You underestimate the ability of humans to compensate for the failings of their machines. Given a rapid enough feedback loop even a child can operate any machine beyond its design limits. We let children as young as three operate remote controlled aircraft, obviously with neither training nor experience. Some of them are even amazing at it.
Fiber optic data cables don't require or benefit from radiation shielding. For heavy work you're dragging a power cable anyway, so why not embed a dozen 40Gbps strands in it? If you want to use wireless data to control the recon machine, this is not a problem either, as in the human-free zone inside a melted down nuclear reactor you are free to use transmitter power sufficient enough to overcome the noise. The noise in there is hellish but overcoming that problem is easier than finding radiation hardened humans.
We are going to be about this meltdown recovery business for 40 years at a price of over a hundred billion dollars. We would save a great deal of money by leveraging technology as best we can to cut the human healthcare costs. Using a human for 30 minutes in that hellhole costs a half million bucks if he dies quick after, and ten if he lingers. Japan is not Russia, which had hundreds of thousands of humans from vassal states to use up for a half day each to clean up their mess. Japan takes care of their people.
For Japan to gain some waldo magic from this would only be making the most of a bad situation. (A waldo is a machine operated remotely by a human. )
An exoskeleton is essentially two things. A sensor suit that perceives human bodily motions, providing sensory feedback is the first. A mechanical framework which reproduces the actions and receives physical feedback, perhaps with amplified strength is the second.
With modern telepresence technology with physical and visual sensors and displays surpassing human abilities to perceive, and for the second thing planned to be operating in a radiological hazard likely to cause failure of the human providing data input, requiring that the first thing be physically located inside the second thing is an engineering failure.
If Elop had kept his mouth shut Symbian would still have 20% share and enjoy a long tail. But no, we had to throw them off the burning platform and get fully committed to Redmond. Symbian buyers bought it because it wasn't Windows mobile. To think you could ever convert those customers to Windows Phone on the strength of the Nokia brand was just dumb.
That is exactly not the problem. Buying ATI and the debt involved is what is killing AMD. It was too bold. But given the same options I might have been so bold too. Hindsight is 20:20.
This argument for MSOffice is that the fact it is the world's least compatible Office product, that's the major selling feature. You simply cannot get your data out of it and into something else. No other office suite has this 'feature'. So yes, by all means if your goal is to become committed to a permanent relationship to a sole-source software vendor that holds your own documents hostage, go with Microsoft Office. Most rational people considering this issue would go the other way. The sad fact is that the vast majority of people just don't include this issue in their consideration at all.
For many years Microsoft was the 800lb gorilla of technology, a titan among small fry, not just the largest technology company but such a king that could hold sway over all of the market. That gave us such gems as this: "Minding your Microsoft Manners." The palpable hubris is, in hindsight, the problem. Pride goeth before a fall.
When Apple knocked them off of the top of the market cap, revenue and profits hills many of them do doubt were telling themselves it was a fluke, a fad, a bubble. But now not only is Apple worth well over twice what Microsoft is, but Google has knocked them out of the second spot. Google! The company that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer swore he was going to kill in that legendary chair throwing incident eight years ago has grown over three times in size while Microsoft stood still and has bested him. As if that weren't enough, IBM has been in its customary patient, persistent, conservative way building itself up until it is ready to put Microsoft even out of the third row in "Technology Companies by Market Capitalization". This on the eve of the largest simultaneous refresh of Microsoft's products in its history: new versions of Windows, Server, Office, Mobile, gaming products, the expected success of which the market has already priced in.
This is no longer the giant that others dread.
Microsoft's fall from dominance goes really hard. They are still in denial, demanding things they are no longer entitled to. It affects their partners too. Their longtime partner HP remains loyal despite the fact that Windows PCs make them no profit to speak of, and aren't expected to in the next few years, and HP has been scrambling so fast for so long that literally every other option has been floated but still the company stock is trading at lows not seen in a decade and analysts are calling for a breakup of the company, or doom inescapable. What could make HP act this way when there is no profit in it, nor hope of any? Dell is just as bad off - in the midst of the 2008 panic their stock fell lower than today, but there's no panic today and their shares today traded at an annual low, and the company's market cap is about one third of where it was a decade ago. And then there's Nokia. We all know what's happened to Nokia in the last few years. The only Microsoft partners doing well these days are ones like Samsung, Asus and Acer who keep them at arm's length and are participating in the mobile revolution Microsoft somehow missed.
The world has changed. We don't need to mind our "Microsoft Manners" any more. That is the really, really big deal.
If Mankind has a greater future than for ever increasing populations to devolve into fighting over food and other resources, a better end than the dinosaurs, the only path goes through Ceres. Ceres is key to exploiting the solar system and is the gateway to the stars. It has vast resources of water in near zero g. There can be no higher goal for Human science than to forestall the end of Man. Before we lose the resources to do so we must exploit Ceres. If we fail in this our end is set. We need to convert a good fraction of that water ice to rocket fuel and bring it back and that takes energy. The US has until the Dawn mission's arrival at Ceres to prepare for the gold rush that will follow. Now would be a good time to prepare.
Man is a million years old. The current interglacial is only 9000 years old. Written history is approximately 10,000 years old. The alignment of interglacial and written history is almost probably a coincidence. The fact that mile-high glaciers regularly sweep all evidence of our civilizations into the sea and clean the slate is completely irrelevant, yes?
I was hoping you would weigh in, TapeCutter. If you have some story of static climate over an interesting term I'd love to hear it, even if it wasn't "provable". Give us what you've got.
It is difficult to teach people about the nature of trust. Especially when they must trust people to control their activity when they can't know who their controller is for security reasons. But it can be done. These days this is how change is made.
I buried this thing way deep in the thread on purpose because it's a wild environmentalist rant way out of place here. I've been carrying it for years. How/. managed to dig this deep to mod it to +5 in only hours I'll never know. The wonders of/. I guess.
Oh God, I've rousted the/. Rastafarian contingent. Forgive me. No, I will not be replying to any of your comments. Please: go back to Reddit, Digg, 4Chan, or wherever the hell it is you came from and post here no more.
As a proof of your point please point to a moment in Earth's history where the climate was provably static for a long period of time within our current temperature envelope.
We haven't even begun to exploit clathrates. There's far more of that than there ever was of oil. The arctic and antarctic reserves of oil and gas are far more than those yet discovered. Carbon fuels have a few hundred years to go yet.
As current species move toward the poles, more heat tolerant species are generated at the equator. And life backfills the change with more life. Such is at it has always been. Our dynamic world has never been stable, and should never be.
The supposition of AGC has ever been that a static climate is a desirable thing, despite the fact that such a thing has never existed in the history of the Earth, and never will.
Slashdot Mirror
You underestimate the ability of humans to compensate for the failings of their machines. Given a rapid enough feedback loop even a child can operate any machine beyond its design limits. We let children as young as three operate remote controlled aircraft, obviously with neither training nor experience. Some of them are even amazing at it.
Fiber optic data cables don't require or benefit from radiation shielding. For heavy work you're dragging a power cable anyway, so why not embed a dozen 40Gbps strands in it? If you want to use wireless data to control the recon machine, this is not a problem either, as in the human-free zone inside a melted down nuclear reactor you are free to use transmitter power sufficient enough to overcome the noise. The noise in there is hellish but overcoming that problem is easier than finding radiation hardened humans.
We are going to be about this meltdown recovery business for 40 years at a price of over a hundred billion dollars. We would save a great deal of money by leveraging technology as best we can to cut the human healthcare costs. Using a human for 30 minutes in that hellhole costs a half million bucks if he dies quick after, and ten if he lingers. Japan is not Russia, which had hundreds of thousands of humans from vassal states to use up for a half day each to clean up their mess. Japan takes care of their people.
For Japan to gain some waldo magic from this would only be making the most of a bad situation. (A waldo is a machine operated remotely by a human. )
An exoskeleton is essentially two things. A sensor suit that perceives human bodily motions, providing sensory feedback is the first. A mechanical framework which reproduces the actions and receives physical feedback, perhaps with amplified strength is the second.
With modern telepresence technology with physical and visual sensors and displays surpassing human abilities to perceive, and for the second thing planned to be operating in a radiological hazard likely to cause failure of the human providing data input, requiring that the first thing be physically located inside the second thing is an engineering failure.
Was thinking the same thing. HOLMES IV.
It's an excuse. It only needs to be solid enough for plausible deniability. The bar is quite low.
If Elop had kept his mouth shut Symbian would still have 20% share and enjoy a long tail. But no, we had to throw them off the burning platform and get fully committed to Redmond. Symbian buyers bought it because it wasn't Windows mobile. To think you could ever convert those customers to Windows Phone on the strength of the Nokia brand was just dumb.
That is exactly not the problem. Buying ATI and the debt involved is what is killing AMD. It was too bold. But given the same options I might have been so bold too. Hindsight is 20:20.
Not yet. And there is still ARM.
This argument for MSOffice is that the fact it is the world's least compatible Office product, that's the major selling feature. You simply cannot get your data out of it and into something else. No other office suite has this 'feature'. So yes, by all means if your goal is to become committed to a permanent relationship to a sole-source software vendor that holds your own documents hostage, go with Microsoft Office. Most rational people considering this issue would go the other way. The sad fact is that the vast majority of people just don't include this issue in their consideration at all.
For many years Microsoft was the 800lb gorilla of technology, a titan among small fry, not just the largest technology company but such a king that could hold sway over all of the market. That gave us such gems as this: "Minding your Microsoft Manners." The palpable hubris is, in hindsight, the problem. Pride goeth before a fall.
When Apple knocked them off of the top of the market cap, revenue and profits hills many of them do doubt were telling themselves it was a fluke, a fad, a bubble. But now not only is Apple worth well over twice what Microsoft is, but Google has knocked them out of the second spot. Google! The company that Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer swore he was going to kill in that legendary chair throwing incident eight years ago has grown over three times in size while Microsoft stood still and has bested him. As if that weren't enough, IBM has been in its customary patient, persistent, conservative way building itself up until it is ready to put Microsoft even out of the third row in "Technology Companies by Market Capitalization". This on the eve of the largest simultaneous refresh of Microsoft's products in its history: new versions of Windows, Server, Office, Mobile, gaming products, the expected success of which the market has already priced in.
This is no longer the giant that others dread.
Microsoft's fall from dominance goes really hard. They are still in denial, demanding things they are no longer entitled to. It affects their partners too. Their longtime partner HP remains loyal despite the fact that Windows PCs make them no profit to speak of, and aren't expected to in the next few years, and HP has been scrambling so fast for so long that literally every other option has been floated but still the company stock is trading at lows not seen in a decade and analysts are calling for a breakup of the company, or doom inescapable. What could make HP act this way when there is no profit in it, nor hope of any? Dell is just as bad off - in the midst of the 2008 panic their stock fell lower than today, but there's no panic today and their shares today traded at an annual low, and the company's market cap is about one third of where it was a decade ago. And then there's Nokia. We all know what's happened to Nokia in the last few years. The only Microsoft partners doing well these days are ones like Samsung, Asus and Acer who keep them at arm's length and are participating in the mobile revolution Microsoft somehow missed.
The world has changed. We don't need to mind our "Microsoft Manners" any more. That is the really, really big deal.
If Mankind has a greater future than for ever increasing populations to devolve into fighting over food and other resources, a better end than the dinosaurs, the only path goes through Ceres. Ceres is key to exploiting the solar system and is the gateway to the stars. It has vast resources of water in near zero g. There can be no higher goal for Human science than to forestall the end of Man. Before we lose the resources to do so we must exploit Ceres. If we fail in this our end is set. We need to convert a good fraction of that water ice to rocket fuel and bring it back and that takes energy. The US has until the Dawn mission's arrival at Ceres to prepare for the gold rush that will follow. Now would be a good time to prepare.
Tar pit.
In the Wheeler hypothesis all points in history both past and future are both fixed and possible.
This wasn't about gaming. It was about putting a permanent end to their very dangerous cloud desktop tech. That was a disruptive threat.
They squeeze an entire K-12 curriculum into 4GB storage, because they must.
Man is a million years old. The current interglacial is only 9000 years old. Written history is approximately 10,000 years old. The alignment of interglacial and written history is almost probably a coincidence. The fact that mile-high glaciers regularly sweep all evidence of our civilizations into the sea and clean the slate is completely irrelevant, yes?
I was hoping you would weigh in, TapeCutter. If you have some story of static climate over an interesting term I'd love to hear it, even if it wasn't "provable". Give us what you've got.
It is difficult to teach people about the nature of trust. Especially when they must trust people to control their activity when they can't know who their controller is for security reasons. But it can be done. These days this is how change is made.
I buried this thing way deep in the thread on purpose because it's a wild environmentalist rant way out of place here. I've been carrying it for years. How /. managed to dig this deep to mod it to +5 in only hours I'll never know. The wonders of /. I guess.
Heat tolerant species are generated? By whom? And more importantly, how quickly?
By evolution, as quickly as necessary. Darwin.
Oh God, I've rousted the /. Rastafarian contingent. Forgive me. No, I will not be replying to any of your comments. Please: go back to Reddit, Digg, 4Chan, or wherever the hell it is you came from and post here no more.
Obviously, besides this one.
As a proof of your point please point to a moment in Earth's history where the climate was provably static for a long period of time within our current temperature envelope.
We haven't even begun to exploit clathrates. There's far more of that than there ever was of oil. The arctic and antarctic reserves of oil and gas are far more than those yet discovered. Carbon fuels have a few hundred years to go yet.
As current species move toward the poles, more heat tolerant species are generated at the equator. And life backfills the change with more life. Such is at it has always been. Our dynamic world has never been stable, and should never be.
The supposition of AGC has ever been that a static climate is a desirable thing, despite the fact that such a thing has never existed in the history of the Earth, and never will.
Hemp has a lot of advantages, but nutritious for humans it ain't.