I gave long thought it would benefit society by requiring the open sourcing of all medical knowledge. As it is now for the most part, a profit center, yet the profit takes away from the general productivity, it doesn't add to it, it just helps it a little by not getting any worse. As such, it is more profitable to have healthier people with less medical expenses. Medical expenses fall under the "broken windows fallacy" of economics.
As to alt energy, I hear ya. I also like how it is suitable for decentralization, which increases security (more points of production, less chance of cascading failures) and can help to drop cost, as individuals can eventually pay off their own means of production, which is the same as locking in a futures contract on commodities.
I'm part way there. I have some solar PV, and rely on solid state nuclear fusion batteries..errr.. my firewood stash. Actually out splitting some today in this heat. Not a lot, I did three large rounds today, but I try to do some every day, year round. Sort of get paid to workout. At least that is what I psych myself out with, ha!
There's just so much that *could* be done all over, to help the economy, to improve healthcare, to improve the energy situation..waiting for the big change from the establishment won't work, it is up to the individual to just do it themselves. A million, ten million, whatever, individuals doing it IS change. Route around the government and entrenched corporate bottlenecks.
This is why I embrace modern survivalism, or practical preparedness, getting independent of as much as possible in your basic day to day human needs allows you to be wealthier, without the necessity of having to count your wealth in the terms of their scam fiat currency units.
the system today is set up and run to transfer your labor upstream into as few of hands as possible. All you have to do is...stop doing that. the more people work directly for themselves, the better off they get and the more of their labor that goes to enrich them, and not to further enrich already obscenely wealth entities.
Examples, pay off your land, then build your house as you can afford the materials. Result, no interest payments, no mortgage required, a nice home, at a fraction of the money-your labor-required. Most people don't realize how attractive this is as an option, you can have a paid off home in a few years, rather than a thirty year note that winds up costing you quadruple or more *for the same house*.
a garden..people don't realize how much wealth creation they can get from a garden,beats most any stock on the stock exchange. Example, this year we grew -as part of our gardens- around 20 watermelons. cost was a few seeds, saved from previous melons, maybe one gallon total fuel for my tiny tractor to rototill the area up, and maybe another buck or two for electricity to run the well for the few times we watered it. At even wholesale prices, we spent a few bucks and made over 40 bucks, and at retail, say around five bucks per (organic) melon, which is still cheap, we made about a hundred dollars worth of fine melons, which we have been eating and giving some away. It's a tremendous solar powered force multiplier and wealth multiplier. If say around half the suburban lawns out there were repurposed to productive gardens, that would add billions to the economy, and also drop energy demand. there is already expense and energy use going to keep the lawns cut, the same energy could be put into food production. And people would still have half their lawn to enjoy...
Insulation, run buildings up to R55 or 60 level, with some appropriate other tricks, and we could drop heating and cooling demands down to less than a third, for as long as the building is standing. People just don't run the numbers to see what an incredible deal this is economically, plus to lessen energy demand and improve the environment that way.
Old laptops, about 4 kilos, new laptops, about 1.5 kilos, but people want longer runtime with the batteries. The point was maybe we could get by with a laptop that weighed 2 kilos, still smaller than the older ones, with the extra weight being a big honking battery. Same sort of conversion with a portable communications device, the cellphone or radio. Back in the day, I carried a large 2 way radio for work. It was huge compared to today's cellphones. Maybe we could have larger cellphones that had better batteries, instead of the race to see how microscopic we can make phones.
If we managed to get by with those much larger devices back then, perhaps a compromise with the much smaller ones we have today, and offset it with larger batteries and bigger screens.
Is this clearer now? A hundred gram cellphone with so-so battery life, replace it with a 150 gram cellphone with twice as large of a battery, for much better runtime. Still falls into the small category. The old radios I used to carry weighed proly more than one kilo, or close to it, around there, and it needed a belt holster. We "got by" with that and didn't suffer hernias or anything.
As to what measurement is sane or not, meh, it is what I was raised with, same as you were raised with pure metric. I own a decent selection of mechanics tools, half are metric, half the stuff I work on is metric. I know the most common close enough to slide by things like grabbing a metric 13 is very similar to a half inch, might fit. I can get by with either, it doesn't bother me at all, just I was raised with standard so that's what I use in casual conversation.
Now think about modern day "embedded reporters". They won't be embedded very long if they don't pump out the official party line. That's just as corrupt, IMO. And if they aren't embedded, they just kill them, you must have seen that video of the apache video game gunner wasting those reporters and the civilians who stopped to help them. That's what militaries do to non tame reporters now, kill them if they feel like it. All belligerent/aggressive/totalitarian nations do it to reporters. You are on the payroll sub rosa or even above board, parrot the party line or disseminate the "big lie" disinformation, or you are a target they will get around to eventually if they feel like it, chose one.
The solution is there, people don't want it (well, I would but I am a blue collar guy and tiny differences in weight mean zilch to me..intown hipsters want teeny airweight and nothing else it seems). It's called a bigger battery. We used to have ten lb laptops, people still lugged them around. Now they want three lb laptops, or these things in your pocket, one ounce or something negligible. These phone batts just don't weigh that much, they could make them twice as large, it would still fit in your pocket and wouldn't weigh much. People won't buy them. You have to go after-market for the solution.
I know on my phone you *can* get a much larger battery, but it then needs a battery cover replacement that is larger, the sum total equals another similar phone (just a feature phone is all I have) in price, or close enough to not matter.
We have had significant battery breakthroughs, nicad to nimh to now lithium whatevers, but they also reduced the size and weight at the same time, so runtime is not getting any better. If they kept the old larger and heavier sizes, just with lithium tech, you could have outstanding battery runtime..now try to sell them when your competitor pushes how light and thin his are.
Maybe it is a niche market that could be tapped, big phones with beefy big batteries and actual useful screen sizes, etc, but no major brand is trying it that I am aware of. I carry mine in a holster anyway, so even twice as big and heavy would still be lightweight, certainly lighter than the cellphones or walkie talkies of some years past that we managed to struggle by with.
A lot of reporters have stood their ground on sources. An even larger number have sold out to the authorities and worked sub rosa for them, spreading disinfo or gathering intel, etc. It's a well mixed bag. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/ARCHIVE/ciamedia.html
note: I am not entirely in favor of hybrids (until they make a diesel electric work truck I could use), but I recognize they are good transitory step to all electric. Some of the benefits are, in stop and go traffic, the dang ICE shuts *off*, instead of you being part of the herd sitting there with an engine idling for no reason. This helps reduce smog in the downtown heat island effect areas, and maybe help all those millions of urban kids who have bad asthma all the time, and the other health ailments people get soaking in smog. Hybrids also have regenerative braking**, regular vehicles do not.
**Hydraulic regenerative braking might be a much cheaper option for most sedans rather than being gas/electric hybrids. Just enough of a boost to get you going again after each stop without really having to hit the throttle heavy.
So you move closer to work, give up the stand alone home with a real yard and garage, pay twice as much for a townhome or apartment, with half the square footage..to save a little on gas mileage? And then in the future, say you wanted to go solar PV because now you are more responsible about things..whoops..no PV panels allowed, violates covenants or living in an apartment, you don't own the roof. Or..you want to grow more of your own food, to be more responsible about things and help to eliminate the thousand mile salad..whoops..limited to one tomato plant in a pot in a window.
There are potential benefits that can be expanded on in suburbia, that you just can't do very well living sardine can style just to be closer to work. Instead of fixating on what some other people drive, why not lobby for more telecommuting and for basic nationwide good fiber to everywhere so this could be possible?
Yes, but what are these kids in the demographic specializing in then? I read, playing basketball and hanging out, hitting some social network places..Are those really comparable skills to some generations back when humans had to actually do something productive to get by all their life? And what happens when their potential one specialization gets downsized/offshored, whatever, and they haven't learned to be a *flexible* tool using human, to go with the flow? All of that is set at a very young age, your brain gets hard wired. Getting hardwired to hang out..not seeing as that becoming much of a future.
I made a point to say I was not putting people down, just wondering what they do, and that would be an extension on what they will be doing in the future.
As to eating a vegetable or beef or chicken..you don't know me very well..I'm a farmer you doo doo head! hahahahaha I grow things, fix things, build things and so on. I have a rather extensive skill set, just I don't program. I can build a house from scratch, do every single bit of the work involved, top to bottom, foundation to roof. Build furniture from scratch, yes, all the way from starting with a raw log and running a mill and debarker and kiln, then making the finished lumber. Do all the plumbing and wiring. Tear a car or a lot of other machinery down to bits and bolts and put it back together. Stuff like that. Walk out and "read" cows, see all their differences and moods and pick up on their needs and wants. Walk around and identify a ton of plants and animals in the wild. Heck, I even lived out totally feral for a bit more than a year before, totally off the land living, including through a new england winter, the only modern tech I had was my clothes and pack and normal camping stuff like a knife. Back in the day, when things were built to be repaired a little easier than today, I repaired all my broken stuff, everything, it wasn't all use until one thing broke then toss it out, all of it, you name it. And a lot like that there. I've worked from commercial fishing on the ocean to high rise steel in big cities. Worked on some big concerts and a lot of smaller ones. Worked a few commercials before. Geez, lotsa stuff thinking back. And all of that because I started out as a young person who did stuff, had tools in hand.
So, I am cognizant of a lot of what is needed to make modern life possible, I was wondering what the demographic in the article was learning and exploring and "doing" so they could do similar in the future.
I wasn't making a value judgment (much...) just trying to figure out/find out what a normal (whatever that is..) young person drive goes into, when it isn't into any of the long running human traditional tool using spheres. I am somewhat *concerned* as your basic nature gets pretty well set at a young age.
There's an interesting long running experiment in consciousness and the future running at halfpasthuman.com. It's called predictive linguistics. You might be interested in it.
Ya, but WHAT? In the fine article the kid outlined said he was really into basketball, and that was it. whoopedy zing, that's it??? for real? So I repeat, what do they DO? Just entertainments, media consumption, play sports? Anything serious? Just saying that "they don't do what you like to do" isn't answering the question, it is just further dodging it.
And really, to repeat, I am not trying to "get off my lawn" dump on anyone or any generation, it is just fascinating in an odd way to me to think there are humans out there who have no interest at all in how things around them work, that using actual tools is just never even considered, that that is for someone else, this vague someone else to do.
I am *seriously* reminded of that somewhat famous heinlein quote about specialization and insects. And what makes it worse, is that even the specialization is apparently being ignored now, appears they want to "do" anything else but work/build/create/explore. Just some sort of existence with no real purpose, no drive or something, anyone but them needs to "do that" so they can...what?? Just live, contribute nothing back, expect to go their entire lives like that??
I don't know, that's why I am asking. And that is what I was wondering, I just can't believe it, so I want to know what really takes the place of being a tool using tinkering human today, especially in this demographic in the article.
What the heck do you *do* then, that you have no interest in, or skills in, those things that make up technological civilization? Egads I simply can't imagine being that un-curious about things. Being a tool user is what separates us from the lesser primates. You say you use this or that that this "someone else" knows how to make work, to do what you want to do, so what is that, just be a media consumer, or what?
This is mind boggling to me, I grew up with a tool box and tearing stuff apart and building things, etc, ALONG with reading all sorts of things, being interested in nature and learning about that, etc. Granted, I don't program, and that is because my mind just doesn't work that way, linear and rote memory, I think spatially, which is why I have always preferred the GUI..but that still didn't stop me from learning to build/assemble computers either, have done that a bunch.
If you are a representative of this generation and demographic they are talking about in the fine article (or older I guess but with the same attitude), what the heck do you DO? Those kids, what the heck do they DO?
Note: not being snarky or flaming, not at all, your post just blew me away, I honestly do not know a single person in meatspace like the folks in the article and somehwat you who have no apparent interest in any technology that we all use, other than having someone else do it so you can use it.
Traditional college and university education has become just too expensive for many, and a lot of people graduate so much in debt it could have been a paid off small home. Along with health care expenses, it is one of the fastest growing expenses that people might have. The net can change this, and make it affordable again, down to very cheap in fact. The net can also make the scheduling more useful for a lot of people, so they can still work and perhaps take care of their kids, etc, and take courses and classes on their schedule, something that fits.
Yes, it might not be *perfect*, but it could be *good enough*, which is what really counts in the long view.
On my old PB 1400 I switched to the iCab browser and never looked back, loads better than what was available at the time, IE or Navigator. Have you tried that on your older powerbook? It might resurrect it and make it useful on the web again. (note: haven't checked it out in 2 or so years now I guess, but it *used* to be pretty spiffy as browsers go)
Most people don't care about "free" when all they see are computers for sale that come with the "free" operating system already installed. Very few people really buy a barebones computer and then go pay retail or otherwise acquire some OS. All they see is a bundled price, this has been industry standard for like forever, so that is how it goes. A starving student will buy used, and THAT will come with a "free" operating system on it.
Yes, it SHOULD have been made a requirement at the retail level ages ago to SHOW the software cost in the total bill, or to force these guys to offer alternatives, but the government didn't care, people didn't seem to care, so there ya go. It's just what comes with the machine, so the software is "free enough" for people.
And for that matter, very few people build their own desktops, and when it comes to laptops, that falls way way down to insignificant levels, even within the hard core tech savvy crowd. They may wipe the disk and install something else, but the incidence of barebones laptops or build from scratch laptops is microscopic in terms of numbers. It is possible, just very unlikely.
So "free" or Free never enters the picture for most people. Just the way it is.
And that deal with Dell and Canonical..from day one you could see Dell wasn't sincere about it, it was a sop or something, just to get them shutup and to "prove" to the shareholders or whatever that "linux doesn't sell" so they could eventually abandon the idea and have it go away.. They had "dell recommends windows..yada yada" on top of the pages for the few models with ubuntu they were selling! I mean, WTF, I saw that and thought "no way am I ever buying from them for being such dickheads about it". And there was no price savings, and most models you couldn't get, and you had to hunt to even find those. It was a con from day one. Ya, they would sell you one, but their effort was some sort of con, a half assed attempt designed to fail. That's my opinion of course, can't prove it, but recommending windows on top of the linux computers page is rather glaring evidence that they never were sincere about the effort.
The fix has been in for a long long time now. Wintel on your boxes, or now Apple has such good cred with phones and whatnot they are using that to boost sales with their other offerings, and free operating systems are relegated to mostly server use and the one dude out of a thousand-that's it, one in a thousand maybe- who geeks out with the hardware. And even there the free software enthusiasts are dwarfed by just the gamers. Heck, most hardware geeking that kids do revolves around video games, I don't think this can be disputed, so that means Windows.
It looked for awhile that netbooks might provide the big breakthrough, but that is lost now as well, back to mostly windows on those things from the manufacturers.
I like linux just swell, use it exclusively. never tried any of the BSDs but I assume they work fine as well. so now you have to ask the question, why having totally free stuff doesn't work, and the only credible answer is, it isn't a real mainstream business, and there is no credible mainstream retail level business to be made from it. As such, it will continue to exist, but at low levels and "hidden" like in various gadgets with embedded systems, android phones, etc. But mainstreet-mainstream desktops and laptops, DOA. When Free and free doesn't work, it is no longer much of a viable business model, if it ever was to begin with.
Now if someone with really DEEP pockets wanted to out canonical canonical, and do a "stack", hardware plus guaranteed to work free software offering (just offering the software is not a real business model with any hope), and then advertised the snot out of it nation wide/globally..perhaps.
Short of that, small mom and pop "linux installed" sales, and a few enthusiasts, and that's it. And half the enthusiasts (right here on slashdot for one example) still use windows and a
Really hard to say, although your scenario is entirely possible, and maybe it has a combination effect! My first reaction though was a variation on front running. Remember earlier this year when some guy quit at goldman sachs, walked away with some trading software program, and it got let out that "in the wrong hands, this software could be used to manipulate the market"? Well, that means in the originator's hands it could be used to manipulate the market as well. That story got buried. So that is what I think is going on, a variation of front running or shilling, creating artificial demands so they can jump on the small price fluctuations in real time right after they create these small market swings with the phony orders. Or they dump what they have right after demand goes up a scosh, demand they created, sort of a combo front running and pump and dump.
Either way, it sure looks mega crooked to me, and funny they can't identify who is doing these orders....
It certainly would tend to discourage a lot of middlemen and make direct purchases more popular. FedEx and so on would gain a lot of "share". and yes, anything to restrict market velocity back downjh so it reflects true investing and not microsecond arbitrage speculation.
I've been so disgusted with the crookedness in the stock market, that after researching the great depression back when I was a young teen, plus talking to my immediate older generations who lived through it, I made a vow to never buy a single share. Never have either.
My "stock" all has four legs and goes moo and tastes great off the grill. I only invest in useful tangibles, that's it. Nor will I buy a bond, all that is, is telling my neighbor and younger folks that I think it is cool to put them into debt to me so I could could "make more money", and tells my elected goofs that it is OK to run in the red perpetually. Screw that.. I think that is simply despicable, so I don't do that either, and I would much rather a "pay only if you can afford it right now" styled government.
And I refuse to do any bank loan either, I do not support the "trickle down" economic theory of fractional reserve banking combined with fiat currencies, I think that is a much bigger conjob than the stock market.
The intent is to game the system by creating bogus artificial demand-or lack of demand-in large enough quantities to influence trades below. Therefore,because they can do it at such a huge volume, and they know in advance what they are doing, they can use the split they have created to leverage that into a sort of arbitrage all day long. I am *guessing* right now they have to use a partner trader/bot to do the actual "real" trades following the bot shilling. Like secret partners in a poker game.
My opinion, crooked leeches, parasites, this sort of trading should be outright banned. I'd also like to see sales tax put on trades, we simply don't need this high speed trading at all, and that would be the simplest solution to this whole mess.
Would it reduce churn and volatility? Yes it would, not eliminate it, but slow it down enough to make it so actual human beings had to stop and think on what they want to do, and it would force a return to investing in a company, rather than this casino action we have now.
...so I guess all these uni scientists who create for-profit spinoff companies and patent the living crap out of everything, including patenting life itself, which is rather bogus..that they do all this from altruism, and just want to give everything away for the good of Gaia and stuff and work for a pittance, simply refuse most of their stipends and salaries, etc., and just creative commons license everything for free or..err.how does that work again, which is it? And they publish on those free..er..journal paywall sites that want a month's pay for people in the developing world to read an article...That's certainly altruistic....not...
Too broad, man. Scientists are humans, that's it, with the same wild and varied mix of greed to altruism everyone else has. There just *ain't* too many pure Gandhis** on this planet, never has been, and it will be a really long time until there is.
**well, OK, I suppose some wisenheimer will now link me to the white pages of india phone book to prove me wrong. %^)
If you have been allocated the "rights" to some segment of the public airwaves, that doesn't mean you can jam some other segments just because you want to stifle access with your competitors. The same should apply to wired access.
That is what this issue is about,the wired has to have access to public takings right of ways to build out their infrastructure..which means they are NOT all private business, so no one can claim they have all the property rights here, cable or twisted pair telco. Can an ISP A restrict or slow down-jam-the access to website/service/whatever B, just because they think they can "make more money"? Is it really a taking by the government when they are told they can't do that, jam some third party service or insist you buy their version of it (say like skype over the telco version of voip), or slow it down so much it becomes ridiculous? Just because they technically can, should they be allowed?
I say no, they agreed to be regulated when they assumed temporary control over a lot of other people's private property, all these poles with wires, all the underground runs, etc. Those companies have paid nothing for that access, and the private people never got paid back a nickle for it either.
But now that they have it, they want to be able to restrict the public's access as they see fit to improve their bottom line. Nuts. Ain't fair at all.
If they want to still do that, swell, let them *first* negotiate with every single real owner of the property where their lines cross, once they really "own" all that, then maybe, until then, *absolutely not*. The government-we the peeps-need to regulate them and say "no jamming the competitors", wireless OR wired.
And we could sort this out faster if we made it a law that they had to choose-be a content provider, OR a carrier, one or the other, but not both.
Slashdot Mirror
I gave long thought it would benefit society by requiring the open sourcing of all medical knowledge. As it is now for the most part, a profit center, yet the profit takes away from the general productivity, it doesn't add to it, it just helps it a little by not getting any worse. As such, it is more profitable to have healthier people with less medical expenses. Medical expenses fall under the "broken windows fallacy" of economics.
As to alt energy, I hear ya. I also like how it is suitable for decentralization, which increases security (more points of production, less chance of cascading failures) and can help to drop cost, as individuals can eventually pay off their own means of production, which is the same as locking in a futures contract on commodities.
I'm part way there. I have some solar PV, and rely on solid state nuclear fusion batteries..errr.. my firewood stash. Actually out splitting some today in this heat. Not a lot, I did three large rounds today, but I try to do some every day, year round. Sort of get paid to workout. At least that is what I psych myself out with, ha!
There's just so much that *could* be done all over, to help the economy, to improve healthcare, to improve the energy situation..waiting for the big change from the establishment won't work, it is up to the individual to just do it themselves. A million, ten million, whatever, individuals doing it IS change. Route around the government and entrenched corporate bottlenecks.
This is why I embrace modern survivalism, or practical preparedness, getting independent of as much as possible in your basic day to day human needs allows you to be wealthier, without the necessity of having to count your wealth in the terms of their scam fiat currency units.
the system today is set up and run to transfer your labor upstream into as few of hands as possible. All you have to do is...stop doing that. the more people work directly for themselves, the better off they get and the more of their labor that goes to enrich them, and not to further enrich already obscenely wealth entities.
Examples, pay off your land, then build your house as you can afford the materials. Result, no interest payments, no mortgage required, a nice home, at a fraction of the money-your labor-required. Most people don't realize how attractive this is as an option, you can have a paid off home in a few years, rather than a thirty year note that winds up costing you quadruple or more *for the same house*.
a garden..people don't realize how much wealth creation they can get from a garden,beats most any stock on the stock exchange. Example, this year we grew -as part of our gardens- around 20 watermelons. cost was a few seeds, saved from previous melons, maybe one gallon total fuel for my tiny tractor to rototill the area up, and maybe another buck or two for electricity to run the well for the few times we watered it. At even wholesale prices, we spent a few bucks and made over 40 bucks, and at retail, say around five bucks per (organic) melon, which is still cheap, we made about a hundred dollars worth of fine melons, which we have been eating and giving some away. It's a tremendous solar powered force multiplier and wealth multiplier. If say around half the suburban lawns out there were repurposed to productive gardens, that would add billions to the economy, and also drop energy demand. there is already expense and energy use going to keep the lawns cut, the same energy could be put into food production. And people would still have half their lawn to enjoy...
Insulation, run buildings up to R55 or 60 level, with some appropriate other tricks, and we could drop heating and cooling demands down to less than a third, for as long as the building is standing. People just don't run the numbers to see what an incredible deal this is economically, plus to lessen energy demand and improve the environment that way.
Really. Same as with cars, change oil regularly, less engine troubles. Prevention beats cure, all the time.
Old laptops, about 4 kilos, new laptops, about 1.5 kilos, but people want longer runtime with the batteries. The point was maybe we could get by with a laptop that weighed 2 kilos, still smaller than the older ones, with the extra weight being a big honking battery. Same sort of conversion with a portable communications device, the cellphone or radio. Back in the day, I carried a large 2 way radio for work. It was huge compared to today's cellphones. Maybe we could have larger cellphones that had better batteries, instead of the race to see how microscopic we can make phones.
If we managed to get by with those much larger devices back then, perhaps a compromise with the much smaller ones we have today, and offset it with larger batteries and bigger screens.
Is this clearer now? A hundred gram cellphone with so-so battery life, replace it with a 150 gram cellphone with twice as large of a battery, for much better runtime. Still falls into the small category. The old radios I used to carry weighed proly more than one kilo, or close to it, around there, and it needed a belt holster. We "got by" with that and didn't suffer hernias or anything.
As to what measurement is sane or not, meh, it is what I was raised with, same as you were raised with pure metric. I own a decent selection of mechanics tools, half are metric, half the stuff I work on is metric. I know the most common close enough to slide by things like grabbing a metric 13 is very similar to a half inch, might fit. I can get by with either, it doesn't bother me at all, just I was raised with standard so that's what I use in casual conversation.
that site is OK. Google around, do your own research. Here, I found this just searching for that title in quotes:
http://tmh.floonet.net/articles/cia_press.html
Now think about modern day "embedded reporters". They won't be embedded very long if they don't pump out the official party line. That's just as corrupt, IMO. And if they aren't embedded, they just kill them, you must have seen that video of the apache video game gunner wasting those reporters and the civilians who stopped to help them. That's what militaries do to non tame reporters now, kill them if they feel like it. All belligerent/aggressive/totalitarian nations do it to reporters. You are on the payroll sub rosa or even above board, parrot the party line or disseminate the "big lie" disinformation, or you are a target they will get around to eventually if they feel like it, chose one.
Here ya go, another
http://en.rsf.org/
The solution is there, people don't want it (well, I would but I am a blue collar guy and tiny differences in weight mean zilch to me..intown hipsters want teeny airweight and nothing else it seems). It's called a bigger battery. We used to have ten lb laptops, people still lugged them around. Now they want three lb laptops, or these things in your pocket, one ounce or something negligible. These phone batts just don't weigh that much, they could make them twice as large, it would still fit in your pocket and wouldn't weigh much. People won't buy them. You have to go after-market for the solution.
I know on my phone you *can* get a much larger battery, but it then needs a battery cover replacement that is larger, the sum total equals another similar phone (just a feature phone is all I have) in price, or close enough to not matter.
We have had significant battery breakthroughs, nicad to nimh to now lithium whatevers, but they also reduced the size and weight at the same time, so runtime is not getting any better. If they kept the old larger and heavier sizes, just with lithium tech, you could have outstanding battery runtime..now try to sell them when your competitor pushes how light and thin his are.
Maybe it is a niche market that could be tapped, big phones with beefy big batteries and actual useful screen sizes, etc, but no major brand is trying it that I am aware of. I carry mine in a holster anyway, so even twice as big and heavy would still be lightweight, certainly lighter than the cellphones or walkie talkies of some years past that we managed to struggle by with.
A lot of reporters have stood their ground on sources. An even larger number have sold out to the authorities and worked sub rosa for them, spreading disinfo or gathering intel, etc. It's a well mixed bag. http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/ARCHIVE/ciamedia.html
Portugal has been working on this for some years now. They will be getting some of the first shipments of the Nissan/Renault electric Leafs I presume.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL0934720820080709
note: I am not entirely in favor of hybrids (until they make a diesel electric work truck I could use), but I recognize they are good transitory step to all electric. Some of the benefits are, in stop and go traffic, the dang ICE shuts *off*, instead of you being part of the herd sitting there with an engine idling for no reason. This helps reduce smog in the downtown heat island effect areas, and maybe help all those millions of urban kids who have bad asthma all the time, and the other health ailments people get soaking in smog. Hybrids also have regenerative braking**, regular vehicles do not.
**Hydraulic regenerative braking might be a much cheaper option for most sedans rather than being gas/electric hybrids. Just enough of a boost to get you going again after each stop without really having to hit the throttle heavy.
So you move closer to work, give up the stand alone home with a real yard and garage, pay twice as much for a townhome or apartment, with half the square footage..to save a little on gas mileage? And then in the future, say you wanted to go solar PV because now you are more responsible about things..whoops..no PV panels allowed, violates covenants or living in an apartment, you don't own the roof. Or..you want to grow more of your own food, to be more responsible about things and help to eliminate the thousand mile salad..whoops..limited to one tomato plant in a pot in a window.
There are potential benefits that can be expanded on in suburbia, that you just can't do very well living sardine can style just to be closer to work. Instead of fixating on what some other people drive, why not lobby for more telecommuting and for basic nationwide good fiber to everywhere so this could be possible?
Yes, but what are these kids in the demographic specializing in then? I read, playing basketball and hanging out, hitting some social network places..Are those really comparable skills to some generations back when humans had to actually do something productive to get by all their life? And what happens when their potential one specialization gets downsized/offshored, whatever, and they haven't learned to be a *flexible* tool using human, to go with the flow? All of that is set at a very young age, your brain gets hard wired. Getting hardwired to hang out..not seeing as that becoming much of a future.
I made a point to say I was not putting people down, just wondering what they do, and that would be an extension on what they will be doing in the future.
As to eating a vegetable or beef or chicken..you don't know me very well..I'm a farmer you doo doo head! hahahahaha I grow things, fix things, build things and so on. I have a rather extensive skill set, just I don't program. I can build a house from scratch, do every single bit of the work involved, top to bottom, foundation to roof. Build furniture from scratch, yes, all the way from starting with a raw log and running a mill and debarker and kiln, then making the finished lumber. Do all the plumbing and wiring. Tear a car or a lot of other machinery down to bits and bolts and put it back together. Stuff like that. Walk out and "read" cows, see all their differences and moods and pick up on their needs and wants. Walk around and identify a ton of plants and animals in the wild. Heck, I even lived out totally feral for a bit more than a year before, totally off the land living, including through a new england winter, the only modern tech I had was my clothes and pack and normal camping stuff like a knife. Back in the day, when things were built to be repaired a little easier than today, I repaired all my broken stuff, everything, it wasn't all use until one thing broke then toss it out, all of it, you name it. And a lot like that there. I've worked from commercial fishing on the ocean to high rise steel in big cities. Worked on some big concerts and a lot of smaller ones. Worked a few commercials before. Geez, lotsa stuff thinking back. And all of that because I started out as a young person who did stuff, had tools in hand.
So, I am cognizant of a lot of what is needed to make modern life possible, I was wondering what the demographic in the article was learning and exploring and "doing" so they could do similar in the future.
I wasn't making a value judgment (much...) just trying to figure out/find out what a normal (whatever that is..) young person drive goes into, when it isn't into any of the long running human traditional tool using spheres. I am somewhat *concerned* as your basic nature gets pretty well set at a young age.
There's an interesting long running experiment in consciousness and the future running at halfpasthuman.com. It's called predictive linguistics. You might be interested in it.
Ya, but WHAT? In the fine article the kid outlined said he was really into basketball, and that was it. whoopedy zing, that's it??? for real? So I repeat, what do they DO? Just entertainments, media consumption, play sports? Anything serious? Just saying that "they don't do what you like to do" isn't answering the question, it is just further dodging it.
And really, to repeat, I am not trying to "get off my lawn" dump on anyone or any generation, it is just fascinating in an odd way to me to think there are humans out there who have no interest at all in how things around them work, that using actual tools is just never even considered, that that is for someone else, this vague someone else to do.
I am *seriously* reminded of that somewhat famous heinlein quote about specialization and insects. And what makes it worse, is that even the specialization is apparently being ignored now, appears they want to "do" anything else but work/build/create/explore. Just some sort of existence with no real purpose, no drive or something, anyone but them needs to "do that" so they can...what?? Just live, contribute nothing back, expect to go their entire lives like that??
I don't know, that's why I am asking. And that is what I was wondering, I just can't believe it, so I want to know what really takes the place of being a tool using tinkering human today, especially in this demographic in the article.
What the heck do you *do* then, that you have no interest in, or skills in, those things that make up technological civilization? Egads I simply can't imagine being that un-curious about things. Being a tool user is what separates us from the lesser primates. You say you use this or that that this "someone else" knows how to make work, to do what you want to do, so what is that, just be a media consumer, or what?
This is mind boggling to me, I grew up with a tool box and tearing stuff apart and building things, etc, ALONG with reading all sorts of things, being interested in nature and learning about that, etc. Granted, I don't program, and that is because my mind just doesn't work that way, linear and rote memory, I think spatially, which is why I have always preferred the GUI..but that still didn't stop me from learning to build/assemble computers either, have done that a bunch.
If you are a representative of this generation and demographic they are talking about in the fine article (or older I guess but with the same attitude), what the heck do you DO? Those kids, what the heck do they DO?
Note: not being snarky or flaming, not at all, your post just blew me away, I honestly do not know a single person in meatspace like the folks in the article and somehwat you who have no apparent interest in any technology that we all use, other than having someone else do it so you can use it.
Traditional college and university education has become just too expensive for many, and a lot of people graduate so much in debt it could have been a paid off small home. Along with health care expenses, it is one of the fastest growing expenses that people might have. The net can change this, and make it affordable again, down to very cheap in fact. The net can also make the scheduling more useful for a lot of people, so they can still work and perhaps take care of their kids, etc, and take courses and classes on their schedule, something that fits.
Yes, it might not be *perfect*, but it could be *good enough*, which is what really counts in the long view.
On my old PB 1400 I switched to the iCab browser and never looked back, loads better than what was available at the time, IE or Navigator. Have you tried that on your older powerbook? It might resurrect it and make it useful on the web again. (note: haven't checked it out in 2 or so years now I guess, but it *used* to be pretty spiffy as browsers go)
Most people don't care about "free" when all they see are computers for sale that come with the "free" operating system already installed. Very few people really buy a barebones computer and then go pay retail or otherwise acquire some OS. All they see is a bundled price, this has been industry standard for like forever, so that is how it goes. A starving student will buy used, and THAT will come with a "free" operating system on it.
Yes, it SHOULD have been made a requirement at the retail level ages ago to SHOW the software cost in the total bill, or to force these guys to offer alternatives, but the government didn't care, people didn't seem to care, so there ya go. It's just what comes with the machine, so the software is "free enough" for people.
And for that matter, very few people build their own desktops, and when it comes to laptops, that falls way way down to insignificant levels, even within the hard core tech savvy crowd. They may wipe the disk and install something else, but the incidence of barebones laptops or build from scratch laptops is microscopic in terms of numbers. It is possible, just very unlikely.
So "free" or Free never enters the picture for most people. Just the way it is.
And that deal with Dell and Canonical..from day one you could see Dell wasn't sincere about it, it was a sop or something, just to get them shutup and to "prove" to the shareholders or whatever that "linux doesn't sell" so they could eventually abandon the idea and have it go away.. They had "dell recommends windows..yada yada" on top of the pages for the few models with ubuntu they were selling! I mean, WTF, I saw that and thought "no way am I ever buying from them for being such dickheads about it". And there was no price savings, and most models you couldn't get, and you had to hunt to even find those. It was a con from day one. Ya, they would sell you one, but their effort was some sort of con, a half assed attempt designed to fail. That's my opinion of course, can't prove it, but recommending windows on top of the linux computers page is rather glaring evidence that they never were sincere about the effort.
The fix has been in for a long long time now. Wintel on your boxes, or now Apple has such good cred with phones and whatnot they are using that to boost sales with their other offerings, and free operating systems are relegated to mostly server use and the one dude out of a thousand-that's it, one in a thousand maybe- who geeks out with the hardware. And even there the free software enthusiasts are dwarfed by just the gamers. Heck, most hardware geeking that kids do revolves around video games, I don't think this can be disputed, so that means Windows.
It looked for awhile that netbooks might provide the big breakthrough, but that is lost now as well, back to mostly windows on those things from the manufacturers.
I like linux just swell, use it exclusively. never tried any of the BSDs but I assume they work fine as well. so now you have to ask the question, why having totally free stuff doesn't work, and the only credible answer is, it isn't a real mainstream business, and there is no credible mainstream retail level business to be made from it. As such, it will continue to exist, but at low levels and "hidden" like in various gadgets with embedded systems, android phones, etc. But mainstreet-mainstream desktops and laptops, DOA. When Free and free doesn't work, it is no longer much of a viable business model, if it ever was to begin with.
Now if someone with really DEEP pockets wanted to out canonical canonical, and do a "stack", hardware plus guaranteed to work free software offering (just offering the software is not a real business model with any hope), and then advertised the snot out of it nation wide/globally..perhaps.
Short of that, small mom and pop "linux installed" sales, and a few enthusiasts, and that's it. And half the enthusiasts (right here on slashdot for one example) still use windows and a
Well, sort of, been around a long time. Not hugely practical, unless you have no other source of vehicle fuel, then it is *very* practical.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_gas
Not bad for a quickee re-rendition.
Really hard to say, although your scenario is entirely possible, and maybe it has a combination effect! My first reaction though was a variation on front running. Remember earlier this year when some guy quit at goldman sachs, walked away with some trading software program, and it got let out that "in the wrong hands, this software could be used to manipulate the market"? Well, that means in the originator's hands it could be used to manipulate the market as well. That story got buried. So that is what I think is going on, a variation of front running or shilling, creating artificial demands so they can jump on the small price fluctuations in real time right after they create these small market swings with the phony orders. Or they dump what they have right after demand goes up a scosh, demand they created, sort of a combo front running and pump and dump.
Either way, it sure looks mega crooked to me, and funny they can't identify who is doing these orders....
It certainly would tend to discourage a lot of middlemen and make direct purchases more popular. FedEx and so on would gain a lot of "share". and yes, anything to restrict market velocity back downjh so it reflects true investing and not microsecond arbitrage speculation.
I've been so disgusted with the crookedness in the stock market, that after researching the great depression back when I was a young teen, plus talking to my immediate older generations who lived through it, I made a vow to never buy a single share. Never have either.
My "stock" all has four legs and goes moo and tastes great off the grill. I only invest in useful tangibles, that's it. Nor will I buy a bond, all that is, is telling my neighbor and younger folks that I think it is cool to put them into debt to me so I could could "make more money", and tells my elected goofs that it is OK to run in the red perpetually. Screw that.. I think that is simply despicable, so I don't do that either, and I would much rather a "pay only if you can afford it right now" styled government.
And I refuse to do any bank loan either, I do not support the "trickle down" economic theory of fractional reserve banking combined with fiat currencies, I think that is a much bigger conjob than the stock market.
The intent is to game the system by creating bogus artificial demand-or lack of demand-in large enough quantities to influence trades below. Therefore,because they can do it at such a huge volume, and they know in advance what they are doing, they can use the split they have created to leverage that into a sort of arbitrage all day long. I am *guessing* right now they have to use a partner trader/bot to do the actual "real" trades following the bot shilling. Like secret partners in a poker game.
My opinion, crooked leeches, parasites, this sort of trading should be outright banned. I'd also like to see sales tax put on trades, we simply don't need this high speed trading at all, and that would be the simplest solution to this whole mess.
Would it reduce churn and volatility? Yes it would, not eliminate it, but slow it down enough to make it so actual human beings had to stop and think on what they want to do, and it would force a return to investing in a company, rather than this casino action we have now.
also see this, it's just a high tech variation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_running
...so I guess all these uni scientists who create for-profit spinoff companies and patent the living crap out of everything, including patenting life itself, which is rather bogus..that they do all this from altruism, and just want to give everything away for the good of Gaia and stuff and work for a pittance, simply refuse most of their stipends and salaries, etc., and just creative commons license everything for free or..err.how does that work again, which is it? And they publish on those free..er..journal paywall sites that want a month's pay for people in the developing world to read an article...That's certainly altruistic....not...
Too broad, man. Scientists are humans, that's it, with the same wild and varied mix of greed to altruism everyone else has. There just *ain't* too many pure Gandhis** on this planet, never has been, and it will be a really long time until there is.
**well, OK, I suppose some wisenheimer will now link me to the white pages of india phone book to prove me wrong. %^)
If you have been allocated the "rights" to some segment of the public airwaves, that doesn't mean you can jam some other segments just because you want to stifle access with your competitors. The same should apply to wired access.
That is what this issue is about,the wired has to have access to public takings right of ways to build out their infrastructure..which means they are NOT all private business, so no one can claim they have all the property rights here, cable or twisted pair telco. Can an ISP A restrict or slow down-jam-the access to website/service/whatever B, just because they think they can "make more money"? Is it really a taking by the government when they are told they can't do that, jam some third party service or insist you buy their version of it (say like skype over the telco version of voip), or slow it down so much it becomes ridiculous? Just because they technically can, should they be allowed?
I say no, they agreed to be regulated when they assumed temporary control over a lot of other people's private property, all these poles with wires, all the underground runs, etc. Those companies have paid nothing for that access, and the private people never got paid back a nickle for it either.
But now that they have it, they want to be able to restrict the public's access as they see fit to improve their bottom line. Nuts. Ain't fair at all.
If they want to still do that, swell, let them *first* negotiate with every single real owner of the property where their lines cross, once they really "own" all that, then maybe, until then, *absolutely not*. The government-we the peeps-need to regulate them and say "no jamming the competitors", wireless OR wired.
And we could sort this out faster if we made it a law that they had to choose-be a content provider, OR a carrier, one or the other, but not both.