> So eliminating it from the New World can't do that much damage given that the ecosystem got along fine before it arrived.
I wonder what kind of South American bug pollinates Cherimoya blooms? The Cherimoya fruit is exceptional, but producing it in California requires hand pollination since some bug that lives in the Andes isn't in California.
Hopefully whatever man dumps into the environment won't create some new nasty... flesh-eating locusts perhaps?
Don't forget the possibility of data being repeated by your electric meter even if you don't provide WiFi. They're generally dual band, operating at WiFi frequencies for local interaction and with more power at a lower frequency for the networked traffic. While the protocols are not intended to be WiFi compatible, the already-proven-hackable devices are just a patch away from unexpected functionality. The local link is intended for things like telling your air conditioner not to run part of the time when the grid supply doesn't have much excess capacity.
What other data is sitting around? How about raster images of whatever your "copier" printer fax has handled? Even if you're using USB, if there's WiFi capability in there, assume it can be awakened. A link that's not compatible with your sniffer is a possibility too. Drag out a spectrum analyzer and directional antenna. While you're at it, check those new LED streetlights for bursts of r.f. too.
But what of value was actually produced by that "computational effort"? What is the current total worth of the results for all of that computational effort?
If effort produces nothing of lasting value, is it a valid basis for value?
Machine rights and slavery are being ignored as people blindly treat the work done by machine slaves as if it was done by "owners". Some publicly act as if slavery of machines or other humans should not be the basis for a currency, yet we still have slaves. The slavery still around isn't just about mining the materials for the capacitors in your tech toys. And it wasn't just a part of past colonies.
How many hours of CPU work, or how many bitcoins does a slave cost? If some do decide or admit that slavery is acceptable, or just a fact of life, would the value of a slave be a more stable value for the basis of a currency? (measured in prime adult slave-years perhaps). Perhaps one should have to be a slave for a time to obtain bitcoins. However if one is born into debt, it might take some time to have a positive balance.
Does being born into a society where there is public debt associated with a national currency amount to defacto slavery?
But what of value was actually produced by that "computational effort"? What is the current total worth of the results for all of that computational effort? If effort produces nothing of lasting value, is it a valid basis for value?
The computation power secures the network from double-spending. Do security guards also produce nothing of lasting value?
"Giving someone coins is similar to Bitcoin." It is quite a stretch to compare bitcoin to gold or other useful metals. Gold has significant inherent value, bitcoin is inherently worthless. The value of gold can't fall to very low levels since it is scarce and is valuable for industrial uses (excellent conductor that doesn't corrode, etc.). It is unlikely that there could be much of a change in the scarcity of gold. (This hasn't taken into account the demand for gold for jewelry)
Since Bitcoin has no inherent value, those initially creating and trading it for something of value would seem to have gotten something for nothing, or nearly so.
I was thinking about issuing pellets as a currency. It takes work units (gathering/mining and processing food) to create them. Much of the work is carried out by an organic machine called a rabbit. The currency has more inherent value than bitcoin since it has inherent value as a fertilizer. The maximum amount of currency is finite since it biodegrades and the Earth can only support a finite number of rabbits.
As with all physical currency, it is wise to wash your hands after handling it.
Various units are possible for convenience. The smallest are individual pellets. They can be compressed rolled and cut into "sheet" currency, and made into bricks.
For still higher value currency the rabbit may be replaced with a bull. Some bull-sheet currency should be available soon.
Value is ultimately determined by what people are willing to trade for - by supply and demand.
Obviously, Bitcoin is not worhtless to thousands of people. They are being traded at $14 at Mt Gox right now.
Why is gold valued at $50/gram today and was valued at $30 in 2007? Is it because we are creating more jewellery and need more for industrial applications and the supply cannot match the demand? It´s not - the value is increasing because people see gold as safe way to store money. To quote Wikipedia: "the price of gold is mainly affected by changes in sentiment"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_as_an_investment
Gold's inherent value (industrial uses) is nowhere near the price it trades at. You could say that gold can't fall to zero because of that, but if it still devalues even 10 times, you can bet that people will panic.
Bottom-line - nothing is absolutely safe as a savings medium, and gold is not as axiomatically special as many people hold it to be.
"The above equation is also why lights in your house dim when you turn on a motor (= inductor). There is a significant current change, and the voltage changes even more, so the lights dim."
Uh, no. Most of the voltage drop in the source occurs in the resistance of the wiring, and you didn't even figure resistance into the equation. Intuitively, the surge current more closely matches that of a capacitor charging through resistances. It isn't even a matter of the motor inductance or the frequency of the power. In fact the early surge would be seen even if we used D.C. power and a D.C. motor. The time constant matching the light dimming involves the mass of the rotor being brought up to speed. The load is actually more resistive at startup than when an A.C. motor is up to speed and coasting.
A pure inductor starts at zero current the instant voltage is applied and it ramps up at a rate determined by the inductance, at D.C. or very low frequencies rising to where it becomes limited by the series resistance. It's pure capacitors that draw a maximum current at the instant voltage is applied to the circuit.
I believe that many people get lost in the math and lose a feel for what is happening. What you said is completely backwards from reality. Mechanical analogies are far easier for people to get a feel for than Laplace Transforms. Compare the behavior of an RLC circuit to a machanical system with a shock absorber, spring, and a mass.
People may get confused over a critically damped circuit, but the idea of a car oscillating up and down after a bump with no shock absorber is easy to grasp.
There is no way a motor is well-modeled by a capacitor, either analytically or intuitively. It's a coil of wire, practically a poster child for an inductor.
This does have lumped resistance elements, but by the time you put the two inductors and two resistors in to the differential equation with forcing
sin (2*pi*60*t) u(t),
you're not going to be in a good place as far as intuition goes.
In fact, overall, I'm not seeing much intuitive sense in your summary. Once you really delve in to it, the subject of starting electric motors (AC and DC) is very complex.
"But the problem is living spaces being separate from working spaces."
Some companies have closely integrated living and working.
Foxconn is one such company.
(some have suggested that Foxconn employee depression problems may be partly due to the employees living away from their friends and families, often at a considerable distance)
I think people are missing the point. Apple is actually moving in the direction of less lock-in as far as the consumer goes. They've basically said that in the latest generation many people won't need to buy any one device to use as a hub or to sync, and no additional device is needed to establish service. They seem to have gone as far as content providers will allow in getting away from DRM, and they support syncing music and pictures across quite a few devices, even PCs. Their being able to negotiate a deal where users can Music-Match (replace their own music rips with 256k DRM-free AAC copies that can sync to many devices) is extraordinary. It's a very smart move. It ensures excellent playback quality, and it likely will get some additional people buying from them as music customer.
Being able to view photos taken with an iPhone or iPad streamed through Apple TV is a nice added feature for those not set up to do it through a desktop or laptop.
In an environment designed for easy transmission and sharing of data lock-in just doesn't seem to apply. It's nothing like having data tied up in a proprietary format that only expensive software can read.
The only lock-in I see is things being addictively simple.
> Apple is actually moving in the direction of less lock-in as far as the consumer goes.
Do you expect that any non-Apple device will be able to use iCloud? Vendor Lock-in is what's important here, and it's definitely been made stronger by this move. Once all your data is in the cloud, do you want to go through all the effort of moving it to a different cloud (if you even can!) or do you want to cough up a few extra $100 to buy from Apple and make things easy.
Do you expect that any non-Apple device will be able to use iCloud?
Given that Apple is supporting Windows for Photo Stream and iTunes Match at least, I would say the answer is closer to yes than you are intimating here.
I hadn't heard of that thank you for pointing it out. This does make things look more optimistic. I would still define it as vendor lock-in though. The iTunes binary might be available for Windows, but Apple still claims control over your experience and your data.
While they are in control of your data, you will be faced with a question every time you upgrade your hardware. Do you want to interact with your own documents and music using a clunky interface, or do you want to use an interface that makes you feel more in control and happier?
The above question is a little contrived, but I believe that it is fairly close to the truth, Apple has always been a company based on making you feel good.
The photos and music are still stored unencrypted on your hard drives, and the metadata is embedded in those files, so no, they aren't controlling your data, any more than Dropbox does.
Do you think any Android phone, or Windows mobile, will be able to use iCloud?
Apple support Windows because there would be an uproar if Windows users bought iPods and iPhones and couldn't use them. They do the bare minimum they have to however.
Foxconn has had some problems, but didn't rank that poorly. It seems to be more a case of what life is like in China.
"In a survey published in 2010 by Oxfam Hong Kong, Foxconn ranked sixth for corporate social responsibility out of the 42 companies that then made up the Hang Seng index."
MobileMe accounts are being extended to a year from now for free, before the service is shut off.
If the phone no longer meets her needs at that time, she can sell it to help fund a new one (or perhaps you will have yet another leftover from another upgrade of yours).
Even an old iPhone can still be used as an iPod, to play games on, and for some WiFi net activities. Old Apple phones have better resale value than any others I've seen.
It sounds like you're complaining about problems that are more hypothetical than real. If you really think that many users are being placed in a bad position, think of it as an opportunity to rescue them with some kind of great app / service that you create. Also, Steve said something yesterday about some open iCloud APIs.
We couldn't possibly help those users, because the MobileMe is built deeply into the system apps. On Android (and I don't want to sound like a fanboy too much here, although I'm sure I do), we could drop in a replacement calendar and email app to replace the system ones. On iPhone, that's a no go.
Search alone isn't vertical, search alone isn't even a market if people don't pay for it. You misunderstand the (Google) business and who the customers are. Those doing the searches are not the customers. Advertisers are the customers. Eyeballs of those searching are the primary product. Search isn't the product, only part of the means to obtain the product. Search is a supporting part of a vertical structure that produces revenue for Google.
It's the same thing with commercial broadcast television. The viewers are not customers, the programs are not the product.
In both cases, the choices that produce maximum advertising revenue are not necessarily those that deliver what the person searching or viewing considers best.
In the case of Google, there are elements of a vertical market in the sense that they're combining pieces. They just aren't combining the same pieces or using them the same way as most others. They don't actually sell a mobile OS, or (with past exceptions for developers) handsets. I don't believe they're directly producing much video either.
And while they mine data, that is yet another companion component to drive sales of or increase value of the advertising. The will tell how apps fit into their revenue model. They relate to attracting users, more ads in some cases, and a cut of sales. Even if not a big part of the total phone revenue stream, apps are still something that they're stuck dealing with.
There was search before Google, there was data mining before Google, there were ad brokers before google. They're well beyond all of that, more vertical than any of those things alone. In some cases they're filling in gaps or providing alternatives in other vertical products (handset/OS/carrier) only to insert their ad business into the equation. Mapping, video hosting and other things they do also are methods to increase the value of ad business, or build pathways to insert themselves into other ad funded businesses (perhaps broadcasting)
Whether a particular model or product is "good" all depends on perspective. A model where the OS is nearly free appeals to some handset makers or carriers. Low budget "reality" tv and infotainment news programs with 18+ minute of ads an hour may appeal to a tv network if it has a better viewer/cost ratio than obtained with more expensive quality programming.
I wonder what kind of South American bug pollinates Cherimoya blooms? The Cherimoya fruit is exceptional, but producing it in California requires hand pollination since some bug that lives in the Andes isn't in California.
Hopefully whatever man dumps into the environment won't create some new nasty... flesh-eating locusts perhaps?