Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: snl.com

Stories and comments across the archive that link to snl.com.

Comments · 5

  1. Largest of its type only by hackertourist · · Score: 5, Interesting · on Boeing Installs World's Largest 'Reversible' Renewable Energy Storage System (computerworld.com)

    Reversible energy storage systems have been around for a while. Pumped water storage scales to GW levels with 70% efficiency, but depend on specific geography.
    Another scheme is to use an electric locomotive to push rail cars up a hill, and use motor braking on the downhill run to extract the energy again.

    Storage in hydrogen is less efficient: electrolysis is 70% efficient, a fuel cell is 40-60%, so chain efficiency is around 35%. The advantage is it's scalable and can be made portable (which is why the DOD is interested).

  2. Re:One of the best apologies I have ever read by pedestrian+crossing · · Score: 5, Interesting · on NASA Unveils Sweeping New Programs For Next 5 Years

    We just spent more money shoring up some major banks than we spent in the last ten years on the space program!

    OK, enough of this bullshit that I keep hearing mindlessly repeated. The TARP funds that went to banks were structured as investments, which haven't done too bad considering the circumstances.

    A big chunk of that has been paid back (at an annual rate of return around 8.5%). Yes there will be some write-offs that will ultimately lower that rate and in the end, it may end up being a wash. That means little or no net loss. Pretty good for a government program.

    Stop spewing this ridiculous meme that the bank bailouts were some huge money sink. It is not true.

    Now, if you want to complain about how things went with our money and AIG (an insurance company) and the automakers, fine. But on the balance, the bank bailout wasn't too bad...

  3. I work in the power industry and this isn't new... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on $9 Billion Loophole for Synthetic Fuel

    I work in the power industry and this has been going on for 5 or more years. Take coal and spray junk tar, bunker C type oil or whatever on it then sit back and take your tax break and profit!.

    One site I was at had the stuff congeal in their coal bunkers. They had to blast and hydro the gunk out. The bunkers are 20+ ft in diameter, 80+ ft tall, about 6 of them. The only place they had flow was in about 3 foot of the center of each bunker. It had to cost a ton of money to get the stuff cleaned out and also in lost generating revenues, but they didn't care because of millions in tax breaks.

    A power station near Charlotte, NC is adding the capabilty to mix this "syn-fuel" costing millions in infrastructure which will be recovered in a couple of years (to be fair, the same and other plants are adding various pollution controls and the cost of $1.25+ billion spread over several plants, see here for some PR info on the pollution controls and here for a blurb about both the synfuel and pollution controls.

  4. Re:OS included? by AaronBrethorst · · Score: 1 · on Free Software on a Cheap Computer

    I'm not deriding their business model. On the contrary, they're kicking ass and taking names. What I was doing, instead, was disagreeing with the parent poster who was claiming that Apple is a software company that happens to sell hardware. Take a look at page 28 of Apple's last 10K filing with the SEC. Notice how their software sales are well below their hardware sales.

  5. Wrong... Check Apple's Financials... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Daring to Dream: Apple & IBM
    The unit sales in the Apple Form 10-K for Fiscal Year 2004, filed on December 3, 2005, show what the breakdown of Freescale (Motorola SPS) versus IBM.

    The unit sales from the 10-K are as follows:

    • Power Macintosh : 709k
    • PowerBook : 785k
    • iMac : 916k
    • iBook : 880k


    Of all of these product lines in FY2004, only the Power Macintosh and iMac G5 models use IBM microprocessors. The Power Macintosh line is only 21.5% of the entire Macintosh unit sales. Furthermore, the iMac G5 is a small fraction of the total year iMac unit sales because it was only introduced in August. The Q404 results statements show that there were 229k iMac units sold that quarter when the iMac G5 was introduced, but does not differentiate between iMac G4 and and iMac G5 sales. Even if all the iMac unit sales in Q404 were counted as iMac G5 (which they can't be because it was only introduced in August and Apple's Q4 ended on September 25), the vast majority of iMac sales were iMac G4, and therefore not using IBM microprocessors. The same handwaving can be done about the iBook G3 -> iBook G4 in October 2003, but there were no shortages of iBook G4 as scandalous as IBM's inability to deliver G5 microprocessors.

    I would say Apple is strongly PortalPlayer because the total iPod unit sales is
    4416k (and PortalPlayer has 100% of Apple's market), which is greater than the 3290k units for the entire Macintosh product lines put together.