Slashdot Mirror

If you have 10 cores, that makes sense, but if you have 100, you can go much lower level. See GreenDroid for an example of that works. The high-level is that they take Android, run it through a profiler (err... with some workload), and compile the most common basic blocks to hardware, grouped together into a bunch of small cores, each with a few basic blocks and a with to transfer to other cores as well as a general purpose processor. Then they have a special compiler that can compile C code given the set of basic blocks available in hardware. (The two steps are separate so they can design the hardware based on an older version of Android and still be able to compile a newer version.)

A genuinely interesting paper would have specific ideas for architecture capable of solving problems beyond the scope of current CPUs and GPUs.

A couple cool projects I've seen on making good use of dark silicon are GreenDroid and Chlorophyll, both of which are recent research projects on compiling for weird architectures that are specially designed to be energy efficient. If it's specialized for different applications that you want, then Anton is the closest I've seen; it's specialized for running physical simulations so it can do things like protein folding.

"merely" an engineering challenge? Oh is that all?

Please describe how electrolysis works on earth first, then describe how this magical fuel lab is supposed to work in free-fall with only radiative cooling. I supposed in your fever dreams it's liquefied, yes?

I also note your arrogance that you think there is only cashiering and NASA in the world. I guess at some point you had to stoop to buying parts somewhere and using a poor cashier somewhere?

Your colossal arrogance and your childish delusions are the end of you.

It must suck to be so deluded you can't see reality and your only answer is "you must be a cashier".

Nice mentality there.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

You *know* space is dead, so you push your delusion even further out so that you think we need to go to space... so we can be in space!

Delusional thought pattern. Completely bonkers, insane, unreal.

And what the hell is "Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle." supposed to even mean?

Chuuch???

"merely" an engineering challenge? Oh is that all?

Please describe how electrolysis works on earth first, then describe how this magical fuel lab is supposed to work in free-fall with only radiative cooling. I supposed in your fever dreams it's liquefied, yes?

I also note your arrogance that you think there is only cashiering and NASA in the world. I guess at some point you had to stoop to buying parts somewhere and using a poor cashier somewhere?

Your colossal arrogance and your childish delusions are the end of you.

It must suck to be so deluded you can't see reality and your only answer is "you must be a cashier".

Nice mentality there.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

You *know* space is dead, so you push your delusion even further out so that you think we need to go to space... so we can be in space!

Delusional thought pattern. Completely bonkers, insane, unreal.

And what the hell is "Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle." supposed to even mean?

Chuuch???

Violence against one another is about the only threat to our future, we have technology of such a state that we are otherwise pretty well situated for centuries of continued growth.

Continued growth at the current rate is not possible with any energy source for more than about 2 centuries. In 275 years, we would have to collect 20% of all the sunlight falling on earth. If we used local fusion reactors, we would very rapidly heat the earth beyond habitability. If we want to survive as a species, we'll have to transition to a steady state society in relatively short order.

There's no need to wait and see. This idea is foo'd up for all the same reasons that HAM radio operators have a statistically significant higher incident of cancer. Why everyone is racing to drop the broadcast power of cellphones. And, why putting your head in the microwave is generally considered a bad idea.

Are you going glow green, set off radiation detectors at airports, or erupt in blisters and boils? No, but just because it isn't ionizing radiation doesn't mean its harmless.

"Space is not a destination, it is a universe of destinations."

Only in your mind. I think you fail to grasp the sheer size of the vast nothing that surrounds us, the fragility of our bodies, and the weakness of our technology.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

" Obviously, only a few destinations are within near future reach such as Earth orbit, the Moon, Mars, some asteroids, etc. "

How is it a "destination" if you can't get out of your tin can and there's nothing there? (Forgetting for a moment that we can't even *get* there!)

"As I see it, peoples' wealth continues to grow " ...wow. You're not just a little delusional, you're full-on in another dimension. We're so wealthy we don't even have Concorde anymore but you're dreaming about the asteroids... and the "etc"!!! Nice touch!

You're a loon. Very likely an under-35 programmer with no kids. You'll see how "wealthy" you are after marriage, kids, and a house. See how much you have left over for your "universe of destinations"! Bahahahahaaaa!!!!

"it will get to the point where some of modest means can save up for a trip to space" ...or you're 80 and never got over the gee-whiz Space Age propaganda. Do you really think there's just this massive amount of people of "modest means" (How? I thought we're all getting so wealthy?) waiting to go to space?

Oh my god....!!!!

This exists NOW and is cheaper!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

"Space is not a destination, it is a universe of destinations."

Only in your mind. I think you fail to grasp the sheer size of the vast nothing that surrounds us, the fragility of our bodies, and the weakness of our technology.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

" Obviously, only a few destinations are within near future reach such as Earth orbit, the Moon, Mars, some asteroids, etc. "

How is it a "destination" if you can't get out of your tin can and there's nothing there? (Forgetting for a moment that we can't even *get* there!)

"As I see it, peoples' wealth continues to grow " ...wow. You're not just a little delusional, you're full-on in another dimension. We're so wealthy we don't even have Concorde anymore but you're dreaming about the asteroids... and the "etc"!!! Nice touch!

You're a loon. Very likely an under-35 programmer with no kids. You'll see how "wealthy" you are after marriage, kids, and a house. See how much you have left over for your "universe of destinations"! Bahahahahaaaa!!!!

"it will get to the point where some of modest means can save up for a trip to space" ...or you're 80 and never got over the gee-whiz Space Age propaganda. Do you really think there's just this massive amount of people of "modest means" (How? I thought we're all getting so wealthy?) waiting to go to space?

Oh my god....!!!!

This exists NOW and is cheaper!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

There was lots about this at the "beginning" of AGW (or before). http://earthguide.ucsd.edu/vir... I'm not sure when that was written, but I remember hearing about the Atlantic Conveyor Belt in the '90s or earlier.

Maybe they found more information about details and confirmation. Such things get published all the time.

They are closer than you think.

http://health.ucsd.edu/clinicaltrials/sanford/Pages/default.aspx

Sounds to me as if Mr. Kalil wants a pony before he can take care of a hamster. I suggest that he first understand the implications of the exponential function and why growth as we know it today has an expiration date. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Tom Murphy: Growth has an Expiration Date You can follow Tom on his blog at http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

Not with an efficiency at or above unity. Hence, no.

Do the math.

Further reading: http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

Based on this, 1 gram of Deuterium produces 320 megawatts of power.
The average American would consume the amount of deuterium found in 60kg of ordinary water per year to produce the energy they need in a year. There's enough Deuterium in our oceans to produce free power until long after the sun dies.

Average solar insolation is more like 5 sun-hours/day, not 8, in good locations. Much less in places like Germany.

Actually it's 4.8 hours/day for a fixed tilt panel in the worst location of the 48 lower US states (St. Louis, Missouri). So almost any US location is guaranted an average of more than 5 sun-hours/day. Germany is indeed a bit worse but not as much as some think. Still Berlin can only count on about 3 sun-hours/day. That previous link also clearly shows that there's significant seasonal variation. This can be mitigated a bit by using the grid to connect to less affected places. Still a 100% renewable scenario does require the need for either lots of seasonal storage (the hardest kind), or lots of over-capacity.

Very interesting. Not quite the same as the article because the subject in this case is blindfolded and its a referred sensation.
Nonetheless I didn't know about this and was happy for the reference.
I think the /. appropriate content is at the links below

Synaethesia in phantom limbs induced with mirrors (1996)
V.S. Ramachandran & D Rogers-Ramachandran
http://chip.ucsd.edu/pdf/Synst...

Phantoms Limbs and Neural Plasticity
V.S. Ramachandran & D Rogers-Ramachandran (2000)
http://www.neurosciences.us/co...

I dislike replying to trolls. But for the record and anyone who might actually buy your bullshit, your statements should not be allowed to stand unchallenged.

The Antarctic ice maximum is SEA ice, just a thin sheet a meter or two thick, consistent with higher winds (guess why- increased thermal gradients) leaving source water exposed to the atmosphere.
At the same time GIGATONS of LAND ice (the kind which raises sea level) is being lost in the Antarctic and even faster in Greenland.

Land volume growing? I know you know better, as every fucking article about this stuff people correct you on it, but no, that's an outright lie. Laser altimiters and gravity meters on satellites clearly show massive losses in ice volume.

Arctic is pretty darned normal? Look at the fucking ice volume death spiral graph! Does that look perfectly normal to you?!

http://iwantsomeproof.com/exti...
http://iwantsomeproof.com/exti...

Try this one on for size: look in the geologic record for what the Earth looked like last time we had this much CO2 in the atm. You have to go back to the fucking Pliocene to see that.

https://scripps.ucsd.edu/progr...

Guess what. The ice melted. 40 meters of sea level rise. It happened. That is exactly what we are headed for. Actually more, because in the next few years we will breeze past the CO2 ppm peak that happened those millions of years ago.

From the paper, here are the links to Google Earth KMZ files to view the whole earth results:

Gravity anomaly map

VGG map

The new data is very cool, and a clear improvement from Google Earth's standard data. They've got all the world's water, even lakes. They only missed a 2000 km radius circle centered on the north pole. To see the difference, after opening the KMZ files in Google Earth, select and unselect the check boxes in the Temporary Places folder.

From the paper, here are the links to Google Earth KMZ files to view the whole earth results:

Gravity anomaly map

VGG map

The new data is very cool, and a clear improvement from Google Earth's standard data. They've got all the world's water, even lakes. They only missed a 2000 km radius circle centered on the north pole. To see the difference, after opening the KMZ files in Google Earth, select and unselect the check boxes in the Temporary Places folder.

You are doing the wrong math.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/09/got-storage-how-hard-can-it-be/
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/08/nation-sized-battery/
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/

That site is a very good read for people interested in this topic.

You are doing the wrong math.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/09/got-storage-how-hard-can-it-be/
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/08/nation-sized-battery/
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/

That site is a very good read for people interested in this topic.

You are doing the wrong math.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/09/got-storage-how-hard-can-it-be/
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/08/nation-sized-battery/
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the-math/2011/11/pump-up-the-storage/

That site is a very good read for people interested in this topic.

Of course we're still discovering it. The problem is that we've been consuming it faster than we're discovering more since the mid 80's.

If you think the ocean is like the vacuum of space, no rational discussion with you is possible. You've been brainwashed by trashy sci-fi and now have nothing but emotional, romantic drivel in your mind.
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

Some point out that the open ocean is also hostile to human life, and conjure the image of a luxury ocean liner placidly plying the waters, oblivious to the surrounding harshness. If we can picture that, why is it such a stretch to imagine a luxury liner in space? It’s a gripping image, and would seem to counter worries about the cruelty of space. But let’s look at the oh-so-many ways the two situations cannot compare.

If the ship sinks, and you have a life raft, you stand some chance of rescue. The ocean is vast, but it’s a two-dimensional vastness teeming with human activity (compared to any realistic vision of 3-d space inhabitation even within the confines of our solar system). People have survived for months on the open ocean, subsisting on the elements around them. Running out of air is not a problem. Fresh water falls out of the sky as rain. Critters that are attracted to the cover of your life raft provide a source of food. I recommend the book 117 Days Adrift for a gripping account of a British couple who survived such an ordeal. Sometimes edible fish would actually jump into their dinghy. By contrast, a hamburger has never slammed into the side of the space shuttle in orbit, and I very much doubt that chicken nuggets are going to float up seeking the shelter of your space rescue pod!

If you fall overboard in the ocean, you can conceivably survive for a day or more depending on water temperature. I have actually met a guy who twice survived being stranded overnight treading water in the ocean—once in Indonesia and another time in Australia! In space, you’re dealing with a life expectancy of about one minute, unless you’re lucky enough to be suited up for the unexpected accident—in which case you have a perhaps a few hours to enjoy the view.

If the ship springs a leak, you can pump out water indefinitely, and that magical, life-supporting air fills in the void: it surrounds the ship, which is open to the air above. In space, a leak must be replaced with air brought on board (presumably in pressurized containers), but cannot be counted on to last indefinitely. A submarine is therefore a more apt analogy, but even then, the safety of the surface is never more than “walking distance” away.

Those ships were going to places that were naturally habitable and didn't need to bring every molecule of air, water and food along with them. The ocean provided natural propulsion and food too. Space has none of these things, and Mars is an utterly dead rusty ball of rock.
I will never understand the quasi-religious fervor some people have about space.
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

"Which technologies have plateaued"

Dude, are you serious? Pretty much all of them except information processing. How long did it take to fly across the Atlantic in 1969 during the maiden flight of the 747? How long does it take today?

WE DON'T EVEN HAVE CONCORDE ANYMORE!!!!!

"that's where we will be heading"

No, "we" aren't.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

"it has tried to guess where technological development might lead to. "

Not any more than fantasy has tried to guess where dragons lead to. I don't know where this "sci-fi is a plan and space is the goal" idea came from, but it's ridiculous.

"why would not having gasoline change anything? "

Wow, you're in your bubble and haven't given a picosecond's thought as to where and how the stuff around you came from. Go ahead, look around your room, and figure it out...

"People were moving around before it,"

Yup, within walking distance of where they were born.

"we have technologies to completely replace it anyways."

Ah, I see the problem, you are unable to grasp the difference between a resource and technology. Like a child, you reason simply and quickly. There's no depth to anything you think about. No wonder you believe what you do.

Only on Slashdot would a circular fallacy get +5, because as long as it's about space, you can say any nonsense you want and get +5.

"The moon has vast natural resources; they merely need to be extracted from the rock"

Um, considering the Earth masses something like 83 times the Moon, and all we need to do is DIG, we have all the natural resources we need right here.

And your "merely" paints over such a vast, enormous complexity it's laughable. Your mind has been poisoned by sci-fi, and your emotions prevent you from looking at reality objectively.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

No one's mining the Moon, no brave homesteaders are going to the asteroids to bring back rocks worth 15$ a ton, no one's colonizing Mars. It's delusional and laughable.

Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..

It's baffling to me where this nonsense comes from. I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.

But then again, simple math and reality in the video game generation is too much to ask for, I guess.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

We don't even have the Concorde anymore, and you loons are talking about going outside the Solar System as if it's even remotely possible. The only propositions you have are decades-old fantasies.

Reality isn't going away. You're not going anywhere. Not you, not me, not your kids, not their kids, and not whatever will replace us in a hundred thousand years... Evolution is still happening, you know.

As opposed to the idiot who's pretty sure that the actual engineers and scientists involved in building the device, planning its mission and experiments on the ISS, and then putting it in an actual rocket and launching it into space...didn't consider all of this?

The only consideration done is with respect to the budget. Usefulness or purpose? Nope, they just have to sell it.

Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..

It's baffling to me where this nonsense comes from. I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.

But then again, simple math and reality in the video game generation is too much to ask for, I guess.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

We don't even have the Concorde anymore, and you loons are talking about going outside the Solar System as if it's even remotely possible. The only propositions you have are decades-old fantasies.

Reality isn't going away. You're not going anywhere. Not you, not me, not your kids, not their kids, and not whatever will replace us in a hundred thousand years... Evolution is still happening, you know.

As opposed to the idiot who's pretty sure that the actual engineers and scientists involved in building the device, planning its mission and experiments on the ISS, and then putting it in an actual rocket and launching it into space...didn't consider all of this?

The only consideration done is with respect to the budget. Usefulness or purpose? Nope, they just have to sell it.

Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..

It's baffling to me where this nonsense comes from. I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.

But then again, simple math and reality in the video game generation is too much to ask for, I guess.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

We don't even have the Concorde anymore, and you loons are talking about going outside the Solar System as if it's even remotely possible. The only propositions you have are decades-old fantasies.

Reality isn't going away. You're not going anywhere. Not you, not me, not your kids, not their kids, and not whatever will replace us in a hundred thousand years... Evolution is still happening, you know.

As opposed to the idiot who's pretty sure that the actual engineers and scientists involved in building the device, planning its mission and experiments on the ISS, and then putting it in an actual rocket and launching it into space...didn't consider all of this?

Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..

It's baffling to me where this nonsense comes from. I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.

But then again, simple math and reality in the video game generation is too much to ask for, I guess.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

We don't even have the Concorde anymore, and you loons are talking about going outside the Solar System as if it's even remotely possible. The only propositions you have are decades-old fantasies.

Reality isn't going away. You're not going anywhere. Not you, not me, not your kids, not their kids, and not whatever will replace us in a hundred thousand years... Evolution is still happening, you know.

As opposed to the idiot who's pretty sure that the actual engineers and scientists involved in building the device, planning its mission and experiments on the ISS, and then putting it in an actual rocket and launching it into space...didn't consider all of this?

Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..

It's baffling to me where this nonsense comes from. I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.

But then again, simple math and reality in the video game generation is too much to ask for, I guess.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

We don't even have the Concorde anymore, and you loons are talking about going outside the Solar System as if it's even remotely possible. The only propositions you have are decades-old fantasies.

Reality isn't going away. You're not going anywhere. Not you, not me, not your kids, not their kids, and not whatever will replace us in a hundred thousand years... Evolution is still happening, you know.

Yes, melting plastic in a closed environment. Brilliant. Instead of planning for their little hobby-jump in Low Earth Orbit, let's bring a cranky, tiny toy to make coat hangers... (in free-fall LOL). I just love the armchair engineers and programmers here going on about the 3D printer will be this tool to help colonize the universe..

It's baffling to me where this nonsense comes from. I'd expect that from eight year olds, not adults.

But then again, simple math and reality in the video game generation is too much to ask for, I guess.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

We don't even have the Concorde anymore, and you loons are talking about going outside the Solar System as if it's even remotely possible. The only propositions you have are decades-old fantasies.

Reality isn't going away. You're not going anywhere. Not you, not me, not your kids, not their kids, and not whatever will replace us in a hundred thousand years... Evolution is still happening, you know.

That's the thing, even if the asteroids were made of 100% pure gold, it's still a losing proposition.

If you want to become a millionaire mining asteroids, the best way is to start as a billionaire.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

Trust in the smart grid to automatically reduce demand by 25% for a full week?

That's making an assumption of solar capacity far beyond the wildest dreams of those that wish to supply it. I'll assume it's a simple error instead of a deliberate attempt to mislead.

Wow! I see neither the solar capacity assumption, the error or the attempt to mislead. I must be so dumb. Or did you mean there's no way PV can ever provide a significant portion of our electricity needs?

Tom Murphy is a physicist, not a journalist

However the person I referred to is not Tom Murphy is it?

Given that it follows the section that started with "So that's dealt with the article that kicked off the discussion - now for the one you've linked", I'd say it is.

Due to the nature of grids and distributed power generation it's the wrong approach anyway since there is no requirement to provide enough storage for a single second. [...] For a start there are so many gas turbines sitting on coal seam gas or similar just waiting for a chance to spin up for more than an hour or two every few days.

This relies on the assumption that fossil fuels will remain cheap and plentiful for decades to come, and that we don't need to reduce their use for environmental reasons. I think both are incorrect. It also assumes that building and operating spare gas turbines to deal with variable load is cheaper than using grid storage. That's correct for now but it's no reason not to look for better solutions. Cheap electricity storage would have other uses besides helping the grid deal with variable load and production. For instance it would help wind turbine and PV plants operators better monetize their production by not forcing them to sell on the spot market.

I thought you Americans got used to such things when you embraced deregulation and let Enron et all in the door?

I'll let Americans speak for themselves.

Try reading whole sentences. The following is a quote from this article.

Due to evaporation losses from the exposed water surface and mechanical efficiency losses during conversion, only between 70% and 85% of the electrical energy used to pump the water into the elevated reservoir can be regained in this process.

Here is a quote from another article

The cycle is generally about 80% efficient, with losses due to water evaporation and engine non-idealities.

And another article.

Pumps and turbines (often implemented as the same physical unit, actually) can be something like 90% efficient, so the round-trip storage comes at only modest cost.

Please note that 90% pump efficiency + 90% turbine efficiency equals 81% overall efficiency.

Here is another;

First, the charging process in pumped hydro storage is affected by the pump efficiency that pumps the water into the upper reservoir at times of low electrical demand. The losses during discharging process on the other hand are caused by the turbine operation to generate electricity at peak load periods. The total charging and discharging rate is given by calculating the product of the efficiencies of pipe (friction losses) and the mechanical equipments

The hourly evaporation losses is assumed to be negligible because the amount of water evaporated is far too small compared to the total water volume in the reservoir

That paper quotes efficiency at 75 – 85 percent.

Here is an article stating that evaporative losses are minor;

North Eden Creek will be the primary source of water for the initial fill of the lower reservoir. Water rights will need to be secured, both for the initial fill and annual evaporation maintenance. The advantages of this system are that once the initial fill has occurred, the only water needed will be a small amount to offset annual evaporation from the reservoirs. The precipitation and evaporation balance will result in an annual water loss of approximately 0.2m over the total surface area of both reservoirs.

While higher in the desert evaporative losses do not effect cycle efficiency significantly.
Need I go on? Yelling without up backing you statement with references just weakens your case.

There's a much easier solution, already in operation - pumped hydro power plants.

Pumped hydro works but just cannot be scaled to provide sufficient storage. Hence other solutions are needed. Actually it's likely nothing short of a combination of many approaches will be enough.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

But if you're the typical geek who likes to say they're all about math and science, you won't like it since it peels apart all the pro-space nuttery to show that no one is going anywhere. Ever.

It'd also be worth pointing out that the STEM "gap" isn't just in people choosing fields, it's also the fact that females score lower on all kinds of science tests and assessments. This bias shouldn't exist, regardless of what job people ultimately choose, unless you want to engage in some hoary stereotyping that "explains" why women don't have the "spatial acuity" for physics or blah blah.

Among mere practicing physicians, a group where men and women are basically at parity, women make 80% what their male counterparts do, and only 20% of medical school faculty are women.

There is the more fundamental metaphysical question -- even if we define STEM fields to include medicine and we can get the diversity to 50-50, why should we have to? Why would their be so many more male physicists than female ones (again without engaging in insulting stereotypes and gender essentialism)?

Are you saying that CO2 is going down? Because that is obviously not true. Scientists have found that about 1/2 of the CO2 we release stays in the atmosphere. 1/4 is absorbed by the ocean. 1/4 by the land. The rest remains in the atmosphere: http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/gra...

In space? Oh boy. Time for some education!

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

If we *had* the energy and resources to build this, we don't have an energy or resource problem!

There are different forms of "working"
1. Works in theory.
2. We get fusion but the containment costs more energy than the reactor provides.
3. We get fusion and it gives more power than we put in it to contain the reaction.
4. We get fusion and it is feasible with some subsidies.
5. We can sell fusion power cheaper than the alternatives.
6. Too cheap to meter
7. Oops, we forgot that we have to radiate that energy away
8. ...
9. Profit!

The ITER is planned to be at 3 and could probably be upgraded to 4.

Each step takes bigger reactors with the Tokamak design. Luckily the energy requirement for the containment field grows less fast than the energy a rector uses. Sadly that means huge reactors for decent profitability. Huge reactors mean huge costs and huge additional costs in case of mistakes. Huge costs mean that there first must be a proof of concept.

No disabling Canvas tracking and they even included Go to about:config and set "webgl.disabled" to true.

It's not perfect... But from what I can understand this will atleast mitigate the issue: http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~hovav/...

Either way, this does indeed seems like a very hard problem. And disabling canvas might not be enough. See the article from before.

The paper "Pixel Perfect: Fingerprinting Canvas in HTML5" by Keaton Mowery and Hovav Shacham is from 2012.

It looks like the technical details would be found in this link: http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/~hovav/...

In that first article the CEO of AddThis says that "Itâ(TM)s not uniquely identifying enough" and the guy who originally developed it says it's only 90% accurate.

For one, we will eventually exhaust all the resources on this planet, and our species will become extinct if we cannot - at the very least - successfully extract resources from other worlds. We really need to find a way to actually live on other worlds if we are to continue to exist.

Actually, it's fairly easily shown that if we continue our current exponential rate of population growth and resource usage, we'll use up the entire Milky Way Galaxy in 2,500 years. That's assuming nonexistent magitech FTL drives which contradict our current fundamental physics theories.

Or, we could stabilise our short-term rapid growth and learn to live on the one accessible habitable world we have, like we did for the past few million years. Our choice.

By the way, any future that has economically viable space colonies in it will also have economically viable greenhouse cities in Antarctica, the Sahara and the Australian outback first. Because they'll be much cheaper to build, require no launch costs, don't have to be perfectly airtight, and you get atmospheric pressure, water and oxygen for free. Also, in the case of war, plague and political tensions, ground-based semi-closed environments will be much less fragile and more survivable than sealed orbital tin cans.

Any space activists keen on setting up some of those first?

And the retroreflecting prism arrays sent to the moon, that anyone with a big enough laser can bounce a beam off and determine what the distance of the moon is at the moment, were presumably put up there by Elvis on his way home. Hell, it's just a few pairs of his rhinestone trousers that fell out of his trunk.

It's also possible that your grandchildren will need to know how to shoe a horse. That's far more probable.

You really need to learn more about human history and realize that this idea that everything "progresses" towards some "better" goal is a recent idea. As recent as coal and oil... See what I mean?

I think a far more likely future scenario will be simpler lives, less materialism, more hardship. Is that so hard to believe?

Space is a fantasy that won't die for the same reason religions won't die. It appeals to some basic human instincts and has a nice narrative.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

I say that things won't be any better than they are now with the same certainty that we won't have faster than light spaceships.

I have the same certainty that we don't even have supersonic air travel anymore!

Could I be wrong? Maybe. But where would you place your bets?

Sci-fi fantasies? Or physical reality?

Perhaps you could do some baby steps yourself; like getting familiar with math and engineering 101.

Orbital Solar Power makes no sense outside of comic books either. Fusion? 50 years and counting. Space Elevator? More sci-fi comic book fantasies. Asteroid mining? Are you joking?

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

As for SpaceX, it's the same old fuel in a stick stuff that we've been doing for more than half a century now. It's not magic. LEO and satellites. That's it.

Why would you want to open a door if there's nothing but a deadly vacuum filled with radiation on the other side?

What's the appeal? You're talking about "humans"? You're concerned about your fellow man or just your sci-fi fantasies you read about as a child?

Perhaps you could do some baby steps yourself; like getting familiar with math and engineering 101.

Orbital Solar Power makes no sense outside of comic books either. Fusion? 50 years and counting. Space Elevator? More sci-fi comic book fantasies. Asteroid mining? Are you joking?

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...
http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

As for SpaceX, it's the same old fuel in a stick stuff that we've been doing for more than half a century now. It's not magic. LEO and satellites. That's it.

Why would you want to open a door if there's nothing but a deadly vacuum filled with radiation on the other side?

What's the appeal? You're talking about "humans"? You're concerned about your fellow man or just your sci-fi fantasies you read about as a child?

Tidal is marginal at best.

http://physics.ucsd.edu/do-the...

"But my overall goal is to assess which forms of power can take on a substantial fraction (possibly up to a quarter) of our power needs. Only those sources capable of expansion at this scale stand any chance of achieving even half of that. Tidal is not one of those players."

Nuclear should be the way to go until we achieve fusion (improbable) or achieve a way to use solar/wind along with a scalable grid battery (slightly more probable but still difficult). That and natural gas which is abundant and the cleanest hydrocarbon.

We should ditch coal as soon as possible. And diesel too.

Oh, by the way, this is obligatory reading for everyone interested in this topic:
http://www.withouthotair.com/