Link to Original Source
Submission Summary: 0 pending, 11 declined, 0 accepted (11 total, 0.00% accepted)
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
Link to Original Source
"A pervasive elitism hovers in the background of collaborative software development: everyone secretly wants to be seen as a genius. In this talk, we discuss how to avoid this trap and gracefully exchange personal ego for personal growth and super-charged collaboration. We'll also examine how software tools affect social behaviors, and how to successfully manage the growth of new ideas."
What? I'm not a genius? What just a minute!!! This isn't a black and white choice! I'm good in both groups and as an individual programmer! Some think that team strategies like eXtreme Programming is the ONLY way to have teams work. I prefer to let each person contribute to the best of their ability even if that means that they let their genius out of the box. So some of the stuff in the linked talk is nonsense in my view.
What do you think? How well do you work in teams? Alone? How can you improve? Do you think any of the myths are true or false? Has your team experienced the "bus factor"? Do you think that the "many eyes" meme is true? How so? Does working in a team slow you down or speed you up? Do you inhabit a cave to do your best work? How do you integrate your work with others? How do you feel when they reject your work as inferior or "not applicable"? How much do you rely upon other programmers to cover your own short comings as a developer? Are you stronger in a team or alone or some mix of those? What's the best system you wrote and how did others contribute? Do you use others to help design, code, test, debug, and roll out apps? Are you one of a kind or just a drone? Do you think that the guys in the video are off base or on target? How so? Why? Why not? What's the worst experience you've had in a team, and working alone? What's the best?
Personally I think they are completely off base. No one can drop their "ego", if they did they'd die. What's important in my view is working well with others and working well alone whichever is actually better for YOU and your projects! If it's better to work in a team then so be it! If it's better for you to work alone or do parts alone then so be it!"
Native Client: Using Native Code to Build Compute Intensive Web Applications
Client Track — Brad Chen, David Sehr, Nicholas Fullagar Some applications require high-performance client-side computation. Native Client is a technology for running native code in web applications, with the goal of maintaining the browser neutrality, OS portability, and safety that people expect from web apps. This talk will give a brief overview of the architecture of Native Client. We'll then look at some specific example applications as well as strategies for how to use native code to handle compute intensive tasks within web applications using SRPC, Shared Memory and NPAPI.
Native Client will enable you or me to have web pages running your or my choice of programming language including a mix of languages as your or I see fit. True freedom of choice, power and higher speed. Desktop powered apps can finally come to the desktop through the browser no matter what language they are written in!
Opera, Firefox, Microsoft, Apple,
This groundbreaking report demonstrates overwhelming rational scientific support for the position that the warming of the twentieth century was moderate and not unprecedented, that its impact on human health and wildlife was positive, and that carbon dioxide probably is not the driving factor behind climate change.
The authors cite thousands of peer-reviewed research papers and books that were ignored by the IPCC, plus additional scientific research that became available after the IPCC's self-imposed deadline of May 2006."
Link to Original Source
"The Sun's gradual brightening will seriously compromise the Earth's biosphere within ~ 1E9 years. If Earth's orbit migrates outward, however, the biosphere could remain intact over the entire main-sequence lifetime of the Sun. In this paper, we explore the feasibility of engineering such a migration over a long time period. The basic mechanism uses gravitational assists to (in effect) transfer orbital energy from Jupiter to the Earth, and thereby enlarges the orbital radius of Earth. This transfer is accomplished by a suitable intermediate body, either a Kuiper Belt object or a main belt asteroid. The object first encounters Earth during an inward pass on its initial highly elliptical orbit of large (~ 300 AU) semimajor axis. The encounter transfers energy from the object to the Earth in standard gravity-assist fashion by passing close to the leading limb of the planet. The resulting outbound trajectory of the object must cross the orbit of Jupiter; with proper timing, the outbound object encounters Jupiter and picks up the energy it lost to Earth. With small corrections to the trajectory, or additional planetary encounters (e.g., with Saturn), the object can repeat this process over many encounters. To maintain its present flux of solar energy, the Earth must experience roughly one encounter every 6000 years (for an object mass of 1E22 g). We develop the details of this scheme and discuss its ramifications." — D. G. Korycansky, Gregory Laughlin, Fred C. Adams
Personally living up in Canada we could use an improvement of oh, say 10c each day all year round. That would make Canada about as warm as it was a long time ago. It's interesting that people think that the changes are bad. If we had our technological civilization thousands of years ago when miles of ice covered most of North America we'd be freaked about the retreating ice caps. I guess somethings don't change even while the planet does what it wants. So let's get a move on and make it happen. Which direction? Move Earth inward or outward? If so by what temperature difference? -Tc -10c -5c -1c 0c +1c +5c +10 +Tc? Why do you want that?"
Cool, I can see ultra-durable and strong clothing made out of this stuff. No more torn pants! Any shirt could be a bullet proof vest! Nifty.
"The secret of its strength is the huge surface area of each nanotube, said Ben Wang, director of Florida State's High-Performance Materials Institute. "If you take a gram of nanotubes, just one gram, and if you unfold every tube into a graphite sheet, you can cover about two-thirds of a football field," Wang said."
Wow, how can I make this stuff now? I know that by lighting a match you get all many things bucky... can you make useful bucky tubes, balls, and sheets (paper) at home? Maybe a bucky paper could be combined with electronic paper to produce robust and flexible and strong displays that we've been wanting for years now?"
"Today's computer chips are made by etching patterns onto semiconducting wafers using a combination of light and photosensitive chemicals. But the technique is being pushed to the limit as ever more processing power is being packed onto chips, requiring engineers to etch details just a few tens of nanometres across. So scientists are hunting for alternative ways to assemble even tinier chips."
"Letting them build themselves is, in many ways, the most obvious solution, says Dago de Leeuw, a researcher at Philips Research Laboratories in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. "The nicest example is DNA," he says. Our genetic code provides a set of instructions that can be used to marshal molecules into an entire person, and researchers would like to come up with a similar set of compounds able to organize each other into circuits."
Ok, where will this lead? Besides to newer amazing chips and circuits of various sorts it will help with that very special self assembling geek friend, if you know what I mean, of course."
Rogers Ruined iPhone in Canada
From the time I signed the online petition at 3pm on Sunday till the time I posted this six hours later over 2400 people had also signed the petition!
"Everyone would like to say "NO THANKS" to Rogers/Fido for screwing our iPhone Canadian dream with poor data/voice plans. If you consider these plans not suitable, please sign this petition. On July 11th 2008, we will send a printed copy of all these messages to Rogers HQ to demonstrate our indignation toward them. We would like to say "Thank You, You" for signing this petition and helping the iPhone cause in Canada."
"More than 100,000 unique visitors in 48 hours!"
Ruined iPhone Blog
If you live in Canada please sign the petition if you fell Rogers is being too aggressive in their prices and plan limits."
Well it seems that bacteria are what the moisture is clinging to to grow into all that white beauty that falls each year. I wonder how much is bacteria from space and how much is from Earth (likely the majority)? Maybe this is how life was seeded on Earth?
Who would have thought that when trowing snowballs one was trowing a multitude of life forms and germs at your friends and the passing car: so now snowballs are potential biological weapons and every kid who trows one a terrorist (well we know that already)?"
Link to Original Source
The Globe And Mail reports that: Canada is working with the FBI on a system called Server in the Sky that would see fingerprint and iris scan data shared around the world to nab individuals running from the law. The personal information on the database would be used by Canada, the United States, Britain, Australia and New Zealand and could ultimately be used by European Union countries as well. The number of people in the system with connections to terrorism and other serious crimes would be well over one million.
Yeah right, within years it will be up to billions of people tracked as the Big Brothers grips tighten even more than they already are.
Google News has a Pretoria of other news articles about this: pro and con. What the heck would they put it in orbit? Why not just have it on Earth somewhere and link everyone by the Net?"
But in practice that's not quite how it works — at least the way mathematics has traditionally been done. Because in reality a mathematical proof of the kind people publish in papers is something much more social. It's a vehicle for convincing other humans — one's fellow mathematicians — that something is true."
Link to Original Source