itwbennett writes The promise of modular smartphones like Google's Project Ara is that buyers will be able to upgrade components at will — and now Finnish company Circular Devices has come up with a use for discarded computing modules, which they're calling Puzzlecluster. Drawings of the Puzzlecluster architecture show a chassis with slots for the reused modules, which can then be interconnected with others to create the cluster. Just one unit could also be used as a desktop computer."
One day the world will be liberated and people will be free to trade. Right now we live in a Kafkaesque dystopia.
If somone has a job and a place to live why shouldn't they be able to move about and work anywhere in the world? Just because a person is born on one side of a fence why should they be denied an equal opportunity? If labor is fluid the world will be a better place for it. I was born in the UK. I've lived and worked all over the world. Most people I know (here now in the US) would like the opportunity to travel and experience life abroad but silly imaginary lines prohibit them from doing so. Imagine if people in California were prohibited from working in Oregon. The whole idea of national borders is dumb. It's about time humanity started moving on to bigger things and living up to its true potential.
they should allow pot.
This is a good thing if it brings awareness of what these guys have done. They uncoverred at lot of really very inappropriate behaviour by people in power. They have given us all a pretty good example of how power can corrpupt. They have reminded us of the importance of managing our own government more responsibly. If it wasn't for wikileaks we would all still be ignorant.
Hey thanks for the info. I can find nothing on any models for EM infomation density except at the quantum level. Do you have a refference?
The spectrum is not a finite medium though. AFAIK there is nothing in physics that for a practical purpose puts a limit on information density in space. Interference is a problem because we choose to use an antiquated non-meshed infrastructue. The only reason our phones can't talk to each other directly is because of a bad network design that blocks it. There's no reason we couldn't use these long range phone frequencies so that every device could form an ipv6 semi non centrailzed meshed network that costs next to nothing to run. Why are we still doing it the old fashioned way? Let's open up the spectrum. It's not finite like the FCC says it is.
Why can we not open the spectrum up to competition? Why does only one carrier get to dominate a set of frequencies? AFAIK there is nothing in physics that for a practical purpose puts a limit on information density in space. Interference is a problem because they choose to use an antiquated non-meshed infrastructue. The only reason our phones can't talk to each other directly is because of a bad network design. There's no reason we couldn't use these long range phone frequencies so that every device could form an ipv6 semi non centrailzed meshed network that costs next to nothing to run. Why are we still doing it the old fashioned way? Let's open up the spectrum. It's not finite like the FCC says it is.
Wise people in power and authority always think they know what is best for everyone and how to plan everything out so the world is a better place. They like to tweak things here and there so they can fix stuff that is wrong. There is scant evidence this approach to controlling the economy by making it illegal for people to negotiate their own labor contracts actually works.
I think you'll find these kind of incidents also happen with regular cab drivers. Newspaper articles are often not a good source of data for these kind of stats.
Isn't this simple? You have two people. A driver. A passenger. The driver wants to drive the passenger from A to B and the passenenger wants to pay the driver. What moral right does anyone have to prevent them from entering into their own contract? The state claims safety yet the state doesn't seem to care if I climb mountains which is statistically far riskier. We live in a bizzar kafkaesque disytopia when people are regulating just for the sake of having regulation jobs. Even if Uber is not safe isn't it up to the consumer to decide how much risk to take?
Serial lurker here that would much prefer that you don't leave.
This is a free zero cost medium. The spectrum should be opnened up to everyone with power being the only limitation. We are told over and over the spectrum needs to be regulated because of interference yet for all intents and purposes there is nothing in physics that limits information density until you get to the quantum level. Wireless carriers have zero incentive to combat interference when they have a monopoly on the spectrum. They just charge more. It's also obvious to many engineers that mesh networks are more efficient. But mesh networks decentralize authority and therefore affect revenue so meshing is not likely to be popular with incumbent carriers. All those billions will ultimately be paid for be the consumer while the incumbents have zero incentive to innovate. We should take the spectrum away from business people and give it to engineers who can actually do something with it.
These free trade sites will keep popping up as fast as they are shutdown. The government's position that unrestricted trade is dangerous is untenable.
Interesting how we think we are free because we can say what we want. Yet we are not free. We cannot trade with anyone, anywhere, anytime. I mean you cannot freely buy any product directly from the manufacturer anywhere in the world. Why not? Is it a public safety issue? Is it protecting jobs? Or is it an easy revenue stream for those in power?