I've always wondered why they didn't do something like that. You would want the water on the back of the cells though so it doesn't absorb any of the incident energy.
Funny- have you ever participated in a focus group for things you would consider yourself somewhat of an expert, or at least in the 80th percentile?
Those groups are actually pretty interesting. I don't know how to pull it off with consumer electronics, but in my work we had a really great analysis of a company's expansion strategy, and had a good knock-down, build up session.
Contrast that with a few of the crap focus groups I was at- attempting to normalize data across 100 different participants.
A good focus group is a lot like a design charet, where people can add in things that someone who has been in the trenches too long might miss.
Lumens is actually the measure of total output; candela (or candlepower) is the unit for luminous intensity.
It's been quite a long time since being quoted luminous efficacy, but I thought an incandescent bulb was at 4 lm/w, halogen at 4 lm/w, flourescent and HID at around 16-20 lm/w.
I think the main problem with the LED headlights/flashlights is that the optics are crap, and they aren't really trying to compete with the established incandescent/halogen systems yet.
Productivity after hours is a function of what type of work you are doing. If you spend most of the day being distracted every 30 minutes by a phone call that must be answered, it is quite hard to write a report-- getting two hours undisturbed on the train or after dinner can be a significant boost.
BUT, if the extra time is constrained by the same factors as the normal day, there will be no productivity gain.
The same is true for manual/trade labor - you only get a week's worth of work out of people, no matter how many hours you put in, if it is a long-term situation.
The stupidity of the wireless companies is precisely why I like the Nokia 770- you can de-couple your PDA from the cell phone, and more importantly the cell phone companies.
I am surprised that I haven't found any device that is just a portable gprs bluetooth gateway- no screen, no voice, no keypad. Hell, who actually even needs a phone number then...
It's harder to keep the cell providers on their toes in the US because there aren't any multi-protocol phones with "universal" sim cards, but elsewhere it is nice to get the phone you want (for about the same price and without a contract), and switch between pre-pay providers at will.
Technically, the point of outsourcing is to gain a competitive advantage, usually by focusing on core competencies. The competitive advantage can also be an around-the-clock workforce, or access to a bigger labor market. These things might not lower costs, but offer an opportunity to increase revenue.
Businesses vary, but the phone is never a substitute for face-to-face interaction. People tolerate it out of need only.
Personally, I would argue if you really do not wish to be outsourced, then become a marketer or become the company owner.
You don't have to go all the way down to "marketer", but you do need to develop strong client interaction skills. I've outsourced myself to Thailand, and the biggest challenge I am faced with is the lack of face-time with clients (and co-workers).
One thing that can't easily be outsourced or done remotely is to have a meeting with a client where you let them know that you understand their concerns and have unique insight into how you can solve their problems.
In contrast, my management functions that I previously performed just disappeared into the organization, although I was supervising 12 people and over $3m of projects a year. Those functions were important, but not as critical as "getting the work done." Management positions should evolve, not be artificially created - good managers might seem hard to do without, but most organizations can survive some chaos, as long as work is coming in through marketing and going out through production.
I may be a little different than many here (American living in Asia), but I had the complete opposite reaction.
I think of tiny niche interests (many software packages would be similar), and I am amazed at the effort many non-native English speakers provide content in English (as painful as it may be) to attract a wider audience than they might in say, Danish.
The benefit is clear: control. Everything else is clearly a looser.
The fleecing is by the publishers. They have a certain cost model they need to protect.
Still, it bugs the living shit out of me that to purchase electronic versions of material I already own (over the course of many years), in a sufficiently open format to suit my needs, would cost $30k. Much of this is code books, IEEE reference materials, and other stuff that doesn't even compensate the authors at all.
I am fine with copyright protection, but there really should be a legal way to convert formats of information.
AC servers cater to the lowest-common denominator, the guy that wants to plug it in on his desk.
At 40kW though (really anything over 25kW in the US), a single/redundant -48V converter for the rack makes a lot of sense : you need a bunch of small 30A feeds like the Sun 20k's (12 per machine!).
The trouble with 48V in high-power applications is that you need a lot of copper. A typical DC powerplant in the telecom world is good for a maximum of 400kW. That power plant is about 3,000 square feet (granted it is an 8 hour battery), and would only feed 10 cabinets full of these boards!
Cooling these things would be a nightmare! The best solutions today can get up to 30kW with a lot of effort - things like water-cooled cabinets. Three of these cabinets would need their own 30-Ton CRAC unit which is the size of four cabinets!
The only problem with trying to use -48VDC in a datacenter is that each rack today (with blades) can pull 200A. A row with 10-12 racks is suddenly pulling 2,000A! Four or five rows of equipment, and you start to need a hell of a lot of copper to get the job done (voltage drop is very important in working with redundant DC power systems!).
A solution that has been suggested by data center designers is to switch to a dual-voltage DC design - 500VDC distribution, and large power converters at the rack or row level that are high efficiency and modular-redundant. I think the voltage is still too low, and would prefer 1kV DC myself, but the concept works.
(The other problem with 48VDC is that once you put more than about six battery strings in parallel the fault current is too high for any switching equipment. Telcos ignore the problem or just don't have any switching devices - On Forever.)
Two points are a little off-- first, a PC power supply is only about 60-70% efficient - high-efficency units can get up to 85% efficiency, but you rarely see that.
Second, there are two kinds of power factor - displacement and apparent. A waveform that is not sinusoidal (with high peaks), is said to have a high crest factor. While I am rusty on the terms, one refers to the current and voltage, and the other relates to crest factor.
The argument against net neutrality forgets the resolution of "open access" years ago. The (physical pipe) providers can either have net neutrality or open access to swallow. It doesn't matter which one they take, the end result for the consumer is the same. I don't expect both open access and net neutrality - there is no incentive for multiple ISPs if there is net neutrality.
The consumer is paying for a service. Theoretically, this service is for access to the internet "cloud," not isolated islands of access. The amount they are willing to pay goes up as the service provies more value (becomes something you can't live without). Part of this value is tied to bandwidth needs increasing over time.
In a perfect world, "net neutrality" would not be a concern, because if a service provider did not offer the quality that a consumer demanded, the consumer would switch providers. Physical constraints provide a monopoly or duopoly in most areas, which limits the number of last mile carriers that are viable.
Now, IF a provider was able to saturate their network links, I can see them providing an opportunity for content providers to peer with them to insure adequate access, of course for a fee. What is wrong is for them to throttle the network link to favor different providers.
Actually, we have three different professional recruiting agencies working for us. I still get crap. Nothing like paying a recruiter $50k for a marginal canidate that quits in under a year!
Screened candidates? Oh, so companies want to hire someone to disqualify people for them? Three cheers for capitalism.
I would love to have a reliable outside source do what HR should do. I do actually get resumes from bus drivers that want to become engineers.
I also have a limitation that I cannot make an offer to someone until a background check is completed. This usually takes a week, and I have lost potential hires because of it.
As much as I would love for someone to have subjective tags like "slob," "wife beater," "incessant talker," or "full of shit" added, a simple thumbs-up for "suitable for direct client interaction" would help me cut back on the people I interview by 25%. At a minimum, verification of transcripts, qualifications, references by a contractually trusted source would be great!
I am fine with the fact that there will be "A" and "B" pools, but I want to know which one I am working with before spending 4+ hours in the interviewing process.
And, the really sad reality is that fewer than 20% of our positions are filled by anything but direct referrals, no matter how hard we try.
The problem with salary ranges is that "$40-120k" is no more meaningful than leaving it out.
If i am looking for what I would consider a mid-level engineer, then i will get resumes from senior engineers. For the right person, we can make it work by switching things around a bit. I always show canidates our oficial salary ranges by position in person, but for it to be meaningful, I need to evaluate skills first. (There are 20+ levels for 6 titles)
My mid-sized company uses monster. We have open positions that represent 10% of our workforce. We are in dire need for these positions to be filled.
The boolean mentality does not work for most "good" jobs. Sure, people like the system to pick out the one "perfect" job/canidate, and start on Monday. It doesn't work that way. Typically, a company has minimum requirements and maximum pay in mind, and they want the system to offer the best people within those constraints for further screening.
A better system would mimic a headhunter more than a classified ad, with an incentive for making the match rather than making the marketplace.
Sure, you don't want to move, but under what conditions would you reconsider? The salary might be lower, but the fringe benefits could make up for it. You might be hired for a posting below your skills, with the opportunity to advance quickly.
You really want the killer app? Create a shared database for recruiters like what exists for real-estate. Require screened canidates and offers.
My question is WTF are they doing in the Library in the first place?!
If these rent-a-cops aren't given rights by the Patriot Act, what purpose do they serve? Clearly this is out of line, and a DIRECT result of the GWB "Climate."
Re:marketing expenses a little excessive?
on
Vonage IPO
·
· Score: 1
The important number to look at is total revenue and total expenses. Marketing was half of total expenses. Sounds about right, but I would have expected higher revenue growth personally.
The real problem isn't if the newspapers get your ad revenue for the one article-- do you stay around and view other content on the site? Do they build a positive brand awareness regardless of your duration of visit?
I know that some news outlets require registration, so I don't use their versions of stories. Dallas Morning Post comes to mind as an example. While I might be curious about the reporting slant in Dallas on a particular story compared to (say) San Francisco, I now search out another source for the information.
I use google news because all other online newspapers fail to provide a useful user experience for me - I want the presentation of Data much like Google has already done, with 60+ stories listed on one page, not the usual 10-12.
The really depressing fact is that the newspaper's value to most people is the headlines and pictures - tricks to get you interested. Google beats them even here.
While not everything can be universal-platform, I wish more websites had a better text-only/lo-fi version.
My current work situation forces me to do most of my browsing from a blackberry. I make purchasing decisions based on the information I get in this form. Even if Flash and images weren't a problem, because of speed I would prefer something that would actually work in LYNX (with pictures only used when the content REQUIRES it...not the "design."
LO-FI site options give you exposure to a remaining 5-10% of the population. From a business standpoint, is it worth it to your company?
As others have stated, there is liability and fees in place. Unfortunately, the errors of initial survey, tracer wire accuracy, non-traceable utilities, etc., all add. There is no safe place to dig in a right-of-way.
We had a pipeline being installed near a datacenter that crossed major utilities in six known points in a half mile that was of special interest to us. The contractor was "encouraged" to use an air lance and vacuum truck to dig in 30' of any suspected utility.
Even with all the precautions taken, with the backhoe they still managed to cut one fiber line and expose another, both lacking tracer wires.
If you bury something, it will be cut. It's sure nice to have fault-tolerant systems!
Slashdot Mirror
I've always wondered why they didn't do something like that. You would want the water on the back of the cells though so it doesn't absorb any of the incident energy.
Funny- have you ever participated in a focus group for things you would consider yourself somewhat of an expert, or at least in the 80th percentile?
Those groups are actually pretty interesting. I don't know how to pull it off with consumer electronics, but in my work we had a really great analysis of a company's expansion strategy, and had a good knock-down, build up session.
Contrast that with a few of the crap focus groups I was at- attempting to normalize data across 100 different participants.
A good focus group is a lot like a design charet, where people can add in things that someone who has been in the trenches too long might miss.
(No defence of the m16 or the camaro)
Lumens is actually the measure of total output; candela (or candlepower) is the unit for luminous intensity.
It's been quite a long time since being quoted luminous efficacy, but I thought an incandescent bulb was at 4 lm/w, halogen at 4 lm/w, flourescent and HID at around 16-20 lm/w.
I think the main problem with the LED headlights/flashlights is that the optics are crap, and they aren't really trying to compete with the established incandescent/halogen systems yet.
Productivity after hours is a function of what type of work you are doing. If you spend most of the day being distracted every 30 minutes by a phone call that must be answered, it is quite hard to write a report-- getting two hours undisturbed on the train or after dinner can be a significant boost.
BUT, if the extra time is constrained by the same factors as the normal day, there will be no productivity gain.
The same is true for manual/trade labor - you only get a week's worth of work out of people, no matter how many hours you put in, if it is a long-term situation.
The stupidity of the wireless companies is precisely why I like the Nokia 770- you can de-couple your PDA from the cell phone, and more importantly the cell phone companies.
I am surprised that I haven't found any device that is just a portable gprs bluetooth gateway- no screen, no voice, no keypad. Hell, who actually even needs a phone number then...
It's harder to keep the cell providers on their toes in the US because there aren't any multi-protocol phones with "universal" sim cards, but elsewhere it is nice to get the phone you want (for about the same price and without a contract), and switch between pre-pay providers at will.
Technically, the point of outsourcing is to gain a competitive advantage, usually by focusing on core competencies. The competitive advantage can also be an around-the-clock workforce, or access to a bigger labor market. These things might not lower costs, but offer an opportunity to increase revenue.
Businesses vary, but the phone is never a substitute for face-to-face interaction. People tolerate it out of need only.
Personally, I would argue if you really do not wish to be outsourced, then become a marketer or become the company owner.
You don't have to go all the way down to "marketer", but you do need to develop strong client interaction skills. I've outsourced myself to Thailand, and the biggest challenge I am faced with is the lack of face-time with clients (and co-workers).
One thing that can't easily be outsourced or done remotely is to have a meeting with a client where you let them know that you understand their concerns and have unique insight into how you can solve their problems.
In contrast, my management functions that I previously performed just disappeared into the organization, although I was supervising 12 people and over $3m of projects a year. Those functions were important, but not as critical as "getting the work done." Management positions should evolve, not be artificially created - good managers might seem hard to do without, but most organizations can survive some chaos, as long as work is coming in through marketing and going out through production.
I may be a little different than many here (American living in Asia), but I had the complete opposite reaction.
I think of tiny niche interests (many software packages would be similar), and I am amazed at the effort many non-native English speakers provide content in English (as painful as it may be) to attract a wider audience than they might in say, Danish.
The benefit is clear: control. Everything else is clearly a looser.
The fleecing is by the publishers. They have a certain cost model they need to protect.
Still, it bugs the living shit out of me that to purchase electronic versions of material I already own (over the course of many years), in a sufficiently open format to suit my needs, would cost $30k. Much of this is code books, IEEE reference materials, and other stuff that doesn't even compensate the authors at all.
I am fine with copyright protection, but there really should be a legal way to convert formats of information.
AC servers cater to the lowest-common denominator, the guy that wants to plug it in on his desk.
At 40kW though (really anything over 25kW in the US), a single/redundant -48V converter for the rack makes a lot of sense : you need a bunch of small 30A feeds like the Sun 20k's (12 per machine!).
The trouble with 48V in high-power applications is that you need a lot of copper. A typical DC powerplant in the telecom world is good for a maximum of 400kW. That power plant is about 3,000 square feet (granted it is an 8 hour battery), and would only feed 10 cabinets full of these boards!
Cooling these things would be a nightmare! The best solutions today can get up to 30kW with a lot of effort - things like water-cooled cabinets. Three of these cabinets would need their own 30-Ton CRAC unit which is the size of four cabinets!
The only problem with trying to use -48VDC in a datacenter is that each rack today (with blades) can pull 200A. A row with 10-12 racks is suddenly pulling 2,000A! Four or five rows of equipment, and you start to need a hell of a lot of copper to get the job done (voltage drop is very important in working with redundant DC power systems!).
A solution that has been suggested by data center designers is to switch to a dual-voltage DC design - 500VDC distribution, and large power converters at the rack or row level that are high efficiency and modular-redundant. I think the voltage is still too low, and would prefer 1kV DC myself, but the concept works.
(The other problem with 48VDC is that once you put more than about six battery strings in parallel the fault current is too high for any switching equipment. Telcos ignore the problem or just don't have any switching devices - On Forever.)
Two points are a little off-- first, a PC power supply is only about 60-70% efficient - high-efficency units can get up to 85% efficiency, but you rarely see that.
Second, there are two kinds of power factor - displacement and apparent. A waveform that is not sinusoidal (with high peaks), is said to have a high crest factor. While I am rusty on the terms, one refers to the current and voltage, and the other relates to crest factor.
The difference between push and polling is battery use on the handheld. Push increases battery life, which is always welcome.
The argument against net neutrality forgets the resolution of "open access" years ago. The (physical pipe) providers can either have net neutrality or open access to swallow. It doesn't matter which one they take, the end result for the consumer is the same. I don't expect both open access and net neutrality - there is no incentive for multiple ISPs if there is net neutrality.
The consumer is paying for a service. Theoretically, this service is for access to the internet "cloud," not isolated islands of access. The amount they are willing to pay goes up as the service provies more value (becomes something you can't live without). Part of this value is tied to bandwidth needs increasing over time.
In a perfect world, "net neutrality" would not be a concern, because if a service provider did not offer the quality that a consumer demanded, the consumer would switch providers. Physical constraints provide a monopoly or duopoly in most areas, which limits the number of last mile carriers that are viable.
Now, IF a provider was able to saturate their network links, I can see them providing an opportunity for content providers to peer with them to insure adequate access, of course for a fee. What is wrong is for them to throttle the network link to favor different providers.
Actually, we have three different professional recruiting agencies working for us. I still get crap. Nothing like paying a recruiter $50k for a marginal canidate that quits in under a year!
I would love to have a reliable outside source do what HR should do. I do actually get resumes from bus drivers that want to become engineers.
I also have a limitation that I cannot make an offer to someone until a background check is completed. This usually takes a week, and I have lost potential hires because of it.
As much as I would love for someone to have subjective tags like "slob," "wife beater," "incessant talker," or "full of shit" added, a simple thumbs-up for "suitable for direct client interaction" would help me cut back on the people I interview by 25%. At a minimum, verification of transcripts, qualifications, references by a contractually trusted source would be great!
I am fine with the fact that there will be "A" and "B" pools, but I want to know which one I am working with before spending 4+ hours in the interviewing process.
And, the really sad reality is that fewer than 20% of our positions are filled by anything but direct referrals, no matter how hard we try.
The problem with salary ranges is that "$40-120k" is no more meaningful than leaving it out.
If i am looking for what I would consider a mid-level engineer, then i will get resumes from senior engineers. For the right person, we can make it work by switching things around a bit. I always show canidates our oficial salary ranges by position in person, but for it to be meaningful, I need to evaluate skills first. (There are 20+ levels for 6 titles)
I counter with "valid canidates."
My mid-sized company uses monster. We have open positions that represent 10% of our workforce. We are in dire need for these positions to be filled.
The boolean mentality does not work for most "good" jobs. Sure, people like the system to pick out the one "perfect" job/canidate, and start on Monday. It doesn't work that way. Typically, a company has minimum requirements and maximum pay in mind, and they want the system to offer the best people within those constraints for further screening.
A better system would mimic a headhunter more than a classified ad, with an incentive for making the match rather than making the marketplace.
Sure, you don't want to move, but under what conditions would you reconsider? The salary might be lower, but the fringe benefits could make up for it. You might be hired for a posting below your skills, with the opportunity to advance quickly.
You really want the killer app? Create a shared database for recruiters like what exists for real-estate. Require screened canidates and offers.
My question is WTF are they doing in the Library in the first place?!
If these rent-a-cops aren't given rights by the Patriot Act, what purpose do they serve? Clearly this is out of line, and a DIRECT result of the GWB "Climate."
The important number to look at is total revenue and total expenses. Marketing was half of total expenses. Sounds about right, but I would have expected higher revenue growth personally.
The real problem isn't if the newspapers get your ad revenue for the one article-- do you stay around and view other content on the site? Do they build a positive brand awareness regardless of your duration of visit?
I know that some news outlets require registration, so I don't use their versions of stories. Dallas Morning Post comes to mind as an example. While I might be curious about the reporting slant in Dallas on a particular story compared to (say) San Francisco, I now search out another source for the information.
I use google news because all other online newspapers fail to provide a useful user experience for me - I want the presentation of Data much like Google has already done, with 60+ stories listed on one page, not the usual 10-12.
The really depressing fact is that the newspaper's value to most people is the headlines and pictures - tricks to get you interested. Google beats them even here.
Yeah... I get a 403:connection refused www.google.com.
Oh well...
You use your browser to check gmail? Which device?
My 7290 won't do it through the browser, although you can get apps to do it or download via POP.
While not everything can be universal-platform, I wish more websites had a better text-only/lo-fi version.
My current work situation forces me to do most of my browsing from a blackberry. I make purchasing decisions based on the information I get in this form. Even if Flash and images weren't a problem, because of speed I would prefer something that would actually work in LYNX (with pictures only used when the content REQUIRES it...not the "design."
LO-FI site options give you exposure to a remaining 5-10% of the population. From a business standpoint, is it worth it to your company?
As others have stated, there is liability and fees in place. Unfortunately, the errors of initial survey, tracer wire accuracy, non-traceable utilities, etc., all add. There is no safe place to dig in a right-of-way.
We had a pipeline being installed near a datacenter that crossed major utilities in six known points in a half mile that was of special interest to us. The contractor was "encouraged" to use an air lance and vacuum truck to dig in 30' of any suspected utility.
Even with all the precautions taken, with the backhoe they still managed to cut one fiber line and expose another, both lacking tracer wires.
If you bury something, it will be cut. It's sure nice to have fault-tolerant systems!