This, if any of you remember, is one of the key items of the Star Trek holodeck. The Technical manual showed users on an omnidirectional treadmill (probably using forcefields rather than an actual treadmill), which the holodeck routed to wherever there was space if there were more than one user and they were in different locations of the program.
The same could be said of doing the test of tech remotely from the safety of the surface of the Earth, and being able to return to your own home in a couple of hours.
For that matter, why did we send people to the moon... or up on the Apollo/Gemini/shuttle or Salyut... and why do we keep sending people to the ISS if they're just going to return later?
And had there been the capability of unmanned probes in the 15th and 16th centuries, the same could have been said of sending an unmanned probe across the ocean rather than humans traveling for months across a hostile environment that could not support all the basic living needs of humans, necessitating them to bring their own supplies (of desalinated water and food in the event that captured food was not enough.) Once you got a distance out from European port, quick fail back to port was a tough call.
Actually, same can also be said of climbing Everest or K2.
Why bother traveling there if its tough to failback easily within a couple days, and you're just going to come back? Just send a robot, and use the money on stuff back at home, right?
Sometimes, you need to go out there, push the boundaries, take some risks... even if those risks might mean possible death to the explorers, like in the 15th and 16th centuries, they knew that and still went. Because after one person goes forward, takes the risk, whether they succeed or fail, others will follow and push the envelope further. And as they do, they will improve on what was wrong, and expand on what was right.
When I took my online classes at Charter Oak from 2007-2011, the instructors in ALL the classes were required to have an online forum, and part of the grading criteria for every course was a class participation grade which was 30 pct of the total grade. The instructors usually had a criteria that there had to be X number of posts on the forum across two different days, and that one of the posts had to be an initial post in response to one of the 3 or 4 posted discussion topics for the week. The other posts had to be a meaningful and well thought out post in response to another person's topic advancing the discussion. The teachers also, in addition to a weeklong assignment published ahead of time, had a written assignment due mid week that was not posted until that Sunday, and one that was posted the day after the mid week one that was due Saturday.
These all seemed to be common themes across all the courses. This seemed to be this college's way of trying to keep the students engaged with the class and instructor. Now, it depended on the instructor... some were pretty hands off for their classes, so people got away with posting a very general short post, and some instructors were hands on and did not accept those short posts toward the week total.
The students also, in the first year, had a mid semester and mid term checkup phone conference with their assigned academic advisor, as well as a yearly checkup over the summer to fine tune their course selections for the coming year. After the first year was completed, the only time we really talked to academic advisor was during the summer about fine tuning the course selections, as the course curriculum contained a relatively large open area for choosing your classes toward your major, and WHEN you could choose to take those classes (some colleges insist certain core courses must be taken during your first two semesters... this one was open to when you took them, as long as you did.)
Really though, no matter what amount of handholding the college gives you, no matter if you're taking it online or in person, or hybrid, its up to you as the student to step up as an adult and realize you're overwhelmed and need help. With an online course, you end up taking more of that in your own hands, as no one can actually see your body language, your class hours are NOT set to specific times like at a brick and mortar, and you also aren't as isolated from outside real world distractions during your chosen class time as you are at a brick and mortar.
Whereas in a brick and mortar college you are able to sit yourself down in the cafeteria or library and read, and you MUST be in a structured class between 2:30-5:00 on Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday... In an online class you have to find time after the kids head to sleep, and your chosen class time is 10:30pm-11:45pm on Sunday, Tuesday, and Saturday.... and as you're sitting at the computer, you have to resist the urge to Facebook/email/IM/game, and set your priorities straight.
(That last little bit right there is the unstated reason why so many people have problems... myself included. I never bombed out of any online classes or withdrew... but I skated through on a few classes by phoning it in with lax teachers while on a raiding guild schedule from shortly after work ended until midnight.)
Had that been the case, them including the service of consulting, repairing, recommending, or selling Apple (Cupertino) branded products or accessories, that probably would have given Apple (Cupertino) the necessary ammunition to sue them to change their name... even if the apple (fruit) products were the primary function of the store still.
It sounds like a lose/lose... Either you get the phone ringing, taking up your time and business and pulling you away from your customers walking in the door, to the point you change your name... or you take advantage of the opportunity, and open yourself up to being sued for the name.
Where is the link to the actual article? All this posting is, is a link to EA's website and a bunch of photo-hosting site pictures. Has the user actually engaged EA's customer support over email to appeal the ban? Would like if there was an actual story, because as it currently stands, this seems to be just one person posting anecdotal information that is focused on a single person, not a widespread group.
Well, actually... it is a problem of both. With my WebOS tablet (and Android GB and now, ICS Cyanogen install on same tablet), the native email client is always running in the background, and making a ding when a new email comes in. Same with my iPhone. For the phone, same goes for the native text messaging application. (I would imagine an iPod to be similar.)
Granted, I could turn off the data connection on both, or remove the configuration totally for the email client. This may not be an option in the future, though (similar to Orwell's 1984 vidscreens, which don't come with an off switch... just turning volume down.) Obviously powering the phone/tablet off defeats the purpose of using it to view an eBook.
As to IM, I use a third party app that has unified IM, and can at a touch logoff all IM networks.
The ultimate answer lies in the type of society we are in... need to learn that just because a device CAN have interrupt requests, and can have multitasking, does not mean you HAVE to acknowledge incoming items or go use these multitasking functions... its a matter of focusing on the singular task at hand.
I am curious, not trying to bust your chops or anything but how can you justify the cost on something that will never pay a return? I cannot see it ever being a good investment at todays prices at least.
p>The downside to this approach is that in a few years, solar panels will be even cheaper and more efficient and the resulting loan payment will be even less and you'll be stuck saving less than you could have saved had you waited. In other words, do you want a net savings of $30/month starting today for 20 years, or wait 3 years and have a net savings of $50/month for 20 years?
The problem with this kind of statement is that it is an overall generalisation that can be applied to ANY industry, and will never have a set definite cutoff date. You can say the same thing about buying a computer... why buy now when you could buy a cheaper more efficient one in 3 years... and that statement holds just as true in 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010.
In 1995, you may as well just live without a 486 or Pentium computer until the more efficient Pentium II comes along in 1997, but wait, there's a more efficient Pentium III, but wait, more efficient Pentium IV, but wait, Core, but wait, Core II Duo, but wait, Core i3, i5, i7, but wait, next step in development... if you kept putting off a purchase like that, you'd never get the item.
The same goes with solar panels. Is it a huge leap in logic to consider that the panels of today are cheaper and more efficient than those of 5 years ago, or those of 5 years before that? I could probably guarantee that whatever units are available during today's administration are cheaper and more efficient than those installed during the Carter administration, and the ones in 2015 will be better still, and in 2020, even better still.
At some point, the balance of efficiency gains versus cost saving versus life of the item has to be weighed.
Another possible way is to find some way to spread your purchases over time while still staying compatible through the whole system. Say you need 10 panels to power your house completely over 20 years lifetime per panel, plus backend equipment with 20 year lifetime. Purchase one panel every 2 years, and at year 20, replace the first panel and the backend as its lifetime is up and efficiency is waning, and continuously upgrade every 2 years ad infinitum as your equipment dies. True, you will not get the full benefit of power savings immediately, but you WILL reap the benefit of having a system that is utilizing the newest and more efficient tech over the years as opposed to a static system that is altogether 20 years outdated. The efficiency will average out, assuming all items are swappable and compatible with one another... true, it will probably be about as efficient as a complete system slightly older than the average age, but at the 20 year mark, an 11 or 12 year old averaged system is probably more efficient than a 20 year old complete system, and is cheaper to upgrade a single panel to keep that average than flat out replacing the 20 year old system.
Link to Original Source
* A 20% gratuity will be added to corporations with a market value of 100 billion dollars or more.
And what corporations will do is the same as companies have been doing for a very long time: find the loophole, exploit it. In this case, they will create a child company or something that is not them that is worth less than that cap so they don't have to pay, or define themselves as not being a corporation.
Or, use creative accounting to massage their books so that their market value is not X amount, but so that all their assets still add up the same.
I had the same thought... didn't Tabula Rasa (another NCSoft game) go through these same measures a short time before they closed up shop? Server mergers, more moves to bring people in... free periods of time... collapsing down to only a handful of servers, then close.
It's sad that we lose portions of the gaming world, some storylines that have the potential of being interesting, when online gaming servers close. I know TR had the initial potential of being interesting from the intro vid... yes, gameplay was a little poor, but the storyline had some potential. I think though this is possibly the start of the end, whether long (a few years) or short (maybe half year) of Aion.
Seeing it active in the beta doesn't exactly mean that the carrier will include support in the final version. For a short time in the iPhone OS 3.0 beta (a week or two), Tethering was active, even though ATT had not officially acknowledged support.
We all know tethering is available in the final OS 3.x code for all carriers in the world, and that ATT has refused to activate iPhone users to tether, while other phones on ATT can tether fine. Tethering for ATT users can be activated in the OS via jailbreak (as well as wireless tethering with utilities such as MyWi), indicating that a special contract agreement with ATT is not required, just flipping certain switches in the iPhone OS and updating the carrier files.
Well, actually, yes, they will ban Cracker Jack, as well as most of the sugar cereals out there.
'This ordinance breaks the link between unhealthy food and prizes.'
This gives them all the ammo to ban stores in Santa Clara County from carrying ANY kind of sugar cereal, or any food that has an additional non-food component inside the box that is not normally part of the normal sale of said food. In addition, it gives other counties (anywhere in the US), and possibly the state, a precedent to refer to when expanding this law to cover their jurisdiction.
I agree. This provider sounds very fishy, if they are intentionally breaking into your hardware without your permission. Get another provider, post haste, that has a privacy clause in their contract guaranteeing that they will not do such a thing without your explicit permission, and that if they do something outside the contract such as breaking into your box without your permission, there's a rather steep monetary fee to pay on their part as a breach of contract lawsuit is in order.
"Put together by the lowest bidder"
-Steve Buscemi, Rockhound, Armageddon