Let the mice steer the beetles!
Let the mice steer the beetles!
I've not really played PC games since the Doom era so I'm really out of touch here. I don't have a real gamer box, just a simple video card. What do Slashdotters think I should try? A simple FPS or some type of networked game would do.
Sounds like you've missed a fair few generations of games then.
Try giving Enemy Territory a go.
Quite addictive in its time and a nice cooperative element to online play.
It was released back in 2003, and runs quite well on Linux. You did mention only having a "simple" video card but odds are better than even your system has sufficient support - even basic integrated video chipsets tend to have some degree of OpenGL support these day.
System requirements are: 600 MHz CPU, 128 MB RAM, 32 MB OpenGL graphics card, 56.6k Modem/LAN
Its not quite Open Source but it is (and always has been) free as in beer.
Microsoft wouldn't allow licensing dual cores on netbooks.
As far as I can tell, that's only regards Windows XP.
See this article (which, admittedly, its talking about a "nettop" box, not a netbook:
...first thing you see is that it runs on Windows Vista - XP under Microsoft's licensing terms for netbooks limited it to single core CPUs.
Got anything which specifically states that other OS's besides XP (which they've been trying to drop support on for a some time now) is restricted regards Dual Core?
Hearing implants are apparently already pretty good. They went from "hear something" to "hear people talk but bit wonky" in a decade or so. The obvious huge difference here is that the implants are connected to I/O already present in the brain wetware and it's still extremely difficult to pull off. Your calculator example would require completely artificial interface layer to the brain
... Subvocalizing would be relatively straightforward to do, thought. You could have conversation with your implants hooked to your auditory nerve.
I'm assuming by "subvocalizing" you mean effecting speech without actually using the human voicebox, then transferring that speech information electronically to a "receiver" which is hooked up to a hearing implant?
So why can't I subvocalize "Computer, what's 63 * 14.69", pass through speech recognition, process the result, and transmit back to my own hearing implant?
In the long term, surely any "interface layer to the brain" would ultimately have to enter human consciousness in order to be perceived anyway. I don't think a wet-wired calculator would cause an imaginary physical calculator to suddenly appear into anyone's head - one needs a mental model for interacting with device. Speech and hearing seems an ideal, or at least achievable goal.
The next step would be to actually be to process an manipulate the visual stream between the eyes and the brain. Perhaps you could "draw" a calculator over someone's visual field, heads-up-display style. I would expect the level of precision and bandwidth would remain out of reach for our lifetimes however, and even then you still need a means of "pressing" the buttons.
Much more likely, easier, safer and possibly effective to display onto glasses - in which case the audio component can be built into headphones at the end of the glasses, and a direction mic could pick up whispering. Why tap into the brain at all? (c:
the idea I would LOVE to see is where there are frequent stops (like gas stations) where you can swap your drained batt for a freshly charged one. they have that idea for propane tanks at supermarkets - you don't have to WAIT to have yours filled; you simply swap your empty for a full one.
The short answer to your question is the way any given battery is treated over the course of its usage has a drastic effect on the battery's ability to build and maintain a charge.
I've recently performed a complete electrics overhaul on a yacht, complete with solar panels, regulators, meters to measure amp input and output, etc. The goal was to build a system capable of powering a laptop (netbook actually) and a mobile phone using a constant 3G connection for 8-10 hours per day entirely off solar and the occasional (once every 3-4 days) 30-60 minute idle generation from the engine to make up the difference.
Without getting too far into technical details, you really only ever get to use 35% of a battery's rated capacity. At that point you need to recharge it or you risk permanent damage. You need pretty complex gear even to monitor how much energy you are using at a given time. For example, as you discharge a battery its voltage drops. But it doesn't do it immediately. You would have to wait approximately 24 hours after using a battery before a simple voltmeter would give you an accurate reading.
Bottom line, if you take a normal 12V car battery and wind it down to below 10.5 volts or so, you're effectively eliminated 50% of the battery's capacity on future charges. Do it a couple times and your car might start once or twice more, then probably never again.
The types of batteries used in these applications are many grades higher than the engine starting battery in your car right now of course, but the problems from repeatedly over-discharging still apply.
Are you willing to trust the person who had the battery in your car last to have treated it as well as you would have?
The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness. -- John Muir