I don't know Jack - sorry, I don't know Werner - about quantum computing, but you did just describe the state of regular computing circa 1946 or thereabouts.
The difference is that the way forward was clear in 1946. Scaling up was primarily a problem of cooling and maintenance. In other words, engineering problems, not theoretical ones.
The area of quantum computing today is nowhere near on par with where we were with classical computing in 1946.
There are other things to think about as well. Often, having visible pornography in the workplace falls afoul federal sexual harrasment rules. What is the library going to do when they get sued by their own staff?
Fortunately, you have corrected this problem with Slashdot by posting this same offtopic rant in every article for days and days and days. Thanks for caring so much!
Can anyone comment on why the Supreme Court has historically allowed the Commerce clause to apply to absolutely anything that could be remotely, however ridiculously, be considered related to interstate commerce, and thus trample states' rights?
Is this simply a perennial sin of the Court, or is there a sound Constitutional basis for it?
I certainly cannot, since the states rights are enshrined in the 14th amendment and the commerce clause is in the original constitution, it has never made sense to me. The amendments are supposed to supercede the consititution. That's the whole point of having them.
So as someone from outside (I'm Canadian), I've come to the conclusion that the US will only solve it's issues that way.
Please. Who in America is going to look up from their screens long enough revolt? Hardly anyone can be bothered to write a letter to their representative, but they're going to take up arms?
What's idiotic about this is that every tech company gets its products made by the same factories. Why are they proposing boycotting apple, not boycotting all tech companies?
Oh, that's right, because boycotting all tech companies would be impossible to make happen, and apple are an easy scapegoat.
No. It's because Apple is the most visible target and also has enough clout to make changes in the industry. It has nothing to do with scapegoating and everything to do with strategy.
Except it's really China's manufacturing practices. Foxconn makes parts and subsystems (as well as finished goods) for thousands of companies. Calls to boycotting Apple, in that context, are absurd, and in some ways suggest and even less informed (by way of thinking you know something now, but only knowing part of the story) position.
It's not absurd at all. Apple is, by far, the most visible customer of Foxconn and therefore the best place to start pressuring them. Boycotting Foxconn directly is impractical because no one knows which products have Foxconn parts and/or assemblies and Foxconn isn't a household word. Apple on the other hand, is a household word and everyone would understand what is involved in an Apple boycott.
In my view, the real question should not be "should we boycott iPhones" but "which smartphone do we boycott". There is no reason Apple should be the only smarphone manufacturer under inspection, and I haven't read anywhere a comparison.
And in case they're all bad, you will never get enough people to boycott all Smartphones. But compare the manufacturers: RIM, HTC, Apple, Samsung, SONY, Nokia and you can find the worst offender. Then, you can put pressure on the worst offender.
That way, you can raise the manufacturing conditions by the bottom, which makes sense. But I somehow doubt Apple is one of the worst offender. I may be wrong.
No, the way to raise manufacturing conditions is to put pressure on the most VISIBLE company. That puts pressure on everyone. Apple is the most visible, so start with them and when they reform, the others will have to follow in order to compete.
I'm convinced the USofA can be a profitable exporter of manufactered goods and produce providing their managers start looking at the long term instead of just this quarters profits.
I agree, but it won't be in consumer electronics, or, probably, in any kind of consumer good. Germany has found an important niche which is the machines that are used to make the consumer goods. America needs to find a "niche" which I put in quotes because to get America working again, it will need to be a very large niche.
Ford (unlike GM and Chrysler) didn't accept the stimulus funds, and so were able to fix things their own way. If you accept huge amounts of government funding to avoid collapse, then you better expect there will be an equivalent amount of government oversight and input into how you do things. And that includes the government firing management (who were responsible for the bad decisions to begin with).
If you're the largest shareholder in a company, you get the most say in how things are run, and who runs it. Doesn't matter if you as a shareholder are an individual, a mutual fund, a pension fund, or the government.
So then why did the white house tell Ford to stop running TV ads talking about how they didn't take government money? Why does the white house get to veto the advertising policy at a company that DIDN'T take government money?
People who keep playing old games are picking the pockets of the developers. They're still playing old games when they could be buying the new versions and playing those.
The problem is bigger than that. Some people don't even PLAY video games! They're picking the pockets of the developers AND the console makers!
Because the stores don't pay very much for used games. The used game that you bought for $30 (instead of $45 new or probably $20 on a Steam sale), the store paid $5. At most.
I'm almost always surprised at how much money Game Depot is willing to pay for my used crap. Mega Media Exchange pays even better.
The used games stores are bad for the industry. All the bad things that publishers say about games piracy? The loss of sales and money being diverted away from the people who make the games? The need to jack up prices to make up for sales lost due to alternate means of acquisition? All that shit is actually true about the used games industry. With the kicker that the people lost to the used games pawnbrokers are actually paying customers, which is something you can't say about the pirates.
I buy mostly used games for my kids. Occassionally, I'll pop for a new title. I have also spent my money on two game systems, accessories and controllers. When things break, I spent money on replacements. Take away the used games, and I spend nothing. It is simply not worth the cost of the console and accessories to play the very few games for which I would be willing to spend $60.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know Jack - sorry, I don't know Werner - about quantum computing, but you did just describe the state of regular computing circa 1946 or thereabouts.
The difference is that the way forward was clear in 1946. Scaling up was primarily a problem of cooling and maintenance. In other words, engineering problems, not theoretical ones.
The area of quantum computing today is nowhere near on par with where we were with classical computing in 1946.
There are other things to think about as well. Often, having visible pornography in the workplace falls afoul federal sexual harrasment rules. What is the library going to do when they get sued by their own staff?
Fortunately, you have corrected this problem with Slashdot by posting this same offtopic rant in every article for days and days and days. Thanks for caring so much!
Can anyone comment on why the Supreme Court has historically allowed the Commerce clause to apply to absolutely anything that could be remotely, however ridiculously, be considered related to interstate commerce, and thus trample states' rights?
Is this simply a perennial sin of the Court, or is there a sound Constitutional basis for it?
I certainly cannot, since the states rights are enshrined in the 14th amendment and the commerce clause is in the original constitution, it has never made sense to me. The amendments are supposed to supercede the consititution. That's the whole point of having them.
At least the editors waited for the story to fall all the way to the bottom of the front page before duping it!
So as someone from outside (I'm Canadian), I've come to the conclusion that the US will only solve it's issues that way.
Please. Who in America is going to look up from their screens long enough revolt? Hardly anyone can be bothered to write a letter to their representative, but they're going to take up arms?
equal parts 'Leave It to Beaver' corniness and social awkwardness
I wonder, what is his slashdot id?
Right. Because Siri is completly original.
Jeannie.
I do it all the time with jeannie.
What's idiotic about this is that every tech company gets its products made by the same factories. Why are they proposing boycotting apple, not boycotting all tech companies?
Oh, that's right, because boycotting all tech companies would be impossible to make happen, and apple are an easy scapegoat.
No. It's because Apple is the most visible target and also has enough clout to make changes in the industry. It has nothing to do with scapegoating and everything to do with strategy.
Except it's really China's manufacturing practices. Foxconn makes parts and subsystems (as well as finished goods) for thousands of companies. Calls to boycotting Apple, in that context, are absurd, and in some ways suggest and even less informed (by way of thinking you know something now, but only knowing part of the story) position.
It's not absurd at all. Apple is, by far, the most visible customer of Foxconn and therefore the best place to start pressuring them. Boycotting Foxconn directly is impractical because no one knows which products have Foxconn parts and/or assemblies and Foxconn isn't a household word. Apple on the other hand, is a household word and everyone would understand what is involved in an Apple boycott.
No. You cannot make this work. At any price. Not in the US. No matter how you try to work it, the lawsuits will fly.
In my view, the real question should not be "should we boycott iPhones" but "which smartphone do we boycott". There is no reason Apple should be the only smarphone manufacturer under inspection, and I haven't read anywhere a comparison.
And in case they're all bad, you will never get enough people to boycott all Smartphones. But compare the manufacturers: RIM, HTC, Apple, Samsung, SONY, Nokia and you can find the worst offender. Then, you can put pressure on the worst offender.
That way, you can raise the manufacturing conditions by the bottom, which makes sense. But I somehow doubt Apple is one of the worst offender. I may be wrong.
No, the way to raise manufacturing conditions is to put pressure on the most VISIBLE company. That puts pressure on everyone. Apple is the most visible, so start with them and when they reform, the others will have to follow in order to compete.
I'm convinced the USofA can be a profitable exporter of manufactered goods and produce providing their managers start looking at the long term instead of just this quarters profits.
I agree, but it won't be in consumer electronics, or, probably, in any kind of consumer good. Germany has found an important niche which is the machines that are used to make the consumer goods. America needs to find a "niche" which I put in quotes because to get America working again, it will need to be a very large niche.
Ford (unlike GM and Chrysler) didn't accept the stimulus funds, and so were able to fix things their own way. If you accept huge amounts of government funding to avoid collapse, then you better expect there will be an equivalent amount of government oversight and input into how you do things. And that includes the government firing management (who were responsible for the bad decisions to begin with).
If you're the largest shareholder in a company, you get the most say in how things are run, and who runs it. Doesn't matter if you as a shareholder are an individual, a mutual fund, a pension fund, or the government.
So then why did the white house tell Ford to stop running TV ads talking about how they didn't take government money? Why does the white house get to veto the advertising policy at a company that DIDN'T take government money?
Slashdot should stop giving the government mod points.
n/t
People who keep playing old games are picking the pockets of the developers. They're still playing old games when they could be buying the new versions and playing those.
The problem is bigger than that. Some people don't even PLAY video games! They're picking the pockets of the developers AND the console makers!
Pre-iTunes, CDs sold for $15-$18.
I love my kinect! My kids get exercise now!
Because the stores don't pay very much for used games. The used game that you bought for $30 (instead of $45 new or probably $20 on a Steam sale), the store paid $5. At most.
I'm almost always surprised at how much money Game Depot is willing to pay for my used crap. Mega Media Exchange pays even better.
The used games stores are bad for the industry. All the bad things that publishers say about games piracy? The loss of sales and money being diverted away from the people who make the games? The need to jack up prices to make up for sales lost due to alternate means of acquisition? All that shit is actually true about the used games industry. With the kicker that the people lost to the used games pawnbrokers are actually paying customers, which is something you can't say about the pirates.
I buy mostly used games for my kids. Occassionally, I'll pop for a new title. I have also spent my money on two game systems, accessories and controllers. When things break, I spent money on replacements. Take away the used games, and I spend nothing. It is simply not worth the cost of the console and accessories to play the very few games for which I would be willing to spend $60.
I hate to be the one to tell you this, but that particular comic does not apply to every slashdot article that has appeared this morning.
What do the six lattermost companies have to gain from this?
The ability to design products that do what the end-user wants instead of what the media companies demand.
Of course, if Sony is any indication, the evil from aquired media companies will spread through the entire organization like poison.
Actually, an STM is typically about the size of a baseball. The vacuum chamber housing it, however...