As someone who will never own a tractor, I am concerned about it. I am also not liable to be caught up in a genocide of Southeast Asian minorities or gagged by surveillance software in Central Asia or harassed by police because of my race. Some of us care about things that don't immediately impact our lives because we care about other human beings.
Both entities will be able to better complete their visions by working together. We sometimes forget just how precious something like a standards-based Web and free knowledge are. I've supported the WMF and W3C for almost 20 years and I always will. This is great news.
I can't speak to which features of Edge I would like to see--I've opened the browser four times for a few seconds. But either way, the world benefits from being able to poke around at high-quality code. I don't have the skills and knowledge to develop a web browser but again, I think others would. Security exploits are a low priority for me, since virtually no one uses Edge now and everyone who does is probably just passively doing it because it's the default browser on Windows. All of those users will shift over to the Chromium/Blink-based Edge whenever *that* becomes the default.
But it's not good for developers: if one entity controls the Web, then everyone is beholden to that one entity. If there are at least two viable options, then developers need to develop based on standards rather than a single company's whims or financial interests.
Making the code open would be virtually no cost and maybe someone could get something useful from it. I am sure *some* community would form around EdgeHTML. And really, we can't know how bad the code is because we can't directly audit it.
And the second best time is today. It is a sad day for the Web when Microsoft shifts not to making Edge's code free software and developing a community around it but throwing in their lot with the Apple/Google/Opera behemoth based on Blink/WebKit.
And to be clear, I don't even have a beef with their browsers and rendering engines on a technical level (other than proprietary components of Chrome, Opera, and Safari) but how can it be good for the Web if virtually everyone is using the same browser that is controlled by a handful of mammoth companies?
I see a lot of threads here (and elsewhere) 1.) calling BS or 2.) saying "he edits [x] times per hour--no way that he is fact-checking"... etc. Take a look at his edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... You can see that a really common thing he does is splitting up categories, so take (e.g.) all of the actors in Colorado and split them into male actors from Colorado and actresses from Colorado. This doesn't really require a lot of fact checking and semi-automated tools can make this virtually instantaneous (as pointed out in the article). He also does substantial edits but these kind of smaller, back-end, maintenance things obviously make up the bulk of his edits. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...).
But Pat Buchanan "taking" votes from George W. Bush didn't swing the election? The other left-wing or progressive parties who got more than 527 votes didn't spoil it? *Bush* took more Democratic votes from Gore than Nader did. This is just a nonsense claim.
Yeah, the way Thomas Eagleton was treated was shameful. The difference is that mental illness was not a good reason to ditch him but there were compelling reasons to ditch Quayle. It would be really easy for a long-term establishment person like Bush I to quietly convince him to "spend more time with his family" and choose a more attractive running mate.
Tho you can say a lot of things good and bad about him, I will always respect how he stood by Dan Quayle as his running mate, essentially knowing it would cost him the election. Any other snark or criticism aside (and there is plenty, sure) I think that speaks a lot to his character.
Pyrolizing things other than woody biomass is pretty far outside of what All Power Labs does: http://www.allpowerlabs.com/su...
But a more fuel-flexible machine is definitely desirable and something they build toward.
>Don't we already have enough scam artists peddling this? Elementary physics will tell you that it doesn't work. Pulling water out of air works... If you plan to do this by solar power, be prepared to drop some pretty penny (and dedicate some real estate) to collecting that energy.
It's like you didn't read the article. It's not powered by solar (why are you saying this?) but biomass gasification and the water is not extracted directly from the atmosphere but the woody feedstock. How is this a scam?
Nothing like sewage is usable in these machines. They will get more fuel-flexible someday (maybe even somehow fuel agnostic) but these are the acceptable feedstocks: http://www.allpowerlabs.com/su...
They likely would be, honestly. But even if not and someone just throws the biochar by the side of the road, it will end up in the soil.
Additionally, biochar can be used for water filtration which is quite probably in a disaster relief scenario.
The existing Skysource/Skywater technology harvests water from the atmosphere. You could certainly attach it to some *other* renewable technology for power (e.g. solar, hydrogen) or nuclear.
Slashdot Mirror
And how is that "obvious"? Do you care to say anything substantial other than glib, driveby criticism?
What PR firms? What talking heads? Why would I think that stories about corporate malfeasance are plants but you aren't?
As someone who will never own a tractor, I am concerned about it. I am also not liable to be caught up in a genocide of Southeast Asian minorities or gagged by surveillance software in Central Asia or harassed by police because of my race. Some of us care about things that don't immediately impact our lives because we care about other human beings.
Both entities will be able to better complete their visions by working together. We sometimes forget just how precious something like a standards-based Web and free knowledge are. I've supported the WMF and W3C for almost 20 years and I always will. This is great news.
I can't speak to which features of Edge I would like to see--I've opened the browser four times for a few seconds. But either way, the world benefits from being able to poke around at high-quality code. I don't have the skills and knowledge to develop a web browser but again, I think others would. Security exploits are a low priority for me, since virtually no one uses Edge now and everyone who does is probably just passively doing it because it's the default browser on Windows. All of those users will shift over to the Chromium/Blink-based Edge whenever *that* becomes the default.
But it's not good for developers: if one entity controls the Web, then everyone is beholden to that one entity. If there are at least two viable options, then developers need to develop based on standards rather than a single company's whims or financial interests.
Making the code open would be virtually no cost and maybe someone could get something useful from it. I am sure *some* community would form around EdgeHTML. And really, we can't know how bad the code is because we can't directly audit it.
And the second best time is today. It is a sad day for the Web when Microsoft shifts not to making Edge's code free software and developing a community around it but throwing in their lot with the Apple/Google/Opera behemoth based on Blink/WebKit. And to be clear, I don't even have a beef with their browsers and rendering engines on a technical level (other than proprietary components of Chrome, Opera, and Safari) but how can it be good for the Web if virtually everyone is using the same browser that is controlled by a handful of mammoth companies?
I see a lot of threads here (and elsewhere) 1.) calling BS or 2.) saying "he edits [x] times per hour--no way that he is fact-checking"... etc. Take a look at his edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... You can see that a really common thing he does is splitting up categories, so take (e.g.) all of the actors in Colorado and split them into male actors from Colorado and actresses from Colorado. This doesn't really require a lot of fact checking and semi-automated tools can make this virtually instantaneous (as pointed out in the article). He also does substantial edits but these kind of smaller, back-end, maintenance things obviously make up the bulk of his edits. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...).
And the second best time is today.
https://puri.sm/
But Pat Buchanan "taking" votes from George W. Bush didn't swing the election? The other left-wing or progressive parties who got more than 527 votes didn't spoil it? *Bush* took more Democratic votes from Gore than Nader did. This is just a nonsense claim.
The Nader lie is empirically untrue: most Nader voters would have not voted. This is just a canard.
Depression is a mental illness, not a "mental illness".
Yeah, the way Thomas Eagleton was treated was shameful. The difference is that mental illness was not a good reason to ditch him but there were compelling reasons to ditch Quayle. It would be really easy for a long-term establishment person like Bush I to quietly convince him to "spend more time with his family" and choose a more attractive running mate.
Tho you can say a lot of things good and bad about him, I will always respect how he stood by Dan Quayle as his running mate, essentially knowing it would cost him the election. Any other snark or criticism aside (and there is plenty, sure) I think that speaks a lot to his character.
What a brave stand, Anonymous Coward.
Pyrolizing things other than woody biomass is pretty far outside of what All Power Labs does: http://www.allpowerlabs.com/su... But a more fuel-flexible machine is definitely desirable and something they build toward.
>Don't we already have enough scam artists peddling this? Elementary physics will tell you that it doesn't work. Pulling water out of air works... If you plan to do this by solar power, be prepared to drop some pretty penny (and dedicate some real estate) to collecting that energy. It's like you didn't read the article. It's not powered by solar (why are you saying this?) but biomass gasification and the water is not extracted directly from the atmosphere but the woody feedstock. How is this a scam?
Nothing like sewage is usable in these machines. They will get more fuel-flexible someday (maybe even somehow fuel agnostic) but these are the acceptable feedstocks: http://www.allpowerlabs.com/su...
They likely would be, honestly. But even if not and someone just throws the biochar by the side of the road, it will end up in the soil. Additionally, biochar can be used for water filtration which is quite probably in a disaster relief scenario.
The existing Skysource/Skywater technology harvests water from the atmosphere. You could certainly attach it to some *other* renewable technology for power (e.g. solar, hydrogen) or nuclear.
This unit uses woody biomass.
Does your air conditioner process woody biomass?
No. There is no woody biomass on Mars.