Older gear typically uses more power / FLOP, and is slower, so your time-to-solution takes a hit too.
If we get to the point where the power usage / FLOP for an N+1 device is basically the same as N, then you might see people do this, so long as they are okay with waiting longer for a result. Until then, don't hold your breath
It means that radio stations have to play Canadian music, and that television networks must show Canadian shows.
As you can imagine, there are strong opinions about this. For example, what constitutes Canadian content? If it is an American made show that is shot on Canadian soil (Toronto playing the role of Big-American-City), should that count? Or if the writers are Canadian, but the show is produced in the US, how should it be counted? What about a celebrity gossip show, primarily about Hollywood stars, that is hosted by Canadians? I'm not making these examples up by the way.
In radio, Can-con can lead to odd things too: when there is a new Canadian band, airwaves become oversaturated with their music quite quickly, to the point where the domestic audience gets tired of them. DJs want to play popular music (mostly of US origin), but must also meet Can-con rules. A new, popular Canadian band can actually be hurt by too much exposure in a short period of time.
So the CRTC here isn't just about issuing licenses for limited airwaves. It is also about enforcing rules on the content.
My personal opinion is that Can-con (mandating some % of material be broadcast) is probably not the best approach to supporting Canadian artists. I don't think it makes sense for TV, radio, or internet.
That said, it is pretty clear to me that under the current rules, Netflix and Youtube should fall under the same umbrella. I don't see an argument how the government has the authority to set rules about radio and TV but not the internet. I suppose you could claim that wireless spectrum is a public space, therefore within the purview of the government. But that arguement falls apart since most people have cable anyway. To give you a sense of how inconsistent things currently are, if you have a cable modem, part of the signal (TV) is subject to Can-con, but if you stream (internet) it is not.
Again, I'm not coming out in favour (note the u
On my android phone, I can type words by swiping between letters, rather than simply poking at them with my fingers. I'm amazed how well this tech works and how fast I can write with it.
I know that eye trackers exist (and that one can select letters by hovering over them) but does eye tracking + swipe exist? If it doesn't, it would be straightforward to prototype it easily (originally you had to buy it, but now it seems to be part of the main OS. http://www.swype.com/
...actually, after a bit of googling it looks like others have thought of this: http://sciencenordic.com/texti...
Other human computer interaction options would be the various brain wave headsets which are now appearing (e.g. from google I see http://neurosky.com/ http://interaxon.ca/ etc). They tend to be less accurate, but are probably useful for things like controlling the environment (lights on and off) etc. It wouldn't be difficult to interface them with some basic home automation hardware.
I would think that finding a mix off input devices would be ideal in terms of preventing fatigue.
Once a bit of time has passed, you might consider spending some time looking through the faculty pages at your local University's CS Department. Get in contact with them. There is a lot of work (and funds) going on into HCI right now. This seems like the type of project that would get a lot of support from graduate students and faculty.
Please come back to us with a follow-up post. Don't forget to include a fundraising link for equipment costs. I would certainly contribute.