Not exactly. From TFA... The prototype reactor was designed and tested at CalTech, using electrical furnaces to generate the required 3,000 degrees. They then went to Switzerland to use the Paul Scherrer Institute's High-Flux Solar Simulator - "capable of delivering the heat of 1,500 suns" - to test with a solar heat source.
So it was *mostly* CalTech guys, using Swiss equipment for testing and further development.
The researchers will next compare Windows based and Open Source based mobile phones. The title of the article will be, "These are not the Droids you're looking for."
If it were possible for anyone and everyone to avoid paying taxes, I don't think anyone would mind.
Actually, if it were possible for everyone, the powers-that-be would close or change the tax loopholes. The rich and powerful cannot be so without poorer/weaker people to support them.
While I have my own ideas and the professor over this class to lean on, I've found it difficult to get the few students that I've tried to teach in the past to connect the dots and understand how it relates to what they already know about computers.
Not to be mean-spirited, but this generally means that either you don't have a strong enough grasp on the subject material and ability to relate it in terms to which your students can relate, or your students don't actually know anything, or enough, about computers, or you/they have too much system-specific knowledge and not enough general knowledge.
Computers are simply a tool, albeit a complex one, that can be used for many, many purposes. One must know the capabilities and, more importantly, the limitations of this tool. For that to happen, they must know how it works. Not simply how Linux works, but general concepts of what goes on and why. Better understanding of these are more universally useful as they are applicable to most other systems.
Teaching the "major ins and outs of the Linux terminal and GUI"? That's pretty basic, but the concepts are not specific to Linux. I would argue that focusing too closely on Linux specifics would be like teaching a class in Excel rather than spreadsheets. This can lead to tunnel vision later.
Case in point, we once had a fresh-from-college hire who installed SunOS - not Solaris mind you, so this was a long time ago - his Sun workstation, configured root's home directory as "/root" - as was on the Linux system he used in college - and then wondered why not everything worked as expected on his system. Granted, in a perfect world it would have worked, but in reality some systems and applications have assumptions for "root".
The lesson being: Learn systems in general, learn how they differ, tailor your work to the system. Just my $.02, with 25+ years as a system admin, system programmer on almost every kind of Unix (and, sigh, some Windows) systems known, from Cray to PC.
If you think you need to bank from your 'phone, you're doing life wrong.
Seriously agree. In fact, those commercials that show someone querying their credit card or bank balance to see if they can buy a huge flat-screen TV or, quite frankly, any mobile banking issue, illustrates something very wrong with that model and poor personal financial planning and management by those who would rely on such features.
Indeed. I did LISP research in college from 1985-87 on a Xerox Star 8010 "Dandelion". Granted, it was a $50k system, so it was only widely available to people with lots of cash.:-)
The phone can receive text-messages, but only from the provider -- for things like usage alerts. I originally got it from PrimeCo, now nTelos in my area. The phone was $200 in 1998 and my plan is $15/month (w/taxes) -- no minutes, but I only use it occasionally/for emergencies -- still, it has 6 hours of talk and 2 weeks of standby.
Someday I may get a current phone, when I have more people to call:-(
And people scoff at my 14 year old Qualcomm QCP-1900. I'd send them all an SMS of Death, if my phone could send text messages... (sigh) Still. Try defending yourself from a mugger with a Droid or iPhone - hah!
The NY Times article, Publisher Tinkers With Twain, reports that "Indian" is substituted for "injun". Still, it's unwarranted revisionist tinkering. Schools shouldn't fear teaching, and students need to learn, history and literature as it was, not how we'd like it to have been.
Basically he believes he is a decendant of an Ancient Mayan King, despite not being Mayan himself, and that he is spiritually channeling this doomsday warning to the rest of the world.
The show was of a similar theme as the BBC mini-series Voyage to the Planets though there have been heated comparisons of the two shows. There is a book tie-in to that show. From Wikipedia:
BBC Books published a book written by Christopher Riley with the same title as the UK version of Space Odyssey. It was based on the fictional diary entries of the ground staff and crew on Pegasus, with supplementary factual information on the planets they visited and the real robotic missions which have explored them through history. It is illustrated with specially commissioned digital still images and screenshots taken from the drama.
I really enjoyed "Defying Gravity" and even bought the DVDs, which I recommend, to see the last 5 un-aired episodes. As to how the show itself would have progressed and ended, see these interviews with the show's creator:
Instead of forcing a computer to seek out the data it needs, as traditional computing systems do, the information would automatically slide along the racetrack to where it could be used. The result: powerful and efficient computing.
"Instead of forcing the computer to seek out data." (Meaning, at the address where it was stored?) "The data automatically slides to where it can be used." (Is the data omniscient?) "Powerful and efficient computing." (OK, perhaps w/regard to data retrieval.)
I don't get it. Article needs more information, less hyperbole (ya, I know, this is/.) so it doesn't really seem like a Samuel L. Jackson moment.
There's "private". Then there's "public". But then there's "on the Internet", which is a whole different ball of wax.
Not really. If something is in public view, it could simply be photographed and published anywhere - without permission. That's the nature of "in public view". There's nothing inherently different about it being "on the internet" in these cases.
The lesson is, to co-opt a phrase, that people shouldn't air their clean laundry in public.:-)
Or patent this one as "browser highlight all button - in one's pants", so when the USPTO eventually has to go looking for their own asses, with two hands and a flashlight, they'll owe *me* money.
Researchers found a fly in the soup, so they sent it back. In related news, when the researchers were asked what they thought the fly was doing in the soup, they replied, "the backstroke."
I wouldn't have a problem dedicating a portion of my taxes to pay for this, as long as everyone else pays for it as well, regardless of whether they themselves have health insurance. I agree that the cost for this shouldn't be born by only those who have purchased insurance, but the solution is not to force others into the insurance system, it's to provide base single-payer insurance for everyone.
Your statements contradict each other. So you'd be OK with requiring everyone to pay taxes to support health care, but not requiring everyone to purchase insurance? Think of the premiums as the tax. Problem solved.
All that aside. I too, would rather support a single-payer system. We already have two in the US: Medicare for those 65+ and Tricare for those in the military. Medicare has the lowest overhead expense rate of all insurers - 2%. Even doubling that would be much lower than for private insurers. Heck, even all the old-folks in the Tea Party want to keep their Medicare. See this: Matt Taibbi on the Tea Party (How corporate interests and Republican insiders built the Tea Party monster.)
Slashdot Mirror
Technically... the Sun is still shining at night, just not on you. I think it has to do with the Earth rotating and stuff... :-)
Umm... Is this news to anyone? Ok, perhaps the exact figure of 20x, but otherwise?
So it was *mostly* CalTech guys, using Swiss equipment for testing and further development.
The researchers will next compare Windows based and Open Source based mobile phones. The title of the article will be, "These are not the Droids you're looking for."
Actually, if it were possible for everyone, the powers-that-be would close or change the tax loopholes. The rich and powerful cannot be so without poorer/weaker people to support them.
Not to be mean-spirited, but this generally means that either you don't have a strong enough grasp on the subject material and ability to relate it in terms to which your students can relate, or your students don't actually know anything, or enough, about computers, or you/they have too much system-specific knowledge and not enough general knowledge.
Computers are simply a tool, albeit a complex one, that can be used for many, many purposes. One must know the capabilities and, more importantly, the limitations of this tool. For that to happen, they must know how it works. Not simply how Linux works, but general concepts of what goes on and why. Better understanding of these are more universally useful as they are applicable to most other systems.
Teaching the "major ins and outs of the Linux terminal and GUI"? That's pretty basic, but the concepts are not specific to Linux. I would argue that focusing too closely on Linux specifics would be like teaching a class in Excel rather than spreadsheets. This can lead to tunnel vision later.
Case in point, we once had a fresh-from-college hire who installed SunOS - not Solaris mind you, so this was a long time ago - his Sun workstation, configured root's home directory as "/root" - as was on the Linux system he used in college - and then wondered why not everything worked as expected on his system. Granted, in a perfect world it would have worked, but in reality some systems and applications have assumptions for "root".
The lesson being: Learn systems in general, learn how they differ, tailor your work to the system. Just my $.02, with 25+ years as a system admin, system programmer on almost every kind of Unix (and, sigh, some Windows) systems known, from Cray to PC.
Seriously agree. In fact, those commercials that show someone querying their credit card or bank balance to see if they can buy a huge flat-screen TV or, quite frankly, any mobile banking issue, illustrates something very wrong with that model and poor personal financial planning and management by those who would rely on such features.
Indeed. I did LISP research in college from 1985-87 on a Xerox Star 8010 "Dandelion". Granted, it was a $50k system, so it was only widely available to people with lots of cash. :-)
I think the Project Triangle applies: There's good, fast, and cheap. Pick any two.
Someday I may get a current phone, when I have more people to call :-(
And people scoff at my 14 year old Qualcomm QCP-1900. I'd send them all an SMS of Death, if my phone could send text messages... (sigh) Still. Try defending yourself from a mugger with a Droid or iPhone - hah!
According to Stephen Colbert, the proper modern term is "intern".
The NY Times article, Publisher Tinkers With Twain, reports that "Indian" is substituted for "injun". Still, it's unwarranted revisionist tinkering. Schools shouldn't fear teaching, and students need to learn, history and literature as it was, not how we'd like it to have been.
So... Glenn Beck? :-)
Fixed that for you.
I really enjoyed "Defying Gravity" and even bought the DVDs, which I recommend, to see the last 5 un-aired episodes. As to how the show itself would have progressed and ended, see these interviews with the show's creator:
Happy New Year!
"Instead of forcing the computer to seek out data." (Meaning, at the address where it was stored?) "The data automatically slides to where it can be used." (Is the data omniscient?) "Powerful and efficient computing." (OK, perhaps w/regard to data retrieval.)
I don't get it. Article needs more information, less hyperbole (ya, I know, this is /.) so it doesn't really seem like a Samuel L. Jackson moment.
Ironically, it's actually a really, really, really, old guitar, used to calm passengers with folk songs, or club anyone that gets out of hand.
...they finally got enough material for some articles, or is it going to be 800 pages of ads again?
Not really. If something is in public view, it could simply be photographed and published anywhere - without permission. That's the nature of "in public view". There's nothing inherently different about it being "on the internet" in these cases.
The lesson is, to co-opt a phrase, that people shouldn't air their clean laundry in public. :-)
Or patent this one as "browser highlight all button - in one's pants", so when the USPTO eventually has to go looking for their own asses, with two hands and a flashlight, they'll owe *me* money.
Researchers found a fly in the soup, so they sent it back. In related news, when the researchers were asked what they thought the fly was doing in the soup, they replied, "the backstroke."
Your statements contradict each other. So you'd be OK with requiring everyone to pay taxes to support health care, but not requiring everyone to purchase insurance? Think of the premiums as the tax. Problem solved.
All that aside. I too, would rather support a single-payer system. We already have two in the US: Medicare for those 65+ and Tricare for those in the military. Medicare has the lowest overhead expense rate of all insurers - 2%. Even doubling that would be much lower than for private insurers. Heck, even all the old-folks in the Tea Party want to keep their Medicare. See this: Matt Taibbi on the Tea Party (How corporate interests and Republican insiders built the Tea Party monster.)