The source of the biomass is a local green waste recycle yard.
How much is the cost? That's contingent on how many of the value propositions a given user can maximize between waste disposal, productive power generation, heating and cooling, biochar, and the extracted water. The costs can justify whatever this unit's end cost is in... three years? Four? Depends on the capacity factor as well.
I had nothing to do with giving out the award, I just have knowledge of the unit. The water comes from the biomass being heated and dried which does release it back into the atmosphere and then extracts it.
The link I provided says nothing at all about dehumidifying: it's APL's web site. Nothing on that site is about this unit.
And yes, the water is extracted from the woody biomass. This is not the standard atmospheric water extraction unit that Skywater/Skysource makes but one paired with APL's biomass gasifier to take water from the biomass as it is heated and dried.
To be fair, it's not well-reported but the other half of the technology is these biomass gasifiers: http://allpowerlabs.com/
This is not ambient atmosphere water extraction but extraction from biomass. Also not a scam. Get educated before you throw around your armchair physicist hot takes, guys.
Anything less than infinite years is infinitely far away from being forever. Yes, 10^139 is a big number but it is less than one millionth of one millionth of one millionth of infinity.
Do you realize that Lavabit *did* fight this in a secret court? And that they reconstituted the company with Silent Circle to make a secure mailing protocol? I get the impression you made this comment without reading anything about what happened in court (the owner was given a gag order from his own *lawyer*) and what has happened since 2014. Is that accurate?
Code quality doesn't come from the quantity of people looking at it. Code quality comes from the quality of the people working on it.
Did you read the article? Theo De Raadt says as much:
Theo De Raadt, the founder of OpenBSD, agreed with van Sprundel that more eyeballs on OpenBSD would make the operating system more secure. "I remember reading his first slides, which were mostly about the impact of small API misuses," De Raadt tells CSO Online by email. "Unfortunately, this is a problem of the volume of code relative to manpower. Ensuring all code is 100 percent bug-free and handles all exceptional conditions is a rather difficult problem."
Look at several domains of computers: free software makes up the vast majority of operating systems for servers, mainframes, and smartphones. Users are interacting with these constantly without even knowing if they are using free software and in that sense, it is so meaningful due to how ubiquitous it is. I think the primary *failure* here is in the moral and legal dimension where users don't necessarily prioritize their rights. I would sincerely hope that users will prioritize free software because it is the right thing to do, in addition to being more secure or cheaper.
Incorrect. It is perfectly fine to not want to be tracked all the time. Whether or not it is okay to take measures to not be tracked is another thing and whether or not contracts like that should even be legal is another one as well.
Correct. It is totally legitimate to not want to be tracked or surveilled constantly at almost every job at almost every time but saying that you did maintenance or servicing of equipment when you did not is unjustified and fraudulent. If he did that as well, then he is using privacy rights as a thin proxy for being unprofessional.
The problem here is not the browser but the user's behavior. Free software is necessary but insufficient for privacy. Pair the software with things like strong legal protections, constant innovation, and the smart use of best practices, and that decreases your surface quite a bit. It may not be perfect but it's *impossible* in principle to have security and privacy with proprietary software; free software makes it *possible* if not inevitable.
Yours is a distinction without a difference.
And no, not all free speech should be legal because there is no way to determine the difference between the "free speech" of a fraudulent contract and the "fraud" of a fraudulent contract.
Donald Trump is no different than anyone else to the extent that he has every right to have a personal social media account and some measure of privacy for that. But the problem is when he mixes his personal platform to talk with the bully pulpit of a public office (remember Hillary Clinton's private email server?) If you want to have a Twitter account, make it @DJtheprez and then get into petty public feuds with *that* and make your other account private.
Slashdot Mirror
>it seems to be nowhere near any significant source of biomass. It uses biomass from a local green waste recycle yard.
It takes no more energy than in any other environment because the unit that won the prize extracts water from biomass, not the atmosphere.
Are you familiar with water generators that pull water from woody biomass like this system does?
The source of the biomass is a local green waste recycle yard. How much is the cost? That's contingent on how many of the value propositions a given user can maximize between waste disposal, productive power generation, heating and cooling, biochar, and the extracted water. The costs can justify whatever this unit's end cost is in... three years? Four? Depends on the capacity factor as well.
This is extracting the moisture from biomass, not directly from the atmosphere. It's not their standard unit but one paired with a biomass gasifier.
I had nothing to do with giving out the award, I just have knowledge of the unit. The water comes from the biomass being heated and dried which does release it back into the atmosphere and then extracts it.
The link I provided says nothing at all about dehumidifying: it's APL's web site. Nothing on that site is about this unit. And yes, the water is extracted from the woody biomass. This is not the standard atmospheric water extraction unit that Skywater/Skysource makes but one paired with APL's biomass gasifier to take water from the biomass as it is heated and dried.
The good news is that it's not a scam or water from air--it's water from biomass that contains water.
To be fair, it's not well-reported but the other half of the technology is these biomass gasifiers: http://allpowerlabs.com/ This is not ambient atmosphere water extraction but extraction from biomass. Also not a scam. Get educated before you throw around your armchair physicist hot takes, guys.
Their site lists many more franchises still: http://www.blockbuster.com/fra...
"It's" should be "its".
Anything less than infinite years is infinitely far away from being forever. Yes, 10^139 is a big number but it is less than one millionth of one millionth of one millionth of infinity.
Thanks.
Does anyone know if current builds of Chromium do this?
Do you realize that Lavabit *did* fight this in a secret court? And that they reconstituted the company with Silent Circle to make a secure mailing protocol? I get the impression you made this comment without reading anything about what happened in court (the owner was given a gag order from his own *lawyer*) and what has happened since 2014. Is that accurate?
Lavabit.
Code quality doesn't come from the quantity of people looking at it. Code quality comes from the quality of the people working on it.
Did you read the article? Theo De Raadt says as much:
Compared to 20 years ago, when it was essentially 100% proprietary software. So, yes, that is a huge improvement.
Look at several domains of computers: free software makes up the vast majority of operating systems for servers, mainframes, and smartphones. Users are interacting with these constantly without even knowing if they are using free software and in that sense, it is so meaningful due to how ubiquitous it is. I think the primary *failure* here is in the moral and legal dimension where users don't necessarily prioritize their rights. I would sincerely hope that users will prioritize free software because it is the right thing to do, in addition to being more secure or cheaper.
Incorrect. It is perfectly fine to not want to be tracked all the time. Whether or not it is okay to take measures to not be tracked is another thing and whether or not contracts like that should even be legal is another one as well.
Correct. It is totally legitimate to not want to be tracked or surveilled constantly at almost every job at almost every time but saying that you did maintenance or servicing of equipment when you did not is unjustified and fraudulent. If he did that as well, then he is using privacy rights as a thin proxy for being unprofessional.
The problem here is not the browser but the user's behavior. Free software is necessary but insufficient for privacy. Pair the software with things like strong legal protections, constant innovation, and the smart use of best practices, and that decreases your surface quite a bit. It may not be perfect but it's *impossible* in principle to have security and privacy with proprietary software; free software makes it *possible* if not inevitable.
Yours is a distinction without a difference. And no, not all free speech should be legal because there is no way to determine the difference between the "free speech" of a fraudulent contract and the "fraud" of a fraudulent contract.
Donald Trump is no different than anyone else to the extent that he has every right to have a personal social media account and some measure of privacy for that. But the problem is when he mixes his personal platform to talk with the bully pulpit of a public office (remember Hillary Clinton's private email server?) If you want to have a Twitter account, make it @DJtheprez and then get into petty public feuds with *that* and make your other account private.
Here. Not in Eritrea. The two aren't mutually exclusive and having a free society and an enlightened mind means fighting against both.