The thing is, every single person vaguely familiar with the Tech world already knows this.
It's everybody else that needs convincing, and I'm pretty sure neither Google nor Facebook, 2 Tech giants, are the right pick the counter this.
Google, Facebook... these are perfect places for a "learn-in". Imagine if Google or Facebook "went dark" for every user (at least in the U.S.) once a day for a week, and, instead of serving up normal content, served up content that explained what SOPA would mean to them, the non-techies, in a language they could understand. Hitting reload would get you through to the content you were originally looking for, so it's not a huge impediment, but enough to wake people up.
Reddit is not the best place for this, but it's a start.
I'm just guessing here, but I suspect they want to have control over the JVMs out in the field in such a way that doesn't necessarily screw up your vendor's package management system. Upgrades in-place, for example, won't work when the initial install was via rpm/deb/whatever and the upgrades are via Java's updater. Or, rather, the vendor tool will think that Java is messed up - sizes and checksums won't match; timestamps will be off. I bet they're thinking this is for the distro's benefit.
Also, by forcing everyone to go to the Oracle site, they can force you to accept their license before downloading, as well as generate some reasonable pseudo-accurate numbers on how many copies are in use and where (IP address based geo-lookups).
My gut says there's a monetisation strategy in there somewhere. I just can't quite see it yet.
Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, confessions resulting from torture are still allowed as evidence at trial. Personally, I think that sweating a suspect in an interrogation room for 8+ hours, when the cops can lie to him and spell each other off (so they're always relatively fresh), is still psychological torture. While not nearly as bad as water-boarding or other Geneva-convention-listed forms of torture, I'm not convinced that what cops regularly do isn't torture. If you think that the only way to get out of the interrogation room is to tell the cops what you think they want to hear, it's a coerced statement.
I'm sure Iran was more, um, forceful than that,of course.
DRM doesn't stop casual people from pirating when they can go to thepiratebay (or wherever) and get the movie pre-cracked. The guys who get the original movie have to crack it, but once done, no one else has to care. Blocking the IP addresses are slightly more effective in that way.
You say that as if it were a bad thing. To have played a significant role in a universal epic of our time? Whether you liked the films or not, if you were born prior to ~1990, you have probably seen the films. Using that as a frame of reference allows of us who don't really pay attention to the credits to understand who this "Bob Anderson" person is and was, and thus understand his significance in our lives (even if that is "none, really").
I agree with AC. However, there seem to be good reason for the difference, just in story-telling.
In eps 1-3, there were dozens, if not hundreds, of jedi. Plenty to practice and hone your fencing skills with. I would expect fast swordplay if only because the goal of any military action (and that's what a sword fight is) is a quick decision, not a prolonged battle. The quicker you dispatch your enemy, the sooner you can move on to the next action, and the less likely an ambush.
Meanwhile, in eps 4-6, Vader, Obi-Wan, and Luke really don't have anyone to practice with, at least not in the previous 16-20 years (yeah, yeah, I don't really know what the timeline between 3 and 4 is). I would expect their actions to be a bit clunky. Especially Vader, being "more machine than man." And I'm not sure he ever really embraced his cyborg nature the way that General Greivous did, making it somewhat of an internal battle just to move.
That said, I agree that the sound effects are definitely key - they take good scenes and make them great.
I took EE in school. Many years ago. Haven't done a thing with it since. However, the part you seem to be missing (and the AC you responded to) is simple logic, not EE-specific. We're not comparing inductive charging to gas vehicles. We're comparing inductive charging to non-inductive charging. That is, driving your EV to a specific area of your garage vs driving your EV to somewhere that it can reach the proper outlet and be plugged in.
86% efficiency for inductive charging means that when you buy 1KWh from the power company, you're only getting.86KWh to your vehicle. Additional losses come into play after that (and before that as well), but they should be the same losses whether we're using inductive charging or not, so they're entirely irrelevant. Copper wire's losses are negligible over this short of a distance, so when you buy 1KWh from the power company, you're putting 1KWh of energy into your vehicle, for all intents and purposes. That 14% loss is increasing the cost of "refueling" your EV by about 16%.
When comparing against gas vehicles, the mode of charging is relevant in that it affects the overall efficiency of the system. And you have a valid point that the overall efficiency of an EV likely far surpasses gas and diesel vehicles. However, we then open whole new cans of worms - depending on your energy source, the EV may not be a significant overall improvement when considering things like pollution. If your electricity is from a coal-fired plant vs natural gas vs nuclear/wind/solar/hydro, for example. If from coal, the EV advantage may not be nearly as significant.
Having said all that, induction charging can make the convenience of an EV very attractive. You don't have to think about it, you have a fully-charged vehicle every morning. No worrying about making a run to the gas station for regular commutes. If someone else can solve the distance problem, we could get a long way toward a serious contender to take gas vehicles off the road. While this doesn't make the EV a must-have, it is another parallel attempt to get there.
The cost of both hardware and DB licenses for a system that can handle 500 Ktps (transactions per second) at peak vs 5-10 Mtps may be significant. If I'm looking for useful data to actually improve user experience, I don't need all of them, a sample is good enough, and if I keep the volume down, I can do it on much smaller hardware and thus much smaller cost for licensing to Oracle, DB2, whatever.
Well, that depends. On why Verizon never had CarrierIQ.
If it's because "we looked at it, and thought it a gross violation of our customers' privacy" then, yes, "never did it" trumps.
However, if it's because Verizon has not yet managed to get the required hardware to support the volume of data that CarrierIQ produces, combined with the analytics systems required to make bottom-line-driven decisions with that information, then, no, "never did it (yet)" does not trump. In fact, it loses, big time. Sprint, having gone down that road, sunk a bunch of money on it, and abandoned it, is the clear winner as they're unlikely to do it a second time. Verizon may still be looking at implementing it/rolling it out.
I'm not saying that's the case. I'm saying it's a possible scenario that fits with the known facts (very few in this thread) where "never did it" does not trump "stopped doing it". I don't have any idea how likely either scenario is.
Context-free grep/diff can be used to search for data/changes in arbitrary non-line-record-based files. Such as XML, HTML, JSON, SQLite databases, other databases, Apache configs, and many other pieces of data. Heck, even most programming languages are not line-based, but statement terminated/separated. Imagine being able to grep for a function name, and getting its entire prototype/usage even when it spans multiple lines (very common in standard glibc headers). And, depending on the plugin's capabilities, you could grep for a function name as a function name and not get back any usage of that text as a variable or embedded in a string, or a comment (skip commented-out calls!).
If there's sufficient configurability, you could ask for the entire block that given text is in, and such a grep would be able to display everything in the corresponding {...}. Makes grep that much valuable.
So, my question is, why aren't more IT-heavy corporations/government departments not involved?
I'm not sure that these "large files" prove what you think it does. Then again, I'm not entirely confident that the opposite is true, either. Even if it doesn't prove what you think it does, I think your point still largely stands.
Let's say I have a 32G SSD device. If I put some movies on here, I'm left with, say, 16G, of "active" disk space usage. If I then go and use what's left very actively, the write endurance for that section falls given the same usage patterns. For example, at 100GB/day erase/write cycles, I've cut it down to ~43 years. If I can interleave the deletion/replacement of the movies into the mix, then I should trend back up to around 85 years, but I don't think that the life span will be extended beyond that, again, assuming constant usage.
Where your point largely still stands is how much less than 100GB/day a consumer will use their disk. By storing 16G of movies/music and only going through 50GB of erase/write cycles, we get back up to 85 years. And both of these numbers are still way too high for consumer usage - 3GB/day might be stretching it as an average for consumers.
My experience, over the last ten years, of off-shored devs has been the opposite. In all countries, other than India, there is a small percentage of wizards/star developers, a small percentage of incompetents, and the vast majority have been competent, more or less. If you swap the incompetent and not-incompetent percentages around, that's roughly my experience with India. Ireland has had a slightly-above-average level of incompetents, but my experience with Irish devs has been too small to make any final conclusion. China (mainland), Germany, Canada, U.S., Brazil, all more or less the same. Japan has been a standout in my experience with highly respectful and highly productive people.
It's all in the reading. You could take this example to show the opposite: we need to clear out our biosphere of animals, plants, etc., that aren't helping us cure cancer so that new ones can emerge.
For the record, I didn't say I agreed with the courts. Merely trying to keep our collective disgust at the snubbing of reality based on fact rather than overblown emotion.
You're reading the courts too broadly. They're saying that sites that traffic counterfit goods can be sued out of search engines. That's a fairly big difference. Pepsi can't sue Coke to get them out of search results.
One has to analyze the total economic advantage of having a girlfriend on the other side of the world. Seems to defeat the purpose.
When I lived in Toronto, my girlfriend lived in Taiwan. This was back in 1997/1998. We spent waaaay too much on LD. We're now married and have three kids. Doesn't entirely defeat the purpose.:-)
Revenue stream, yes. Pepsi pay for a "Coke" vanity URL on FB? Unlikely. Courts have already determined some rights to trademark names in URLs - though Pepsi still has to pay the regular registration fee to use "pepsi.com", a competitor attempting to misuse their trademark would likely lose the domain in a court battle, as has happened in the past.
How is this actually any different from anyone else?
I've seen atheists unwilling to learn about religions, "as if [they] -know- that they're wrong." Or environmentalists unwilling to learn about chemistry (dose-response relationships, going so far as to try to outlaw DHMO), physics (EMF, nuclear power), or socio-biology (think "PETA freeing lab animals into the wild where they are quickly exterminated by true wild animals"). I've seen practitioners of various services (everything from aestheticians to medical doctors) talk trash about competing fields without understanding or a desire to understand. Even homeopaths talking negatively about other forms of homeopathy (which, though quite entertaining, is understandable when you take time to understand human nature).
And I've seen competent people who are willing to understand a greater world than their own in all of these areas, including people of faith.
I don't find religion to be inherently anything special when it comes to close-minded unwillingness to learn about other things.
Yes, I'm Catholic, have a BSc, think that, while, yes, current theories on evolution probably have some holes in it, it's probably the closest theory we have to the truth (much like Newtonian physics from 150 years ago - when there wasn't a better explanation available). I, like the top hierarchies of my religion, am comfortable with modern Evolution as a theory, and that it is taught to my kids in Catholic schools with the rest of the science curriculum: as the best explanation we currently have available.
You seem to have painted all faith with the same brush. It's almost like you don't want to know the broad spectrum covered by faith, "as if [you] -know- that [you]'re wrong" just so you can "preserve [your] wrongheadedness."
After all, that's an opinion. I'm allowed to hold my opinion and vote based on it. So, yes, I do. And I expect everyone else to, as well, even when it doesn't agree with my opinion. Of course, my opinion is right and if you disagree with me you must be wrong, but we still get to vote on it.:-P
there should be limits to what potentially harmful decisions you can make on your child's behalf.
And therein lies the theory that government knows better than parents how to raise their children. While it does so happen from time to time that you get incompetent parents and the bureaucracy does in fact to a better job, I cannot buy into the theory that this is always true. My kids are my responsibility, and I will do the best I can for them (which, of course, does not mean giving in to their every demand or catering to tantrums just because we're out in public). I do not want the government interfering in that.
For the record: my kids have had every scheduled vaccination as appropriate for their age according to the local health department, plus H1N1 when it was going around. They have not had any flu vaccination (other than H1N1). The regular vaccinations' only criticisms I've ever seen have been relating to autism, and that seems full of bunk. The flu vaccinations' primary criticism I've received from our general physicians (both our previous one, who is now retired, and our new GP): the vaccination is for the correct strain less than 50% of the time (I think the now-retired GP said somewhere around 25% of the time), your chances of a significant reaction to the vaccine is higher than getting that year's flu and getting a significant issue from that. And, without any other risk factor, the likelihood of anything worse than a week off work was already slim-to-none. And that's where H1N1 was different: our then-infant was deemed at risk for severe issues from H1N1 in the unlikely scenario of getting it, i.e., death, so we considered it very differently. My mother was concerned that he'd get autism from it. Of course, I paid that all the attention it deserved (we got the vaccinations and told her over a week later).
Oh, and I received all my childhood vaccinations, too - my mother wasn't so sucked in to medical bunkumism at the time.
Just because I advocate most of the vaccinations doesn't mean I think the government should be interfering.
I was thinking AAA/AA/C/D batteries. With the sheer quantity of these that are embedded in items around the house, with three kids under 6, I can't be plugging everything over night. Cell phones, no, I wouldn't need two. But at a cost of $400 for a battery, I think there'd be some impetus in the industry to go with standard sizes to allow the batteries to be separate from the phones, so you could continue to re-use the same battery for life. So, yes, I think that'd be fine.
Slashdot Mirror
"Shell account" is why I'm with DH. I upload everything using rsync-over-ssh. It's not like those other options aren't there.
The thing is, every single person vaguely familiar with the Tech world already knows this. It's everybody else that needs convincing, and I'm pretty sure neither Google nor Facebook, 2 Tech giants, are the right pick the counter this.
Google, Facebook ... these are perfect places for a "learn-in". Imagine if Google or Facebook "went dark" for every user (at least in the U.S.) once a day for a week, and, instead of serving up normal content, served up content that explained what SOPA would mean to them, the non-techies, in a language they could understand. Hitting reload would get you through to the content you were originally looking for, so it's not a huge impediment, but enough to wake people up.
Reddit is not the best place for this, but it's a start.
I'm just guessing here, but I suspect they want to have control over the JVMs out in the field in such a way that doesn't necessarily screw up your vendor's package management system. Upgrades in-place, for example, won't work when the initial install was via rpm/deb/whatever and the upgrades are via Java's updater. Or, rather, the vendor tool will think that Java is messed up - sizes and checksums won't match; timestamps will be off. I bet they're thinking this is for the distro's benefit.
Also, by forcing everyone to go to the Oracle site, they can force you to accept their license before downloading, as well as generate some reasonable pseudo-accurate numbers on how many copies are in use and where (IP address based geo-lookups).
My gut says there's a monetisation strategy in there somewhere. I just can't quite see it yet.
Confessing under torture doesn't make you guilty.
Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, confessions resulting from torture are still allowed as evidence at trial. Personally, I think that sweating a suspect in an interrogation room for 8+ hours, when the cops can lie to him and spell each other off (so they're always relatively fresh), is still psychological torture. While not nearly as bad as water-boarding or other Geneva-convention-listed forms of torture, I'm not convinced that what cops regularly do isn't torture. If you think that the only way to get out of the interrogation room is to tell the cops what you think they want to hear, it's a coerced statement.
I'm sure Iran was more, um, forceful than that,of course.
DRM doesn't stop casual people from pirating when they can go to thepiratebay (or wherever) and get the movie pre-cracked. The guys who get the original movie have to crack it, but once done, no one else has to care. Blocking the IP addresses are slightly more effective in that way.
You say that as if it were a bad thing. To have played a significant role in a universal epic of our time? Whether you liked the films or not, if you were born prior to ~1990, you have probably seen the films. Using that as a frame of reference allows of us who don't really pay attention to the credits to understand who this "Bob Anderson" person is and was, and thus understand his significance in our lives (even if that is "none, really").
I agree with AC. However, there seem to be good reason for the difference, just in story-telling.
In eps 1-3, there were dozens, if not hundreds, of jedi. Plenty to practice and hone your fencing skills with. I would expect fast swordplay if only because the goal of any military action (and that's what a sword fight is) is a quick decision, not a prolonged battle. The quicker you dispatch your enemy, the sooner you can move on to the next action, and the less likely an ambush.
Meanwhile, in eps 4-6, Vader, Obi-Wan, and Luke really don't have anyone to practice with, at least not in the previous 16-20 years (yeah, yeah, I don't really know what the timeline between 3 and 4 is). I would expect their actions to be a bit clunky. Especially Vader, being "more machine than man." And I'm not sure he ever really embraced his cyborg nature the way that General Greivous did, making it somewhat of an internal battle just to move.
That said, I agree that the sound effects are definitely key - they take good scenes and make them great.
I took EE in school. Many years ago. Haven't done a thing with it since. However, the part you seem to be missing (and the AC you responded to) is simple logic, not EE-specific. We're not comparing inductive charging to gas vehicles. We're comparing inductive charging to non-inductive charging. That is, driving your EV to a specific area of your garage vs driving your EV to somewhere that it can reach the proper outlet and be plugged in.
86% efficiency for inductive charging means that when you buy 1KWh from the power company, you're only getting .86KWh to your vehicle. Additional losses come into play after that (and before that as well), but they should be the same losses whether we're using inductive charging or not, so they're entirely irrelevant. Copper wire's losses are negligible over this short of a distance, so when you buy 1KWh from the power company, you're putting 1KWh of energy into your vehicle, for all intents and purposes. That 14% loss is increasing the cost of "refueling" your EV by about 16%.
When comparing against gas vehicles, the mode of charging is relevant in that it affects the overall efficiency of the system. And you have a valid point that the overall efficiency of an EV likely far surpasses gas and diesel vehicles. However, we then open whole new cans of worms - depending on your energy source, the EV may not be a significant overall improvement when considering things like pollution. If your electricity is from a coal-fired plant vs natural gas vs nuclear/wind/solar/hydro, for example. If from coal, the EV advantage may not be nearly as significant.
Having said all that, induction charging can make the convenience of an EV very attractive. You don't have to think about it, you have a fully-charged vehicle every morning. No worrying about making a run to the gas station for regular commutes. If someone else can solve the distance problem, we could get a long way toward a serious contender to take gas vehicles off the road. While this doesn't make the EV a must-have, it is another parallel attempt to get there.
Actually, please don't.
The cost of both hardware and DB licenses for a system that can handle 500 Ktps (transactions per second) at peak vs 5-10 Mtps may be significant. If I'm looking for useful data to actually improve user experience, I don't need all of them, a sample is good enough, and if I keep the volume down, I can do it on much smaller hardware and thus much smaller cost for licensing to Oracle, DB2, whatever.
Well, that depends. On why Verizon never had CarrierIQ.
If it's because "we looked at it, and thought it a gross violation of our customers' privacy" then, yes, "never did it" trumps.
However, if it's because Verizon has not yet managed to get the required hardware to support the volume of data that CarrierIQ produces, combined with the analytics systems required to make bottom-line-driven decisions with that information, then, no, "never did it (yet)" does not trump. In fact, it loses, big time. Sprint, having gone down that road, sunk a bunch of money on it, and abandoned it, is the clear winner as they're unlikely to do it a second time. Verizon may still be looking at implementing it/rolling it out.
I'm not saying that's the case. I'm saying it's a possible scenario that fits with the known facts (very few in this thread) where "never did it" does not trump "stopped doing it". I don't have any idea how likely either scenario is.
Sounds like a good reason to create a throw-away FB page.
Context-free grep/diff can be used to search for data/changes in arbitrary non-line-record-based files. Such as XML, HTML, JSON, SQLite databases, other databases, Apache configs, and many other pieces of data. Heck, even most programming languages are not line-based, but statement terminated/separated. Imagine being able to grep for a function name, and getting its entire prototype/usage even when it spans multiple lines (very common in standard glibc headers). And, depending on the plugin's capabilities, you could grep for a function name as a function name and not get back any usage of that text as a variable or embedded in a string, or a comment (skip commented-out calls!).
If there's sufficient configurability, you could ask for the entire block that given text is in, and such a grep would be able to display everything in the corresponding {...}. Makes grep that much valuable.
So, my question is, why aren't more IT-heavy corporations/government departments not involved?
I'm not sure that these "large files" prove what you think it does. Then again, I'm not entirely confident that the opposite is true, either. Even if it doesn't prove what you think it does, I think your point still largely stands.
Let's say I have a 32G SSD device. If I put some movies on here, I'm left with, say, 16G, of "active" disk space usage. If I then go and use what's left very actively, the write endurance for that section falls given the same usage patterns. For example, at 100GB/day erase/write cycles, I've cut it down to ~43 years. If I can interleave the deletion/replacement of the movies into the mix, then I should trend back up to around 85 years, but I don't think that the life span will be extended beyond that, again, assuming constant usage.
Where your point largely still stands is how much less than 100GB/day a consumer will use their disk. By storing 16G of movies/music and only going through 50GB of erase/write cycles, we get back up to 85 years. And both of these numbers are still way too high for consumer usage - 3GB/day might be stretching it as an average for consumers.
My experience, over the last ten years, of off-shored devs has been the opposite. In all countries, other than India, there is a small percentage of wizards/star developers, a small percentage of incompetents, and the vast majority have been competent, more or less. If you swap the incompetent and not-incompetent percentages around, that's roughly my experience with India. Ireland has had a slightly-above-average level of incompetents, but my experience with Irish devs has been too small to make any final conclusion. China (mainland), Germany, Canada, U.S., Brazil, all more or less the same. Japan has been a standout in my experience with highly respectful and highly productive people.
It's all in the reading. You could take this example to show the opposite: we need to clear out our biosphere of animals, plants, etc., that aren't helping us cure cancer so that new ones can emerge.
For the record, I didn't say I agreed with the courts. Merely trying to keep our collective disgust at the snubbing of reality based on fact rather than overblown emotion.
You're reading the courts too broadly. They're saying that sites that traffic counterfit goods can be sued out of search engines. That's a fairly big difference. Pepsi can't sue Coke to get them out of search results.
No it's not.
One has to analyze the total economic advantage of having a girlfriend on the other side of the world. Seems to defeat the purpose.
When I lived in Toronto, my girlfriend lived in Taiwan. This was back in 1997/1998. We spent waaaay too much on LD. We're now married and have three kids. Doesn't entirely defeat the purpose. :-)
Revenue stream, yes. Pepsi pay for a "Coke" vanity URL on FB? Unlikely. Courts have already determined some rights to trademark names in URLs - though Pepsi still has to pay the regular registration fee to use "pepsi.com", a competitor attempting to misuse their trademark would likely lose the domain in a court battle, as has happened in the past.
Their lawyers wouldn't let them even try it.
How is this actually any different from anyone else?
I've seen atheists unwilling to learn about religions, "as if [they] -know- that they're wrong." Or environmentalists unwilling to learn about chemistry (dose-response relationships, going so far as to try to outlaw DHMO), physics (EMF, nuclear power), or socio-biology (think "PETA freeing lab animals into the wild where they are quickly exterminated by true wild animals"). I've seen practitioners of various services (everything from aestheticians to medical doctors) talk trash about competing fields without understanding or a desire to understand. Even homeopaths talking negatively about other forms of homeopathy (which, though quite entertaining, is understandable when you take time to understand human nature).
And I've seen competent people who are willing to understand a greater world than their own in all of these areas, including people of faith.
I don't find religion to be inherently anything special when it comes to close-minded unwillingness to learn about other things.
Yes, I'm Catholic, have a BSc, think that, while, yes, current theories on evolution probably have some holes in it, it's probably the closest theory we have to the truth (much like Newtonian physics from 150 years ago - when there wasn't a better explanation available). I, like the top hierarchies of my religion, am comfortable with modern Evolution as a theory, and that it is taught to my kids in Catholic schools with the rest of the science curriculum: as the best explanation we currently have available.
You seem to have painted all faith with the same brush. It's almost like you don't want to know the broad spectrum covered by faith, "as if [you] -know- that [you]'re wrong" just so you can "preserve [your] wrongheadedness."
Um, yes?
After all, that's an opinion. I'm allowed to hold my opinion and vote based on it. So, yes, I do. And I expect everyone else to, as well, even when it doesn't agree with my opinion. Of course, my opinion is right and if you disagree with me you must be wrong, but we still get to vote on it. :-P
And therein lies the theory that government knows better than parents how to raise their children. While it does so happen from time to time that you get incompetent parents and the bureaucracy does in fact to a better job, I cannot buy into the theory that this is always true. My kids are my responsibility, and I will do the best I can for them (which, of course, does not mean giving in to their every demand or catering to tantrums just because we're out in public). I do not want the government interfering in that.
For the record: my kids have had every scheduled vaccination as appropriate for their age according to the local health department, plus H1N1 when it was going around. They have not had any flu vaccination (other than H1N1). The regular vaccinations' only criticisms I've ever seen have been relating to autism, and that seems full of bunk. The flu vaccinations' primary criticism I've received from our general physicians (both our previous one, who is now retired, and our new GP): the vaccination is for the correct strain less than 50% of the time (I think the now-retired GP said somewhere around 25% of the time), your chances of a significant reaction to the vaccine is higher than getting that year's flu and getting a significant issue from that. And, without any other risk factor, the likelihood of anything worse than a week off work was already slim-to-none. And that's where H1N1 was different: our then-infant was deemed at risk for severe issues from H1N1 in the unlikely scenario of getting it, i.e., death, so we considered it very differently. My mother was concerned that he'd get autism from it. Of course, I paid that all the attention it deserved (we got the vaccinations and told her over a week later).
Oh, and I received all my childhood vaccinations, too - my mother wasn't so sucked in to medical bunkumism at the time.
Just because I advocate most of the vaccinations doesn't mean I think the government should be interfering.
I was thinking AAA/AA/C/D batteries. With the sheer quantity of these that are embedded in items around the house, with three kids under 6, I can't be plugging everything over night. Cell phones, no, I wouldn't need two. But at a cost of $400 for a battery, I think there'd be some impetus in the industry to go with standard sizes to allow the batteries to be separate from the phones, so you could continue to re-use the same battery for life. So, yes, I think that'd be fine.