June 21 2015 16:38 GMT
June 21 2015 16:38 GMT
So you decided to get that large flat panel high definition LCD TV for yourself…
That’s so last year.
The new display technology is based on organic light emitting diodes (OLED), and they promise to provide much high contrast images, blacker-black, and way better energy efficiency.
Right now there’s a premium associated with the price; but all that is changing (and changing rapidly).
OLED and related technology are becoming the commodity technology that’s used in computer monitors, televisions, and portable device displays.
Your big-block electronic store might only have one OLED model for every ten LCD models at the moment, but the CES is just around the corner, and manufacturers will be looking for ways to lure consumers to spend more of their hard earned money, and offering them compelling reasons (in the form of phenomenal displays at reasonable prices) to get their share of your paycheck.
Not to far down the road we’ll see PLED, the flexible version — which may finally deliver on the dreams of “LCD Paper”…
To help you understand the new acronyms, here’s a list you might want to familiarize yourself with.
For more information on these technologies, get yourself a snack and beverage and spend a few hours reading the results of an Internet search.
Originally posted 2009-12-19 01:00:36.
I’ve been asked by several individuals why I publish so many quotes on my BLOG.
The answer is simple.
You gain new perspective by viewing an issue from another vantage point.
Good quotes are ones that make us think and reassess the conclusions we’ve drawn about a topic.
Even if you don’t change your view point, a quote is often good for a chuckle — or a shake of your head.
Originally posted 2010-03-14 02:00:15.
No, not a swarm of bees, wasps, hornets, or yellow jackets — I’m talking about file sharing technology.
First, there’s absolutely nothing illegal or immoral about using file sharing technology for file sharing and distribution, just as there’s nothing illegal or immoral about using hyper-text (http) or file transfer (ftp) technology. It all has to do with the content you’re trying to exchange, not the system you’re using to exchange it.
There are many legitamate uses for BitTorrent and other P2P technologies. Here’s a perfect example.
A small company has a number of offices spread throughout the world, and no one location has an internet connection with significant bandwidth (let’s say for argument, they all had a high end class of DSL service, but none of them have fibre). This company would like to distribute it’s trial software, but because of the economics can’t afford to pay for additional bandwidth or for a content delivery system — they could opt to “aggragate” the bandwidth of all of their offices by providing a torrent and running torrent servers at each location — that would allow the nodes with the most bandwidth available to satisfy requests, and any individuals who had downloaded the software and elected to continue seeding would be able to source it as well. While no one individual might get the software as quickly (though that’s not necessarily true), many more people would be able to get the software sooner, and at no additional cost; thus the company could meet it’s budgetary constraints and might not have to consider increasing the amount they need to charge for the software to cover operating expenses.
Swarming technology is real, it’s practical, and it’s a solution for a number of problems.
Swarms are highly fault tolerant, they’re highly distributed, and they dynamically adjust to changing conditions…
While any technology can be abused and misused, there’s nothing inherently bad in any of the P2P technologies. Just because bank robbers use pens to write hold up notes we didn’t outlaw the pen or pencil…
Originally posted 2009-01-12 12:00:19.
The Census Bureau released new numbers on the US poverty rate yesterday — 14.3% last year; the highest since 1994.
Largely due to the rising unemployment amount working age individuals in this country (even the US government admits unemployment to be in double digits — and we can all be sure that they minimize the numbers as much as they can through their creative accounting and adjustments).
13.9%, or 39.8 million people in 2008 to 14.3%, or 43.6 million people in 2009… and you can be sure that number will be even higher in 2010.
The report also showed the number of Americans without health coverage rose form 15.4% to 16.7% (or 50.7 million people); mainly because of the loss of employment and employer-provided health insurance. And the new health care provisions were passed; the main provisions won’t take effect until 2014.
Because of the Recovery Act and many other programs providing tax relief and income support to a majority of working families — and especially those most in need — millions of Americans were kept out of poverty last year.
· President Barrack Obama
The really incredible thing is that the numbers were expected to be much worse — and in fact it’s likely that increases in Social Security payments and expansion of unemployment insurance through federal extensions helped keep the numbers in check.
Clearly those earning over $250,000 need to have their tax cuts renewed!
Originally posted 2010-09-17 02:00:40.
I’ve written about 7-Zip before; but since we’re on the verge of a significant improvement I felt it was time to highlight it again.
7-Zip is a file archiver written by Igor Pavlov. Originally only available for Windows, but now available for most every operating system.
7-Zip was one of the first archiving tools to include LZMA (Lempel-Ziv-Markov chain algorithm); and consistently demonstrated much higher compression ratios at much higher compression rates than any other compression scheme.
The next release of 7-Zip (9.10) will include LZMA2.
The source code for the LZMA SDK has been put into the public domain, and is freely available for use in other products. The SDK includes the main line C++ course, ANSI-C compatible LZMA and XV source code; C# LZMA compression and decompression source code; Java LZMA compression and decompression source code; as well as other source code.
You can read all the features of LZMA as well as download the Windows version of 7-Zip and locate links for pZip for *nix operating systems. You can also do a search for tvx or vx for *nix based systems as well.
This is the only archive utility you need; it would have been nice had Microsoft chosen to base the folder compression in Windows 7 on the LZMA SDK, or at least made it easy to replace the compression module; but 7-Zip installs a Windows shell extension so you have a separate (though confusing for some) menu item for compression and decompression.
Originally posted 2010-01-21 01:00:14.
I just did a little exercise in trying to figure out if solar panels would be cost effective for me.
Using my latitude and longitude; NREL and NASA data; along with the ratings from a couple of the manufacturers of the most cost effective panels currently produced it appears that for about $750 I can produce enough electricity to run two [small] compact florescent lights — or a little less than $30 in electricity per year (at today’s rate).
So considering the energy and tax savings the panel couldn’t pay for itself in ten years (and that’s just the panel, that doesn’t include the batteries, inverter, installation, etc). Plus, I suspect it’s unlikely that a solar panel would last ten years here.
I’d say that solar panels have to increase in cost/performance by a factor of roughly 2x before they’d be feasible here (and we get quite a bit of sun).
I’m always on the lookout for ways to be a little more “green”; but I also believe that any solution needs to be sustainable; and I’m sure if I consider the impact of the production of the panels into this “equation” I’m going to find [here] that solar panels really aren’t that “green”.
I’ll have to keep looking for other options that might be more effective.
Originally posted 2009-08-13 01:00:36.
Over one thousand posts — over two thousands hits per day — a ranking just over two million…
I would have never dreamed my BLOG would have reach such heights in under two years.
Honestly, though, it’s not the stats that make me do it — it’s the fact that I enjoy sharing my interests and views on what ever crosses my mind (I know — there are those of you who think I lost my mind… but trust me, I have it on a tight leash).
Originally posted 2010-11-30 02:00:33.
The following is an except from a Denver Post opinion article by Rhonda Hackett (a clinical psychologist born in Canada, living in the US)
Myth: Taxes in Canada are extremely high, mostly because of national health care.
In actuality, taxes are nearly equal on both sides of the border. Overall, Canada’s taxes are slightly higher than those in the U.S. However, Canadians are afforded many benefits for their tax dollars, even beyond health care (e.g., tax credits, family allowance, cheaper higher education), so the end result is a wash. At the end of the day, the average after-tax income of Canadian workers is equal to about 82 percent of their gross pay. In the U.S., that average is 81.9 percent.
Myth: Canada’s health care system is a cumbersome bureaucracy.
The U.S. has the most bureaucratic health care system in the world. More than 31 percent of every dollar spent on health care in the U.S. goes to paperwork, overhead, CEO salaries, profits, etc. The provincial single-payer system in Canada operates with just a 1 percent overhead. Think about it. It is not necessary to spend a huge amount of money to decide who gets care and who doesn’t when everybody is covered.
Myth: The Canadian system is significantly more expensive than that of the U.S.Ten percent of Canada’s GDP is spent on health care for 100 percent of the population. The U.S. spends 17 percent of its GDP but 15 percent of its population has no coverage whatsoever and millions of others have inadequate coverage. In essence, the U.S. system is considerably more expensive than Canada’s. Part of the reason for this is uninsured and underinsured people in the U.S. still get sick and eventually seek care. People who cannot afford care wait until advanced stages of an illness to see a doctor and then do so through emergency rooms, which cost considerably more than primary care services.
What the American taxpayer may not realize is that such care costs about $45 billion per year, and someone has to pay it. This is why insurance premiums increase every year for insured patients while co-pays and deductibles also rise rapidly.
Myth: Canada’s government decides who gets health care and when they get it.While HMOs and other private medical insurers in the U.S. do indeed make such decisions, the only people in Canada to do so are physicians. In Canada, the government has absolutely no say in who gets care or how they get it. Medical decisions are left entirely up to doctors, as they should be.
There are no requirements for pre-authorization whatsoever. If your family doctor says you need an MRI, you get one. In the U.S., if an insurance administrator says you are not getting an MRI, you don’t get one no matter what your doctor thinks — unless, of course, you have the money to cover the cost.
Myth: There are long waits for care, which compromise access to care.There are no waits for urgent or primary care in Canada. There are reasonable waits for most specialists’ care, and much longer waits for elective surgery. Yes, there are those instances where a patient can wait up to a month for radiation therapy for breast cancer or prostate cancer, for example. However, the wait has nothing to do with money per se, but everything to do with the lack of radiation therapists. Despite such waits, however, it is noteworthy that Canada boasts lower incident and mortality rates than the U.S. for all cancers combined, according to the U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group and the Canadian Cancer Society. Moreover, fewer Canadians (11.3 percent) than Americans (14.4 percent) admit unmet health care needs.
Myth: Canadians are paying out of pocket to come to the U.S. for medical care.Most patients who come from Canada to the U.S. for health care are those whose costs are covered by the Canadian governments. If a Canadian goes outside of the country to get services that are deemed medically necessary, not experimental, and are not available at home for whatever reason (e.g., shortage or absence of high tech medical equipment; a longer wait for service than is medically prudent; or lack of physician expertise), the provincial government where you live fully funds your care. Those patients who do come to the U.S. for care and pay out of pocket are those who perceive their care to be more urgent than it likely is.
Myth: Canada is a socialized health care system in which the government runs hospitals and where doctors work for the government.Princeton University health economist Uwe Reinhardt says single-payer systems are not “socialized medicine” but “social insurance” systems because doctors work in the private sector while their pay comes from a public source. Most physicians in Canada are self-employed. They are not employees of the government nor are they accountable to the government. Doctors are accountable to their patients only. More than 90 percent of physicians in Canada are paid on a fee-for-service basis. Claims are submitted to a single provincial health care plan for reimbursement, whereas in the U.S., claims are submitted to a multitude of insurance providers. Moreover, Canadian hospitals are controlled by private boards and/or regional health authorities rather than being part of or run by the government.
Myth: There aren’t enough doctors in Canada.
From a purely statistical standpoint, there are enough physicians in Canada to meet the health care needs of its people. But most doctors practice in large urban areas, leaving rural areas with bona fide shortages. This situation is no different than that being experienced in the U.S. Simply training and employing more doctors is not likely to have any significant impact on this specific problem. Whatever issues there are with having an adequate number of doctors in any one geographical area, they have nothing to do with the single-payer system.
Originally posted 2010-03-10 02:00:43.
This will be the first in a multi-part posting.
I use Microsoft Virtual Server on my PCs for virtualization, and I use VMware on my Macs (I used to use Parallels, but it got to be too expensive to keep paying for updates, and when VMware attempts to charge for an update I’ll probably switch to VirtualBox on my Macs); but most everything I have to say here will apply to any virtualization solution you might choose to use.
When you evaluate a virtual solution, you need to look at a number of requirements and features and decide which is right for you:
The above list will get your started on evaluating the relative merits of different virtualization solutions. My recommendation is start with a solution that’s free and try it out, if you find it doesn’t seem to fit your needs, then try solutions that offer a trial period. And when you identify things you like or don’t like, go back and look at the free solution and compare it again. Often you will find after getting a broader experience base things look different, and you shouldn’t just stop with the last one you looked at — you should reassess the less expensive alternatives you dismissed.
One final word, don’t install multiple virtualization solutions on a single machine. Remove the previous software you were looking at (you can retain the virtual machines), reboot, and install the new software.
The next postings will cover basic operating, maintenance, and some ways to make management easier.
Originally posted 2009-01-13 12:39:01.