You got me - I generated this post algorithmically... Guess I need to work on it.
But Les Perelman, a writing teacher at MIT, has shown the limits of algorithms used for grading with an essay that got a top score from an automated system but contained no relevant information and many inaccuracies.
Considering the fake generated paper that was published in a peer reviewed journal, I'd say that means the robo-graders are on par with human proof readers.
The practical considerations for applications it ends up in depend tremendously on how much it costs. If this room temperature supercondictor costs more than the current cryogenic cooling of a conventional superconductor, because it's made from a super exotic material or requires a prohibitively expensive process to manufacture, it's not likely to displace it from most current applications, let alone get into many new ones. Of course that still depends on the price difference; If they're comparable you'll see some change over. Power companies would love it, but if the conductor costs significantly more than the percentage of power they are losing to resistive heating in a given section, it won't get changed. Chip applications may be a notable exception if it's not terribly expensive, but they have the additional consideration of manufacturing: if it can't be laid down on silicon in a process that is compatible with the current lithography, they are almost certainly going to stay in a niche market for a long time even if the bulk material is dirt cheap.
So folks can do the Glass half full thing and figure out places where it can be used, but without an answer to "How much does it cost" there is no way to predict the paramount information of where it *will* be used.
They're not going after home users yet but they never will. They may try to make it sound like there is a persuasive reason for end users to buy a license or something but taking a non-commercial entity to court over using an unlicensed or infringing device is asking for it to be thrown out with prejudice. End users are not selling equipment or services. Anyone could build, from scratch, a device that infringes on every patent every filed and, unless they tried to sell it, no one can say a damned thing about it. Do your best to get this slapped down now, but don't fret about millions of home router users getting named in an RIAA/MPAA style lawsuit.
It's important to note that a large amount of power in a portable computer is being expended outside performing calculations. Your LCD probably consumes more energy than your processor - heck, if I leave wifi off on my cell phone, more than 90% of my battery consumption is from the OLED screen. Add in a portable's spinning disks, wifi radio and other various bits and you have a system that, even if the processor was 2x as energy efficient, you'll barely be into a double digit percentage savings in overall energy. Granted, battery tech is getting better and other components are getting more efficient as well, but not anywhere near an 18 month exponential rate.
If they get enough evidence to justify questioning someone as a suspect or person if interest and that person isn't smart enough to shut the fuck up until they have a lawyer to do the talking for them, the authorities will probably get all they need to continue prosecution from there. "Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law" is not a concept unique to the United States.
of course it should be said that this effort is largely to blame for california bearing the greatest number of hate groups in the united states according to the SPLC
Total, or per capita?
Sounds like something some silly little teenager would say. And has nothing to do with TFA.
Yeah, except for current events relating to vigilante action against corporations that harass people and draw the ire of a large group of reasonably tech savvy people with something to prove. Other than that, totally unrelated.
I'll just leave this right here...
If "that's what she said" doesn't work, "giggidy" probably does.
I knew this username was bound to pay off some day.
Because the patent office doesn't care if your work is good, only that it's original
The first 2 sentences of your reply needn't even be there, they simply cloud the issue. As for the uranium fraction being similar to clay soil, one typically doesn't breathe in dirt to a significant degree though not breathing in fine ash in the air near a coal plant is much less likely. And how the fuck is coal ash not airborne and spreading around the world?
Just goes to show how unpredictable the future is... You forecast three possible outcomes and there were actually five.
Human Compassion, with a price-tag that carries the weight of law is Socialism. One can be an advocate of compassion for others without advocating that compassion be mandated by the government. I see it as a significant distinction.