are going to be very slow. But for this usage, setting up a fileserver on ZFS and copying all his files to it would fit well, especially as the other advantages of ZFS with large filesystems will come into play.
In my humble opinion, ergonomic keyboards are a really stupid response to most typing RSI issues, and it's probably a better idea to get a keyboard with proper keyswitches - all the ergonomic boards I've touched still have the same shitty membrane switches.
90% of the 'ergonomic' keyboards are only ergonomic because their marketing department decided to call it that. There's no actual testing, no actual thought on what would help the typist, they just copied what everyone else calls ergonomic.
If you are going to get an ergonomic keyboard, look for the ones where they actually thought about it - they'll cost more, but they'll actually be good as well. Personally, I use a Kinesis, and it's very good. They also all have mechanical switches - some models even offer a choice of which switch you want.
On the other hand, you'll never find them in a store...
No, the TSA's job is to make Americans think they should feel safe, while actually making them feel less safe (by making sure they are aware of the 'danger'), thereby justifying the government to spend more money on safety against terrorists.
I tried it - It's actually worse than than the standard keyboard.
It's not the type of input, it's the responsiveness: The Palm was instantly responsive, always taking the text. Android... Isn't. It lags. It offers suggestions. It misses letters. All little things, but it means that I have to pay attention: 'Did it actually take what I entered?' Which means I'm not paying attention to the person who was talking.
Slashdot Mirror
While I agree with you completely, I think it's a sham that there was no attempt in the article to even try to show the watch in question.
The iPhone 4 (no 's') is also on sale over that time period. I wonder if that might also be part of the numbers - iPhone sales were split between several models, including upcoming models. (Though the fact that an Android phone was right up there is still news.)
And the court's default position is 'if the patent office passed it it's probably valid'.
It probably would be profitable, in small sections. (The original 'Dyson Fleet' version.) If you have the tech to put up orbital solar at reasonable cost, it's probably profitable to put up more and more orbital solar plants as your race grows.
That's over the entire universe. It's quite possible for any subset of the universe to gain or loose energy, by sending it outside the subset.
Also, just because the energy exists doesn't mean you can use it.
Dyson's original proposal wasn't they built it all at once, or even that it was solid piece: Building ever more solar energy collectors and putting them into different orbits will eventually do the same job, and put out the same signature radiation.
Basically, the assumption is that the one true limiter on growth/productivity is energy (a reasonable assumption looking at human history) and that eventually a growing race will capture all the energy they have available to them.
The main problem that the phrase attempts to solve these days is with data-mining. If you have a huge dataset, and start pulling random trends out of it, there's a decent likelihood that some of those trends will correlate. But you have no real evidence that one caused the other - the correlation is just as likely to be random chance. You didn't start by finding a problem which you need to find a cause for: you started with 'What's going on?' You found that out, but it's tempting to start assigning problems, causes, and solutions because you think you can.
Read the grandparent, and the great-grandparent. It's relevant to this thread of the conversation, which has gotten onto a tangent.
No, but global warming is threating the viability of the cacao growing areas, messing up the rainfall patterns.
Technically, probably yes.
And yes, there are people who make Xerox art
It's not the software design which is being closed-sourced. (At least, not alone.) It's the design of the box itself - previous Makerbots you could download the plans for every part, get them printed/lasercut/etc. whereever you choose, and build one yourself. Or submit changes to make it work better, which many did.
Rooting it is irrelevant, really - the software on the box can be flashed over, no problem, IIUC. You still don't have access to the design work for the device itself - which was possible before.
The interesting difference here is the barrier to entry: The Replicator 2 is a physical object. It needs a supply chain, and shipping arrangements, and a manufacturing base to fork it. (Instead of in pure software where the only thing besides the people you need is some web hosting.) So, it'll take others quite some time to set up a fork of reasonable size and quality, and a fair amount of money.
Should be interesting to watch the fallout of this.
Choice of lighting, positioning, focus, shutter speed, filters used, etc. all can have a significant difference to how a photograph turns out, and that's before you do anything drastic. It's not hard to show that there's a lot of creative effort involved in a good photograph.
Can you think of a better way to lobby to get the laws changed than to ban all Apple products?
There will probably never be a MacOS XI. That's a confusion of the marketing name and the version number. The marketing name for the series is 'Mac(OS) X 10.' (Where the part in parens is optional.) They are currently on version 8 of the series, and I'm fully expecting them to go past version 10.
The reason for the X/10 is because version 1 was the successor to MacOS 9, which was an entirely different product.
Apple's animal names started as internal code names (intended to obscure what was being worked on), that leaked out. Rumor sites would talk about the upcoming project 'Puma', not really knowing much about it, and then it became apparent that this was the next version of the OS, so the same sites would continue to refer to it as 'Puma' to keep things consistent.
Repeat again with 'Jaguar', but this time Apple's marketing department noticed that people liked the name, and decided to continue using it themselves. The next code name was then chosen with marketing's involvement....
But the violence - or at least visible violence, only happened in the large-scale experiments, or at least was/is much less prevalent in the small scale ones. (Communes.) It was more a symptom than a cause. The cause is trying to make it work, because you think it must be better, rather than letting it work, because it's time has come.
It's time hasn't come yet. We probably won't even recognize when it does - the change will happen in bits and spurts, where and when it fits.
I agree in many ways - no system completely supersedes the older, it just replaces parts of it. Nor is there any 'one true system': each has it's own advantages. And that issue with the incentives/rewards/feedback is well-placed - and exactly what I mean by them trying to force it. If you are imposing a community structure from the top down, the top also has to implement the feedback mechanisms to keep people honest. We are evolving mechanisms bottom-up (or at least peer-to-peer) to expand this feedback on a larger-than-local scale, or at least we are in my opinion. As those mechanisms are tested and expand, the system can change on top of it. But you can't change the systems until the new mechanisms are in place and expected - and once you have, the change will happen on it's own.
I know you are joking, but I think Karl Marx was probably more right on that than we'd think - and that open source, crowdsourcing, and others are the tip of that.
The problem with his image is that people tried to force it, and changes like that can't be forced, they have to come because society has changed to the point where they are necessary. Trying to force it just means you'll get it wrong, as the structures needed to even understand what you are doing correctly haven't been built yet.
Which means what we'll get is nothing like what tried to imitate it, and probably nothing like what we'd imagine it to be.
If he uses FreeNAS on RAIDZ, he can get the dedup in there as well. ;)
You have to enable it, which can be done on a per-filesystem basis. Once it's on, any new data written to that filesystem will be deduplicated. If you then turn it off, new data will not be deduplicated but data already on disk will remain deduplicated. (Unless it gets modified, of course. Then it's new data.)
PC-BSD installs onto ZFS by default if you have over 4GB or so of ram, but won't turn on deduplication automatically. Dedup is costly: it requires a dedup table which has 320 bytes per (variably sized) block, which must be consulted on every write. (A quick estimate based on an average 64K block size for the case above results in a 24 GB dedup table.) So, if you can't fit that table into ram or onto a SSD cache drive, writes are going to be very slow. But for this usage, setting up a fileserver on ZFS and copying all his files to it would fit well, especially as the other advantages of ZFS with large filesystems will come into play.
Freedom religion is there because that type of battle doesn't end until there are two people.
You are way to optimistic about how many people would be left.
In my humble opinion, ergonomic keyboards are a really stupid response to most typing RSI issues, and it's probably a better idea to get a keyboard with proper keyswitches - all the ergonomic boards I've touched still have the same shitty membrane switches.
90% of the 'ergonomic' keyboards are only ergonomic because their marketing department decided to call it that. There's no actual testing, no actual thought on what would help the typist, they just copied what everyone else calls ergonomic.
If you are going to get an ergonomic keyboard, look for the ones where they actually thought about it - they'll cost more, but they'll actually be good as well. Personally, I use a Kinesis, and it's very good. They also all have mechanical switches - some models even offer a choice of which switch you want.
On the other hand, you'll never find them in a store...
No, the TSA's job is to make Americans think they should feel safe, while actually making them feel less safe (by making sure they are aware of the 'danger'), thereby justifying the government to spend more money on safety against terrorists.
I tried it - It's actually worse than than the standard keyboard.
It's not the type of input, it's the responsiveness: The Palm was instantly responsive, always taking the text. Android... Isn't. It lags. It offers suggestions. It misses letters. All little things, but it means that I have to pay attention: 'Did it actually take what I entered?' Which means I'm not paying attention to the person who was talking.