It's all fine to sum up the reasons why we should set up a space colony, but it seems to me that it always comes down to cost and incentive: Who's going to cough up the money for this project, and why should they? There are plenty of space enthusiasts who will tell you that more can be learned about what's out there for a lot less if you just stick to using robotic probes and telescopes.
Of course, not colonizing space means that we keep all of our eggs in the same basket, which I agree is a bad thing, but convincing the average Joe of this is not easy. Nobody's going to want to spend that much money to help people live up there when it's obviously cheaper (and not to mention nicer) to live down here. If you ask me, this attitude will only change when enough of us decide that it would be *better* to live up there than down here. First, though, life down here will have to become miserable enough for people to start thinking such crazy thoughts, but it looks to me like we're well on our way to making that happen. So, IMHO, we will eventually leave the nest, but only after we ruin it first.
Seems to me they could do a lot better by removing the the guy inside. After all, he can only see out with the aid of some cameras and monitors anyway. Perhaps they'd have to work on improving their wireless communications, but I don't think that would be a show stopper. A little AI would also help.
The UN Security Council has decided that, from this day on, all websites with controversial and/or adult content will be given IP addresses with odd numbers, and all websites with uncontroversial content and/or content fit for all ages will be given IP addresses with even numbers.
Of course, thanks to John Bolton, the American ambassador to the UN, the Security Council understands that realizing this new rule so quickly will not be easy. That's why they have decided to take his advice and entrust the manufacture and maintenance of the special routers needed for this task to Microsoft: a global company we can all trust. Microsoft has even been kind enough to develop a whole new set of Internet protocols for this purpose.
Those are cases where the males are often (but not always) eaten by the females just after (or even during) mating. Perhaps that, as a result of this practice, these males will often end up expiring a little sooner than otherwise, but I'm not sure that they simply have significantly shorter lifespans to begin with.
...for an octopus. These creatures never cease to amaze me; they're absolutely fascinating. It's therefore such a pity that they all have such short lives: once they reach sexual maturity, they reproduce and die. Most do not live more than one or two years. The giant Pacific octopus lives longer than most: males about 4 years and females about 3.5.
Perhaps it's their reproductive strategy which is to blame. The females produce zillions of little eggs, which they guard with their lives, but do not take care of the young once they've hatched. Having been so successful in producing so many offspring, there's no evolutionary advantage for them to be around any longer and so they die. Being part of the same reproductive strategy, the males don't last much longer either (actually, I can't think of any examples in the natural world where one sex significantly outlives the other).
As I was saying, life is short for an octopus.
That much is obvious, but he does have a point. Sure, there are completely different ways of tackling this problem in the Unix world, but that doesn't mean there aren't any people in the Windows world who wouldn't like to be able to manage Linux workstations the same way they do Windows workstations. For them, it's always been a tool that's been missing for Linux. Let's face, most big companies are still Windows centric as far as the desktop is concerned and many of the sysadmins out there find themselves in cross-over situations at best. ZENworks Linux is for them. Let 'em use it if they think it's the best solution: that's fine with me. I recently heard a complaint about Linux from one ZENworks sysadmin that the lack of this kind of tool was exactly the reason why his department was not yet ready to consider Linux as a serious alternative to Windows. Maybe ZENworks Linux will shut him up. Okay, so NDS (um,.. eDirectory) is not as popular as it used to be, but at least this kind of solution is available for those who want to work this way. And who knows, if some companies that go with this product eventually end up getting rid of most of their Windows desktops as a result, maybe they'll start to notice the other more elegant Unix-type solutions as well.
That's what this is called (I certainly wouldn't call it an antidote or a cure). This is so obvious, that I believe it's the only reason why M$ has avoided competing in this market for years. Until now that is. Why? I guess it's mainly because they're desperate to find substantial sources of income beyond their Windows/Office monopoly, but maybe it's also because they're hoping most people will no longer see how ironic this is. Hell, it's basically a scam.
The Hubble may be expensive, but if you look at all the fantastic discoveries that have been made with it, it's been great value for money anyway. And all that's needed is a measly $1 billion to keep it going until the James Webb space telescope can take over in 2011, or maybe even a little longer. That's nothing compared to the money Bush has been throwing away in Iraq. What a crying shame.
Still the worst has got to be Bush's stupid Moon-Mars initiative. It sounds too good to be true because it is; when push comes to shove, it's never going to happen because it's far too expensive. It won't be funded. But, the American people won't find that out until it's too late and so many other valuable projects, such as the Hubble, have already been scrapped.
Just as the average income has increased over the years, so has the cost of living. As a result, your salary's economic value does not increase as quickly as its monetary value. Similarly, in the world of personal computing, CPUs may get faster all the time, but they also live in an increasingly expensive computing environment. So, why does everybody put up with this? Well, because it's what most people want. Just as most of us would rather not do without all of the technological services and amenities that we have today, even though they make life more expensive, most people would rather not use their modern PCs to run only MS-DOS v6, Word Perfect v5.1 and Lotus 123 v2.2.
They have no real competition. Whether you require a specialized business application, have to run somebody's telebanking software, need help from your ISP, would like to upload a list of phone numbers to your mobile phone or just want to play the latest games on your PC, most roads still lead to Redmond. Windows will always suck as long as this is the case. As long as Windows is making money for M$, why should they fix it? We must all do our best to educate the people around us that there are alternatives to Windows, especially if all they want to do is just type and surf, but we're still up against a formidable foe. M$ are a real monopoly, which means they are very powerful: they can and do raise their prices arbitrarily (86% profit for Windows in 2002) -- something they can do without harming their market share -- and they defend their position tooth and nail, making heavy use of marketing, FUD, misinformation and of course, a practically unlimited budget.
Every free-market economy has (or should have) antitrust laws to protect it from the unfair competition and business practices of a monopolist defending and exploiting its monopoly. In 1907, John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company had cornered 64% of the oil market. The United States government took him and his company to court and won, after which it was broken up in 1911. Unfortunately, though the law may be clear in this area, justice is never automatic -- it still has to be enforced by the government. And since governments are run by people and people can be corrupted, it's possible for the monopolists to get anyway with their evil practices anyway. In 1998, the DOJ under the Clinton Administration took M$ to court for similar reasons -- and by that time M$ had cornered a lot more than 64% of their market. But, alas: before the trial could be concluded, the Bush administration had taken over from Clinton and within the space of only a few short months, uncle Bill and his buddies were off the hook. The DOJ's case, representing years of hard work and $200 million of the taxpayers money, was simply flushed down the toilet. Boy, what little money in Washington can do for a guy! What's ironic in this comparison is that Rockefeller, although ruthless, was not as successful with his monopoly as you may think: the price of kerosene had fallen from $2 a gallon in the early 1860s to about six cents a gallon by the time of the Standard Oil trial. On the other hand, by 2001, M$ was raking in ridiculous profits for its Windows software, but they're the ones who got off almost scot-free.
For PC users, I believe that things will eventually get better. Alternative operating systems, such as OS X and Linux will slowly eat away M$'s lead, but I feel this may take a long time. At one point, a critical mass will be reached and the makers of business software will begin to offer Linux versions, as will the banks, your ISP will begin to offer support for OS X and the gaming industry will no longer be able to afford to focus on Windows alone. Exactly when this day will arrive is anybody's guess, but I sure do hope it arrives sooner as opposed to later.
Recently, I was asked by a client if I could come up with a wireless audio link for between his computer and an existing sound system. It seemed like a pretty straightforward proposition, but after asking around I soon learned that it is always a better to use cables if you can help it in order to avoid possible interference problems. It's one thing to listen to a digital broadcast over the Internet using a laptop and a wi-fi card, but anyone thinking that it's therefore also possible to replace their speaker cables with radio links and not suffer a loss in sound quality is making a mistake. Such solutions are only a last resort.
Well, perhaps I'll compile a fresh kernel with a separate DRM module tomorrow -- although I'm still not clear on what you'd have me do with it after that. Anyway, I am using he agpgart as well as the mga module. Regarding the XFree86 drivers, I'm using a pair supplied by Matrox (mga_drv.o and mga_hal_drv.o for DVI support), dated 2004-11-01, instead of the ones that come standard with the XFree86 version (4.3.0) I'm running.
With this configuration I get no DRI support, according to glxinfo. The only way I've been able to get glxinfo to say I am running with DRI support, is when I use the stock mga_drv.o driver together with the mga_hal_drv.o file from Matrox. But then X freezes up on me the moment I even try running an OpenGL screensaver. But, I suppose that's asking for trouble.
As for my XFree86.0.log, unfortunately, the Slashdot "postercomment" compression filter will not allow me to post it. I'll email it to you.
I take it you don't mean just using a later kernel. I'm using 2.6.8 at the moment with DRM enabled in the kernel (not loaded as a module). And yes, I've been trying to get XFree86 to run with DRI (which I think looks great). Are you suggesting that I recompile the kernel with DRM as a module, and then replace it with a different version? If so, where would you suggest I look for it (or the source code)? I didn't notice anything in the driver package from Matrox.
I'm still running a G550 on my Debian sid system with XFree86 and KDE, but after some recent upgrades/updates, I'm no longer able to get it to run OpenGL stuff. Obviously, this sucks, so now I'm on the verge of dumping it in favor of something from nVidia.
There's no reason whatsoever for the government to suddenly change its strategy regarding M$.
This is just an another opportunity for some M$ management types to meet up with their buddies at the Justice Department and talk about old times. After that, Longtime will get the thumbs up and M$ will be allowed to continue unfolding its evil plans unhindered.
Actually, I too was surprised at this. M$ bashing is easy, but does this mean that every time I do so, I'll be awarded points for it? The only explanation I have for this, is that there are still people out there who are coming to grips with the basics regarding M$' modus operandi. Perhaps it just takes time for the truth to dawn on some individuals, despite the overwhelming body of evidence available.
Their programmers might care, but M$ itself isn't interested in respect from the cryptographic community, because it's something that doesn't matter to their stockholders; it's too obscure for them to care about. M$ only responds to this kind of thing once the news gets out and the public begins to perceive it as a problem. Security through obscurity, remember? Basically, M$ are only in it for the money; a statement that explains their entire track record.
If the science involved is correct, then I don't believe that there is much hope for us. While as individuals or as small groups -- perhaps even nations -- many of us are capable of understanding the urgency of the matter and what needs to be done to avert a global catastrophe, I don't believe it will be enough; too many of us are unable and/or unwilling to understand the problem and what hangs in the balance.
These days, I often think that the whole situation looks a lot like a simple, closed-ecosystem experiment that one might perform in a lab involving a petri dish, an algae culture and some bacteria. If the bacteria were smart, they would limit their own population size before reaching the point at which the algae could not reproduce fast enough to feed them anymore, or the point at which they would be poisoned by their own waste products before it could be processed by the algae. But, being bacteria, they're not so smart, so they eat and reproduce themselves to death. It seems to me that, at the moment, we're behaving just like those bacteria; by the time enough of us realize that something is wrong, it'll be too late for us all.
... they actually did figure out how to make everybody immortal in about 25 years or so, but that by that time, with global warming and overpopulation and everything, the world becomes such a miserable place that nobody would want to extend their lives anyway.
... since hard disks are still the worst performance bottleneck in just about any PC. Over the years as CPUs and RAM have become faster, this bottleneck has just become more pronounced. Along the way we've heard about all kinds of amazing, alternative mass-storage technologies entering the pipeline, but nothing ever comes out the end. What's the status of that non-volatile nanotech memory they were talking about a while back? If that stuff ever hits the market and performs even half as well as they were saying, my machines would be zillion times faster than with these ancient, unreliable, revolving magnetic disks, large as they may be.
Most of the time, I use Konqueror, FireFox and Mozilla, in that order and wouldn't want to loose any of them. All are different (especially Konqueror), so that if I encounter a webpage that doesn't look right in one browser, I'll try another. If none of them work and I really have to view the page, I'll start up Windows (Win4Lin) and try the Windows version of FireFox. Only as a last resort will I use IE, although luckily it's been months since I've had to do that (a good sign).
Finally, all are separate. This is good, since if I'm doing some serious research and have a lot of webpages open, I don't want one bad page to crash the only browser I'm using and make me start all over again. With three browsers, if I spread things around evenly enough, one browser crashing will not mean that I loose all of my results.
A mobile phone that is actually a mini-PC running Linux with a fixed IP address, a permanent connection to the Internet and an affordable, flat-rate subscription. One day, I believe that all mobile phones will do this and that all mobile phone companies will offer this service. After a while there won't be a difference between an ISP and a mobile phone company.
Now, once I have a phone like this, I'll want something extra for it too: a pair of small, backwards/forwards facing cameras with built-in microphones and earphones that I'll be able to clip onto my glasses on either side of my head.
With these four camera lenses, I'd be able to record what was in front of me and behind me in stereo. If my glasses even had a pair of high-res HUDs, I might be able to watch my own back as I walked through a dangerous neighborhood. Maybe they'd even let me see in the dark.
Anyway, even with a single camera and microphone I'd be able to produce a real-time, audio-visual feed that I can store locally or on my server at home. Or, I could send this feed to someone else to watch and listen while I'm busy with something they might be interested in. Think about it: this technology would allow someone a world away to talk you through a problem while watching and listening to what you're doing!
Mobile phone companies: are you listening? This is the killer application you're looking for! Enough of this can already be achieved with existing technology. You only need the will to make it happen.
Three days? I calculate that at a transfer rate of 80 MBps, it would take just over 15 days and 4 hours to fill a 100TB tape -- time enough for a decent vacation! But, that's assuming an average transfer rate of 80 MBps. If anything slows down this average transfer rate, every single MB per second less will increase the total backup time by 4.6 hours.
This seems likely, too. For instance, it sounds like this is going to be a linear drive. The article states that "With its current technology, IBM is now able to store 704 data tracks on the 1.27 centimeter (half-inch) wide tape used by IBM's TotalStorage 3580 LTO Generation 3 drives." Further on, they say that by narrowing the width of the tracks, they hope to fit 20 times as many onto a given width of tape. That would mean 14080 data tracks. Therefore, this tape drive would have to switch tracks 14079 times before the tape would be full. And if each track switch (slow down, reverse and switch tracks, start up) would take a full second (and that would be fast), then that would mean that the backup would take a further 3.9 hours to complete.
Slashdot Mirror
Lighting the way for the rest of us? Yeah, right. Sounds more like they found their way to the bank.
It's all fine to sum up the reasons why we should set up a space colony, but it seems to me that it always comes down to cost and incentive: Who's going to cough up the money for this project, and why should they? There are plenty of space enthusiasts who will tell you that more can be learned about what's out there for a lot less if you just stick to using robotic probes and telescopes.
Of course, not colonizing space means that we keep all of our eggs in the same basket, which I agree is a bad thing, but convincing the average Joe of this is not easy. Nobody's going to want to spend that much money to help people live up there when it's obviously cheaper (and not to mention nicer) to live down here. If you ask me, this attitude will only change when enough of us decide that it would be *better* to live up there than down here. First, though, life down here will have to become miserable enough for people to start thinking such crazy thoughts, but it looks to me like we're well on our way to making that happen. So, IMHO, we will eventually leave the nest, but only after we ruin it first.
Seems to me they could do a lot better by removing the the guy inside. After all, he can only see out with the aid of some cameras and monitors anyway. Perhaps they'd have to work on improving their wireless communications, but I don't think that would be a show stopper. A little AI would also help.
The UN Security Council has decided that, from this day on, all websites with controversial and/or adult content will be given IP addresses with odd numbers, and all websites with uncontroversial content and/or content fit for all ages will be given IP addresses with even numbers.
Of course, thanks to John Bolton, the American ambassador to the UN, the Security Council understands that realizing this new rule so quickly will not be easy. That's why they have decided to take his advice and entrust the manufacture and maintenance of the special routers needed for this task to Microsoft: a global company we can all trust. Microsoft has even been kind enough to develop a whole new set of Internet protocols for this purpose.
Those are cases where the males are often (but not always) eaten by the females just after (or even during) mating. Perhaps that, as a result of this practice, these males will often end up expiring a little sooner than otherwise, but I'm not sure that they simply have significantly shorter lifespans to begin with.
...for an octopus. These creatures never cease to amaze me; they're absolutely fascinating. It's therefore such a pity that they all have such short lives: once they reach sexual maturity, they reproduce and die. Most do not live more than one or two years. The giant Pacific octopus lives longer than most: males about 4 years and females about 3.5.
Perhaps it's their reproductive strategy which is to blame. The females produce zillions of little eggs, which they guard with their lives, but do not take care of the young once they've hatched. Having been so successful in producing so many offspring, there's no evolutionary advantage for them to be around any longer and so they die. Being part of the same reproductive strategy, the males don't last much longer either (actually, I can't think of any examples in the natural world where one sex significantly outlives the other).
As I was saying, life is short for an octopus.
That much is obvious, but he does have a point. Sure, there are completely different ways of tackling this problem in the Unix world, but that doesn't mean there aren't any people in the Windows world who wouldn't like to be able to manage Linux workstations the same way they do Windows workstations. For them, it's always been a tool that's been missing for Linux. Let's face, most big companies are still Windows centric as far as the desktop is concerned and many of the sysadmins out there find themselves in cross-over situations at best. ZENworks Linux is for them. Let 'em use it if they think it's the best solution: that's fine with me. I recently heard a complaint about Linux from one ZENworks sysadmin that the lack of this kind of tool was exactly the reason why his department was not yet ready to consider Linux as a serious alternative to Windows. Maybe ZENworks Linux will shut him up. Okay, so NDS (um,.. eDirectory) is not as popular as it used to be, but at least this kind of solution is available for those who want to work this way. And who knows, if some companies that go with this product eventually end up getting rid of most of their Windows desktops as a result, maybe they'll start to notice the other more elegant Unix-type solutions as well.
That's what this is called (I certainly wouldn't call it an antidote or a cure). This is so obvious, that I believe it's the only reason why M$ has avoided competing in this market for years. Until now that is. Why? I guess it's mainly because they're desperate to find substantial sources of income beyond their Windows/Office monopoly, but maybe it's also because they're hoping most people will no longer see how ironic this is. Hell, it's basically a scam.
The Hubble may be expensive, but if you look at all the fantastic discoveries that have been made with it, it's been great value for money anyway. And all that's needed is a measly $1 billion to keep it going until the James Webb space telescope can take over in 2011, or maybe even a little longer. That's nothing compared to the money Bush has been throwing away in Iraq. What a crying shame.
Still the worst has got to be Bush's stupid Moon-Mars initiative. It sounds too good to be true because it is; when push comes to shove, it's never going to happen because it's far too expensive. It won't be funded. But, the American people won't find that out until it's too late and so many other valuable projects, such as the Hubble, have already been scrapped.
Just as the average income has increased over the years, so has the cost of living. As a result, your salary's economic value does not increase as quickly as its monetary value. Similarly, in the world of personal computing, CPUs may get faster all the time, but they also live in an increasingly expensive computing environment. So, why does everybody put up with this? Well, because it's what most people want. Just as most of us would rather not do without all of the technological services and amenities that we have today, even though they make life more expensive, most people would rather not use their modern PCs to run only MS-DOS v6, Word Perfect v5.1 and Lotus 123 v2.2.
They have no real competition. Whether you require a specialized business application, have to run somebody's telebanking software, need help from your ISP, would like to upload a list of phone numbers to your mobile phone or just want to play the latest games on your PC, most roads still lead to Redmond. Windows will always suck as long as this is the case. As long as Windows is making money for M$, why should they fix it? We must all do our best to educate the people around us that there are alternatives to Windows, especially if all they want to do is just type and surf, but we're still up against a formidable foe. M$ are a real monopoly, which means they are very powerful: they can and do raise their prices arbitrarily (86% profit for Windows in 2002) -- something they can do without harming their market share -- and they defend their position tooth and nail, making heavy use of marketing, FUD, misinformation and of course, a practically unlimited budget.
Every free-market economy has (or should have) antitrust laws to protect it from the unfair competition and business practices of a monopolist defending and exploiting its monopoly. In 1907, John D. Rockefeller's Standard Oil Company had cornered 64% of the oil market. The United States government took him and his company to court and won, after which it was broken up in 1911. Unfortunately, though the law may be clear in this area, justice is never automatic -- it still has to be enforced by the government. And since governments are run by people and people can be corrupted, it's possible for the monopolists to get anyway with their evil practices anyway. In 1998, the DOJ under the Clinton Administration took M$ to court for similar reasons -- and by that time M$ had cornered a lot more than 64% of their market. But, alas: before the trial could be concluded, the Bush administration had taken over from Clinton and within the space of only a few short months, uncle Bill and his buddies were off the hook. The DOJ's case, representing years of hard work and $200 million of the taxpayers money, was simply flushed down the toilet. Boy, what little money in Washington can do for a guy! What's ironic in this comparison is that Rockefeller, although ruthless, was not as successful with his monopoly as you may think: the price of kerosene had fallen from $2 a gallon in the early 1860s to about six cents a gallon by the time of the Standard Oil trial. On the other hand, by 2001, M$ was raking in ridiculous profits for its Windows software, but they're the ones who got off almost scot-free.
For PC users, I believe that things will eventually get better. Alternative operating systems, such as OS X and Linux will slowly eat away M$'s lead, but I feel this may take a long time. At one point, a critical mass will be reached and the makers of business software will begin to offer Linux versions, as will the banks, your ISP will begin to offer support for OS X and the gaming industry will no longer be able to afford to focus on Windows alone. Exactly when this day will arrive is anybody's guess, but I sure do hope it arrives sooner as opposed to later.
Recently, I was asked by a client if I could come up with a wireless audio link for between his computer and an existing sound system. It seemed like a pretty straightforward proposition, but after asking around I soon learned that it is always a better to use cables if you can help it in order to avoid possible interference problems. It's one thing to listen to a digital broadcast over the Internet using a laptop and a wi-fi card, but anyone thinking that it's therefore also possible to replace their speaker cables with radio links and not suffer a loss in sound quality is making a mistake. Such solutions are only a last resort.
Well, perhaps I'll compile a fresh kernel with a separate DRM module tomorrow -- although I'm still not clear on what you'd have me do with it after that. Anyway, I am using he agpgart as well as the mga module. Regarding the XFree86 drivers, I'm using a pair supplied by Matrox (mga_drv.o and mga_hal_drv.o for DVI support), dated 2004-11-01, instead of the ones that come standard with the XFree86 version (4.3.0) I'm running.
With this configuration I get no DRI support, according to glxinfo. The only way I've been able to get glxinfo to say I am running with DRI support, is when I use the stock mga_drv.o driver together with the mga_hal_drv.o file from Matrox. But then X freezes up on me the moment I even try running an OpenGL screensaver. But, I suppose that's asking for trouble.
As for my XFree86.0.log, unfortunately, the Slashdot "postercomment" compression filter will not allow me to post it. I'll email it to you.
I take it you don't mean just using a later kernel. I'm using 2.6.8 at the moment with DRM enabled in the kernel (not loaded as a module). And yes, I've been trying to get XFree86 to run with DRI (which I think looks great). Are you suggesting that I recompile the kernel with DRM as a module, and then replace it with a different version? If so, where would you suggest I look for it (or the source code)? I didn't notice anything in the driver package from Matrox.
I'm still running a G550 on my Debian sid system with XFree86 and KDE, but after some recent upgrades/updates, I'm no longer able to get it to run OpenGL stuff. Obviously, this sucks, so now I'm on the verge of dumping it in favor of something from nVidia.
There's no reason whatsoever for the government to suddenly change its strategy regarding M$. This is just an another opportunity for some M$ management types to meet up with their buddies at the Justice Department and talk about old times. After that, Longtime will get the thumbs up and M$ will be allowed to continue unfolding its evil plans unhindered.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=126068&cid=105 56200
It's unclear WHY this post was modded up.
Actually, I too was surprised at this. M$ bashing is easy, but does this mean that every time I do so, I'll be awarded points for it? The only explanation I have for this, is that there are still people out there who are coming to grips with the basics regarding M$' modus operandi. Perhaps it just takes time for the truth to dawn on some individuals, despite the overwhelming body of evidence available.
Their programmers might care, but M$ itself isn't interested in respect from the cryptographic community, because it's something that doesn't matter to their stockholders; it's too obscure for them to care about. M$ only responds to this kind of thing once the news gets out and the public begins to perceive it as a problem. Security through obscurity, remember? Basically, M$ are only in it for the money; a statement that explains their entire track record.
If the science involved is correct, then I don't believe that there is much hope for us. While as individuals or as small groups -- perhaps even nations -- many of us are capable of understanding the urgency of the matter and what needs to be done to avert a global catastrophe, I don't believe it will be enough; too many of us are unable and/or unwilling to understand the problem and what hangs in the balance.
These days, I often think that the whole situation looks a lot like a simple, closed-ecosystem experiment that one might perform in a lab involving a petri dish, an algae culture and some bacteria. If the bacteria were smart, they would limit their own population size before reaching the point at which the algae could not reproduce fast enough to feed them anymore, or the point at which they would be poisoned by their own waste products before it could be processed by the algae. But, being bacteria, they're not so smart, so they eat and reproduce themselves to death. It seems to me that, at the moment, we're behaving just like those bacteria; by the time enough of us realize that something is wrong, it'll be too late for us all.
... they actually did figure out how to make everybody immortal in about 25 years or so, but that by that time, with global warming and overpopulation and everything, the world becomes such a miserable place that nobody would want to extend their lives anyway.
... since hard disks are still the worst performance bottleneck in just about any PC. Over the years as CPUs and RAM have become faster, this bottleneck has just become more pronounced. Along the way we've heard about all kinds of amazing, alternative mass-storage technologies entering the pipeline, but nothing ever comes out the end. What's the status of that non-volatile nanotech memory they were talking about a while back? If that stuff ever hits the market and performs even half as well as they were saying, my machines would be zillion times faster than with these ancient, unreliable, revolving magnetic disks, large as they may be.
Most of the time, I use Konqueror, FireFox and Mozilla, in that order and wouldn't want to loose any of them. All are different (especially Konqueror), so that if I encounter a webpage that doesn't look right in one browser, I'll try another. If none of them work and I really have to view the page, I'll start up Windows (Win4Lin) and try the Windows version of FireFox. Only as a last resort will I use IE, although luckily it's been months since I've had to do that (a good sign).
Finally, all are separate. This is good, since if I'm doing some serious research and have a lot of webpages open, I don't want one bad page to crash the only browser I'm using and make me start all over again. With three browsers, if I spread things around evenly enough, one browser crashing will not mean that I loose all of my results.
A mobile phone that is actually a mini-PC running Linux with a fixed IP address, a permanent connection to the Internet and an affordable, flat-rate subscription. One day, I believe that all mobile phones will do this and that all mobile phone companies will offer this service. After a while there won't be a difference between an ISP and a mobile phone company.
Now, once I have a phone like this, I'll want something extra for it too: a pair of small, backwards/forwards facing cameras with built-in microphones and earphones that I'll be able to clip onto my glasses on either side of my head. With these four camera lenses, I'd be able to record what was in front of me and behind me in stereo. If my glasses even had a pair of high-res HUDs, I might be able to watch my own back as I walked through a dangerous neighborhood. Maybe they'd even let me see in the dark.
Anyway, even with a single camera and microphone I'd be able to produce a real-time, audio-visual feed that I can store locally or on my server at home. Or, I could send this feed to someone else to watch and listen while I'm busy with something they might be interested in. Think about it: this technology would allow someone a world away to talk you through a problem while watching and listening to what you're doing!
Mobile phone companies: are you listening? This is the killer application you're looking for! Enough of this can already be achieved with existing technology. You only need the will to make it happen.
Three days? I calculate that at a transfer rate of 80 MBps, it would take just over 15 days and 4 hours to fill a 100TB tape -- time enough for a decent vacation! But, that's assuming an average transfer rate of 80 MBps. If anything slows down this average transfer rate, every single MB per second less will increase the total backup time by 4.6 hours.
This seems likely, too. For instance, it sounds like this is going to be a linear drive. The article states that "With its current technology, IBM is now able to store 704 data tracks on the 1.27 centimeter (half-inch) wide tape used by IBM's TotalStorage 3580 LTO Generation 3 drives." Further on, they say that by narrowing the width of the tracks, they hope to fit 20 times as many onto a given width of tape. That would mean 14080 data tracks. Therefore, this tape drive would have to switch tracks 14079 times before the tape would be full. And if each track switch (slow down, reverse and switch tracks, start up) would take a full second (and that would be fast), then that would mean that the backup would take a further 3.9 hours to complete.