I really do wish mickysoft would rename their flagship database something else. Are they that arrogant that they feel the need for such a generic name? That's about like naming your product "Web Server" or "Network File Server".
I know, its so annoying! Quickly, lets patent.Net before Microsoft get their hands on...oh...right.
"Early adoption of Yukon in enterprises was quite strong due to the functions and features [..]"
How can you talk about functions and features of software that has not yet been released? How can companies "early adopt" vaporware?
Yes, they can order in advance, but to me "adoption" means running something as a part of your business. Not "planning to maybe use it once you get it and if it turns out to be as good as you was promised it would be".
All the programmers who need the environment to compensate for their inadequacies, step on one side. All the programmers who want to learn from their mistakes and become better at their craft, get on the other side.
Most of us know where this line is located.
"In other news, at the local beach today a vicious fight broke out between geeks about where to draw a line. Sand was kicked, noses have been blooded, we have some unconfirmed reports of a wedgie. We will have more on this breaking news as it comes in."
I have no faith in these OO language crap either. The real world maybe OO, but once your code is compiled, it is going to run us a sequence of statements: i.e., like an imperative language.
Well, DUH. In the end its just ones and zeroes no matter what language you use. OO does not change the way computers operate much, it is a way to help programmers think about the problem domain in a way that hopefully is a bit easier for most of us. Jeez.
If you don't like it because it cramps your "bursting with geek studliness" style, that's fine. But if you don't even understand what high level languages are for, I doubt you know what you are doing.
Remember, a language does not cause overflows - careless and stupid programmers do.
But why have a language that enables the possibility for careless and stupid programmers like myself to do overflows?
"Sir, perhaps its the fact that we put the self destruct button next to the light button on our new combat vehicle that causes a large number of them to explode?" "Button proximity does not cause explosions! Careless operators cause explosions!!"
When I subscribed to Bugtraq, it seemed most of the vulnerabilites discovered (a couple per day) was caused by buffer overflows. The number of vulnerabilites discovered in Java systems (for instance) were rather few, and tended to be for things like DOS attacks, not getting your whole system security compromised.
Not that I think C is going anywhere, it is still going strong in Unix/LInux land and I like the fact that there are many different languages around. Just commenting on that particular sentence above.:-)
I also have problems with mouse support on Mandrake, but for me it is under kernel 2.4. I use it on a Compaq laptop, which has a little pin on the keyboard as a mouse replacement (forget what they are called).
Sometimes when I boot, the mouse just stops working. Sometimes, Mandrake doesn't even detect it and I get an emergency "mouse configuration" menu on startup. It will detect it then, but it still won't work until I reboot.
On the other hand - on my job computer, everything works perfectly.
When you come from a C / Perl / Python background, you quickly notice a few misfeatures of Java
Many programmers tend to find one or two languages they like, and all deviations from that way of thinking is seen as flaws. Adressing your specific points:
(5) It's slow and resource-hungry
True, the VMs have been memory hogs and slow to load, and that is one thing that Sun really has been a bit slow in adressing. However, with Java 1.5 soon to be released, they have licenced Apple's code which allows VMs to share most of the code, so once a VM has been started, the remaining Java programs you start will not consume much more memory, and will be much faster to load.
They have been advancing greately lately. Now Java is fast enough to write platform independent graphics drivers: http://java.sun.com/products/jfc/tsc/art icles/jcan yon/
(1) It's huge (4) Did I mention it is huge?
You are either repeating the complaint from point 5, or you are complaining about one of the great things about Java, the huge amount of libraries available for everything from graphics, databases, XML processing, PDAs, servers.... Hint, you don't have to use these libraries if you don't want to. You can rewrite everything from scratch if you suffer from Not Invented Here syndrome.
(2) The code-compile-test cycle takes too long (6) It is difficult to debug
That is just pure bullshit. I have never had such great tools such as Eclipse, Ant and JUnit. Not even Visual Studio comes close.
Why do you think the.Net clones Nant and NUnit came so quickly?
(3) It's hard to use
No it isn't.
Ask the developers. They will tell you that the debug-compile-test cycle has been significantly slowed.
I'm right here. No it hasn't. I can ask my two collegues sitting in the same room. Nope, they like Java too, and we are getting paid to program in it.
They will show you the POs for new servers needed to handle the same load that the mod_perl servers were handling.
I have been able to run quite big Java applications under Tomcat on fairly old hardware running Linux. With speed and memory improvements in Java 1.4 and Java 1.5, as well as improved POSIX threads in Linux kernel 2.6 they will do even better.
Have you done any significant work in either [Pearl or Python].
Nope, haven't had time. Getting better at Java has been better for my salary. I do intend to learn C++ and Python better this summer though.
Linux is a breeding ground for good concepts that work. Java is not one of them, hence, it is floundering. [...] Remember, Perl and Python are there not because they have huge PR campaigns and million dollar budgets. They are there because they survived where others couldn't. They are there because they deserve to be there on their merits alone.
Java is the third most popular language on Sourceforge. It has survived full frontal attacks by Microsoft to destroy it (few things have). It is being used in big businesses such as banks. It is very popular in mobile phones in Japan and Europe. NASA used it for quite a lot of the software during the latest Mars mission. Java is surviving quite well on its merits too. But thanks for playing.
>>x.print(d); >>I know that the behaviour of print MUST be defined in the class x and nowhere else. >"x" isn't a class, it's a variable that holds an instance of a class.
Yes, sloppy typing, I meant "in the class of x".
That is always the case with overloading or method dispatch; "x.print()" may reboot your computer instead of the expected operation.
Yes, I know. I believed it was easier to check these things in Java though, and that it was better at preventing abuse, but it seems the difference was not as great as I thought.
In fact, "System.out.print" doesn't even invoke a method on an instance of class System, it invokes a method defined in the class of the instance that the variable System.out happens to hold.
First I thought, "What the hell is he saying. Of course it goes to an instance of the class system. What does he think all those 'final' and 'static' keywords stand for?" Then I decided to test it. I was amazed that this worked, and without even a warning!
String Integer = new String("Hello");
System.out.print(Integer);
The "complexity" comes with overloading, which Java already has. Once you have added overloading to a language, you might as well add operator overloading.
Perhaps it's only because I'm not experienced with C++ programming, but I find method overloading easier than operator overloading. With the method overloading, you have the class which the method belongs to, so it is fairly easy to check what it does.
XMLUtil.print(xmlDocument, file);
XMLUtil.print(xmlDocument, ioStream);
XMLUtil.print(xmlDocument); I gave them very explanatory names, but even with something more cryptic, non static like
x.print(d); I know that the behaviour of print MUST be defined in the class x and nowhere else. Other classes can have print methods, such as
System.out.print("Hello"); but I always see the classname first, so there is no risk of confusion between the methods.
On the other hand, with operator overloading, whenever you join a new project you must keep in mind that it is possible that an operator has been overloaded to do something surprising. For instance, in example.h I see someone using
time1 += time2 If I understand operator overloading as it is done in C++, I have to scroll up to the definitions part of example.h to see if there is a
void operator+=(Time &t); somewhere, and may even have to go to different source files in the project to discover IF an operator has been overloaded to do something cute and unexpected, and what.
There is almost no difference between C#/Mono/.NET and Java, but almost no Linux developers write in Java.
Not quite true. Current Sourceforge statistics by language: 1. C++ (12967 projects) 2. C (12955 projects) 3. Java (11446 projects) 4. PHP (8607 projects) 5. Perl (5388 projects)
There is a vocal group of Java haters on Slashdot.
There is a bigger group who is a bit wary because even though the Java Community Project exist and IBM and others are allowed to develop their own implementations, the licence is not GPL and Sun could screw things up if they turn evil or desperate.
Check out your distribution's packages and you'll almost see more JVMs than Java apps.
Yes, because lincence restrictions prevent them from including Suns java. The open source packages are not mature enough to run all apps, so it's pointless to include those apps. The open source implementations of the VM are impressive, but the java standard is developing too quickly for them to keep up porting all libraries. Just like.Net will evolve too quickly for Mono to keep up. Only in that case it is guaranteed MS will deliberatly include things that will break Mono.
there's every reason to use Java, especially for applications.
Yes, and I believe a huge reason for the upswing of Linux in businesses is the great combination of Linux and Java.
Do NOT help Microsoft kill off Java with their.Net clone, when they are done with that they can concentrate on the single remaining target.
C# does have some nice things that, say, Java lacks. Operator overloading, automatic boxing and unboxing of primitive types, and properties come to mind.
Operator overloading - no, and it probably won't ever be included for good reasons. It's neat to have that power, but makes your code harder to understand and less maintainable for everyone else.
Autoboxing - yes, here in Java 1.5. You can already download a beta SDK.
With a GUI, there is a lot of hunting and squinting and guessing: basically, the stuff is never in the same place and never looks the same from one machine to the next.
Well, I like using the command line, but to be fair, there are lots of inconsistencies there too.
* Standards for command parameters. For instance, using a command recursively, sometimes the flag is "-r", sometimes "-R". * Always use a dash to separate command flags from file names. Except for the exceptions like tar: "tar xzvf filename.tar" * Differences between unixes and Linux. "df -h" gives you human readable disc sizes in Linux (50G) and an error message in AIX.
Also, while I agree command line commands are more convenient at first, it is easier to remember GUI moves if you have been away for a while. When using an old FTP program I haven't used in years, I can quickly remember the steps I need to take to configure and get started, I hardly need to read the text on the buttons or menues. But when its time to do something on the command line I haven't done in a while, its much harder. "Ok, setting up a new CVS repository. was it 'cvs init', or 'cvs -i' or something else? Do I have to set the CVSROOT environment variable first, or was that just for the clients...?"
The POSIX standard with "--help" "--verbose" and so on makes it easier to use and remember commands, but doesn't solve everything.
No new technology seems to be involved, some comments would lead one to believe that there was some inkjet printed circuitry involved and that it is a paper computer. Not so, I could see no evidence of this.
"Printable circuits Using printable, conductive ink based on non-toxic carbon powder, electronic circuits and antennas can be printed directly onto low cost substrates, such as paper, cardboard or plastic.
By forming electronic circuit lines and monitoring if they are opened or closed, printable circuits can be used to detect events, such as a broken seal, an open lid or damaged packaging. This includes the formation of pressure sensitive areas which can be used as key switches in an electronic questionnaire. The circuits attach to Cypak Electronic Module (CEM) where events are recorded and time stamped.
In the same production step as circuits our robust and extremely low cost antenna can be printed in the form of patches the size of a credit card.
Our know-how in printing circuits on folded paper enables multiple form factors, such as boxes, wallets, books etc. "
The technology is not new, they have developed it since 1996 and won a major prize in 1999 for it. What *is* new is that now apprearently it is mature and cheap enough to start using for real.
but it seems all our advances in disposable technology comes from the swedes.
Yes, imagine it, disposable paper! And disposable ink! The horror! I can't think of anything more wasteful, I hope it never catches on. Whatever will we think of next...;-)
Seriously, this is a pretty sweet technology. They are using cheap, non-toxic conductive ink, so you will probably by able to buy printers pretty soon where you can print your own computers.
The most immediate benefit is as the article mentioned in passing for medical use. For instance patients who need to take their medicine for, say Alzheimers. If they forget, their condition gets worse. But how will they remember to take the medicine on time if they have Alzheimers? The paper bag the medicine comes in can start to signal when its time to take the medicine. And a PDA can check up on it, if the bag is not opened in time, an alarm can be sent so someone can check up on the patient.
I was surprised to see your claim that security cameras in London have had no effect on crime rates. From what I had heard, they had a significant drop in crimes, but Googling around seems to refute that. I did find this interesting article though, which seems to say that its a bit of a gray area. It is almost two years old though, don't know if statistics have changed since then.
A simple game for simple kids, Ned's Head is sure to bring frowns to at least a few parents, but come on....name any six-year-old who isn't fascinated with things like vomit and old cheese.
Ten things you should know about Lomborg and the "Skeptical Environmentalist": http://www.wri.org/press/mk_lo mborg_10_things.html
A summary of some of the more important points:
"the environmental issue facing society is not whether we are increasing our material wellbeing - we are - but whether we are prospering in ways that damage the natural environment. Lomborg's book equates -- and confuses -- these two fundamentally different issues."
"Lomborg claims that "marine productivity has almost doubled since 1970" -- a surprising statement given the well-documented declines of many commercial fish stocks. What Lomborg actually means appears later in the book as a figure depicting an increase in total fish catch, plus production from fish farms.[...] And what humans are taking from the oceans and what the oceans are producing are of course fundamentally different matters. "
"Although Lomborg concedes that species extinctions are likely occurring at 1,500 times natural rates[10], he takes repeated issue with an estimate by Norman Myers that as many as 40,000 species may be going extinct each year. But when annual species extinction is calculated with Lomborg's figure, using the number of living species Lomborg cites and the extinction-per-species ratios given by leading authorities in Lomborg's own footnotes, the Myers estimate is confirmed as sitting well within the range."
If you want more in-depth, there is a 64 page rebuttal here
You think it was political rather than scientific to post it?;-)
Well, it IS quite big news either way. Still, my +4 karma deserves a couple of "redundants" now I guess, but most moderators are probably spending their points on that topic instead.
Slashdot Mirror
I really do wish mickysoft would rename their flagship database something else. Are they that arrogant that they feel the need for such a generic name? That's about like naming your product "Web Server" or "Network File Server".
.Net before Microsoft get their hands on...oh...right.
I know, its so annoying! Quickly, lets patent
"Early adoption of Yukon in enterprises was quite strong due to the functions and features [..]"
How can you talk about functions and features of software that has not yet been released? How can companies "early adopt" vaporware?
Yes, they can order in advance, but to me "adoption" means running something as a part of your business. Not "planning to maybe use it once you get it and if it turns out to be as good as you was promised it would be".
You can download Python plugins to work together with the excellent Eclipse.
All the programmers who need the environment to compensate for their inadequacies, step on one side. All the programmers who want to learn from their mistakes and become better at their craft, get on the other side.
Most of us know where this line is located.
"In other news, at the local beach today a vicious fight broke out between geeks about where to draw a line. Sand was kicked, noses have been blooded, we have some unconfirmed reports of a wedgie. We will have more on this breaking news as it comes in."
I have no faith in these OO language crap either. The real world maybe OO, but once your code is compiled, it is going to run us a sequence of statements: i.e., like an imperative language.
Well, DUH. In the end its just ones and zeroes no matter what language you use. OO does not change the way computers operate much, it is a way to help programmers think about the problem domain in a way that hopefully is a bit easier for most of us. Jeez.
If you don't like it because it cramps your "bursting with geek studliness" style, that's fine. But if you don't even understand what high level languages are for, I doubt you know what you are doing.
Remember, a language does not cause overflows - careless and stupid programmers do.
:-)
But why have a language that enables the possibility for careless and stupid programmers like myself to do overflows?
"Sir, perhaps its the fact that we put the self destruct button next to the light button on our new combat vehicle that causes a large number of them to explode?"
"Button proximity does not cause explosions! Careless operators cause explosions!!"
When I subscribed to Bugtraq, it seemed most of the vulnerabilites discovered (a couple per day) was caused by buffer overflows. The number of vulnerabilites discovered in Java systems (for instance) were rather few, and tended to be for things like DOS attacks, not getting your whole system security compromised.
Not that I think C is going anywhere, it is still going strong in Unix/LInux land and I like the fact that there are many different languages around. Just commenting on that particular sentence above.
I also have problems with mouse support on Mandrake, but for me it is under kernel 2.4. I use it on a Compaq laptop, which has a little pin on the keyboard as a mouse replacement (forget what they are called).
Sometimes when I boot, the mouse just stops working. Sometimes, Mandrake doesn't even detect it and I get an emergency "mouse configuration" menu on startup. It will detect it then, but it still won't work until I reboot.
On the other hand - on my job computer, everything works perfectly.
When you come from a C / Perl / Python background, you quickly notice a few misfeatures of Java
t icles/jcan yon/
.Net clones Nant and NUnit came so quickly?
Many programmers tend to find one or two languages they like, and all deviations from that way of thinking is seen as flaws. Adressing your specific points:
(5) It's slow and resource-hungry
True, the VMs have been memory hogs and slow to load, and that is one thing that Sun really has been a bit slow in adressing. However, with Java 1.5 soon to be released, they have licenced Apple's code which allows VMs to share most of the code, so once a VM has been started, the remaining Java programs you start will not consume much more memory, and will be much faster to load.
They have been advancing greately lately. Now Java is fast enough to write platform independent graphics drivers:
http://java.sun.com/products/jfc/tsc/ar
(1) It's huge
(4) Did I mention it is huge?
You are either repeating the complaint from point 5, or you are complaining about one of the great things about Java, the huge amount of libraries available for everything from graphics, databases, XML processing, PDAs, servers....
Hint, you don't have to use these libraries if you don't want to. You can rewrite everything from scratch if you suffer from Not Invented Here syndrome.
(2) The code-compile-test cycle takes too long
(6) It is difficult to debug
That is just pure bullshit. I have never had such great tools such as Eclipse, Ant and JUnit. Not even Visual Studio comes close.
Why do you think the
(3) It's hard to use
No it isn't.
Ask the developers. They will tell you that the debug-compile-test cycle has been significantly slowed.
I'm right here. No it hasn't. I can ask my two collegues sitting in the same room. Nope, they like Java too, and we are getting paid to program in it.
They will show you the POs for new servers needed to handle the same load that the mod_perl servers were handling.
I have been able to run quite big Java applications under Tomcat on fairly old hardware running Linux. With speed and memory improvements in Java 1.4 and Java 1.5, as well as improved POSIX threads in Linux kernel 2.6 they will do even better.
Have you done any significant work in either [Pearl or Python].
Nope, haven't had time. Getting better at Java has been better for my salary. I do intend to learn C++ and Python better this summer though.
Linux is a breeding ground for good concepts that work. Java is not one of them, hence, it is floundering. [...] Remember, Perl and Python are there not because they have huge PR campaigns and million dollar budgets. They are there because they survived where others couldn't. They are there because they deserve to be there on their merits alone.
Java is the third most popular language on Sourceforge. It has survived full frontal attacks by Microsoft to destroy it (few things have). It is being used in big businesses such as banks. It is very popular in mobile phones in Japan and Europe. NASA used it for quite a lot of the software during the latest Mars mission. Java is surviving quite well on its merits too. But thanks for playing.
I believe I DO understand. :-)
I was with all the way until this:
I doubt java.lang.System ever gets instantiated (its existence just attests to another design stupidity in Java).
The Javadoc claims the class never gets instantiated. But why is the existance of that class so poor design? I thought it was fairly conventient.
>>x.print(d);
>>I know that the behaviour of print MUST be defined in the class x and nowhere else.
>"x" isn't a class, it's a variable that holds an instance of a class.
Yes, sloppy typing, I meant "in the class of x".
That is always the case with overloading or method dispatch; "x.print()" may reboot your computer instead of the expected operation.
Yes, I know. I believed it was easier to check these things in Java though, and that it was better at preventing abuse, but it seems the difference was not as great as I thought.
In fact, "System.out.print" doesn't even invoke a method on an instance of class System, it invokes a method defined in the class of the instance that the variable System.out happens to hold.
First I thought, "What the hell is he saying. Of course it goes to an instance of the class system. What does he think all those 'final' and 'static' keywords stand for?" Then I decided to test it. I was amazed that this worked, and without even a warning!
String Integer = new String("Hello");
System.out.print(Integer);
Hmm, you learn something new every day...
The "complexity" comes with overloading, which Java already has. Once you have added overloading to a language, you might as well add operator overloading.
Perhaps it's only because I'm not experienced with C++ programming, but I find method overloading easier than operator overloading. With the method overloading, you have the class which the method belongs to, so it is fairly easy to check what it does.
XMLUtil.print(xmlDocument, file);
XMLUtil.print(xmlDocument, ioStream);
XMLUtil.print(xmlDocument);
I gave them very explanatory names, but even with something more cryptic, non static like
x.print(d);
I know that the behaviour of print MUST be defined in the class x and nowhere else.
Other classes can have print methods, such as
System.out.print("Hello");
but I always see the classname first, so there is no risk of confusion between the methods.
On the other hand, with operator overloading, whenever you join a new project you must keep in mind that it is possible that an operator has been overloaded to do something surprising. For instance, in example.h I see someone using
time1 += time2
If I understand operator overloading as it is done in C++, I have to scroll up to the definitions part of example.h to see if there is a
void operator+=(Time &t);
somewhere, and may even have to go to different source files in the project to discover IF an operator has been overloaded to do something cute and unexpected, and what.
No language can replace C until it can compile its own compiler written in itself.
Espresso
- a Java compiler written in Java.
A list of compiler and compiler tools in Java -including parser generators like JavaCC
There is almost no difference between C#/Mono/.NET and Java, but almost no Linux developers write in Java.
.Net will evolve too quickly for Mono to keep up. Only in that case it is guaranteed MS will deliberatly include things that will break Mono.
.Net clone, when they are done with that they can concentrate on the single remaining target.
Not quite true. Current Sourceforge statistics by language:
1. C++ (12967 projects)
2. C (12955 projects)
3. Java (11446 projects)
4. PHP (8607 projects)
5. Perl (5388 projects)
There is a vocal group of Java haters on Slashdot.
There is a bigger group who is a bit wary because even though the Java Community Project exist and IBM and others are allowed to develop their own implementations, the licence is not GPL and Sun could screw things up if they turn evil or desperate.
Check out your distribution's packages and you'll almost see more JVMs than Java apps.
Yes, because lincence restrictions prevent them from including Suns java. The open source packages are not mature enough to run all apps, so it's pointless to include those apps. The open source implementations of the VM are impressive, but the java standard is developing too quickly for them to keep up porting all libraries. Just like
there's every reason to use Java, especially for applications.
Yes, and I believe a huge reason for the upswing of Linux in businesses is the great combination of Linux and Java.
Do NOT help Microsoft kill off Java with their
C# does have some nice things that, say, Java lacks. Operator overloading, automatic boxing and unboxing of primitive types, and properties come to mind.
.Net lacks too.
Operator overloading - no, and it probably won't ever be included for good reasons. It's neat to have that power, but makes your code harder to understand and less maintainable for everyone else.
Autoboxing - yes, here in Java 1.5. You can already download a beta SDK.
Java have a lot of libraries that
Macbeth: "Is this a Slashdotting I see before me? It's URL pointing to my own server? Here, let me hold you!"
Ah,thanks.
With a GUI, there is a lot of hunting and squinting and guessing: basically, the stuff is never in the same place and never looks the same from one machine to the next.
Well, I like using the command line, but to be fair, there are lots of inconsistencies there too.
* Standards for command parameters. For instance, using a command recursively, sometimes the flag is "-r", sometimes "-R".
* Always use a dash to separate command flags from file names. Except for the exceptions like tar: "tar xzvf filename.tar"
* Differences between unixes and Linux. "df -h" gives you human readable disc sizes in Linux (50G) and an error message in AIX.
Also, while I agree command line commands are more convenient at first, it is easier to remember GUI moves if you have been away for a while. When using an old FTP program I haven't used in years, I can quickly remember the steps I need to take to configure and get started, I hardly need to read the text on the buttons or menues. But when its time to do something on the command line I haven't done in a while, its much harder. "Ok, setting up a new CVS repository. was it 'cvs init', or 'cvs -i' or something else? Do I have to set the CVSROOT environment variable first, or was that just for the clients...?"
The POSIX standard with "--help" "--verbose" and so on makes it easier to use and remember commands, but doesn't solve everything.
No new technology seems to be involved, some comments would lead one to believe that there was some inkjet printed circuitry involved and that it is a paper computer. Not so, I could see no evidence of this.
& page=tech_printable
You couldn't have looked very long:
http://www.cypak.com/index.php?a=tech&b=printable
"Printable circuits
Using printable, conductive ink based on non-toxic carbon powder, electronic circuits and antennas can be printed directly onto low cost substrates, such as paper, cardboard or plastic.
By forming electronic circuit lines and monitoring if they are opened or closed, printable circuits can be used to detect events, such as a broken seal, an open lid or damaged packaging. This includes the formation of pressure sensitive areas which can be used as key switches in an electronic questionnaire. The circuits attach to Cypak Electronic Module (CEM) where events are recorded and time stamped.
In the same production step as circuits our robust and extremely low cost antenna can be printed in the form of patches the size of a credit card.
Our know-how in printing circuits on folded paper enables multiple form factors, such as boxes, wallets, books etc. "
The technology is not new, they have developed it since 1996 and won a major prize in 1999 for it. What *is* new is that now apprearently it is mature and cheap enough to start using for real.
They have started to get some license agreements from big companies.
but it seems all our advances in disposable technology comes from the swedes.
;-)
Yes, imagine it, disposable paper! And disposable ink! The horror! I can't think of anything more wasteful, I hope it never catches on. Whatever will we think of next...
Seriously, this is a pretty sweet technology. They are using cheap, non-toxic conductive ink, so you will probably by able to buy printers pretty soon where you can print your own computers.
The most immediate benefit is as the article mentioned in passing for medical use. For instance patients who need to take their medicine for, say Alzheimers. If they forget, their condition gets worse. But how will they remember to take the medicine on time if they have Alzheimers? The paper bag the medicine comes in can start to signal when its time to take the medicine. And a PDA can check up on it, if the bag is not opened in time, an alarm can be sent so someone can check up on the patient.
I guess the person who modded me up didn't realize that the scenario I described above is using Dvd Shrink + Nero + Windows.
:-)
Haha! Good one. You are either going to get a plus 5 funny for both your posts or get modded to oblivion. I vote for "funny" and also insightful.
I was surprised to see your claim that security cameras in London have had no effect on crime rates. From what I had heard, they had a significant drop in crimes, but Googling around seems to refute that. I did find this interesting article though, which seems to say that its a bit of a gray area. It is almost two years old though, don't know if statistics have changed since then.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2071496.stm
A simple game for simple kids, Ned's Head is sure to bring frowns to at least a few parents, but come on....name any six-year-old who isn't fascinated with things like vomit and old cheese.
Uh, girls? The other 50 percent, remember?
We can't predict how much rain there'll be one week from now, but we can predict the temperature to within one degree a century from now? Get real.
"We can't predict if an electron will go left or right, but we can predict that a lamp gets turned on if we flick a switch? Get real."
Ten things you should know about Lomborg and the "Skeptical Environmentalist":o mborg_10_things.html
http://www.wri.org/press/mk_l
A summary of some of the more important points:
"the environmental issue facing society is not whether we are increasing our material wellbeing - we are - but whether we are prospering in ways that damage the natural environment. Lomborg's book equates -- and confuses -- these two fundamentally different issues."
"Lomborg claims that "marine productivity has almost doubled since 1970" -- a surprising statement given the well-documented declines of many commercial fish stocks. What Lomborg actually means appears later in the book as a figure depicting an increase in total fish catch, plus production from fish farms.[...] And what humans are taking from the oceans and what the oceans are producing are of course fundamentally different matters. "
"Although Lomborg concedes that species extinctions are likely occurring at 1,500 times natural rates[10], he takes repeated issue with an estimate by Norman Myers that as many as 40,000 species may be going extinct each year. But when annual species extinction is calculated with Lomborg's figure, using the number of living species Lomborg cites and the extinction-per-species ratios given by leading authorities in Lomborg's own footnotes, the Myers estimate is confirmed as sitting well within the range."
If you want more in-depth, there is a 64 page rebuttal
here
michael is so predictable.
;-)
You think it was political rather than scientific to post it?
Well, it IS quite big news either way. Still, my +4 karma deserves a couple of "redundants" now I guess, but most moderators are probably spending their points on that topic instead.