You don't deal with many non-profits do you? Even middle-management at many non-profits earn a very healthy income, easily on par with anything the corporate world offers. From the perspective of employees these non-profits are for-profit entities.
That said, some of those executives you describe are directly responsible for the existence of non-profits. The money has to come from somewhere.
This is nothing new. This happens dozens (hundreds?) of times a year. A story surfaces, whether it was a mistake or actual disinformation, and is exploited by those stand to gain from spreading. It's beaten to death those first couple of weeks, repeated to the point that people believe it as fact. Then once it's been forgotten details come to light that completely refute the original claims or sometimes simply strips the blatant sensationalism of the original reporting. The correction is always released quietly and easily missed. Of course, by that point the damage is done and there's no going back.
I see evidence of this all the time. And of course the average joe, who doesn't have the time or inclination to follow up on every shred of news, and too often doesn't want to believe something that violates his worldview, becomes an unwitting pawn continuing to spread falsehoods. Hell, I've seen it happen on Slashdot many times.
Unfortunately, there's not a whole lot that can be done about it beyond calling these people out I guess.
It's unreal. The French government needs to raise the retirement age to, a still absurdly young, 62. They've been cutting healthcare coverage and benefits for years now. I had family members who've had to get private insurance to augment what the government has cut. But apparently they have the means to do something as stupid as subsidize music downloads.
There are all the absurd subsidies to a wide variety of industries. The government cut the work week back but forced companies to maintain current salaries with the delusion this would somehow increase jobs. They made it excessively difficult to fire employees, particularly college graduates, in the hope of providing job security and instead increased unemployment. The French government, and quite a few other European governments along with them, have created this expectation of handouts amongst their citizens. They can't make necessary cuts now because the unions all take to the streets and shut down the nation. But it seems like for every sensible measure there are several stupid ones which offset it.
This isn't an inherent failing of socialism. It's socialism applied stupidly. I'd argue it's quite difficult to keep a socialist nation from spiraling out of control with excessive handouts but the system certainly has some benefits.
People here seem to be forgetting that the American standard for conservative is quite different from what is considered conservative in Europe. A conservative in Europe is still heavily socialist. Although, the US is a lot more socialist than Americans seem to realize. A corporate handout is just as socialist as national healthcare.
Actually, the big problem I've been seeing is the theft of copper pipes from foreclosed and abandoned homes. I know someone who's a real estate agent and the impression I've gotten, in the city where I live, is that any home on the market, not being lived in, gets it's copper stolen within a few months. In some cases they'll even rip up walls to get at the pipe.
Recently, he went to look over a home a client was about to put an offer on. He discovers a few inches of water in the basement and with more gushing into the basement from a broken pipe. It turns out someone had broken in and taken all the piping they could. Needless to say the client no longer wanted the house.
This has been having quite an impact on real estate prices and there's not a whole lot that can be done to fight it. The pathetic part here is that the thieves aren't earning a whole lot of money for all the trouble they go through to get at the copper. But then, they have to be rather stupid to resort to this sort of thing. They could earn more working a minimum wage job. They're incapable of holding down a job because they can't stand being told what to do. And in the scheme of things stealing copper seems like a relatively benign crime.
If these people weren't so stupid they wouldn't be stealing copper. They'd earn more if they just took a job at McDonalds. Unfortunately, more often than not these people don't want someone telling them what to do, so they're incapable of holding down a proper job.
Somewhat off topic, but why does this story have Blade Runner as a tag? I don't recall the novel or movie being much about biotechnology. Weren't they all androids?
A more appropriate reference would be Windup Girl which is extremely relevant to the subject matter.
Given that the majority of consumers have made the switch to HDTVs in the past couple of years, especially after the switch over to digital signals is it really any surprise? And on top of that, who want's to watch tv with a pair of stupid, expensive glasses especially given that there's little out there that takes advantage of the technology. This has been one of the more blatant gimmicks dumped on the consumer.
What I find surprising is that companies seem to have loads of disposable income. They seem to think that the average person is willing to spend a good $800 every couple of years to replace a perfectly good television. I'd venture to say that most consumers buy a tv with the same expectation they've always had, which is that they're going to keep the thing as long as it still works. All sorts of consumer electronics are competing for everyone's hard-earned money: DVD/Blu-ray players, televisions, game consoles, mobile phones, computers, tablet PCs and a multitude of other toys. Just because people are willing to throw away $150-$300 every year or two on a new mobile phone doesn't mean that they're automatically prepared to do the same with pricier consumer electronics.
Corporate executives seem to be delusional and have far, far too much faith in marketing. They seem to believe that if you market something well enough that people will lose all common sense and go out and waste money on something. All you need to do is convince them they want it. It works sometimes, but only to a limited degree. This is especially absurd given the state of the global economy. They're totally detached from reality.
Well, the problem isn't that they're offering these TVs. The problem is that it seems they expected the TVs would would sell in significant numbers.
I honestly have a hard time seeing how anyone can be surprised by their bill, outright of a blatant mistake on the part of the carrier. I don't track my calls and text messaging meticulously but I do have a general sense of my load. If I happen to overdo it one month with text messages I'm not surprised when the bill comes and I owe a bit more than usual.
The fundamental problem I have is that carriers love to obfuscate everything. They advertise one price, then once you get sorting through all the charges tacked on top you're greeted to a substantially higher enough. The solution is simple. Prohibit companies from advertising prices that don't include taxes and other assorted fees. And in clear language and large type list what overages are going to cost. Actually, the practice of obfuscation should be banned across the board for all companies, because the problem doesn't only exist with mobile phone companies.
That way you don't need to complicate the matter with obnoxious reminders. Everything was stated clearly when you signed up. If you can't be bothered to read it's your own damn fault.
I honestly don't see how this will truly help. Most of those irresponsible enough to constantly run overcharges will likely continue to do so even with the reminders. They'll get the reminder and ignore it, deciding that they can deal with the extra little they're going to pay. Except that they'll just probably just keep doing this and end up right back where they started, with substantial overcharges.
One thing I'd like to see done is eliminating charges for text messages. It's outrageous what we're being charged for something that costs the carriers virtually nothing.
Using a Earth-orbiting space station is exactly what von Braun recommended sixty years ago before you idiots turned it into a mad dash to "beat the commies".
Who, me?
I'd say we've got a hell of a lot to show for the space program. In an ideal world we should all be working together, but the fact is that humans are very competitive creatures. Without the one-upmanship between the Americans and Soviets it's very likely would have all done far, far less.
Perhaps more recently that's been the case. But traditional samurai hard-asses sure as hell don't look like pretty boys. And Japanese gangsters only in recent decades have been adopting the more effeminate styles. A lot of it is due to foreign influences, particularly Europe. The west does have the metrosexual.
GM had this car in development well before the government bailed them out. And no, it's not an economy car just like the Prius isn't an economy car. An economy car is something like an Aveo or a Yaris. Yes, a Prius starts out at a relatively cheap range, about $23k, but add some options and you're easily pushing $30k, way outside what anyone would consider economy.
If anyone were serious about economy they'd be buying cars with small displacements and ideally running on diesel. The catch is that such small engines don't even exist in the US. 1-liter to 1.4 liter engines are common in Europe and virtually non-existent in the US.
It's disappointing to learn that the car isn't what it was initially billed to be, but after the initial uproar in the media it seems that the car does do what was promised but the gasoline engine can also motivate the car when necessary. That's still neat and is a decent leap in technology over the Prius. Of course, it also sounds quite complex and it does raise concerns about reliability. One of the big reasons why Japanese can make such reliable cars, well Honda and Toyota specifically, is because they tend to keep things simple.
In light of the technology the price isn't unreasonable. Even after tax rebates the Nissan Leaf will probably still be less expensive, but you're also compromising. Range is significantly limited over a regular car and it's still 8 hours to recharge the batteries on 220v. You can install a rapid recharge unit, which reduces that time down to 30 minutes, but then you're looking at $15k or so for the unit and who knows what installation will cost.
We'll see how this car turns out. But unfortunately it looks like the media might end up killing this car with all the negative press. If nothing else, GM had better hope the car is reliable because if it's not there's no way in hell they'll be able to recover from the mess.
I predict that eliminating anonymous commenting will bring an end to commenting in general. Sure, there will be a handful of people who will still be compelled to comment, but most wont venture. It's no different than most people, when in public, avoiding sensitive subjects. The people who will comment will more likely be those who already are compelled to post political commentary on Facebook.
Then there's the whole other issue of having your name plastered on every site you post comments.
The big problem is that the vast majority of people are nowhere near as well informed as they'd like to believe they are. There's an interesting problem society faces today: people know a little about a lot of things. We're probably exposed to more information than we've ever faced before. But it's all disseminated in bite-sized chunks that offer little to no substance. So we're aware of many things without really understand the complexities behind them. And I haven't even gotten into the issue cherry picking and bias. Compound these problems with the fact that humans tend to polarize everything. It's all or nothing.
So we have millions of misinformed, occasionally ignorant but very passionate people commenting on everything. And far too often, because they're incapable of cogent arguments the proceedings devolve into irrational name-calling. Of course, this is all facilitated by the fact that generally these interactions are anonymous.
Slashdot offers the best solution I've seen so far on any site. That said, it's dependent on three few factors: 1) The maturity and knowledge level of those posting. 2) That the site isn't heavily dominated by a particular mindset. All the moderation in the world wont help if group think takes over. 3) There's some level of responsible oversight by those running the site.
It may just be that news sites don't make for the best discussion forums anyway. Discussion forums might be better left to sites like Slashdot where there's a more specific draw.
The Libertarian bent here has been chilling too - I think it's the economy and seeing Mr. Rand or drank the Randian Cool-Aide and went back for seconds Alan Greenspan and others admitting that deregulation wasn't such a god idea.
Libertarian bent? I still see signatures from time to time which are libertarian. But as long as I've been on Slashdot the site has had a decidedly liberal bent. It's subtle and it's not uncommon to find opposing viewpoints. But I'd say that's because the people posting regularly tend to be a bit more mature and are more willing to actually discuss an issue as opposed to simply bashing the other person.
I'd say the liberal slant reached it's height during the last presidential campaign and it persisted for sometime afterward. Some were quite quick to tamp down dissenting views. My posts range from getting modded rather decently to being disregarded and buried under other posts. But during that time I was routinely getting posts modded as troll. For a couple of weeks every couple of posts was getting modded as troll for even having a hint of a more conservative viewpoint. I generally stopped visiting Slashdot for a month or two in frustration.
I felt it was quite an achievement, however, that at least once I managed to get two separate posts, within the same discussion, modded insightful/interesting and troll.
And I can't think of any time when Slashdot has ever been decidedly pro-Apple. Perhaps I haven't been around long enough.
Bees aren't the only pollinating insects. Certain kinds of flies also do a decent job. Many plants are also self-pollinating, to one extent or another. And there's always the option of doing it manually.
That said, bees are extremely vital and their disappearance is cause for serious concern.
This is really nothing new for Apple. Every few years they release a product that has a number of fairly absurd issues they should have caught sooner. This isn't the first iPhone/iPod that's been prone to scratching, but the problems go back well beyond that. Remember the stupid puck-shaped mouse?
Certainly, one of the problems they face now is that Apple has moved far beyond being a niche. In years past they could get away with more because their core base was quite forgiving. But it also seems that the number of issues seem to be growing. I suppose it's Apple's obsession with not compromising on aesthetics, being stubborn about their way of doing things and their experimentation with new materials and manufacturing processes.
The funny think is that the glass used on the iPhone was trumpeted as being amazingly scratch-resistant. I recall reading a story on that glass. I don't recall how much better it was than regular glass, but even 25% more resistance might not translate into a whole lot under actual use.
There are already construction methods for buildings which resemble assembly lines. They involve a construction module that rises with the building. I recall reading of a Japanese company which developed a process, if I recall correctly, where the building is raised as a new floor is built underneath. My memory is vague on that and I can't find a link.
But the point is that there already numerous efficient processes for building construction without having to complicate things by using airlifting.
The more I think about the idea the less I see a real use for it. Any compact structure that needs to be placed somewhere hard to reach can almost certainly be carried by helicopter. It's not like a massive building complex would be placed on a mountain top anyway. For most other locations, simply send parts via land, sea or air and build on the spot.
First of all, books in these countries are cheap. Student's aren't lugging around the hard cover, full-color, overpriced text books Americans get. They're printed in black and white, on ultra cheap newsprint. And for the dedicated student there's always access to a library, well, not always, but the option exists for some. But the most important thing here is that a book doesn't require electricity.
How many parents, in third world nations, are going to want their kids bringing home a computer that needs to be recharged? Electricity costs money and that's something many of these people lack. Supposedly the OLPC had a manual crank for charging it's batteries, but I'd be curious to know how much of a charge that could actually provide. And let's not get into the issue of localizing these devices and providing all the content they're going to need. What's the point of investing in developing these devices if they're only useful in 2 or 3 classes? The point is it's too much work and expense when a far simpler solution is to simply provide the schools with a computer lab.
You can buy a $100 desktop now and it will be more than adequate for these students' needs. And consider the situation: why do these students need computers? I'd argue it's not to improve their education, but provide them with important computer skills which may be valuable when they go out into the working world. Perhaps a side-benefit is to be exposed to a larger world, provided they have internet connection; that's another limitation with the OLPC. As much as people may despise Microsoft, if work environments use Windows extensively, these students are better served being exposed to computers in that environment. I fully understand the implications of chaining people to a particular OS, but I'm approaching this from a pragmatic standpoint: what will be most helpful to these students?
The OLPC is a noble idea. But it's a complicated answer to a problem that much has better solutions. The organization had an annual budget of $12 million, down to $5 million now. I'd love to know how much has been dumped into developing the computer, and how much more will be spent on this new version. All that money could have just gone to buying cheap PCs for these schools and there almost certainly would have been many millions more left to spend on improving these schools and building new ones.
Barely a peep in the media doesn't mean people aren't intrigued. I'm personally very interested in Playstation Move and am seriously considering picking it up for the holidays. If I owned an Xbox360 I'd be considering their option. Judging from what I've seen, and my experience with the Wii, it looks like it could be a lot of fun. And isn't that really all that matters?
This isn't something that's going to pay off overnight. It's something that needs to be built on. I won't go so far as to suggest that it's the future of gaming, because that's absurd. But certainly, we're looking at the beginnings of a very significant genre of gaming. It would have been a massive mistake if Microsoft hadn't developed Kinect.
Is this really a new theory? Or is this a new interpretation of an existing theory.
I recently read 2001, finally, and I'm fairly certain Arthur C. Clarke mentions Saturn's rings having been formed due to the destruction of a moon. He's not a scientist, but I'm fairly certain he got the idea from scientific circles.
Why would it complicate your life? If you get obsessed with it I suppose it would.
I held off for some time but finally gave in because I got an invite from a friend overseas and decided this would be a convenient way to stay in touch. I've rekindled relationships with a few long lost friends. Nothing profound but it's nice to be in touch with people I haven't seen in a while. Not many, I'll admit; I ignore the vast majority of people on the list. It's simply another tool for facilitating communication.
Fortunately, I don't have any people on my list who are compelled to make political posts. The worst I get are the usual inanities; idiotic comments that make no sense to anyone but those in the know and stupid inspirational messages that pretend to have figured out the meaning of life where countless philosophers over the last few millennia could not. Whenever the frequency of dump posts rises above my ability to tolerate them I simply block that individual's posts.
A big peeve of mine are those who simply friend people to grow their list, like there's a prize for having a huge number of friends. I had a classmate I hadn't really seen since elementary school friend a cousin of mine he had never met and who's living somewhere in Europe. It's ridiculous, but then it's nothing to get worked up about.
I will visit on a regular basis, but I don't post much at all. If Facebook has had any impact at all, I would have to admit it's been more positive than negative. Somehow I feel dirty admitting that, but it's the truth.
From an industrial design standpoint, I love the mouse. It's not nearly as expensive as I expected either and it seems to have decent reviews on Amazon. I do have concerns about long-term reliability, about the various parts loosening up over time, and cleaning out dust.
Another issue I see is that despite all the adjustment the mouse seems designed around the palm grip. It would be neat if it's range of adjustment allowed it to transition from a craw grip to palm. I'm also curious to know how much it weighs, although I assume can't be much worse than a mouse loaded with 2 AA batteries.
It's definitely a neat mouse otherwise but my inclination, if you're shopping for a new mouse, to do a bit of research and find something that fits how you use mice. I spent a few weeks before I settled on mine, a Logitech Anywhere MX. I was tired of dealing with Apple's Mighty Mouse and it's failing trackballs. The Magic Mouse was out of the question, sharp edges and too low a profile; as far as I was concerned it was a step backwards regardless of the fancy features. Initially I had considered some of the bulkier Logitech mice. Eventually I found some useful information regarding the claw grip vs palm grip, realized (more like reminded of the fact) that I use the claw grip and decided to avoid desktop mice. For some reason the vast majority of those are designed for the palm grip. Plenty of fondling of mice in stores confirmed this and helped narrow down my selection.
I suppose some will consider that overkill. But I use the mouse all day long. I'm quite happy with this one, about the only complaint I have is that it's a bit heavy. I guess a good reason to get a Rat 7 would be to have an interesting conversation piece.
The problem is that companies like Google and HTC bend to the will of the carriers. They openly permit garbage on these phones. The irony here is that they're decimating their own brands this way.
The carriers themselves have this desperate hope that consumers will accept their walled garden as willingly as they accept they accept Apple's. The problem is that their garden is overrun with weeds and has an overflowing outhouse sitting right there as a centerpiece. People tolerate, even embrace Apple's practices because there's a good level of quality and consistency. A lot of money and effort is invested in maintaining this quality. These other carriers, however, cut corners everywhere they can and put no effort whatsoever into maintaining quality. All they want to do is keep consumers locked in forcibly. They're deluded into believing they can offer something competitive with Apple's app store. They might drive away that consumer at some point, but for now they've got them trapped.
This is one of the consequences of having separate companies develop the OS and the device. Beyond the problem of countless variations of the same basic thing, a user experience that isn't seamlessly integrated these companies simply don't have the leverage Apple enjoys.
This is not to say that I believe that the iPhone reflects some wonderland of technology but simply that the iPhone and the app store have become the benchmark.
The problem with technology is that people don't just sit down and decide, "We're going to build this network of satellites that beam signals to Earth where these little devices will use those signals to determine where they are. And we're also going to to have these neat little touch screens that facilitate usability and we're going to have to put together detailed maps and store them electronically."
There are tons of advancements that went into those GPS devices. Many of those advancements are fed others, but many grew out of disparate avenues of research. Some were thanks to the space program, some university research, others developed in corporations and many more developed for military applications.
The point is, we don't know where future technologies will grow out of. It isn't simply a matter of putting our minds to it. Simply throwing money at some vague idea doesn't necessarily result in anything meaningful. The vast majority of technological advancements grow out of real needs, even if it's simply to improve the functionality of an existing piece of hardware.
Even if we decided to completely abandon military spending we wouldn't be able to do it because so many countries around the world depend on American military might. They have the luxury of spending so little on their own militaries because they know that when push comes to shove the US will be there for them.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't deal with many non-profits do you? Even middle-management at many non-profits earn a very healthy income, easily on par with anything the corporate world offers. From the perspective of employees these non-profits are for-profit entities.
That said, some of those executives you describe are directly responsible for the existence of non-profits. The money has to come from somewhere.
This is nothing new. This happens dozens (hundreds?) of times a year. A story surfaces, whether it was a mistake or actual disinformation, and is exploited by those stand to gain from spreading. It's beaten to death those first couple of weeks, repeated to the point that people believe it as fact. Then once it's been forgotten details come to light that completely refute the original claims or sometimes simply strips the blatant sensationalism of the original reporting. The correction is always released quietly and easily missed. Of course, by that point the damage is done and there's no going back.
I see evidence of this all the time. And of course the average joe, who doesn't have the time or inclination to follow up on every shred of news, and too often doesn't want to believe something that violates his worldview, becomes an unwitting pawn continuing to spread falsehoods. Hell, I've seen it happen on Slashdot many times.
Unfortunately, there's not a whole lot that can be done about it beyond calling these people out I guess.
It's unreal. The French government needs to raise the retirement age to, a still absurdly young, 62. They've been cutting healthcare coverage and benefits for years now. I had family members who've had to get private insurance to augment what the government has cut. But apparently they have the means to do something as stupid as subsidize music downloads.
There are all the absurd subsidies to a wide variety of industries. The government cut the work week back but forced companies to maintain current salaries with the delusion this would somehow increase jobs. They made it excessively difficult to fire employees, particularly college graduates, in the hope of providing job security and instead increased unemployment. The French government, and quite a few other European governments along with them, have created this expectation of handouts amongst their citizens. They can't make necessary cuts now because the unions all take to the streets and shut down the nation. But it seems like for every sensible measure there are several stupid ones which offset it.
This isn't an inherent failing of socialism. It's socialism applied stupidly. I'd argue it's quite difficult to keep a socialist nation from spiraling out of control with excessive handouts but the system certainly has some benefits.
People here seem to be forgetting that the American standard for conservative is quite different from what is considered conservative in Europe. A conservative in Europe is still heavily socialist. Although, the US is a lot more socialist than Americans seem to realize. A corporate handout is just as socialist as national healthcare.
Actually, the big problem I've been seeing is the theft of copper pipes from foreclosed and abandoned homes. I know someone who's a real estate agent and the impression I've gotten, in the city where I live, is that any home on the market, not being lived in, gets it's copper stolen within a few months. In some cases they'll even rip up walls to get at the pipe.
Recently, he went to look over a home a client was about to put an offer on. He discovers a few inches of water in the basement and with more gushing into the basement from a broken pipe. It turns out someone had broken in and taken all the piping they could. Needless to say the client no longer wanted the house.
This has been having quite an impact on real estate prices and there's not a whole lot that can be done to fight it. The pathetic part here is that the thieves aren't earning a whole lot of money for all the trouble they go through to get at the copper. But then, they have to be rather stupid to resort to this sort of thing. They could earn more working a minimum wage job. They're incapable of holding down a job because they can't stand being told what to do. And in the scheme of things stealing copper seems like a relatively benign crime.
If these people weren't so stupid they wouldn't be stealing copper. They'd earn more if they just took a job at McDonalds. Unfortunately, more often than not these people don't want someone telling them what to do, so they're incapable of holding down a proper job.
Somewhat off topic, but why does this story have Blade Runner as a tag? I don't recall the novel or movie being much about biotechnology. Weren't they all androids?
A more appropriate reference would be Windup Girl which is extremely relevant to the subject matter.
A lagomorph sounds like something that will burst out of your chest and requires a team of space marines to take down.
Given that the majority of consumers have made the switch to HDTVs in the past couple of years, especially after the switch over to digital signals is it really any surprise? And on top of that, who want's to watch tv with a pair of stupid, expensive glasses especially given that there's little out there that takes advantage of the technology. This has been one of the more blatant gimmicks dumped on the consumer.
What I find surprising is that companies seem to have loads of disposable income. They seem to think that the average person is willing to spend a good $800 every couple of years to replace a perfectly good television. I'd venture to say that most consumers buy a tv with the same expectation they've always had, which is that they're going to keep the thing as long as it still works. All sorts of consumer electronics are competing for everyone's hard-earned money: DVD/Blu-ray players, televisions, game consoles, mobile phones, computers, tablet PCs and a multitude of other toys. Just because people are willing to throw away $150-$300 every year or two on a new mobile phone doesn't mean that they're automatically prepared to do the same with pricier consumer electronics.
Corporate executives seem to be delusional and have far, far too much faith in marketing. They seem to believe that if you market something well enough that people will lose all common sense and go out and waste money on something. All you need to do is convince them they want it. It works sometimes, but only to a limited degree. This is especially absurd given the state of the global economy. They're totally detached from reality.
Well, the problem isn't that they're offering these TVs. The problem is that it seems they expected the TVs would would sell in significant numbers.
I honestly have a hard time seeing how anyone can be surprised by their bill, outright of a blatant mistake on the part of the carrier. I don't track my calls and text messaging meticulously but I do have a general sense of my load. If I happen to overdo it one month with text messages I'm not surprised when the bill comes and I owe a bit more than usual.
The fundamental problem I have is that carriers love to obfuscate everything. They advertise one price, then once you get sorting through all the charges tacked on top you're greeted to a substantially higher enough. The solution is simple. Prohibit companies from advertising prices that don't include taxes and other assorted fees. And in clear language and large type list what overages are going to cost. Actually, the practice of obfuscation should be banned across the board for all companies, because the problem doesn't only exist with mobile phone companies.
That way you don't need to complicate the matter with obnoxious reminders. Everything was stated clearly when you signed up. If you can't be bothered to read it's your own damn fault.
I honestly don't see how this will truly help. Most of those irresponsible enough to constantly run overcharges will likely continue to do so even with the reminders. They'll get the reminder and ignore it, deciding that they can deal with the extra little they're going to pay. Except that they'll just probably just keep doing this and end up right back where they started, with substantial overcharges.
One thing I'd like to see done is eliminating charges for text messages. It's outrageous what we're being charged for something that costs the carriers virtually nothing.
But if it's wrapped in a protector how are you supposed to enjoy the beauty of the industrial design?
Of course, my feeling is that if you can't design an attractive product that is also durable then you're not a particularly good designer.
Who, me?
I'd say we've got a hell of a lot to show for the space program. In an ideal world we should all be working together, but the fact is that humans are very competitive creatures. Without the one-upmanship between the Americans and Soviets it's very likely would have all done far, far less.
Perhaps more recently that's been the case. But traditional samurai hard-asses sure as hell don't look like pretty boys. And Japanese gangsters only in recent decades have been adopting the more effeminate styles. A lot of it is due to foreign influences, particularly Europe. The west does have the metrosexual.
GM had this car in development well before the government bailed them out. And no, it's not an economy car just like the Prius isn't an economy car. An economy car is something like an Aveo or a Yaris. Yes, a Prius starts out at a relatively cheap range, about $23k, but add some options and you're easily pushing $30k, way outside what anyone would consider economy.
If anyone were serious about economy they'd be buying cars with small displacements and ideally running on diesel. The catch is that such small engines don't even exist in the US. 1-liter to 1.4 liter engines are common in Europe and virtually non-existent in the US.
It's disappointing to learn that the car isn't what it was initially billed to be, but after the initial uproar in the media it seems that the car does do what was promised but the gasoline engine can also motivate the car when necessary. That's still neat and is a decent leap in technology over the Prius. Of course, it also sounds quite complex and it does raise concerns about reliability. One of the big reasons why Japanese can make such reliable cars, well Honda and Toyota specifically, is because they tend to keep things simple.
In light of the technology the price isn't unreasonable. Even after tax rebates the Nissan Leaf will probably still be less expensive, but you're also compromising. Range is significantly limited over a regular car and it's still 8 hours to recharge the batteries on 220v. You can install a rapid recharge unit, which reduces that time down to 30 minutes, but then you're looking at $15k or so for the unit and who knows what installation will cost.
We'll see how this car turns out. But unfortunately it looks like the media might end up killing this car with all the negative press. If nothing else, GM had better hope the car is reliable because if it's not there's no way in hell they'll be able to recover from the mess.
I predict that eliminating anonymous commenting will bring an end to commenting in general. Sure, there will be a handful of people who will still be compelled to comment, but most wont venture. It's no different than most people, when in public, avoiding sensitive subjects. The people who will comment will more likely be those who already are compelled to post political commentary on Facebook.
Then there's the whole other issue of having your name plastered on every site you post comments.
The big problem is that the vast majority of people are nowhere near as well informed as they'd like to believe they are. There's an interesting problem society faces today: people know a little about a lot of things. We're probably exposed to more information than we've ever faced before. But it's all disseminated in bite-sized chunks that offer little to no substance. So we're aware of many things without really understand the complexities behind them. And I haven't even gotten into the issue cherry picking and bias. Compound these problems with the fact that humans tend to polarize everything. It's all or nothing.
So we have millions of misinformed, occasionally ignorant but very passionate people commenting on everything. And far too often, because they're incapable of cogent arguments the proceedings devolve into irrational name-calling. Of course, this is all facilitated by the fact that generally these interactions are anonymous.
Slashdot offers the best solution I've seen so far on any site. That said, it's dependent on three few factors:
1) The maturity and knowledge level of those posting.
2) That the site isn't heavily dominated by a particular mindset. All the moderation in the world wont help if group think takes over.
3) There's some level of responsible oversight by those running the site.
It may just be that news sites don't make for the best discussion forums anyway. Discussion forums might be better left to sites like Slashdot where there's a more specific draw.
Libertarian bent? I still see signatures from time to time which are libertarian. But as long as I've been on Slashdot the site has had a decidedly liberal bent. It's subtle and it's not uncommon to find opposing viewpoints. But I'd say that's because the people posting regularly tend to be a bit more mature and are more willing to actually discuss an issue as opposed to simply bashing the other person.
I'd say the liberal slant reached it's height during the last presidential campaign and it persisted for sometime afterward. Some were quite quick to tamp down dissenting views. My posts range from getting modded rather decently to being disregarded and buried under other posts. But during that time I was routinely getting posts modded as troll. For a couple of weeks every couple of posts was getting modded as troll for even having a hint of a more conservative viewpoint. I generally stopped visiting Slashdot for a month or two in frustration.
I felt it was quite an achievement, however, that at least once I managed to get two separate posts, within the same discussion, modded insightful/interesting and troll.
And I can't think of any time when Slashdot has ever been decidedly pro-Apple. Perhaps I haven't been around long enough.
Bees aren't the only pollinating insects. Certain kinds of flies also do a decent job. Many plants are also self-pollinating, to one extent or another. And there's always the option of doing it manually.
That said, bees are extremely vital and their disappearance is cause for serious concern.
This is really nothing new for Apple. Every few years they release a product that has a number of fairly absurd issues they should have caught sooner. This isn't the first iPhone/iPod that's been prone to scratching, but the problems go back well beyond that. Remember the stupid puck-shaped mouse?
Certainly, one of the problems they face now is that Apple has moved far beyond being a niche. In years past they could get away with more because their core base was quite forgiving. But it also seems that the number of issues seem to be growing. I suppose it's Apple's obsession with not compromising on aesthetics, being stubborn about their way of doing things and their experimentation with new materials and manufacturing processes.
The funny think is that the glass used on the iPhone was trumpeted as being amazingly scratch-resistant. I recall reading a story on that glass. I don't recall how much better it was than regular glass, but even 25% more resistance might not translate into a whole lot under actual use.
There are already construction methods for buildings which resemble assembly lines. They involve a construction module that rises with the building. I recall reading of a Japanese company which developed a process, if I recall correctly, where the building is raised as a new floor is built underneath. My memory is vague on that and I can't find a link.
But the point is that there already numerous efficient processes for building construction without having to complicate things by using airlifting.
The more I think about the idea the less I see a real use for it. Any compact structure that needs to be placed somewhere hard to reach can almost certainly be carried by helicopter. It's not like a massive building complex would be placed on a mountain top anyway. For most other locations, simply send parts via land, sea or air and build on the spot.
The OLPC is a stupid idea. Plain and simple.
First of all, books in these countries are cheap. Student's aren't lugging around the hard cover, full-color, overpriced text books Americans get. They're printed in black and white, on ultra cheap newsprint. And for the dedicated student there's always access to a library, well, not always, but the option exists for some. But the most important thing here is that a book doesn't require electricity.
How many parents, in third world nations, are going to want their kids bringing home a computer that needs to be recharged? Electricity costs money and that's something many of these people lack. Supposedly the OLPC had a manual crank for charging it's batteries, but I'd be curious to know how much of a charge that could actually provide. And let's not get into the issue of localizing these devices and providing all the content they're going to need. What's the point of investing in developing these devices if they're only useful in 2 or 3 classes? The point is it's too much work and expense when a far simpler solution is to simply provide the schools with a computer lab.
You can buy a $100 desktop now and it will be more than adequate for these students' needs. And consider the situation: why do these students need computers? I'd argue it's not to improve their education, but provide them with important computer skills which may be valuable when they go out into the working world. Perhaps a side-benefit is to be exposed to a larger world, provided they have internet connection; that's another limitation with the OLPC. As much as people may despise Microsoft, if work environments use Windows extensively, these students are better served being exposed to computers in that environment. I fully understand the implications of chaining people to a particular OS, but I'm approaching this from a pragmatic standpoint: what will be most helpful to these students?
The OLPC is a noble idea. But it's a complicated answer to a problem that much has better solutions. The organization had an annual budget of $12 million, down to $5 million now. I'd love to know how much has been dumped into developing the computer, and how much more will be spent on this new version. All that money could have just gone to buying cheap PCs for these schools and there almost certainly would have been many millions more left to spend on improving these schools and building new ones.
Barely a peep in the media doesn't mean people aren't intrigued. I'm personally very interested in Playstation Move and am seriously considering picking it up for the holidays. If I owned an Xbox360 I'd be considering their option. Judging from what I've seen, and my experience with the Wii, it looks like it could be a lot of fun. And isn't that really all that matters?
This isn't something that's going to pay off overnight. It's something that needs to be built on. I won't go so far as to suggest that it's the future of gaming, because that's absurd. But certainly, we're looking at the beginnings of a very significant genre of gaming. It would have been a massive mistake if Microsoft hadn't developed Kinect.
Is this really a new theory? Or is this a new interpretation of an existing theory.
I recently read 2001, finally, and I'm fairly certain Arthur C. Clarke mentions Saturn's rings having been formed due to the destruction of a moon. He's not a scientist, but I'm fairly certain he got the idea from scientific circles.
Why would it complicate your life? If you get obsessed with it I suppose it would.
I held off for some time but finally gave in because I got an invite from a friend overseas and decided this would be a convenient way to stay in touch. I've rekindled relationships with a few long lost friends. Nothing profound but it's nice to be in touch with people I haven't seen in a while. Not many, I'll admit; I ignore the vast majority of people on the list. It's simply another tool for facilitating communication.
Fortunately, I don't have any people on my list who are compelled to make political posts. The worst I get are the usual inanities; idiotic comments that make no sense to anyone but those in the know and stupid inspirational messages that pretend to have figured out the meaning of life where countless philosophers over the last few millennia could not. Whenever the frequency of dump posts rises above my ability to tolerate them I simply block that individual's posts.
A big peeve of mine are those who simply friend people to grow their list, like there's a prize for having a huge number of friends. I had a classmate I hadn't really seen since elementary school friend a cousin of mine he had never met and who's living somewhere in Europe. It's ridiculous, but then it's nothing to get worked up about.
I will visit on a regular basis, but I don't post much at all. If Facebook has had any impact at all, I would have to admit it's been more positive than negative. Somehow I feel dirty admitting that, but it's the truth.
From an industrial design standpoint, I love the mouse. It's not nearly as expensive as I expected either and it seems to have decent reviews on Amazon. I do have concerns about long-term reliability, about the various parts loosening up over time, and cleaning out dust.
Another issue I see is that despite all the adjustment the mouse seems designed around the palm grip. It would be neat if it's range of adjustment allowed it to transition from a craw grip to palm. I'm also curious to know how much it weighs, although I assume can't be much worse than a mouse loaded with 2 AA batteries.
It's definitely a neat mouse otherwise but my inclination, if you're shopping for a new mouse, to do a bit of research and find something that fits how you use mice. I spent a few weeks before I settled on mine, a Logitech Anywhere MX. I was tired of dealing with Apple's Mighty Mouse and it's failing trackballs. The Magic Mouse was out of the question, sharp edges and too low a profile; as far as I was concerned it was a step backwards regardless of the fancy features. Initially I had considered some of the bulkier Logitech mice. Eventually I found some useful information regarding the claw grip vs palm grip, realized (more like reminded of the fact) that I use the claw grip and decided to avoid desktop mice. For some reason the vast majority of those are designed for the palm grip. Plenty of fondling of mice in stores confirmed this and helped narrow down my selection.
I suppose some will consider that overkill. But I use the mouse all day long. I'm quite happy with this one, about the only complaint I have is that it's a bit heavy. I guess a good reason to get a Rat 7 would be to have an interesting conversation piece.
The problem is that companies like Google and HTC bend to the will of the carriers. They openly permit garbage on these phones. The irony here is that they're decimating their own brands this way.
The carriers themselves have this desperate hope that consumers will accept their walled garden as willingly as they accept they accept Apple's. The problem is that their garden is overrun with weeds and has an overflowing outhouse sitting right there as a centerpiece. People tolerate, even embrace Apple's practices because there's a good level of quality and consistency. A lot of money and effort is invested in maintaining this quality. These other carriers, however, cut corners everywhere they can and put no effort whatsoever into maintaining quality. All they want to do is keep consumers locked in forcibly. They're deluded into believing they can offer something competitive with Apple's app store. They might drive away that consumer at some point, but for now they've got them trapped.
This is one of the consequences of having separate companies develop the OS and the device. Beyond the problem of countless variations of the same basic thing, a user experience that isn't seamlessly integrated these companies simply don't have the leverage Apple enjoys.
This is not to say that I believe that the iPhone reflects some wonderland of technology but simply that the iPhone and the app store have become the benchmark.
The problem with technology is that people don't just sit down and decide, "We're going to build this network of satellites that beam signals to Earth where these little devices will use those signals to determine where they are. And we're also going to to have these neat little touch screens that facilitate usability and we're going to have to put together detailed maps and store them electronically."
There are tons of advancements that went into those GPS devices. Many of those advancements are fed others, but many grew out of disparate avenues of research. Some were thanks to the space program, some university research, others developed in corporations and many more developed for military applications.
The point is, we don't know where future technologies will grow out of. It isn't simply a matter of putting our minds to it. Simply throwing money at some vague idea doesn't necessarily result in anything meaningful. The vast majority of technological advancements grow out of real needs, even if it's simply to improve the functionality of an existing piece of hardware.
Even if we decided to completely abandon military spending we wouldn't be able to do it because so many countries around the world depend on American military might. They have the luxury of spending so little on their own militaries because they know that when push comes to shove the US will be there for them.