Comment Re:DMCA compliance (Score 1) 396
Problem is, that this not a web host, where 17 USC 512(g) would apply. It's Google's App store.
Problem is, that this not a web host, where 17 USC 512(g) would apply. It's Google's App store.
It still applies. You just have to factor the gain in, which is a multiplicative factor. If the gain is 15db, then a handset 1cm from your face is equivalent to standing 2.1 cm from the base station. Presuming you're in the center of the beam.
Guess what?
Other factors contribute to a lack of savings too!
If households use less energy,
then utility companies make less money,
and will just raise electricity prices to cover their costs.
So people don't save as much money as they thought.
Conversely,
energy efficiency in effect means cheaper energy,
so people just leave TV sets etc on more, knowing that energy bills are lower,
as also shown by Scottish and Cambridge research
http://ceolas.net/#cc214x
Either way, supposed energy - or money - savings aren't there.
__________________________________________________________
Why all energy efficiency regulations are wrong
http://ceolas.net/#cc2x
Summary: Politicians don't object to energy efficiency as it sounds too good to be true. It is.
--The Consumer Side
Product Performance -- Construction and Appearance
Price Increase -- Lack of Actual Savings: Money, Energy or Emissions.
Choice and Quality affected
-- The Manufacturer Side
Meeting Consumer Demand -- Green Technology -- Green Marketing
--The Energy Side
Energy Supply -- Energy Security -- Cars and Oil Dependence
--The Emission Side
Buildings -- Industry -- Power Stations -- Light Bulbs
This has always been my concern about cloud computing and moving toward web apps and online content. Honestly I don't think that the idea of turning our desktops into terminals will catch on, and I'm not really sure that advocates have considered the cost. You're really just moving the hardware requirements to the server side as far as I can tell. Plus, the necessity of perpetual highspeed internet connections...
Errr, no. Think AJAX. A great deal of processing can still be done on the client, but it can be done in a more universal interpreted language that is separated from the hardware it is running on. This is actually good news for application / service providers as it can allow them to only develop a single version of a product for any hardware.
All the people posting stuff about this being inefficient are spot on though, but who cares. The average PC nowadays is so far over specified for what it actually needs to do in and office environment that we no longer need to worry as much about efficiency. Instead the bottle neck in most situations is manpower as man hours are more expensive than mips.
Gendo Ikari? No, wait, it was David Xanatos. On second thought, it was Light Yagami. Then again, it might have been Ozymandius. There's always the possibility that it was Hari Seldon. And, of course, *everything* is a Nemesis plot. But when you get right down to it, the Count of Monte Cristo did it first.
Not to mention the biggest question of all: CAN we do anything about it????
Yes, 2 words: Violent Revolt
About the only choice left
March on DC with torches
Burn it all down
Sack everyone
Start over from scratch
And that is the problem. Everyone thinks the glamour is the new code... which they invariably *screw* up and expect someone else to come in and fix those "details". Developers/Architects suffer from ADD.
What the Bell inequalities tell us is that reality really is fundamentally nondeterministic - quantum mechanics can't possibly be a "layer" on top of some more fundamental, underlying, deterministic system.
Short answer: No.
If you look at the history of "modern science", from circa Newton and forward, the hard science has been separated from philosophy.
In a way you can say that the philosophers are constantly trying to catch up, and integrate the new knowledge in their world perceptions.
As a whole I do not think that is a problem. We might occationally stumble upon a field or a method that we in hindsight can see was a bad idea, for ethical reasons, but the checks and balances that is built into academia and science/science funding will soon enough learn to handle these areas (and perhaps give the philosophers a helping hand in the process).
I see philosophy as contemplative and reactive to the given facts. If we insist that all science must keep pace with philosophy, we will stifle progress enough to start a new "dark age".
I just wish Apple would sell a desktop keyboard with a multi-touch pad attached to it.
I really like it on the laptop, but then I switch to my desk, and... nada.
The millions of office workers out there really do not want to sit for eight hours a day holding their arms in front of them like mummies.
The obvious solution would be to put the touch-screen flat on the desk (and split the keyboard out to either side). Add eye-tracking to switch context/windows, multi-touch on-screen interaction, and built-in windex for a potentially workable solution..?
2000 pounds of chinese soup = 1 Won Ton