Slow news day for you, is it? It's what happens when a manufacturer hasn't monopolized an entire market segment but is, say, monopolizing the consumables for its product lines by preventing third party companies from producing and selling consumables more cheaply or refurbing and reselling them, etc. Slashdot has covered many examples of this tactic; the best known example was Lenovo's chipping of laser toner cartridges and then trying to abuse the DMCA to prevent competing third party compatible cartridges.
If that doesn't morph your LOL into WTF then best you go back to your beer and pretzels.
I don't have a cellphone, but if I did it would be purchased outright. While that tactic is monopolistic too, it's not a direct analog to the tactic we're talking about here. It's all bad, just not precisely the same kinda bad.
I've always found it hypocritical that the companies that engage in this sort of small-scale monopolistic and anti-competitive tactic - and there are thousands of them - are left completely alone by the regulatory agencies that are supposed to be preventing it.
I'm not even a rare-occasion coffee drinker so I'm hardly an expert on the chemistry, but might this be a situation similar to, say, two-part epoxy materials, where the desired result occurs at the time two compounds are mixed and doing that mixing prematurely leads to unacceptable consequences? Would coffee taste quite right if the additives were added weeks or months in advance of consumption?
If the astronaut pool were large enough, it might be more cost effective to simply weed out those that had inconvenient food (or other) preferences.
General competence in use of 3D design software is only critical to the ubiquity of 3D printing because everything that someone might wish to construct will be affected by intellectual property law: if someone else was granted a patent or copyright, then they can demand payment for use of it. Since especially at this stage that payment demand is likely to be unreasonable and excessive, the average person whose 3D printing needs are personal and not entrepreneurial has two choices: either pay the excessive IP demand or simply do without (or find some other traditional means of meeting the need). Most people are likely to choose the latter, at least for the time being.
If, on the other hand, a small few who are highly competent in use of the design software were to create a large body of fully open-sourced designs, or at least ones priced reasonably and fairly, then the vast majority of people interested in 3D printing could simply use those designs rather than being forced achieve that same competence and each create their own designs... and potentially reinventing the wheel repeatedly in the process.
The way this process actually plays out won't be ideal by anyone's ideology. It will be a series of rather ugly compromises that, like most everything else, will wind up disproportionally benefiting a minority, but even that minority won't benefit as much as they'd like.
I propose a giant electromagnet in orbit. Can it be solar powered? After enough junk has glommed onto it, either deorbit the whole mess or launch it at the moon. The moonfall is a better idea; then a new breed of prospectors would have a chance to reclaim the stuff.
Intersections and traffic signals suck just as bad past about that same point. Roundabouts might work marginally worse only because there's no forced cooperation (via the signals). With roundabouts the cooperation is all voluntary, and it's specifically in the heaviest traffic that people revert to animals and become competitive. That's why I said what I said about re-education earlier; people can be trained to cooperate and value cooperating enough to keep doing it even when the chips are down, but it's fighting against animal instinct. That, however, is entirely what "being human(e)" is: a fight against animal instinct; prescriptive versus descriptive behavior. The way people drive needs to be more prescriptive.
No. The energy wasted on full-stop intersections, both by the devices mounted around them and by the vehicles passing through them from the acceleration from a full stop, makes them much less green than the TRIVIAL amount of extra land required for them. Further, that extra land required IS ALREADY USED as part of whatever home or business occupied it - unless you're a developer building a new gated community out in the bush - and therefore wasn't green to begin with. Even in that latter case, the land will still not be green even if intersections are used instead, because somebody still will own that land and will have developed it, be it a corner home or a strip mall or whatever.
I wondered how long it would take someone to trot out the specious extra-land argument.
The comment modding system exists precisely so you can register your admiration without the rest of us having to hear about your nostriladamus incident.
At least a deadlocked roundabout isn't sucking power in the process. Another thought: probably don't need anything like red-light and speeding cams installed at roundabouts, either. Those suck power, have a not-insignificant backend manpower drain, and probably require more recurring maintenance than even the traffic signals and posts (which have to be painted, etc.).
Any other problems with roundabouts and efficiency and/or safety are a matter of re-education and re-training. Notice I didn't say "simple matter"; re-educating people is NEVER a simple matter and is often nearly impossible unless done at a mass cultural scale and great expense.
Why? Let the immigrants hoist a flag and declare circular autonomy. What were you doing in that little patch that was so important? Are you afraid they'll charge a toll for safe passage around their curvy kingdom?
Roundabouts don't consume any power at all or require maintenance. Isn't that greener? Maybe we should be skipping the lights altogether and retrofitting roundabouts? Maybe next we can get rid of all the ubiquitous street lights, which are scarcely a longer blip in human history than automobiles and consume far more power than traffic signals?
Slashdot Mirror
Slow news day for you, is it? It's what happens when a manufacturer hasn't monopolized an entire market segment but is, say, monopolizing the consumables for its product lines by preventing third party companies from producing and selling consumables more cheaply or refurbing and reselling them, etc. Slashdot has covered many examples of this tactic; the best known example was Lenovo's chipping of laser toner cartridges and then trying to abuse the DMCA to prevent competing third party compatible cartridges.
If that doesn't morph your LOL into WTF then best you go back to your beer and pretzels.
I don't have a cellphone, but if I did it would be purchased outright. While that tactic is monopolistic too, it's not a direct analog to the tactic we're talking about here. It's all bad, just not precisely the same kinda bad.
I've always found it hypocritical that the companies that engage in this sort of small-scale monopolistic and anti-competitive tactic - and there are thousands of them - are left completely alone by the regulatory agencies that are supposed to be preventing it.
Hey, I was trying to think contemporary so the young'uns didn't feel left out....
Anthony Hopkins, of course!
Heads up, folks, here come the beer fanbois. They're worse than the Apple ones!
You pulled out the secretary's drawers? So was that your first time with an older woman?
Balkanization means exactly the opposite of your attempted usage. TFS doesn't misuse it.
Balkanization doesn't mean what you think it means. Back to History 101 with you.
Whoops... the GP of your comment, that is.
No, he's tacitly admitting he doesn't know what Balkanization is. I'm guessing he doesn't live in a Balkan state....
I'm not even a rare-occasion coffee drinker so I'm hardly an expert on the chemistry, but might this be a situation similar to, say, two-part epoxy materials, where the desired result occurs at the time two compounds are mixed and doing that mixing prematurely leads to unacceptable consequences? Would coffee taste quite right if the additives were added weeks or months in advance of consumption?
If the astronaut pool were large enough, it might be more cost effective to simply weed out those that had inconvenient food (or other) preferences.
Combine that with laser pistols with enough umph to zap these shiny mosquitoes and then you have something entertaining, too.
General competence in use of 3D design software is only critical to the ubiquity of 3D printing because everything that someone might wish to construct will be affected by intellectual property law: if someone else was granted a patent or copyright, then they can demand payment for use of it. Since especially at this stage that payment demand is likely to be unreasonable and excessive, the average person whose 3D printing needs are personal and not entrepreneurial has two choices: either pay the excessive IP demand or simply do without (or find some other traditional means of meeting the need). Most people are likely to choose the latter, at least for the time being.
If, on the other hand, a small few who are highly competent in use of the design software were to create a large body of fully open-sourced designs, or at least ones priced reasonably and fairly, then the vast majority of people interested in 3D printing could simply use those designs rather than being forced achieve that same competence and each create their own designs... and potentially reinventing the wheel repeatedly in the process.
The way this process actually plays out won't be ideal by anyone's ideology. It will be a series of rather ugly compromises that, like most everything else, will wind up disproportionally benefiting a minority, but even that minority won't benefit as much as they'd like.
I look forward to your Kickstarted project to research and invent this new magnet-for-everything. Maybe we can just cover it in Velcro? Oh wait....
Seriously, I was kidding.
I propose a giant electromagnet in orbit. Can it be solar powered? After enough junk has glommed onto it, either deorbit the whole mess or launch it at the moon. The moonfall is a better idea; then a new breed of prospectors would have a chance to reclaim the stuff.
Intersections and traffic signals suck just as bad past about that same point. Roundabouts might work marginally worse only because there's no forced cooperation (via the signals). With roundabouts the cooperation is all voluntary, and it's specifically in the heaviest traffic that people revert to animals and become competitive. That's why I said what I said about re-education earlier; people can be trained to cooperate and value cooperating enough to keep doing it even when the chips are down, but it's fighting against animal instinct. That, however, is entirely what "being human(e)" is: a fight against animal instinct; prescriptive versus descriptive behavior. The way people drive needs to be more prescriptive.
No. The energy wasted on full-stop intersections, both by the devices mounted around them and by the vehicles passing through them from the acceleration from a full stop, makes them much less green than the TRIVIAL amount of extra land required for them. Further, that extra land required IS ALREADY USED as part of whatever home or business occupied it - unless you're a developer building a new gated community out in the bush - and therefore wasn't green to begin with. Even in that latter case, the land will still not be green even if intersections are used instead, because somebody still will own that land and will have developed it, be it a corner home or a strip mall or whatever.
I wondered how long it would take someone to trot out the specious extra-land argument.
At that price I should be listed as a VC for the product. No thanks... I think I'll buy some wood and run it once through my table saw. :-)
The comment modding system exists precisely so you can register your admiration without the rest of us having to hear about your nostriladamus incident.
Not only is he young, he doesn't know how to use the Internet to find out about this "obscure" Fred Sanford.
At least a deadlocked roundabout isn't sucking power in the process. Another thought: probably don't need anything like red-light and speeding cams installed at roundabouts, either. Those suck power, have a not-insignificant backend manpower drain, and probably require more recurring maintenance than even the traffic signals and posts (which have to be painted, etc.).
Any other problems with roundabouts and efficiency and/or safety are a matter of re-education and re-training. Notice I didn't say "simple matter"; re-educating people is NEVER a simple matter and is often nearly impossible unless done at a mass cultural scale and great expense.
Why? Let the immigrants hoist a flag and declare circular autonomy. What were you doing in that little patch that was so important? Are you afraid they'll charge a toll for safe passage around their curvy kingdom?
Roundabouts don't consume any power at all or require maintenance. Isn't that greener? Maybe we should be skipping the lights altogether and retrofitting roundabouts? Maybe next we can get rid of all the ubiquitous street lights, which are scarcely a longer blip in human history than automobiles and consume far more power than traffic signals?