I actually think the opposite. I would imagine that a driving rain will come in under the wings and into the top of the large cabin. Conventional doors are not perfect and the inside of the doors get wet, however these wings appear to allow the person sitting and seats to get wet.
He is walking a tightrope. And protecting the privacy of those that are not deemed culpable in some way is understandable.
However to be consistent with his previous acceptance of MIT holding some responsibility, he probably should:
(1) release the redacted documents now.
(2) perhaps not refer to this as the "Aaron Swartz situation" or state that "In the time since Aaron Swartz's suicide, we have seen........ ", as this wording is less accepting of some responsibility and really is putting the full burden of the backlash on Aaron. (he could perhaps say "our handling of the Aaron Swartz situation".)
It would appear that regardless of what MIT does, it would be up to the court when and how to release the un-redacted version.
....and MIT, for Fks sake, get your Network security together, that is really not a great reflection on your reputation as world class engineering org.
I think this is a great idea, however I think you can make less ambiguous if you don't say "will not share". I think you are better saying...."will not transmit any information to our server". A lot of services don't intend to "share" things that are uploaded to their servers. Much easier decision to download/install if you unequivocally state that nothing will ever be Transmitted to the server. I personally am hesitant to install this just because it has the capability for me to accidentally upload my private info if I click the wrong setting.
I have seen many Java based Process Modelers Fail to live up the the promise of allowing "business users" the ability to create workflows without writing any code. It appears however that Mendix may have figured out how to make it work. I think that it has to do with the entire closed-loop solution (develop, deploy, monitor, app store, SVN integration, Domain model management, DSL's etc). Without those supporting pieces all working together, developers would inevitably need to be involved, thus stunting business user adoption.
My personal take on this is that it helps to show/teach kids what the expected results are and then praise them for their hard work in trying to reach that goal. For instance, I think it is healthy to go outside and play basketball and say "The goal is to get the ball in the basket". If you miss the basket, try to figure out why you missed and adjust. I think that if your kid gets progressively closer to the hoop and they are trying different things to adjust, that they should be praised for their hard work/effort (even if then do not get any baskets). The kids will focus on both the goal and the process of trying to adjust to achieve that goal, both of those having rewarding outcomes. However if you only focus on the Result, certain kids that are not analytical or highly gifted athletically, could get discouraged when they are not attaining those results as quickly as others. Better results are attainable for others, however they need more nurturing and more practice. On the other hand, to go out and show a child exactly how to shoot the ball in great detail, does not allow the child the room for experimentation to learn how to adapt.
It is important to realize that there are some very successful guys in the NBA that can't really shoot that well (they can sure dunk or pass)....and some team owners that can not shoot at all. Each kid will be different. Find out what your kid is good at and help then along with that.
I agree with these things in general and being a father, I try to keep up on these "outlier" type conversations on parenting. However, being a father of two young children I am also starting to realize that people are programmed a certain way at birth. Some are naturally ambitious, some are cunning, some are observant, some are curious, some are naive, others sensitive, others tough, etc. You can see it very early on. There is no set rule or path to "Success". Not everyone is going to achieve "Success" no matter what you do as a parent. I grew up with three siblings all with the same parents in the same home...three different outcomes. I think that those who read these books (including myself) are part of the group of people who question if they fully optimized their potential and perhaps want to see if they can help their kids along in a different way. There are some kids that don't need an ounce of motivation and others that need to be nurtured at every step. You have to look at each individual differently and adapt to them and their needs. Bottom Line....to paraphrase from Barbara Corcoran's business book... I am trying to help my children "use what they've got"
I have extensive experience with both CNC milling and 3D printing. I feel that 3D printing is disrupting Product Design/Development vs. actual Manufacturing. Anyone with an idea can now make functional prototypes and proofs of concepts with the click of a button. As you wrote, in perhaps 10 years time, we will be able to get the size and surface finish from 3d printing required to make limited production parts that have certain characteristics (weight, shape, containing reentrant angles, etc) not feasible from CNC milling/turning, etc.
For the present time, 3D Printing is NOT revolutionizing the actual production of end products.
However the decreased pricing and increased availability (3D printing has been available for a very long time at a high cost) of 3D Printing machines IS revolutionizing the very important part of the product life cycle....Design For Manufacture (DFM)[1].
Rapid Prototyping, Kanban, lean, agile, and other concepts that are revolutionizing software development were all concepts that developed in the Manufacturing world many years ago.
3D Printing is a very valuable tool for rapidly validating and testing designs....release early and often, get feedback, validate, etc.
Most products for the time being(once through the DFM process) will still get produced using traditional methods (Injection Mouldings, Castings, etc).
On some level, Dropbox is a hardware company [1]. I think that once you have installed software at a clients location, you are in a different realm than simply being a cloud/software/service provider. The customer has full ownership of the device. I think that the move to hardware is tri-fold (a) hardware is easier now than ever (b) hardware is a good strategy and a natural barrier to entry for a startup (in general, less people grok hardware and systems software than they do web programming[2]) (c) a small/mini subconscious push-back against the Cloud[3] where more and more customers are being turned off by not owning something at the end of the day[4]
[1] The hardware is the customers PC.
[2] iOS device programming, w/ human interaction (gyroscope) has also been a natural training ground.
[3] Of course, many Hardware companies these days Square, Dropbox, etc, will be paired with a cloud service.
[4] Acqui-hires..."We are shutting Down. Please Download your stuff by next week. Thanks for being a User and getting me interest from a big fish, see you on my next startup"
DDD is in a great position in a exploding market. They spend a lot of money on R&D...they could acquire this company in a heartbeat as they did Z-Corp and Huntsman in the past. Innovative companies like this help the overall Rapid Prototyping market move forward....DDD and SSYS are the big fish with distribution, service, infrastructure and the the capital ready to make sensible acquisitions. It would be a different story if this was a mature market with slowing growth and new uses were not being found for the technology everyday. It is conceivable that the way this technology is moving forward, we will be printing Clothing, Houses, Body Parts, etc. So there is a lot of room in this market....this is just the very beginning (OR I should say, the "end of the beginning" as the tech has been around for 20 years and now finally hitting the mainstream).
(1) No, I am saying that one of the lowest hanging fruits to drive down the cost of Healthcare is ubiquitous/simple two way electronic communication between providers/payers/patients. Today's technology is more than capable of solving this in a very efficient manner. The politics and other reasons standing in the way of progress is a completely different story.
(2) This product is actually a solution to this specific issue (complicated and inaccessible data interchange formats). This is not going to solve the healthcare crisis alone, however I think the net effect of services like this is very positive and will result in lower costs and Better and Faster healthcare service.
One Note: While a realitime EOB (explanation of benefits) system will benefit patients. Such a system can be abused. Health Providers that are less than ethical (which hopefully is a small minority) that can more easily query for "un-used" benefits that remain on their patients insurance plan can push un-necessary procedures and diagnostics in order to make more claims.
API's and services like this are Key in making it so that more people will be able to afford medical care. Solving the current cluster F* of paperwork and time involved in establishing eligibility is one of the lowest hanging fruits in cutting medical costs (....NOTE: As opposed to more complicated cost cutting concepts such as preventative care) A typical Doctors office of 2 or 3 practitioners may have 2 or 3 or more support people spending their day faxing back EOB's to insurance companies, etc. Those dollars directly affect the cost of Health Care. This is Great.....X12 is arcane, good riddance. There are actually some insurance clearinghouses that will pay you to use them (if you have high enough volume) as they are paid by the insurance companies and/or through government incentive programs.
This is very cool and has a lot of potential, however a few comments.
I have done a lot of hand routing and also have a 3-Axis CNC Router.
Both hand routing and CNC each have their own Setup Costs.
(1) I can see this device being very useful for artists and designers that are doing a lot of one-off shapes and designs (perhaps for Set Design, pattern makers, templates, etc). The setup costs to prepare CNC files for these types of Jobs account for the majority of the costs.
(2) However I would guess that the majority of field (vs. shop) routing is done to "shape" the edge of wood (i.e. with a ogee or roundover, etc). Short of having an on site upside down router table, this is typically done (a) using a plunge bit with a top mounted guide for the Router guard to follow or (b) using a router bit with a small Guide Wheel that follows a top or bottom mounted template/guide edge. The router bits with Guide Wheels can not easily be used for plunge routing and are a pain to use in multi-pass scenarios. I don't know if they can get the precision, however I would think that if this team could offset their sensors to follow the middle of a piece of trim allowing someone to shape the edge of a piece of wood "FreeHand" (after applying some guide tape) and get away from Guide wheels, Clamps, Guides, etc. That would be a MAJOR use case.
(3) After watching the Video, I would urge users to wear dusk masks when routing.
I think that what differentiates Jobs from those other engineers mentioned in the article is that the skills that a Steve Jobs brings to the table would more llikely have been an asset to any type of product in any era. I am not an iPhone guy, however as an engineer, I am a huge Steve Jobs fan and am in constant awe on each example I read of the depth of his work ethic (perhaps his greatest skill). I think a better choice as an author would have been James Gleick.
While I agree that iTunes sucks (at least in comparison to other Apple products), apparently Steve rarely pulled any punches , so this is not out of character. From most of the book quotes that I read, he appears to have said most if not all of these things to the parties involved directly and has famously voiced many of them in public before as well (re: Microsoft in particular) just not in a Blog.
I think it is safe to assume that he was trying very hard to be around for the books release (even pushing up the release date) and was not trying to hide behind anything.
I am not sure I agree with all his views, however I do not fault him for trying to get his real voice out there as there were certainly a lot of stories written about him that he was not able to answer directly and now there is no question about where he stood on matters.
I am sure there are a thousand reasons that these ideas would not be feasible, however I have been thinking of two other approaches towards software and business process patent reform.
(1) would be to shorten the time that a patent is valid to 1 year . Give the Company who 'invents' (and goes through the patent process) a small head start, however in today's quickly changing world, I think that this shorter time-frame is more proportionally in-line with the R&D investment of these types of processes. Patents that protect the Physical items (that in general are more costly to develop and take a longer time to implement due to the more expensive and time consuming manufacturing processes) the protection would remain longer (engines, chip-sets, medicines, etc)
I think that these shorter term-limits will shake out the patent trolls, yet still allow a patent holder some opportunity to leverage their work and license to companies that could not wait the 1 year, however after that, it is all about execution.
(2)Perhaps another approach (and much less realistic) would be to keep the existing term limits, but have a prix-fixe license fee schedule/menu for all software and business processes. There would be a few Tiers of patents (i.e. Class 1, Class 2, Class 3, etc). You would apply to a patent (and a Class) and the license fees would spelled out for the annual license fees. Perhaps the Amazon 1-Click Patent would be Class-1 (i.e. "pretty darn obvious" and the fees would be $100 per year), etc. Anyone willing to pay the fee could license the patent (no one can be denied). This would also stop hoarding, and would allow people with legitimate inventions to monetize their investment, however still allow those that feel that they can execute to also move forward an innovate.
Based on my personal experience as a user of the site, feels like could be staples.com (I used to hate that form, and now it is gone, so I buy more often)....also the revenues match up to Staples of 25B.
While this blog post is well written and has a good point, I have seen several interviews with him and for some reason, every time the reporter quizzes him on the effects his new Diet/Fitness have had on his tennis, he is very quick to change the direction of the interview to his actual play. It is either something personal (perhaps change of diet does not give much street cred) or some PR person telling him, however it is quite obvious that he is trying to direct the public opinion........I have no basis for this, however it almost feels like his nutritionist was doing a bunch of interviews taking all the credit and when everyone started asking him for comment he feels compelled to take the credit back.