That and that they wanted Apple to take on more and more of the cost of developing new chips which were already lagging behind the x86 ones.Not enough parts. Not enough quality in the parts they were getting. Increasing costs with diminishing returns. They all added up to switching to the same chips that everybody else was using and went from a small customer using custom chips to the largest customer they had in a large market.
Ironically, the United States currently imprisons more people than China, and most of those prisoners are not violent offenders. Yes, the Chinese have a record of abuses, but that does not exonerate the United States.
Does that mean that the USA is more oppressive than China (or other nations) or that they simply have more criminals running around? Rule of law doesn't seem to mean that much in China. Corruption is rampant and even the status quo. In the US, if the law is broken, we can expect to go to court and have somebody punished (or found innocent) by the law. That expectation is largely what keeps the USA largely peaceful.
The reason we would set up a base on the moon would be to mine it for water for fuel, radiation shielding for occupants, etc. If the amount of gear we'd need to mine water from the moon is less than the amount of water we need, then at a certain point it becomes more economical to ship mining equipment to the moon and get our water there. It is the large delta V for earth to space versus moon to space that would make it worth it. There is also the issue of mining the moon for things like iron and then doing manufacturing in space. However the research needed to be preformed to figure out if it is economical would probably be enough to continue mining the moon or get to Mars in the first place. It becomes a question of if we are just going to Mars to put up a flag, or if we are in the process of expanding into space. If the first, we might as well just go to Mars because that's all we want to do and it's all just wasted money anyway. If the second, the most of the ground work for going to Mars will have already been done. Even then, going to Mars is going to require more space research just to be able to do it properly and with a decent chance of success. I've seen some people complain because we're spending money on the ISS and talking about missions to the moon instead of spending it on a trip to Mars, what they don't realize is that going to Mars is going to require more money spent on the ISS as well as moon trips to develop the tech needed to go to Mars.
His point is that the "question" is not in the form of a question, or even a set of directions. It is a fragment.
Well, having looked over the exam, that could be part of the test. If you really need to have such a statement explained to you while in a section about Plane Geometry, did you really have what it takes to bother with Harvard? It was the same with the History section. There wasn't a clear question, just some names. They probably didn't want you to just repeat back to them what somebody else taught you, they wanted to see what you had to say on your own. However, almost all of the History section seems to be tied back to the learning Latin and Greek (and I probably do give them too much credit and they did expect the standard memorized details). Likewise, the math, algebra, and geometry section all bring back memories of high school math. I have to forget my calculus and try to remember how to operate fractions and factor polynomials again.
Well, I am a physicist and an engineer, and I can assure you that catapulting a bolder into the shuttle could indeed damage it. (However, how they would get a torsion weapon like a catapult along with crew into orbit or on a military base like where the shuttle lands or is stored is beyond me.)
It wasn't. Examine WHY this was the case before you go into fantasy land. WHY was a 3rd world nation that had suffered a decimating war ahead of a country that was swimming in money and the only effect of war had been fewer unemployed? Once you can answer that, you have learned a lot about the true nature of the US and might even be able to use to help explain the current mess it is in.
Frist, the USSR wasn't 3rd world, they were 2nd world. They are the definition of 2nd world. 3rd world were countries that were not 1st world (US and allies) or 2nd world (USSR and allies), and thus tended to be the minor ones the brush fire wars were fought in. While I know that is not the current usage of 3rd world, in a discussion about the cold war, you should probably use the cold war usage.
Anyway, why did the USSR beat us to space? Because we were essentially going down a much harder technical road to get there. We weren't using rockets to try and get there. If you read various books by Chuck Yeager and the other "Right Stuff" guys, the USA essentially believed that we would just keep building planes that went faster and higher until we got to space. That is a technically hard route that we are still working on. The Soviets instead concentrated on brute force rockets to get to space. When they did it first, the USA changed their technological development and caught up fairly quickly.
I doubt that gaming is the primary use, the reason they bought the tablet, however it is probably the most common use. People by the tablet to get email, browse the web, read books, watch videos, but while finding themselves on the bus, in a car, or a boring meeting, games are much easier to do and can take up much more time. I suspect you'd find the same thing with smart phones. People bought them as a phone but I bet lots of people spend more time playing games than talking on the phone.
So once the market shifts such that the "people that don't actually want a PC" so greatly outnumber the people that do want a PC, and the economies of scale of making PCs have dried up, what should people that do want a PC do?
I wouldn't worry about your PC, the tablets will still require a PC if just to store stuff, and most people will still have PCs for the original reasons they bought them in the first place. What you should worry about would be laptops. Tablets wont cut into PC sales as much as they might laptop sales because more people don't want or need a laptop over a tablet as much as a PC over a tablet. In the office where I do IT, I have already seen several manager types and doctors switch to tablets from laptops. They're much lighter and easier to carry, do 98% of the work they need to with email and the web, and for the other 2%, they RDC back to their office computer.
It wouldn't be visible once it passed the event horizon. That's the defining characteristic of a black hole's event horizon: nothing escapes, including light.
True, but the view of it in it's last instants before it crosses the event horizon would take longer and longer to reach the observer and become increasingly red shifted. It will appear to get closer and closer to the event horizon but never reach it while it fades away as the number of photons reaching the observer are fewer and fewer and are increasing shifted in wave length. Eventually, the wavelength of the light coming from it will be so long that won't even be able to be seen as such.
Unless you're in the star itself, nope. For us, it takes 4 days. For the hapless star, it'll take forever.
I think you've got it backwards. The star experiencing time dialation will experience the entire for days in a blink of an eye. It will be fine and then be destroyed before it knows what happened. Meanwhile, to observers watching the object will see it's last image as it crosses the event horizon go to infinite red shift and just fade away rather than actually cross.
Terrorists and doctors. Patient info is protected under Federal law and is a quagmire even to reveal it to law enforcement. It's practically illegal not to have it encrypted.
If Tony Stark had half of Reed's brains, he'd build nanites to repair his heart and give himself the Iron Man powers without need for a suit.
Congratulations! You just described the Ultimate universe reboot of the Marvel characters that came out over a decade ago. Reed Richards gave his group powers by transporting them to the Negative Zone and Tony Stark is now dependant on his nanites to keep him alive.
I actually haven't run across any evidence of such treatment originating during WW2. I have come across writings from the period talking about how the French were "dirty" or "Ungrateful", and how GIs felt more kinship with the people and culture of Germany than France, but not any insults about being surrenderers. I think that can pretty much can be summed up in three words: Charles de Gaulle. The entire "cheese eating surrender monkeys" is just a cheap shot and did not originate during WW2 as far as I can tell. I happened later after the cold war was underway due to policy set by France and de Gaulle. First, de Gaulle thought that NATO didn't have what it took to win the cold war and the heartless Soviets would win the day, so they withdrew from NATO and went their own way. Two, France was in a big hissy to prove that they were a world power and could do anything the US could while Britain was just a US puppet and only had importance because they rode on the US coattails. They insulted Great Britain a lot, tried to throw their weight around, and did things like unilateral nuclear testing after everybody else had agreed on a ban. All of this after the Allies had freed France and given it back to the people because it was expected that we'd all be friends. It was pretty much felt as a big betrayal, so the surrender remarks are the cheap shot that is easy to make without having to actually get into real issues.
Tablets will, repeat, will be a fad. Then they will become a niche product.
Well then, book readers will also be a fad as there will always be people willing to pay twice the price for five times the functionality. Hell, all of the people I know buying Nooks are doing so to turn them into Android tablets. Then there are the people who are already using them and the distribution channels that exist to fulfill them. If that's all just a fad, then then I suspect we're all going back to dead tree books and CDs anytime now.
If you could telecommute, you could get one of those jobs in the bigger city, make double or triple your current salary, and then take your 10% pay cut. You'd have a higher salary, same cost of living, and no commute. Remember that and make a counter offer next time someone offers you a job at a conference.
The question I'm asking is: Why were the relationships lost in the first place? Is Facebook that much more convenient than e-mail, IRC, SMS, IM, or a telephone call?
Because currently, Facebook is more reliable and much less transient than those forms of communication. There isn't so much spam that you abandon your FB account. Your domain doesn't get bought out from under you so you have to change your namespace. You don't have to change your FB account when you move like a home phone. It's accessible from pretty much any internet device, especially ones that aren't your own. Etc.
Someone on your Friends list you're not interested in hearing from? Just Hide them or the app they are using. You don't have to pay attention to them yet they are still there like a contact list incase you do want to see what they are up to or send them a message. Then there's Events. Pretty much everything seems to be organized via the Facebook Events feature rather than phone, email, or even word of mouth.
Certainly, there is a lot of room to get better as there are things that Facebook does not do or doesn't do well. That's where a new competitor might slip in. I think pretty much the only reason that MySpace is still around is because they handle bands and music and FB doesn't. FB also doesn't handle actual content very well. Want to write up a multi-page vacation report for all your friends? You might as well post it someplace else and then link it to FB. Grouping friends is also way behind other sites, but I suspect they will eventually have some sort of filter function.
Um, no. It's not even sugar but high fruitose corn syrup. That's probably a good thing as sugar tastes better, and I'd probably drink more Coke if it still had sugar in it (like I do while I'm in Europe).
IMHO, sure, you'll have a great system that does exactly what those 6 people wanted it to do, and probably whatever the person that hired them to do it wanted it to do. However, everybody will find out that it doesn't do all the things that the new system was supposed to do, entire departments will have been left out of the process and not even recognized in the new system, interfaces will have been broken and not able to be integrated into the new system, and in the end, the company will either have to run the new and old system at the same time to keep the work being done, or the part of the $45 million that was saved by letting these 6 people will do will have to be more and spent by all the other departments brining their systems up to match the new system that was created.
The US is the only country in North America with the word America in it's name. Thus, it becomes clear as to which people 'Americans' refers.
You say this but I have been corrected several times that everybody that lives on this half of the Earth are all Americans. Sometimes I've even caught myself referring to myself as an American when speaking to people of this hemisphere who are not citizens of the USA and can see them all break out into smiles as I clarify my statement. Funny enough, it mostly seems to be Columbians that this happens with, perhaps it is a local usage for them also, but I have had to deal with that speaking to Mexicans before. So it does happen that some other term is useful when trying to be polite to some people you might want to talk to. As you are neither an "American" nor polite, it's not really an issue for you.
I've tried to see the point in Twitter, but apart from making it easier to have group conversations by SMS I really can't work out what it is supposed to achieve.
Twitter is basically a promotional tool. If you are a celebrity, even a minor one, or have business or something else that needs to be promoted, you get a twitter account and do your promotions there. Fans and people interested in what you are doing subscribe and listen in. Lots of people have it set up as SMS so it is essentially instantaneous making it much better than RSS or email alone as it can fulfill those rolls also at the same time. There are other uses, but the main one I see is that once you want to promote yourself or your business these days, you need a twitter account and trying to get people to follow you to do so.
Because in the real world, things take time. I'm sure as soon as this happened balls were rolling and it has just now got to a point where the news is bothering to talk about it
And while I'm asking, how come we didn't fly in power generators to keep the pumps running before things started to melt?
If that's all it took, I'm sure we would have. Hell, they could have just flown them in from someplace in Japan. For that matter they did but their wasn't a way to patch them into the system because something capable of carrying that sort of voltage and current isn't something you just cut and crimp. Thing is that it was a lot more than just no power. They've got power now and still having issues. I don't think it was just a case of a swamped power plant and no grid. The tsunami basically took out a large part of the plant, pumps were damaged, pipes broken, electronics fried, valves bent, and the place seems to be generally shot to hell.
Car analogy: This wasn't a case of getting a car that had run out of fuel more gas to keep the guys from having to push it to the shop, this a case of car that had just been totaled in a wreck in which the engine was ruined, the gas tank ruptured, and the electrical harness ripped out to the shop. At that point the analgy sort of breaks down because you just don't throw a nuclear power plant onto a flatbed.
Slashdot Mirror
That and that they wanted Apple to take on more and more of the cost of developing new chips which were already lagging behind the x86 ones.Not enough parts. Not enough quality in the parts they were getting. Increasing costs with diminishing returns. They all added up to switching to the same chips that everybody else was using and went from a small customer using custom chips to the largest customer they had in a large market.
Does that mean that the USA is more oppressive than China (or other nations) or that they simply have more criminals running around? Rule of law doesn't seem to mean that much in China. Corruption is rampant and even the status quo. In the US, if the law is broken, we can expect to go to court and have somebody punished (or found innocent) by the law. That expectation is largely what keeps the USA largely peaceful.
So, you're telling us that it will be done 20-30 years after we have fusion power?
The reason we would set up a base on the moon would be to mine it for water for fuel, radiation shielding for occupants, etc. If the amount of gear we'd need to mine water from the moon is less than the amount of water we need, then at a certain point it becomes more economical to ship mining equipment to the moon and get our water there. It is the large delta V for earth to space versus moon to space that would make it worth it. There is also the issue of mining the moon for things like iron and then doing manufacturing in space. However the research needed to be preformed to figure out if it is economical would probably be enough to continue mining the moon or get to Mars in the first place. It becomes a question of if we are just going to Mars to put up a flag, or if we are in the process of expanding into space. If the first, we might as well just go to Mars because that's all we want to do and it's all just wasted money anyway. If the second, the most of the ground work for going to Mars will have already been done. Even then, going to Mars is going to require more space research just to be able to do it properly and with a decent chance of success. I've seen some people complain because we're spending money on the ISS and talking about missions to the moon instead of spending it on a trip to Mars, what they don't realize is that going to Mars is going to require more money spent on the ISS as well as moon trips to develop the tech needed to go to Mars.
Well, having looked over the exam, that could be part of the test. If you really need to have such a statement explained to you while in a section about Plane Geometry, did you really have what it takes to bother with Harvard? It was the same with the History section. There wasn't a clear question, just some names. They probably didn't want you to just repeat back to them what somebody else taught you, they wanted to see what you had to say on your own. However, almost all of the History section seems to be tied back to the learning Latin and Greek (and I probably do give them too much credit and they did expect the standard memorized details). Likewise, the math, algebra, and geometry section all bring back memories of high school math. I have to forget my calculus and try to remember how to operate fractions and factor polynomials again.
Well, I am a physicist and an engineer, and I can assure you that catapulting a bolder into the shuttle could indeed damage it. (However, how they would get a torsion weapon like a catapult along with crew into orbit or on a military base like where the shuttle lands or is stored is beyond me.)
Frist, the USSR wasn't 3rd world, they were 2nd world. They are the definition of 2nd world. 3rd world were countries that were not 1st world (US and allies) or 2nd world (USSR and allies), and thus tended to be the minor ones the brush fire wars were fought in. While I know that is not the current usage of 3rd world, in a discussion about the cold war, you should probably use the cold war usage.
Anyway, why did the USSR beat us to space? Because we were essentially going down a much harder technical road to get there. We weren't using rockets to try and get there. If you read various books by Chuck Yeager and the other "Right Stuff" guys, the USA essentially believed that we would just keep building planes that went faster and higher until we got to space. That is a technically hard route that we are still working on. The Soviets instead concentrated on brute force rockets to get to space. When they did it first, the USA changed their technological development and caught up fairly quickly.
I doubt that gaming is the primary use, the reason they bought the tablet, however it is probably the most common use. People by the tablet to get email, browse the web, read books, watch videos, but while finding themselves on the bus, in a car, or a boring meeting, games are much easier to do and can take up much more time. I suspect you'd find the same thing with smart phones. People bought them as a phone but I bet lots of people spend more time playing games than talking on the phone.
I wouldn't worry about your PC, the tablets will still require a PC if just to store stuff, and most people will still have PCs for the original reasons they bought them in the first place. What you should worry about would be laptops. Tablets wont cut into PC sales as much as they might laptop sales because more people don't want or need a laptop over a tablet as much as a PC over a tablet. In the office where I do IT, I have already seen several manager types and doctors switch to tablets from laptops. They're much lighter and easier to carry, do 98% of the work they need to with email and the web, and for the other 2%, they RDC back to their office computer.
Set up and RDC server, install a client, and be done with it.
True, but the view of it in it's last instants before it crosses the event horizon would take longer and longer to reach the observer and become increasingly red shifted. It will appear to get closer and closer to the event horizon but never reach it while it fades away as the number of photons reaching the observer are fewer and fewer and are increasing shifted in wave length. Eventually, the wavelength of the light coming from it will be so long that won't even be able to be seen as such.
I think you've got it backwards. The star experiencing time dialation will experience the entire for days in a blink of an eye. It will be fine and then be destroyed before it knows what happened. Meanwhile, to observers watching the object will see it's last image as it crosses the event horizon go to infinite red shift and just fade away rather than actually cross.
Terrorists and doctors. Patient info is protected under Federal law and is a quagmire even to reveal it to law enforcement. It's practically illegal not to have it encrypted.
Congratulations! You just described the Ultimate universe reboot of the Marvel characters that came out over a decade ago. Reed Richards gave his group powers by transporting them to the Negative Zone and Tony Stark is now dependant on his nanites to keep him alive.
I actually haven't run across any evidence of such treatment originating during WW2. I have come across writings from the period talking about how the French were "dirty" or "Ungrateful", and how GIs felt more kinship with the people and culture of Germany than France, but not any insults about being surrenderers. I think that can pretty much can be summed up in three words: Charles de Gaulle. The entire "cheese eating surrender monkeys" is just a cheap shot and did not originate during WW2 as far as I can tell. I happened later after the cold war was underway due to policy set by France and de Gaulle. First, de Gaulle thought that NATO didn't have what it took to win the cold war and the heartless Soviets would win the day, so they withdrew from NATO and went their own way. Two, France was in a big hissy to prove that they were a world power and could do anything the US could while Britain was just a US puppet and only had importance because they rode on the US coattails. They insulted Great Britain a lot, tried to throw their weight around, and did things like unilateral nuclear testing after everybody else had agreed on a ban. All of this after the Allies had freed France and given it back to the people because it was expected that we'd all be friends. It was pretty much felt as a big betrayal, so the surrender remarks are the cheap shot that is easy to make without having to actually get into real issues.
No silly, this is real life, not some movie. They'd call it a bion.
Well then, book readers will also be a fad as there will always be people willing to pay twice the price for five times the functionality. Hell, all of the people I know buying Nooks are doing so to turn them into Android tablets. Then there are the people who are already using them and the distribution channels that exist to fulfill them. If that's all just a fad, then then I suspect we're all going back to dead tree books and CDs anytime now.
If you could telecommute, you could get one of those jobs in the bigger city, make double or triple your current salary, and then take your 10% pay cut. You'd have a higher salary, same cost of living, and no commute. Remember that and make a counter offer next time someone offers you a job at a conference.
Because currently, Facebook is more reliable and much less transient than those forms of communication. There isn't so much spam that you abandon your FB account. Your domain doesn't get bought out from under you so you have to change your namespace. You don't have to change your FB account when you move like a home phone. It's accessible from pretty much any internet device, especially ones that aren't your own. Etc.
Someone on your Friends list you're not interested in hearing from? Just Hide them or the app they are using. You don't have to pay attention to them yet they are still there like a contact list incase you do want to see what they are up to or send them a message. Then there's Events. Pretty much everything seems to be organized via the Facebook Events feature rather than phone, email, or even word of mouth.
Certainly, there is a lot of room to get better as there are things that Facebook does not do or doesn't do well. That's where a new competitor might slip in. I think pretty much the only reason that MySpace is still around is because they handle bands and music and FB doesn't. FB also doesn't handle actual content very well. Want to write up a multi-page vacation report for all your friends? You might as well post it someplace else and then link it to FB. Grouping friends is also way behind other sites, but I suspect they will eventually have some sort of filter function.
Um, no. It's not even sugar but high fruitose corn syrup. That's probably a good thing as sugar tastes better, and I'd probably drink more Coke if it still had sugar in it (like I do while I'm in Europe).
IMHO, sure, you'll have a great system that does exactly what those 6 people wanted it to do, and probably whatever the person that hired them to do it wanted it to do. However, everybody will find out that it doesn't do all the things that the new system was supposed to do, entire departments will have been left out of the process and not even recognized in the new system, interfaces will have been broken and not able to be integrated into the new system, and in the end, the company will either have to run the new and old system at the same time to keep the work being done, or the part of the $45 million that was saved by letting these 6 people will do will have to be more and spent by all the other departments brining their systems up to match the new system that was created.
You say this but I have been corrected several times that everybody that lives on this half of the Earth are all Americans. Sometimes I've even caught myself referring to myself as an American when speaking to people of this hemisphere who are not citizens of the USA and can see them all break out into smiles as I clarify my statement. Funny enough, it mostly seems to be Columbians that this happens with, perhaps it is a local usage for them also, but I have had to deal with that speaking to Mexicans before. So it does happen that some other term is useful when trying to be polite to some people you might want to talk to. As you are neither an "American" nor polite, it's not really an issue for you.
Twitter is basically a promotional tool. If you are a celebrity, even a minor one, or have business or something else that needs to be promoted, you get a twitter account and do your promotions there. Fans and people interested in what you are doing subscribe and listen in. Lots of people have it set up as SMS so it is essentially instantaneous making it much better than RSS or email alone as it can fulfill those rolls also at the same time. There are other uses, but the main one I see is that once you want to promote yourself or your business these days, you need a twitter account and trying to get people to follow you to do so.
Because in the real world, things take time. I'm sure as soon as this happened balls were rolling and it has just now got to a point where the news is bothering to talk about it
If that's all it took, I'm sure we would have. Hell, they could have just flown them in from someplace in Japan. For that matter they did but their wasn't a way to patch them into the system because something capable of carrying that sort of voltage and current isn't something you just cut and crimp. Thing is that it was a lot more than just no power. They've got power now and still having issues. I don't think it was just a case of a swamped power plant and no grid. The tsunami basically took out a large part of the plant, pumps were damaged, pipes broken, electronics fried, valves bent, and the place seems to be generally shot to hell.
Car analogy: This wasn't a case of getting a car that had run out of fuel more gas to keep the guys from having to push it to the shop, this a case of car that had just been totaled in a wreck in which the engine was ruined, the gas tank ruptured, and the electrical harness ripped out to the shop. At that point the analgy sort of breaks down because you just don't throw a nuclear power plant onto a flatbed.
Well, according to wikipedia (referencing a publication of the University of Arizona), CSP is still ten times as expensive as nuclear.