180 posts • joined Monday 22nd June 2009 12:16 GMT
Re: "endangerment of life"
How is it not endangerment of life to divert to repairing vandalism, resources which would otherwise be spent on looking after the public?
I suspect the "would" would be "could" and the fact would be "wouldn't"..
This is a real case of "your side, their side, and the truth". I'm suspecting the truth is in between all the polarised sides' viewpoints..
I tend to enjoy growing veg in the garden (the stranger stuff, like purple podded peas, white/purple carrots, many colours of tomato and so on; the stuff you don't often see in a shop).. Would that count against the £1 a week?
For the early ones...
It may well be to help prevent the spate of muggings and other assaults that went with the early iPhones and other "cool" gadgets that were the big status symbol of the moment..
If you turn its resale value to zero, you stop people mugging people for the glasses so they can sell them for 50 quid down the local pub (or sell them on an auction site etc.)..
Re: It means bad news for the end user.
Yes, the 15 billion will need to "grow". That doesn't mean paying it all back in straight cash; that would be stupid (and unworkable).
What the shareholders are after is investing money, and having that investment of X, have that be worth X+n at some time in the future, where n is positive and as large as possible. A great way of doing this is growing a company, obtaining more users for a service, finding ways of making it more efficient (newer hardware with less power consumption etc.), and generally lowering the maintenance bills that always dig into the balance sheet.
It may well be a case of nothing gets "repaid" from the investment, but the initial £15 billion investment becomes £15+n billion if the company ever gets sold on.
If the revenue stream is more than interest paid to the bank (if that's required, some companies have war chests well in excess of this, so interest payments are not a factor, making acquisitions with a long term revenue stream very attractive).
What we get to see is how the execs of the company change that £15 billion into £15+n billion. That's what decides the service.
Re: Not outsourced
Honestly, a management or financial task is just a manipulation of numbers. Here in techie land, we automate those and make them reliable and repeatable. What could be more efficient than replacing all the management number crunching with automation and saving shed loads more, removing most of the management? And CEOs? Hell, you can pick them up bargain basement straight off the end of a degree course. Big savings in the millions!
Do beware, that <insert role here> is just an <insert role here> and thus replaceable cheaper works for every profession. And some are automatable.
I was really fond
Of the look of my old Apricot Qi 300 PC (my first proper PC, after coming up through the ranks of the ZX80,81, VIC 20, BBC B).. It won me a few contracts in the day because of the built in security (infrared key card and security chip on board that prevented anything working unless you authenticated using the key, as long as you had it enabled)... It looked pretty neat too!
The elephant in the room..
That seems to always be forgotten is the concept of copyright, and what it was all about.
The origins had about a 12 year span of protection for a work. This is back in the days when it would take years for a work to saturate the market. So, in that 12 years, it was a fair deal that you really do respect the creator's work, let them make a name for themselves out of it, and then, at the end of that protection, they will need to have worked on something else to provide for themselves in the next 12 years (or be hired for shows for that work, or make some other use of it in a free market).
This pretty much seemed to work. It's also a fair deal. An artificial constraint on copying (not stealing) something for a very limited term, after which it enriches the world by entering the public domain. 12 years is enough that you know if you hold your end of the bargain, in a few years, you'll be able to watch it guilt free or do whatever you want with it. Entirely legally.
However, now copyright is at an insane level of life of the author plus 70 years, that is no deal at all. The media cartels have literally stolen the public domain (used the legal system to remove access to what used to be a public resource) for their own profit. What was once a deal that you could actually understand and could be understood to have a semblance of fairness to it is now more a "we own this in perpetuity, you will never have any participation in it, and you will only do with it what we want". Yes, it makes for a great corporate cash cow for the big productions, but causes the loss of many smaller ones that would survive without those restrictions.
Personally, I don't pirate. I choose not to buy if the deal doesn't feel right to me, under the understanding that copyright sets out in the deal today. There are a LOT of things I don't buy, because they just aren't worth the money, or perversely because the content producer is trying to enforce copy protection to the point it actually makes things difficult for me to get what I want from what I've paid for (which is one reason things like Diablo3 etc. will always be sat in my "wish I could have bought it, just for kicks and reminiscing, but they screwed the pooch with the ridiculous constraints. Deal breaker.".
Getting back to basics with copyright, and actually making a fair and balanced deal with the public would be the first step in helping prevent piracy. When it's a one sided dictat, rather than a deal, are you surprised that people rebel against the unfair conditions?
Re: No sympathy
Marketing, hard work?
I've worked in Advertising and Marketing segments, and it's not "the hard work". It's finding something quirkily catchy to say about something, and knowing the channels to use to put it into the media. Most of that is rote.
Inventing things, and actually getting products to work reliably and in a fashion where they can be released (especially as a lone inventor/small company) is extremely hard work.
Re: The G Bomb!
Nothing wrong with it.. Gaijin and proud of it! And thoroughly enjoy their pride in being Japanese too..
Now we know why they called it "Windows 8" and had that colour scheme!
Re: Win8 for business
The architecture behind Win8, I quite like.. The GUI makes me avoid it like the plague.. :)
Now, if MS, by default, allowed you to choose specifically whether you wanted to use Metro or not (so you had a Win7 equivalent desktop if that's what you needed for your environment) and had a Metro/touch base for a device that you needed that on, things would be great.
It's the probablity that nobody is going to use touch on a desktop (which still has a lot of use for regular office type work) because of gorilla arm and loads of other issues. Yet they have the interface forced on them.
And for the tablet, the desktop isn't the best metaphor.. Though they have that foisted on them too.. I take issue with the way MS are forcing people into the wrong tool for the moment, not on the underlying aspects of the OS.
Not all distros of Linux are free. Some are, some aren't. However, running them in at enterprise level (about the same kind of level that most of those features become really 'interesting') you're be an unmitigated fool to put a front line service server on anything but one of the distros that comes backed by sound commercial support contracts. That's part of the cost of the Microsoft products; they carry a service warranty with them (to a degree).
TCO is not a flat line across all activities. Linux provides advantages in some places, it loses out in others. That's the nature of heterogenous systems; each has its flaws and weaknesses, use them to your advantage, rather than becoming an advantage (or disadvantage) to just one tool.
Not sure where you get the 'fewer servers to do the same work' idea from. Certainly for some variants of work, that's true. But it's a part of the story. In other workflows, you'd need more Linux boxes (if they could do the particular task).
As to Linux being more secure.. I've had to laugh at many people who've told me that, and I'd had to point out that they'd already been rooted. Security is what resource you put in to it. Linux has some damn fine tools to secure a system at various levels, you just need to have the manpower available to keep up with it. In most places, top management doesn't quite understand how essential it is to have good security, so you don't get resourced for it.. If it's not resourced, it's going to be lacking somewhere, Linux or Windows. The approach is different for the different OSs, and you have to see them differently in the slots they fit into in an enterprise.
Again, patch tuesday isn't so bad if you're resourced for proper maintenance, and have proper rollback plans in place. If you don't, Windows or Linux (or any other OS you care to mention) you're in a whole barge load of trouble..
Oh, and in case you were wondering, this was posted from my Linux laptop, as I've left the Android tablet in the living room. This sits next to my Windows workstation which I use to connect up to work remotely when necessary and it hosts all the tools I need to administer the Windows side of things. I use an iPhone because it does what I need in the way I need it done.. Each piece was chosen specifically to achieve a particular function, and I find I'm more than happy with the diversity.. Far happier than if I'd stuck with one product.. And that's they way I go in work too.. Heterogenous all the way..
Re: PowerShell .. MEH!
I did find some of the documentation being a little flaky moving from the good stuff in V2 to the early V3.. I suspect MS will be fixing this soon..
Definitely agree it's got a lot of power on Windows platforms.. I even stopped using Perl as my language of choice on Windows when it PS found its feet. Still use it on *NIX though.
Re: Windows Server is obsolete except as an exchange server
Status is something that's earned through the depth of the argument, and the insight of the poster.
Now, the original AC has some pretty interesting things to say, by and large in line with what I encounter.
Before you yell about Linux being top, and I don't know what I'm talking about, I'm one of the original people on zen.uwe.ac.uk. I'm pretty sure Alan Cox is familiar with that machine..
I was part of the crowd that created the box Tao on Linux (same site) as we were a little more lacksadaisical with what we wanted to do, and Zen became rigorously controlled. So, I go back some time with Linux (actually, to the point the original call was put out by Linus, and it wouldn't be the first time I've tinkered with the source).
That being said, I run windows boxes as well and Linux ones. Before Powershell, I found myself pretty much hamstrung on the wider rollouts and bulk administration. With powershell, I think Microsoft finally woke up. This is a good thing.
I've no idea how you suddenly think you're the victim and being 'attacked' when AC posted a pretty concise evaluation, and actually does sound like he's done his rounds out there, and you chose to accuse him of being a shill, and knowing nothing, deeming yourself superior because you know Linux..
The mark of a veteran in this game is rarely the highly vocal (RMS is an exception, not the rule) zealot, it's the one who casts an eye on the problem at hand and evaluates the breadth of their experience in the many tools they've encountered, and slots the best one for the job into the solution. Sometimes this is Linux. Sometimes it's Windows.. Sometimes it's something completely different (hey, welcome to embedded systems; if nothing does the job, roll your own).
If you throw a flame into a thread, expect it to gain heat. Cause and effect. You're simply reaping the rewards of the tactic you followed. Things like this remind me that we are indeed still in full swing in the Eternal September.. There are days when I miss the old times..
Tools for the job..
Like all things, you choose the best tool for the job if you can..
I've got an e-book reader (Kindle) and a slate (Fusion5 HD Android 10").. The slab does strain the eyes more to read, and I don't use it to read on late at night. It's also wifi only (I have an iPhone to do net type stuff if I really need to connection), so needs PCs to get content.
The Kindle is the connected device. I'm an avid reader, and when going on holiday, more than once I've been sat in the middle of nowhere, and thought "Well, that's the last book done.. What now?", then browsed the book store to grab a new book there and then, and give myself something more to read. The battery life means I can do that for days between recharges.. Great for trekking round.
Tablets have all you need for media, and watching a quick movie, or browsing net, email, and all the photo editing on a journey after downloading the DSLR images.. There's plenty of scope for both, as their primary roles are significantly different.
If you've only got budget for one, then the tablet is the choice.. If you're precious about your reading experience (I am), then eBook readers are the way to go there.. Taking enough paperbacks for me to last a long holiday (2 weeks plus) would mean I lose half my weight allowance in books! Nowhere to stow the diving kit then (as that stuff gets heavy!).
Will get the tech heads perhaps interested. The rest of the world just wants something that works..
From this review, it seems you're extrapolating the possible tech wish of lovely hardware into a prediction that everyone will love it, despite the software really being a bit of a pain in the derriere..
That's not usually the way it works, alas. From all the 'normal people', to quote Avenue Q, I hang out with, they all say they just want something that works and doesn't get in the way. Good hardware spec, bad hardware spec, they'd not know the difference.
However, show them a graphical inconsistency, and they lose patience really quickly.
Mine should be turning up today..
Absolutely loved Darksiders.. The storyline was amusing, dark, yet occasionally light hearted, and engaging..
The puzzles are enough to make you think, without being so tough that you need to go off and ask someone. Watching and thinking was the key.. As for replayability.. I'm on about the 6th run through; it's like picking up a good book and re-reading it again. On the latter run throughs, I'm finding things get easier every time, not by rote muscle memory, but because I find out more things I can do to make my playing style more efficient, and more tactics that give better result.
If this one is even half as good, I think my life will be sunk into it until Guild Wars 2 springs out of the woodwork.. Then I think I'll need a clone so I can be in two places at once.
No, I don't have to wonder why.
It's because someone charged of criminal offenses and due to attend a court of law absconds and takes refuge in an embassy.
Embassies can take the choice to harbour a criminal (hes absconding breaks his bail conditions, which is a criminal offense) or refuse them access. By granting him access, they've created a diplomatic incident (using diplomatic power to subvert the justice system of the host country). If the UK shrugged it off and said "Whatever, go for it", then its international standing in the diplomatic stakes would be seriously hampered. With precedent set, any country could run black ops inside the UK, then when they're discovered, give them immunity by have them run back to the embassy without any consequence. I guess you can see where that path leads.
Up until the time Lasange chose to run, he still had a chance. Now he's committed a crime in this country too (demonstrably).
Ecuador is pretty silly to make a stand on this, as by international dealing, this is going to reflect VERY badly on them. Deals they may have struck to their advantage will probably not be offered, as people just don't trust them so much.
The threat had to be made. Ecuador know the deal, and they chose to follow this route anyway, which could possibly lead to them losing their embassy in the UK, pretty much over trying to keep someone from attending a trial which would be their main way of proving their innocence.. They know they're on the wrong side of the justice system, they're just hoping media will portray them as heroes.. Taken in the harsh light of day, I'd say they just look silly.
Re: Getting him out
That's a pretty sensible thing really.. Given the amoung of shagging around Lasange had been doing courtesy of his media profile, he'd be a pretty strong candidate as an STD infection vector. If the deal is "OK, but protect me from what you may have picked up", but he refused to do that.. That's putting the other person at risk, thus the interpretation into law.
Maybe not rape in the way we perceive it, but I think sexual assault isn't too far from what a court could judge..
Re: How about some nice ladies finally finding interest in all the work?
Innuendo, scare women? Who do you think is reading "50 shades of grey"?
Most of the gals where I work are far more into the innuendo than the guys! They just don't have an interest in the geeky side of the tech work.
Re: Its a MMORPG !
You're really not a programmer are you?
If you can't abstract away the file storage, you've got no business going near commercial coding that uses data storage.
It's a political decision to force people to use the real money marketplace, no more and no less.
Bad move, marketers.
Re: Investment in the backbone?
Good idea.. Though perhaps re-examine their renumeration, as their evidenced value to the organisation isn't what it was thought to be..
Though following the chain, and finding out why the outsourcing decisions were made if the first place, who applied the pressure, and finding out why they applied pressure to something as obviously risky (we hear the cries every time there is outsourcing that something like this will happen; well, here we are). And definitely evaluate their value to the company and renumeration.
Re: How many of those are for current products?
Government doesn't have the hefty grunt to force a buy back clause (if you buy, you buy, and it comes under the same restrictions as any other business).
But, you're essentially correct in that most of those licenses are outdated software (NT4, Windows 2000, and now Windows 2003 is being phased out, along with desktop licenses for Windows 95, 2000 and XP).
The cost to purchase "upgrade protection" and then the upgrade later on doesn't work well with the way budgets are set, so in general, it works out more effective to buy a license, knowing it'll last for about 8 years, then be deprecated.
This does,however, lead to headlines like this, where there are x% of the licenses unused. I daresay in 20 years, there'll be the headline "90% of public sector software licenses are unused" and a lot of wrath from people who don't actually get that this is due to natural deprecation (software stays on the books as an asset).
The licenses that are current and unused will be very small.. I know we're hurting for them here at the mo..
Re: I'm surprised Google hasn't stepped in here
So, gaming is woeful because.. Of a whole load of things that aren't actually to do with a game, just telling people about it, and showing off an 'achievement'?
Personally, I'll take a good game that plays well, and doesn't bother me with any of that stuff over a voice integrated 'achievement every minute' high scored game that just doesn't have an edge.
Trophies and such are irrelevant to a game (though I'm sure it gives people bragging rights). Voice chat.. Easy enough to integrate if you wanted to (but then you'd have a load of people yelling "kill them all" manically on every train)
Why do I want to sign on to most games I play (answer, I don't; I don't want to sign on at all unless it's a MMO)..
Well, I work in the NHS, and we do use Linux. The problem is that 95% of the vendors of clinical systems don't support Linux.
Because these are the things that are used in safety critical things (tracking of patient health etc.), simply saying "We'll try WINE" isn't an option.
Any behemoth organisation will only change slowly, and the NHS has been steeped in Windows for many years. It won't change overnight (though there have been some vendors being a little more enlightened).
This agreement tends to cover things like desktop licenses as well as server, so there's a lot of churn there, and a lot of cash if you need to track it to the exact license count for circa 4k machines (per hospital) for desktop alone.
Covering licensing areas as part of a deal actually lessens ongoing management costs, saving ongoing money. It also strikes a good deal (1% instead of 30% increase).. Again, this saves money..
It's a simple fact that the government needs to buy servers, and a large portion of those are tied into what vendors will supply (usually Windows, with the odd few Linux/UNIX). This looks like a big saving where necessary purchases are made.
Re: Restriction of ideas is silly
Given that most of the ideas had already happened before the model T, your argument lacks any basis.
Advancement would always happen (and there's always the theory that it would happen faster).
The idea of the patent was that someone revealed to everyone how something worked in return for a protection for a limited amount of time, just enough to get them established in the market, before everyone else could join. Prior to this, things were always 'commercial secrets', and jealously guarded. Some great ideas probably perished with their inventors becase the knowledge was lost when they died.
Patents were supposed to get around this, which they certainly helped do. Now, however the misuse of them is rife (certainly in things like software, which should never have been patentable in the first place). This is actively slowing down progress massively and at great cost. Which is exactly the opposite of its intent at origin. Which means that it needs to be re-thought to fit in with the world as it is now, not as it was a few hundred years ago..
Part of the deal in anything would be getting time limitations right (software is museum piece at 25 years, a patent term; this is definitely a serious technical abuse of the system).
This all ignores the elephant in the room
That is the big media stealing the public domain. They have no ethical right to do this, as it was established to enrich culture for everyone, yet through legal technicalities (and outright bribery), they establish a legal bastion to do exactly this.
Everyone is being deprived of what, not long ago was a fully legal right after a timespan.
Now the deal is being changed in a way too heavy handed way.
For example, you agree to pay something, and the vendor says "We'll have it there in a reasonable time. We expect 3 working days". You shell out your money, and you're happy. The system works.
Then a series of vendors get together, and get a legal argument together and say "Well, actually, your goods won't be delivered to you until next month, as we now have a piece of legislation that says that's reasonable".. Then next month they say "Next year, as that's reasonable". Then you get the message next year "Well, technically, infinity years minus one is reasonable as a technical legal definition, therefore you'll never get your goods. No you're not allowed to change your end of the deal".
Very rough analogy, and I know there are legal ramifications to trying to pull that particular stunt, but this is the kind of trick they're trying to play. We've funded their businesses since copyright was created, a few hundred years ago (and of course, before this, by their argument, nobody would ever have created art would they, without protection of Copyright?) under a basic deal. Someone created a work, and for about 12 years, they could do what they wanted with it. It took most of that time for it to travel across the world! So, effectively, you controlled the work until everyone had bought it, and had a chance to buy it under your deal (set price etc) and nobody was allowed to copy it until it was firmly established in the mind of the populace that it was you who created it.
Now, however, with the erosion of the public domain, it's somehow acceptable for a business entity to control this in perpetuity, always controlling how, or even if, a work is available to anyone, allowing selective culling of culture at a whim, and allowing social engineering on a massive scale. Also for attempts to criminalise and control people who 'bend the rules' (I'm all for taking out commercial pirates, but it rankles to have the big brother eye cast over every single person; the law was never created with this level of control in mind).
What we have now is NOT a fair deal. The original one was, at its time, in its context.
So, when the deal is changed, and you have no control over that, and are told to just sit there and take it, people have no clue as to why some people no longer regard that deal as valid, and ignore it?
Everything is a balance, not black and white. This article paints copyright as black and white, which misses the entire point (spurious logic; base an argument on a false premise, and treat the premise as axiomatic, then hope that nobody spots the flaw isn't in the progressive argument, it's in the base premise, in this case that copyright is a fair deal that should be obeyed).
Copyright is no longer balanced. It certainly isn't fair anymore. If one side chooses not to play fair, why should the other?
It's a start.
NHS IT is often the "Poor Cousin". Most of the staff there consider IT as nothing more than magic lights that come on a screen, and everything happens with a wave of a wand. When competing with resources to make sure patients survive surgery, it's hard to justify why you may need a few hundred grand to store documents and databases.
Until, of course, the documents and databases vanish, and nobody has any idea on what to do with the patients in the clinics in the first place.
Still it's one hospital that's managed to present things as they are: If we don't have this, then things will go badly. You won't have the magic lights on the screen and no amount of wand waving will fix that. And overall, this is the best way to go for cost effectiveness.
Yes, it's very "yesterday" for industry, that actually gets to put its profits back into building infrastructure, and has the scope to hire people to carry on the business. The NHS, currently, is fighting to keep the head above water, and with several projects in there that make things like this look small. But it's a hospital trust, and it's doing the right thing. Personally, I give it a round of applause for what it's achieved. Never underestimate the small steps in doing the right thing.
All this talk of 'theft' of intellectual property.. Read:
This details a case (now resolved, and not in a good way), whereby rights are taken back from the Public Domain and placed back in copyright once they had already, by contract (the original law) been given to the public.
US supreme court has essentially said it can take anything back from the public domain anytime it chooses. There is now no truly effective public domain that can be relied on. And if you say it can't happen, this story tells you the effects of it already having happened. With Disney et. al. chasing more extensions, it'll be easy enough for this to happen again.
Now, depriving someone of something is pretty much the definition of theft. In this case though, it's media corporations that are leaning on the government (using bribery/lobbying) representatives to create laws to get the media corporations what they want. They're using the law as a tool to steal from everyone.
Couple this in with the current state that the US keeps threatening to embargo people that don't harmonise their copyright/patent laws with the US standards, and it sets the scene for a globalisation of this practice.
Juries aren't there to make the law. They're there to determine whether a law has been broken or not. Not whether the law is actually just or even ethical (or even enforceable or workable).
You could have a law written to say you had to, say, euthanise every third born child. In a court, even though the law was unethical and mostrous, a jury would still have to convict if someone was shown to not have euthanised a third born.
But hey, nice straw man.
Yep, they cried that if home taping was allowed, everyone would record and share, and the movie industry would die.
They lost the court cases, home taping was allowed, and it set the scene for the lion's share of the movie industry income these days.
Now, they're doing exactly the same "Oooo.. Copying anything will mean we'll all go bankrupt. Copying is killing the industry.".
Basically, this story just says "No it's not. Do something people want at a price that's a fair deal and you've nothing to worry about. Try extortion, and people get unhappy with you.".
Guild Wars 2...
That's due out this year, by all accounts.. It's looking great (out of all the games supposedly out this year, it'd be the one I get, if I only got to choose one).
It's PC only, as far as I'm aware, but well worth mentioning..
Oh, you mean neutrinos plural!
Avoid the scrotes?
Hmm.. Maybe I'll send a few to hang round outside your house and throw abuse at you.
Hey, time for you to move. Have them outside your work too? Get another job..
They hang round the places where you go to unwind, and throw even more abuse at you? Stay in your hidden hovel, do nothing, close the doors and windows, and have no life..
Or, you could call them out on it, make them face the consequences of their actions, and have a life.
Actions have consequence; I certainly knew that by my teenage years. If I'd kept yelling abuse at an adult, I'd have expected a clout. I didn't throw abuse, and I didn't get the clout. Fair deal as far as I can see.
The 'Atlas' contains a set of fact. Exact reproduction of these facts in the same format would breach copyright (i.e. taking sentence extracts, and re-publishing diagrams etc.).
The company did not originate these facts, so would have pulled them from elsewhere. Quite possibly many other elsewheres.
So, one programmer uses a reference book to obtain public information as a quick and accurate reference to produce software that does something else, not competing with that first product.
This is simply reducing the formatted facts back to simple facts (the database), which could have been garnered from the original sources (or any other source that collected them).
So, if this case were to succeed, it would essentially say that any compiled source of freely available facts could not be used (without payment) to compile another set of facts. If facts could be copyrighted (which they can't) then I'd understand (in law) how they could think of starting a lawsuit up, but as it stands, I can't.
If the author hadn't put attribution to what he thought was a good source of compiled information, instead of doing the job from scratch, nobody would have been any the wiser. He tried to do the honourable thing and place attribution. For his efforts, he gets a set of lawyers on his tail.
Net effect, something good is taken away by someone with nothing to put it its place. Hopefully this story will pass around, getting the company a good old PR kicking for being idiots.
92 mile hike...
Well, on a long trek, I turn the phone OFF. If someone wants to talk to me, they can leave a message on the voicemail, or drop a text.
When I'm feeling like a bit of communication, I'll turn it ON for a few minutes to see if I've got signal, and if so, if I've got messages.
I've gone two weeks with that strategy, got all the messages I absolutely needed, and made all the calls/texts I needed.
It's called 'thinking'. Yes, having a replaceable battery is 'nice', but a bit of forethought about what you need will see you through better than extra hardware.
I can't be arsed to have tweets and stuff on my screen while I'm watching a movie.. But I'll be damned if someone tells me that I couldn't if I wanted to.
Wide vs Narrow.
Industry partnerships can fund a wide variety of subjects, but yes, they do need to improve their bottom line.
Where they've identified some research areas that can improve their profitability, they'll invest (and some of those are very unexpected).
Universities can afford to do more blue sky science, as there's far less importance on this research being profitable. Though from this, you find the odd one has commercial applications, and then industry picks it up and delves deeper.
Using the different focusses from different groups is the key. Relying only on one group or focus is a bad way to go.. Losing the wider scope is a problem.
- FLABBER-JASTED: It's 'jif', NOT '.gif', says man who should know
- Analysis Spam and the Byzantine Empire: How Bitcoin tech REALLY works
- VIDEO Herschel Space Observatory spots galaxies merging
- Apple cored: Samsung sells 10 million Galaxy S4 in a month
- More than half of Windows 8 users just treat it like Windows 7