That is rubbish. Project Gutenberg contains 40,000 works. If you apply Sturgeon's Law, "90% of everything is crud.", that means 4,000 wortwhile works are FREE. Has the periodic table really changed in the last 30 years? The problem is that our educational system does not want to change to suit tablets. It is our educators that are obsolete. The Hyundai T7s is $186. The question is what to load on the microSD card because which Android tablet is used does not matter.

Smartphones are faster and have more memory than mainframes of the 1980s. Everyone now has the problem of figuring out what to do with them. The computer industry has the problem of figuring out how to make money with them or off the users. How many useless variations in operating systems do we need? How often do we need to upgrade? We are supposed to buy a computer because it is thin? LOL I would rather have a thicker computer that would run for 24 hours.

So Al Qaeda can change the laws of physics and the nation that put men on the Moon can't tell the entire world the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of buildings designed before 1969. Don't skyscrapers have to hold themselves up? Doesn't every level have to be strong enough to support the combined weights of all levels above? Why is the CN Tower in Toronto shaped the way it is? Didn't the designers of the WTC have to figure out how to distribute the steel to solve a similar problem? But the WTC didn't get narrower at the top. So it had much more of a wind problem. Wind is a sheer force just like an airliner.

That depreciation only refers to CAPITAL GOODS. What about the depreciation of DURABLE CONSUMER GOODS? Galbraith wrote about the planned obsolescence of automobiles in The Affluent Society in 1959. It is now 41 years after the Moon landing and now we have the depreciation of consumer computers. But when consumers replace this junk designed to fall apart economists add it to GDP. But all of that depreciation disappears into space. Economists can't do algebra. http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=28529 .

Do the laws of physics care about the Left the Right or the Truth Movement? Isn't Physics THE TRUTH? How do you build a 1300 foot skyscraper without determining how much steel and concrete to put on every level? How do you analyze a supposed top down gravitational collapse without knowing the distributions of steel and concrete? Skyscrapers MUST hold themselves up. They must also sway in the wind. The people who design skyscrapers MUST figure out how much steel and how much concrete they are going to put on every level before they even dig the hole for the foundation. After EIGHT YEARS why don’t we have a table specifying the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of WTCs 1&2? The NIST report does not even specify the TOTAL for the concrete. The total for the steel is in three places. So even if the planes did it that 10,000 page report is CRAP! Conspiracies are irrelevant. The Truth Movement should be marching on all of the engineering schools in the country. Watch that Purdue simulation. If a 150 ton airliner crashes near the top of a skyscraper at 440 mph isn’t the building going to sway? Didn’t the survivors report the building “moving like a wave”? So why do the core columns in the Purdue video remain perfectly still as the plane comes in? That is the trouble with computer simulations. If they are good, they are very good. But if they have a defect either accidental or deliberate they can be REALLY STUPID once you figure out the flaws. The distributions of steel and concrete are going to affect the sway of a skyscraper whether it is from the wind or an airliner. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - How much does one complete floor assembly weigh? You know those square donut floor slabs? They were 205 ft square with a rectangular hole for the core. There was a steel rebar mesh embedded in the concrete which was poured onto corrugated steel pans which were supported by 35 and 60 foot trusses. There has been talk about those things pancaking on each other for years. But has anyone ever said what the whole thing weighed? Why haven't we seen that A LOT in EIGHT YEARS? The concrete alone is easy to compute, about 601 tons. But the concrete could not be separated from the entire assembly, the upper knuckles of the trusses were embedded into the concrete. So what did the whole thing weigh and why haven't the EXPERTS been mentioning that A LOT in EIGHT YEARS? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - So why hasn't Richard Gage and his buddies produced a table with the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of the WTC? How much computing power do they have now, compared to the early 1960s when the buildings were designed? I asked Gage about that in May of 2008 at Chicago Circle Campus and he got a surprised look on his face and gave me this LAME excuse about the NIST not releasing accurate blueprints. Gravity hasn't changed since the 1960s. They should be able to come up with some reasonable numbers.

Let’s just face a few simple facts. Skyscrapers MUST hold themselves up. They must also sway in the wind. The people who design skyscrapers MUST figure out how much steel and how much concrete they are going to put on every level before they even dig the hole for the foundation. After EIGHT YEARS why don’t we have a table specifying the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of WTCs 1&2? The NIST report does not even specify the TOTAL for the concrete. The total for the steel is in three places. So even if the planes did it that 10,000 page report is CRAP! Conspiracies are irrelevant. The Truth Movement should be marching on all of the engineering schools in the country. Watch that Purdue simulation. If a 150 ton airliner crashes near the top of a skyscraper at 440 mph isn’t the building going to sway? Didn’t the survivors report the building “moving like a wave”? So why do the core columns in the Purdue video remain perfectly still as the plane comes in? That is the trouble with computer simulations. If they are good, they are very good. But if they have a defect either accidental or deliberate they can be REALLY STUPID once you figure out the flaws. The distributions of steel and concrete are going to affect the sway of a skyscraper whether it is from the wind or an airliner. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - How much does one complete floor assembly weigh? You know those square donut floor slabs? They were 205 ft square with a rectangular hole for the core. There was a steel rebar mesh embedded in the concrete which was poured onto corrugated steel pans which were supported by 35 and 60 foot trusses. There has been talk about those things pancaking on each other for years. But has anyone ever said what the whole thing weighed? Why haven't we seen that A LOT in EIGHT YEARS? The concrete alone is easy to compute, about 601 tons. But the concrete could not be separated from the entire assembly, the upper knuckles of the trusses were embedded into the concrete. So what did the whole thing weigh and why haven't the EXPERTS been mentioning that A LOT in EIGHT YEARS? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - So why hasn't Richard Gage and his buddies produced a table with the TONS of STEEL and TONS of CONCRETE that were on every level of the WTC? How much computing power do they have now, compared to the early 1960s when the buildings were designed? I asked Gage about that in May of 2008 at Chicago Circle Campus and he got a surprised look on his face and gave me this LAME excuse about the NIST not releasing accurate blueprints. Gravity hasn't changed since the 1960s. They should be able to come up with some reasonable numbers.

Yeah the Kindle is like an 8-track player but there are more than 2 choices of e-book format. That is why I only use TEXT files. They work on any computer. I can use them on my Archos PMA400 but I have a program that can convert them to any format, including Kindle. The Kindle is too big though. If it won't fit in a pocket it is WORTHLESS. I want auto-scroll though.

Oops! That was supposed to be 'deception' The economic wargame is a continuation of the military wargame by other means. http://discussions.pbs.org/viewtopic.pbs?t=28529 http://www.spectacle.org/1199/wargame.html

All warfare is based on decetion. Marketing people don't talk about the planned obsolescence of the garbage they are trying to sell. In fact they often do not know. Economists are technological morons. How much do consumers lose on the DWPRECIATION of so called Durable Consumer Goods every year?

Economists don't talk about planned obsolescence just like they don't talk about how much consumers lose in depreciation on junk designed to become obsolete. But engineers can figure out that planned obsolescence creates work and therefore jobs for engineers. The pot has no business calling the kettle black.

What has happened with computers since 1966 when Star Trek began? Science fiction is really about what kind of society may be made with technology. Technology is not going going to stop. The real problem is that plenty of people that say they like Trek just concentrate on the people in the stories and don't think about how it is the technology that makes the stories possible. Bible Trek Doesn't God have to know about relativity?

People are being told that netbooks aren’t powerful enough and that they are just for accessing the net. Today's benchmarks do not provide a perspective on how much processing power they really have. They only compare current technology. Here is a different kind of benchmark from the Good Olde Days. http://www.netbookation.com/netbkbnch.htm

It has gotten to the point that now most people don't know what questions to ask about a grade school physics problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc How do you build a 1360 foot skyscraper without figuring out how much steel and concrete to put on every level? Why do people expect it to be possible to figure out whether or not a NORMAL airliner can destroy it in less than 2 hours without that information? And yet now we can make NETBOOK computers more powerful than the mainframes from the 1980s for less than $300. So how many people can figure out what to do with technology this powerful? 40 years after the Moon landing and our so called scientists don't talk about the Planned Obsolescence of automobiles and our economists don't tell consumers how much they have lost on the depreciation of that garbage. John Kenneth Galbraith talked about PO in 1959 also. psik

It has gotten to the point that now most people don't know what questions to ask about a grade school physics problem. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXAerZUw4Wc How do you build a 1360 foot skyscraper without figuring out how much steel and concrete to put on every level? Why do people expect it to be possible to figure out whether or not a NORMAL airliner can destroy it in less than 2 hours without that information? And yet now we can make NETBOOK computers more powerful than the mainframes from the 1980s for less than $300. So how many people can figure out what to do with technology this powerful? 40 years after the Moon landing and our so called scientists don't talk about the Planned Obsolescence of automobiles and our economists don't tell consumers how much they have lost on the depreciation of that garbage. John Kenneth Galbraith talked about PO in 1959 also. psik

I find it curious that there is no mention of the Vero Beach computer education program that was implemented in 1987. How much more powerful are netbooks than 1987 computers? http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/500/421