I assume you haven't RTFA, but here's more or less the criticism that Firefox gets:
1) "Oh look! It has more vulnerabilities than IE!" (tho they fail to state how critical these are. And don't forget that Firefox 1.03 was just released, fixing these. How long it took IE to release theirs?)
and 2) "BWA! Firefox fails to render my favorite IE-only pages!" complains from users.
And that was on the last 1 1/2 pages. The others were just straw words (your usual columnist intro).
This columnist isn't enlightening, nor critical. He's just giving another misinformed opinion.
"Even though such transistors are still in their infancy, says IBM's Avouris, "Carbon nanotubes can get around most of the problems that doom very small silicon devices." In the lab, he has backed this statement up. It took him four years to assemble his current, third-generation prototype of a carbon nanotube transistor, but in the end, the device can carry up to 1,000 times the current of the copper wires used in today's silicon chips, making it vastly more efficient."
Re:Imagine
on
Quantum Wires
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
A room temp super-conductor would be a boon for great speeds with less heat.
Actually, there are already plans for it. Search for "nanotube transistor" on google, and admire.
Not that dobious
on
Quantum Wires
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
We might call them "quasi-superconductors". See, the difference between carbon nanotubes and common conductors is their crystaline structure that makes electrons travel in 1-D, as opposed to 3-D in common conductors. This nullifies heat dissipation, because, if there's no friction between the electrons, there's no energy loss.
And think about this. Cold superconductivity is a temporary, artificial effect. And there's a limit on the amount of current that can flow thru a superconductor before it loses its superconductive properties (don't ask where I read it because that was years ago). But carbon nanotubes have a permanent structure.
So I'd say this is the *REAL* superconductivity, and the phenomena discovered in near-0K conditions was just an attempt to it.
I recall watching in 60 minutes this old man saying how certain reviewers were invited to buffettes and such so they would give favorable reviews of movies that frankly, sucked.
Remember how (for those of you who watched the movie) he began amusing his students, using examples they could see (like slashing an apple in half, with a butcher knife)...
Also - if you have a computer scren and you talk about equations, and present them a 3D view of a graph, etc etc... the students can get curious and ask - what if we add a negative root in here?
So instead of spending dozens of minutes trying to solve an equation, boring the classrom, and earning that kid a terrible reputation among his schoolmates, you just spend a few seconds graphing the equation, solving the doubts, and helping them learn.
Here's the important thing: Technology is a TOOL to aid education. Not a REPLACEMENT for it.
"Ex parte refers to a motion or petition by or for one party. An ex parte judicial proceeding is on where the opposing party has not received notice nor is present. This is an exception to the usual rule of court procedure and due process rights that both parties must be present at any argument before a judge." (Source: http://www.uslegalforms.com/lawdigest/legal-defini tions.php/US/US-EX_PARTE.htm )
About the 10-Q:
"What does it Mean? A quarterly report submitted by all public companies to the SEC in which firms are required to disclose relevant information regarding their financial position. This must be done on time, and the information should be available to all interested parties." (Source: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/10q.asp)
--- In other words...
This means that SCO wanted to play dirty on Linux er, IBM, by doing legal things on their back, this is, without IBM being present for the legal actions to take place - but judge Kimball didn't allow them to do so. Also, SCO also published their quarterly report.
(RTFW <-- words of wisdom to slashdotters regarding legalese;-) )
Let me share you a similar issue that happened to me on the subway.
Pamphlet ads. I see these ads for "cheap high school" being given to people at the subway - even if they're professionals, or elders. They're bulk produced, and the people hired to give them away are not asked how many potential customers they gave the ads. No, they asked them how many ads they gave away.
If the people had been trained with a keen eye and only gave ads to the potential customers i.e. low-class citizens (read: poor) between 16 and 40 years, I'm sure they'd be twice as effective.
Because of the commercials DVDs don't cost that much.
No, unless you get frustrated for not being allowed to fast forward for the Nth time, forcing you to use illegal practices that end up taking the money away from... guess who? The same people that paid so you would be FORCED to see a commercial in a product you purchased.
This isn't about any "social contract" (for social issues and contracts read the previous/. discussion on why the Industry is trying to ban community-based ISPs). This is about squeezing the most money from the user, leaving him no choice.
It's not a fair fight. They're the ones with the money in the first place.
Also, people who use Adblock didn't download it to get rid of "nice, non-intrusive ads" that decorate a webpage. They did it to get rid of the ANNOYING GARBAGE THAT THEY _DO NOT_ PLAN TO BUY ANYWAY!
I'm glad for adblock. It'll teach the sponsors that pay-per-click advertising wasn't such a good idea after all.
It just helps you take away the ads that you DON'T like.
If I block the ad saying "trip to vegas!" (usually the ads at Yahoo! mail have descriptive-enough url's), that saves the sponsors from wasting their bandwidth on uninterested public.
The same goes to "shoot the monkey!", "find an online partner" and such.
Of course it'd be better if Yahoo allowed LOCALIZED ADS so that the users say in... Timbuktu would receive Timbuktu ads. Much more effective. Of course, the "checkboxes" to determine what ads do I want aren't bad, either.
So, no, adblock doesn't violate any contract. Furthermore, those ads also use MY bandwidth. If they want to keep my attention, they should focus more on my tastes. In this I'm in favor of using cookies for ad preferences.
(Come to think about it, there are web standards for everything, even e-business. Why not targetted marketing?)
Is it April 1st? Nope. Check. Is it an invented quote from The Register? Nope. Check. Does it have a </sarcasm> tag at the end? Nope. Check. Is it in the list of things that will never happen? *bzzt*
aise your hands if you went to see episode I even after you heard what a horrible film ir was. Rais eyour hands if you saw episode II even though you knew it was going to suck. Raise your hands if you plan on waiting in line for episode III.
AHHHHHHHHH it feels GREAT to have seen *only* eps IV-VI! Thank you for your support. Instead of a "loser" who never bothered to see "The Saga. Completed", I can laugh at the losers who bothered to see "The Saga. Ruined."
In fact it's a wonderful piece of art dealing with ethics and how to live in a discriminating society that expects perfection from you.
Maybe you went to see that movie with a "cool, sci fi, let's go for the spaceships!". But if we define sci-fi as "startrek/starwars/anything with lasers", Gattaca isn't sci-fi at all.
I find it ironic that someone in/. (whose population finds tinfoil hats extremely popular) would complain about a movie which deals with genetics, biometrics, and privacy.
In coorperate enviroments, people need(ed!) Word. Thus they need windows. Also a lot of intranet pages need IE and thus again Windows is needed. Or what about Photoshop and etc etc.
Give me Linux clones of the top-50 software list in windows, and I shall move the world.
2) There are no good nonlinearities... OR gate optically.... blahblah... Maybe someday someone will invent a great, low power, fast, optically nonlinear material. Don't invest in it yet.
Well, the peopl working in this are, IMO, shortsighted. Who says light has to travel thru (optical) wires or artificial gates? Light can be transmitted in 2D, in parallel, with no interference (unless you're talking holography). We can use that to our favor.
There have been experiments in image recognition using light. I was present in one of them, where it used a simple 8x8 array of LED's to do the processing:
The data were transparent sheets with relatively big opaque pixels. The pattern to search was represented by the "on" led's in our array. The result of the searching was in a sheet of paper behind the transparent sheets.
[8x8 LED ARRAY with the pattern to search]
| | | | | <--- light [transparent sheet with opaque patterns]
| | | | | [sheet of paper with the search result]
The zones where the patterns were found, presented a clear dark spot (a shadow). The ones with *similar* patterns, presented not-so-dark spots.
This is effective parallel image processing using light. Of course, in the rudimentary scale.
Taking this to the industrial level, I'm sure we'd get some amazing results. Imagine using a light processor to effectively render textures for a 3d game - this would make the cell processor look like a tortoise in comparison). Or use it to convert an audio sample to MP3 or whatever.
But oh well, let the scientists cripple the light, freeze it, slow it and make it go thru artificially created gates.
wasn't photon computing's purpose to use the speed of light to do computations? What use is to have light for the processing, if it's slower than the electrons we currently use?
And with all this freezer stuff, I doubt it'll have any practical use except for one or two super-secret govt computers that need millions of dollars in budget to do some crypto-crunching stuff.
Ground telescopes 40x better than hubble (link)
on
Hope for Hubble
·
· Score: 1
Ground telescopes to 'super-size' Sunday, 10 April, 2005, 09:10 GMT 10:10 UK
"A new generation of ground-based telescopes could be up to 10 times the size of existing instruments and have vision 40 times as sharp as the Hubble space telescope." There ya go. Hubble _IS_ obsolete.
(On a second thought, I might submit this to slashdot tomorrow;-) More fuel to the fire...)
Slashdot Mirror
I assume you haven't RTFA, but here's more or less the criticism that Firefox gets:
1) "Oh look! It has more vulnerabilities than IE!" (tho they fail to state how critical these are. And don't forget that Firefox 1.03 was just released, fixing these. How long it took IE to release theirs?)
and 2) "BWA! Firefox fails to render my favorite IE-only pages!" complains from users.
And that was on the last 1 1/2 pages. The others were just straw words (your usual columnist intro).
This columnist isn't enlightening, nor critical. He's just giving another misinformed opinion.
Basically it's a mini-chopter. Big deal.
"Crash course on flying cars"
and in tiny letters:
"life insurance required"
Now I have to change my sci-fi tale again!
/. story includes police mechs, I'll shoot myself!
*scrubs: normal cars
*changes to: flying cars
If tomorrow's
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_16 /b3929120_mz018.htm
From the url:
"Even though such transistors are still in their infancy, says IBM's Avouris, "Carbon nanotubes can get around most of the problems that doom very small silicon devices." In the lab, he has backed this statement up. It took him four years to assemble his current, third-generation prototype of a carbon nanotube transistor, but in the end, the device can carry up to 1,000 times the current of the copper wires used in today's silicon chips, making it vastly more efficient."
A room temp super-conductor would be a boon for great speeds with less heat.
Actually, there are already plans for it. Search for "nanotube transistor" on google, and admire.
We might call them "quasi-superconductors". See, the difference between carbon nanotubes and common conductors is their crystaline structure that makes electrons travel in 1-D, as opposed to 3-D in common conductors. This nullifies heat dissipation, because, if there's no friction between the electrons, there's no energy loss.
And think about this. Cold superconductivity is a temporary, artificial effect. And there's a limit on the amount of current that can flow thru a superconductor before it loses its superconductive properties (don't ask where I read it because that was years ago). But carbon nanotubes have a permanent structure.
So I'd say this is the *REAL* superconductivity, and the phenomena discovered in near-0K conditions was just an attempt to it.
Were they paid for the review?
I recall watching in 60 minutes this old man saying how certain reviewers were invited to buffettes and such so they would give favorable reviews of movies that frankly, sucked.
I'd like to know if this was the case, too.
"They want it to work in the elevator; they want it to work in the basement."
:P
which reminds me - people are already investing in the Space Elevator - and Verizon's CEO dismisses the customers' needs?
Obviously someone's mind is already in orbit - and he didn't need a space elevator for it
Remember how (for those of you who watched the movie) he began amusing his students, using examples they could see (like slashing an apple in half, with a butcher knife)...
Also - if you have a computer scren and you talk about equations, and present them a 3D view of a graph, etc etc... the students can get curious and ask - what if we add a negative root in here?
So instead of spending dozens of minutes trying to solve an equation, boring the classrom, and earning that kid a terrible reputation among his schoolmates, you just spend a few seconds graphing the equation, solving the doubts, and helping them learn.
Here's the important thing: Technology is a TOOL to aid education. Not a REPLACEMENT for it.
Specially if you sneeze in the most inappropriate moment.
Why would you want a door that opens to light?
;-)
I think you should ask Indiana Jones why he WOULDN'T want a door/trap/device that activates with light
like the SCO Vs. IBM fiasco.
Please, use quotes.
Wrong: SCO Vs. "IBM fiasco".
Right: "SCO Vs. IBM" fiasco.
otherwise Billy might misquote you saying Linux is a fiasco. "A slashdotter said it! A slashdotter said it! I swear!"
Ex-parte motion:
i tions.php/US/US-EX_PARTE.htm
;-) )
"Ex parte refers to a motion or petition by or for one party. An ex parte judicial proceeding is on where the opposing party has not received notice nor is present. This is an exception to the usual rule of court procedure and due process rights that both parties must be present at any argument before a judge."
(Source: http://www.uslegalforms.com/lawdigest/legal-defin
)
About the 10-Q:
"What does it Mean? A quarterly report submitted by all public companies to the SEC in which firms are required to disclose relevant information regarding their financial position. This must be done on time, and the information should be available to all interested parties." (Source: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/1/10q.asp)
---
In other words...
This means that SCO wanted to play dirty on Linux er, IBM, by doing legal things on their back, this is, without IBM being present for the legal actions to take place - but judge Kimball didn't allow them to do so. Also, SCO also published their quarterly report.
(RTFW <-- words of wisdom to slashdotters regarding legalese
Let me share you a similar issue that happened to me on the subway.
Pamphlet ads. I see these ads for "cheap high school" being given to people at the subway - even if they're professionals, or elders. They're bulk produced, and the people hired to give them away are not asked how many potential customers they gave the ads. No, they asked them how many ads they gave away.
If the people had been trained with a keen eye and only gave ads to the potential customers i.e. low-class citizens (read: poor) between 16 and 40 years, I'm sure they'd be twice as effective.
Yes, it makes you wonder.
Because of the commercials DVDs don't cost that much.
/. discussion on why the Industry is trying to ban community-based ISPs). This is about squeezing the most money from the user, leaving him no choice.
No, unless you get frustrated for not being allowed to fast forward for the Nth time, forcing you to use illegal practices that end up taking the money away from... guess who? The same people that paid so you would be FORCED to see a commercial in a product you purchased.
This isn't about any "social contract" (for social issues and contracts read the previous
It's not a fair fight. They're the ones with the money in the first place.
Also, people who use Adblock didn't download it to get rid of "nice, non-intrusive ads" that decorate a webpage. They did it to get rid of the ANNOYING GARBAGE THAT THEY _DO NOT_ PLAN TO BUY ANYWAY!
I'm glad for adblock. It'll teach the sponsors that pay-per-click advertising wasn't such a good idea after all.
It just helps you take away the ads that you DON'T like.
If I block the ad saying "trip to vegas!" (usually the ads at Yahoo! mail have descriptive-enough url's), that saves the sponsors from wasting their bandwidth on uninterested public.
The same goes to "shoot the monkey!", "find an online partner" and such.
Of course it'd be better if Yahoo allowed LOCALIZED ADS so that the users say in... Timbuktu would receive Timbuktu ads. Much more effective. Of course, the "checkboxes" to determine what ads do I want aren't bad, either.
So, no, adblock doesn't violate any contract. Furthermore, those ads also use MY bandwidth. If they want to keep my attention, they should focus more on my tastes. In this I'm in favor of using cookies for ad preferences.
(Come to think about it, there are web standards for everything, even e-business. Why not targetted marketing?)
Is it April 1st? Nope. Check.
Is it an invented quote from The Register? Nope. Check.
Does it have a </sarcasm> tag at the end? Nope. Check.
Is it in the list of things that will never happen? *bzzt*
Now wait a minute, something's wrong here...
For those too lazy to cut n paste:
http://swatch.sourceforge.net/
http://www.snort.org/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/sentrytools/
aise your hands if you went to see episode I even after you heard what a horrible film ir was. Rais eyour hands if you saw episode II even though you knew it was going to suck. Raise your hands if you plan on waiting in line for episode III.
AHHHHHHHHH it feels GREAT to have seen *only* eps IV-VI! Thank you for your support. Instead of a "loser" who never bothered to see "The Saga. Completed", I can laugh at the losers who bothered to see "The Saga. Ruined."
In fact it's a wonderful piece of art dealing with ethics and how to live in a discriminating society that expects perfection from you.
/. (whose population finds tinfoil hats extremely popular) would complain about a movie which deals with genetics, biometrics, and privacy.
Maybe you went to see that movie with a "cool, sci fi, let's go for the spaceships!". But if we define sci-fi as "startrek/starwars/anything with lasers", Gattaca isn't sci-fi at all.
I find it ironic that someone in
In coorperate enviroments, people need(ed!) Word. Thus they need windows. Also a lot of intranet pages need IE and thus again Windows is needed. Or what about Photoshop and etc etc.
Give me Linux clones of the top-50 software list in windows, and I shall move the world.
2) There are no good nonlinearities... OR gate optically .... blahblah... Maybe someday someone will invent a great, low power, fast, optically nonlinear material. Don't invest in it yet.
Well, the peopl working in this are, IMO, shortsighted. Who says light has to travel thru (optical) wires or artificial gates? Light can be transmitted in 2D, in parallel, with no interference (unless you're talking holography). We can use that to our favor.
There have been experiments in image recognition using light. I was present in one of them, where it used a simple 8x8 array of LED's to do the processing:
The data were transparent sheets with relatively big opaque pixels. The pattern to search was represented by the "on" led's in our array. The result of the searching was in a sheet of paper behind the transparent sheets.
[8x8 LED ARRAY with the pattern to search]
| | | | | <--- light
[transparent sheet with opaque patterns]
| | | | |
[sheet of paper with the search result]
The zones where the patterns were found, presented a clear dark spot (a shadow). The ones with *similar* patterns, presented not-so-dark spots.
This is effective parallel image processing using light. Of course, in the rudimentary scale.
Taking this to the industrial level, I'm sure we'd get some amazing results. Imagine using a light processor to effectively render textures for a 3d game - this would make the cell processor look like a tortoise in comparison). Or use it to convert an audio sample to MP3 or whatever.
But oh well, let the scientists cripple the light, freeze it, slow it and make it go thru artificially created gates.
Pfft.
wasn't photon computing's purpose to use the speed of light to do computations? What use is to have light for the processing, if it's slower than the electrons we currently use?
And with all this freezer stuff, I doubt it'll have any practical use except for one or two super-secret govt computers that need millions of dollars in budget to do some crypto-crunching stuff.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4426535. stm
;-) More fuel to the fire...)
Ground telescopes to 'super-size'
Sunday, 10 April, 2005, 09:10 GMT 10:10 UK
"A new generation of ground-based telescopes could be up to 10 times the size of existing instruments and have vision 40 times as sharp as the Hubble space telescope."
There ya go. Hubble _IS_ obsolete.
(On a second thought, I might submit this to slashdot tomorrow