Even if you get it to work for the bump problems and all, which I doubt, you are left with the mass problem:
Anyway, flywheels need mass to store energy and energy is needed to accelerate/decelerate that mass, kind of circular logic. Do you have a solution for that too ?
Personally, I don't think it would work for cars. Maybe it could work for express passenger trains that only have to accelerate once and stop once (ex. Washington-Baltimore) ot if the trains stopped long enough at every station in order to recharge the flywheel to make it to the next station. Note that braking could also accelerate (rotation speed) the flywheel since trains brake slowly. Just have the train accelerating the flywheel in order for the train to brake.
A passenger train weight could be say, 95% flywheels - 5% payload, giving it chances to work. For a personal vehicle, it seems like utopia to me.
Good luck going through bumps in the road with your horizontal plan stabilizing device, not mentioning flying over holes in the road or loosing contact with the road where pavement elevation slightly changes;-) Anyway, flywheels need mass to store energy and energy is needed to accelerate/decelerate that mass, kind of circular logic.
With current demand, this is true. This model wouldn't work on a large scale. Everybody would be buying current cheap to charge their battery banks in order to sell high, creating demand around the clock, eliminating the off-peak period.
On a large scale, it is like inventing money, it doesn't work.
Nowadays, most people selling to the grid get their current from wind and solar, not from batteries they charge at night.
Of course utility companies would have to put up some incentive for you to let them use your batteries, meaning they buy a little higher than they sell but I would advice watching closely how they will do the math.
I spend 0.120 KWh everyday just to keep my 6KWh battery bank at float voltage with no current draw. It is used only on power failures. Cost of lost energy would be higher with deep discharges/recharges
So my bill currently looks like this:
Energy stored to your system = 0.120 * 365 * 0.19 = 8.32$
Energy retrieved from your system: 0
I do not view how this could be good for the consumer. I view a great advantage for the utilities although if they market it well. Hence my first post. Think about consumers with old/bad batteries that waste even more on charging, what if you need to charge during peak-rates, etc...
You loose energy when storing/retrieving energy to batteries, so here is a possible use case:
1) You leave for a 1 year trip around the world, leaving your car hooked up to the grid.
2) When you get back a bill awaits you. Have you left your car unplugged, you would have saved that bill.
The bill would read :
Energy stored to your system: 10345 Kwh
Energy retrieved from your system: 8978 Kwh
Total to pay: 1367 Kwh
Thank you for letting us use your system and charge you for that!
It's like if you were running a bank with a safe that spills money into the sewer, not a very nice business model to be into;-)
Problem 1: have 2 flywheels, going in opposite directions. This won't work, try holding 2 bicycle wheels rotating in opposite directions, you will still feel the resistance to movement, not very convenient for non-stationary setups.
This guy has found a miraculous way to fight spam with a mono-strategy approach. It is so good that the guy has sent many posts to/. offering anybody to bet about it with him. Hence his product must be real and what he says must be true, hence no need for regulations, just buy his product, according to him, his mono-strategy approach is the best way, no need for regulations;-))
This doesn't surprise me at all, I guess anybody that follows what happens in Russia suspected this. Still, it will be interesting to see how much evidence is left behind or in other words, how good a job they did at rigging the election;-)
I would advise anybody that considers using a web proxy that diminish the bandwidth usage to use
Google web accelerator.
Any such service should be free to use as Google accelerator is because the proxy you use collects data of the web sites you visit. Giving the proxy such information and paying money on top of it is silly if you use a snake-oil product that charges you for that.
For ISP and sysadmins, you can set-up a caching proxy (squid, apache) and optionally a program that diminish the quality of the images that you cache.
Google uses standard web acceleration strategies:
Google Web Accelerator uses various strategies to make your web pages load faster, including:
* Sending your page requests through Google machines dedicated to handling Google Web Accelerator traffic.
* Storing copies of frequently looked at pages to make them quickly accessible.
* Downloading only the updates if a web page has changed slightly since you last viewed it.
* Prefetching certain pages onto your computer in advance.
* Managing your Internet connection to reduce delays.
* Compressing data before sending it to your computer.
Sorry I tried to download the free trial but it doesn't run on my Linux computer. Snake-oil products usually do not have a linux version because snake-oil vendors know that linux users don't buy snake-oil products anyway. As said before, everything needed to "accelerate" is already there in any standard linux distro installation anyway.
Don't you understand I have nothing to sell, it's not like if you were challenging a competitor, wake up ! If you do not want to pay me, you should pay someone else neutral to run the tests and post the results on your web site instead of just saying "we are the best".
I just had a look at propel.com. I have always figured that web accelerators were a snake-oil business. Nothing I can't do with fine tuning my browser caching settings and using squid or apache proxy with caching for better results. Compression is pretty standard too. Your web accelerator is mostly based on caching, I found that out by looking at the HTTPS section. It may sell well to people that don't understand technology but it is still snake-oil, nothing you can't do without the useless product.
If you are consistent then the poster who called your spam product snake-oil was probably right although I couldn't tell for sure until you pay me or somebody else to run the tests. For the web accelerator, I can tell for sure, it IS snake-oil;-)
No escrow account, you pay me period, I don't put a penny into it. You are the one with a product to market, not me. You are guaranteed that the money you will give me will be profitable for marketing purposes since your product can't fail. So you send me 5000$ as down payment for me to start working on this. Deal?
Sorry, you have exhausted your time slice. You will need to send me $5000 in order for me to continue talking with you. Consider this as an advance for the final deal I will offer you in order to run the tests. I will reimburse the 5000$ to you if no tests take place.
Bottom line is that you are going to have to pay me in order to run the tests. You have nothing to loose since the money invested will definitely be profitable in marketing purposes.
Hehe, simple, it will cost me more than 10,000$ to set up the test process and to pay the lawyers overseeing the whole process. So in the end I would have to pay to prove you wrong and I would gain no commercial advantages since I am not selling anything. So I am guaranteed to loose money.
If you win, you don't mind how much money you spend because you can then brag about how much better your product is.
So you have everything to win and I have everything to loose. It is a silly deal.
You probably already knew about this before proposing that silly bet unless you are more stupid than I think.
Why don't you want to run the tests if you need to convince yourself that a simplistic approach can beat a multi-strategy approach ? I mean you don't even know how SMTP works (e.g. eat the mail), how simplistic does that sound ?
I know you aren't selling anything. You just are making outrageous claims saying that it is impossible for our system to be better than open source software. I simply asked if you had any confidence in the claim which you could prove by accepting my risk free offer.
I never made the outrageous claims you pretend I made. I said that your approach was too simplistic and that any commercial product using a limited set of approach couldn't do as well as putting to contribution all the open-sources tools available and the different tricks of the trade.
I also said combining multiple commercial products could do as well as combining open-source solutions but then you end up with a useless bill.;-(
This could very well be true. But the downside of any commercial system is that it will never do as good a job as smartly combining the many freely available tools to fit your use case. You would need several commercial products to do a good job.
The more I think about it, the more I chat with you, the more I find your approach too simplistic. And the more I find that you sound like an MS brainwashed guy that is trying to sell you a product.
You don't understand, I have no interest in proving my solution is better, unlike you I am not selling anything.
I offer you my assistance to reproduce my setup for the third time now but you say you already know the product you sell is better.
I nevertheless expressed serious concerns that your solution was too simplistic compared to a muti-strategy approach. From my experience, as wonderful as your algorithm may be, I would only use it in a multi-strategy approach taking into account the opinion of your algorithm (giving it a weight) as one of the multiple parameter making me take my final decision on tagging a message as spam or not.
Sorry, you would never get full control. You remind me more and more of that MS VP. You really don't seem to understand how on Earth combining open-source solutions could beat your proprietary product. Furthermore, you do not understand that I have nothing to prove, unlike you. I am just a happy user of Open-Source products reporting the facts. I have no interest in the solution I use, unlike you.
If you understood all that, you would realize that your bet offer, and now your conclusion are both silly.
The way slashdot works (at least with my settings) is that you reply to a message that I sent MYSELF and I get automatically notified by email. Of course, I don't read all messages posted on slashdot to check if somebody wants to bet money with me neither do I get notified by email every time somebody posts on/.
So, short story is reply to one of MY message if you want me to get notified and answer back to you. There is no need to reply to 2 of MY messages with the same text in order for me to get notified by email any faster.
I can send you my detailed configuration (no industrial secrets here) in order for you to reproduce my setup if you want to run comparative tests yourself.
Another important thing, automatically reporting Spam is quite effective. It takes at least a few months before you can see the effects but international spammers DO take your addresses off their lists when they see that spam to those addresses is systematically reported. For the spammers, those addresses could very well be spamtraps as far as they are concerned and they DO take spamtraps off their lists for obvious reasons. That's the MOST effective way to fight spam because you prevent it from being sent in the first place.
Another reason why I find your approach too simplistic I guess. You are missing too many nice features of a multi-strategy approach.
So I challenge that person (ls671) to prove it. I'll put up $10K and ls671 will put up $10K into an escrow account. We'll run the same realtime mailstream through both systems for 24 hours and if you get a lower total error count, you win the $10K. So ls671, this is easy money since you said we'd NEVER be able to match a system constructed of free components. If that were true, you'd accept my bet instantly because you'd always win. So this is easy money. Please accept my bet and post your acceptance here. Or post a retraction. What's your choice?
Quit spamming slashdot with your bet offer;-) dupe1dupe2
Any other dupe I did not come across yet ?
By the way, you remind me of a Microsoft VP we got to meet for an afternoon in Redmond, have you ever worked there? In the end, we chose to use non-MS products.
Here is how it usually works with Sendmail and most standard SMTP servers, they don't "eat the mail", they do not let the user upload it ! Have you really worked with SMTP servers before ?
telnet thevtek.com 25
Trying 74.15.178.5...
Connected to thevtek.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 arthas.thevtek.com ESMTP Sendmail 8.13.7/8.13.4; Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:01:08 -0500
helo localhost
250 arthas.thevtek.com Hello cpu145.adsl.qc.bellglobal.com [207.236.226.149], pleased to meet you
mail from: green_smtp_admin@yahoo.com
250 2.1.0 green_smtp_admin@yahoo.com... Sender ok
data
503 5.0.0 Need RCPT (recipient)
data
503 5.0.0 Need RCPT (recipient)
rcpt to:
501 5.5.2 Syntax error in parameters scanning "to"
rcpt to: joe@sillyaddress
550 5.7.1 joe@sillyaddress... Relaying denied
data
503 5.0.0 Need RCPT (recipient)
No need for a bet I am not the gambling type anyway, are you?
I gave you a list all the open sources tools and tricks you can use to run your own comparative tests.
Unfortunately, I can't test your software unless you send me copy of it. Send me a copy +3000$ for my time and I will test your software in an independent manner. Then I will post the results back here on slashdot.
Note that I won't mind at all if your software beats my open source tools and tricks combination, I have no monetary interest at all in my open source solutions being better. It would simply prove you right and demonstrate that your product is far more superior than we first though here on slashdot. If your product gives better results, I will then consider the cost/gains ratio before using it.
"I don't know of any commercial system with numbers (accuracy or speed) better than ours."
This could very well be true. But the downside of any commercial system is that it will never do as good a job as smartly combining the many freely available tools to fit your use case. You would need several commercial products to do a good job.
I view it the same as security. I would never trust 1 commercial product to keep my system safe. It is much safer to use a combination of tools to keep your system secure.
So I guess I would say the weakness of your system is that it uses only one approach to fight spam.
I have results as good as the numbers you give if not better using
this setup and a few other tricks given in another article on this thread.
Congratulation on your effort to fight spam and take care of yourself;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I don't think it would work for cars. Maybe it could work for express passenger trains that only have to accelerate once and stop once (ex. Washington-Baltimore) ot if the trains stopped long enough at every station in order to recharge the flywheel to make it to the next station. Note that braking could also accelerate (rotation speed) the flywheel since trains brake slowly. Just have the train accelerating the flywheel in order for the train to brake.
A passenger train weight could be say, 95% flywheels - 5% payload, giving it chances to work. For a personal vehicle, it seems like utopia to me.
Cheers,
Good luck going through bumps in the road with your horizontal plan stabilizing device, not mentioning flying over holes in the road or loosing contact with the road where pavement elevation slightly changes ;-) Anyway, flywheels need mass to store energy and energy is needed to accelerate/decelerate that mass, kind of circular logic.
With current demand, this is true. This model wouldn't work on a large scale. Everybody would be buying current cheap to charge their battery banks in order to sell high, creating demand around the clock, eliminating the off-peak period.
On a large scale, it is like inventing money, it doesn't work.
Nowadays, most people selling to the grid get their current from wind and solar, not from batteries they charge at night.
Of course utility companies would have to put up some incentive for you to let them use your batteries, meaning they buy a little higher than they sell but I would advice watching closely how they will do the math.
I spend 0.120 KWh everyday just to keep my 6KWh battery bank at float voltage with no current draw. It is used only on power failures. Cost of lost energy would be higher with deep discharges/recharges
So my bill currently looks like this:
Energy stored to your system = 0.120 * 365 * 0.19 = 8.32$
Energy retrieved from your system: 0
I do not view how this could be good for the consumer. I view a great advantage for the utilities although if they market it well. Hence my first post. Think about consumers with old/bad batteries that waste even more on charging, what if you need to charge during peak-rates, etc...
You loose energy when storing/retrieving energy to batteries, so here is a possible use case:
;-)
1) You leave for a 1 year trip around the world, leaving your car hooked up to the grid.
2) When you get back a bill awaits you. Have you left your car unplugged, you would have saved that bill.
The bill would read :
Energy stored to your system: 10345 Kwh
Energy retrieved from your system: 8978 Kwh
Total to pay: 1367 Kwh
Thank you for letting us use your system and charge you for that!
It's like if you were running a bank with a safe that spills money into the sewer, not a very nice business model to be into
This guy has found a miraculous way to fight spam with a mono-strategy approach. It is so good that the guy has sent many posts to /. offering anybody to bet about it with him. Hence his product must be real and what he says must be true, hence no need for regulations, just buy his product, according to him, his mono-strategy approach is the best way, no need for regulations ;-))
This doesn't surprise me at all, I guess anybody that follows what happens in Russia suspected this. Still, it will be interesting to see how much evidence is left behind or in other words, how good a job they did at rigging the election ;-)
Nope it runs on a toy-OS
another thing on your sig, did you know that :
;-)
eleven plus two / twelve plus one = 12 1/6
while
(eleven plus two) / (twelve plus one) = 1
Just a small unimportant detail
Cheers,
This doesn't work, try it on your favorite linux distro or any Unix.
ren *.avi *.av1 works on windows if on same drive
Any such service should be free to use as Google accelerator is because the proxy you use collects data of the web sites you visit. Giving the proxy such information and paying money on top of it is silly if you use a snake-oil product that charges you for that.
For ISP and sysadmins, you can set-up a caching proxy (squid, apache) and optionally a program that diminish the quality of the images that you cache.
Google uses standard web acceleration strategies: Google Web Accelerator uses various strategies to make your web pages load faster, including:
* Sending your page requests through Google machines dedicated to handling Google Web Accelerator traffic.
* Storing copies of frequently looked at pages to make them quickly accessible.
* Downloading only the updates if a web page has changed slightly since you last viewed it.
* Prefetching certain pages onto your computer in advance.
* Managing your Internet connection to reduce delays.
* Compressing data before sending it to your computer.
;-))
Sorry I tried to download the free trial but it doesn't run on my Linux computer. Snake-oil products usually do not have a linux version because snake-oil vendors know that linux users don't buy snake-oil products anyway. As said before, everything needed to "accelerate" is already there in any standard linux distro installation anyway.
Don't you understand I have nothing to sell, it's not like if you were challenging a competitor, wake up ! If you do not want to pay me, you should pay someone else neutral to run the tests and post the results on your web site instead of just saying "we are the best".
I just had a look at propel.com. I have always figured that web accelerators were a snake-oil business. Nothing I can't do with fine tuning my browser caching settings and using squid or apache proxy with caching for better results. Compression is pretty standard too. Your web accelerator is mostly based on caching, I found that out by looking at the HTTPS section. It may sell well to people that don't understand technology but it is still snake-oil, nothing you can't do without the useless product.
If you are consistent then the poster who called your spam product snake-oil was probably right although I couldn't tell for sure until you pay me or somebody else to run the tests. For the web accelerator, I can tell for sure, it IS snake-oil
No escrow account, you pay me period, I don't put a penny into it. You are the one with a product to market, not me. You are guaranteed that the money you will give me will be profitable for marketing purposes since your product can't fail. So you send me 5000$ as down payment for me to start working on this. Deal?
Sorry, you have exhausted your time slice. You will need to send me $5000 in order for me to continue talking with you. Consider this as an advance for the final deal I will offer you in order to run the tests. I will reimburse the 5000$ to you if no tests take place.
Bottom line is that you are going to have to pay me in order to run the tests. You have nothing to loose since the money invested will definitely be profitable in marketing purposes.
Hehe, simple, it will cost me more than 10,000$ to set up the test process and to pay the lawyers overseeing the whole process. So in the end I would have to pay to prove you wrong and I would gain no commercial advantages since I am not selling anything. So I am guaranteed to loose money.
If you win, you don't mind how much money you spend because you can then brag about how much better your product is.
So you have everything to win and I have everything to loose. It is a silly deal.
You probably already knew about this before proposing that silly bet unless you are more stupid than I think.
Why don't you want to run the tests if you need to convince yourself that a simplistic approach can beat a multi-strategy approach ? I mean you don't even know how SMTP works (e.g. eat the mail), how simplistic does that sound ?
I know you aren't selling anything. You just are making outrageous claims saying that it is impossible for our system to be better than open source software. I simply asked if you had any confidence in the claim which you could prove by accepting my risk free offer.
;-(
I never made the outrageous claims you pretend I made. I said that your approach was too simplistic and that any commercial product using a limited set of approach couldn't do as well as putting to contribution all the open-sources tools available and the different tricks of the trade.
I also said combining multiple commercial products could do as well as combining open-source solutions but then you end up with a useless bill.
This could very well be true. But the downside of any commercial system is that it will never do as good a job as smartly combining the many freely available tools to fit your use case. You would need several commercial products to do a good job.
The more I think about it, the more I chat with you, the more I find your approach too simplistic. And the more I find that you sound like an MS brainwashed guy that is trying to sell you a product.
You don't understand, I have no interest in proving my solution is better, unlike you I am not selling anything.
I offer you my assistance to reproduce my setup for the third time now but you say you already know the product you sell is better.
I nevertheless expressed serious concerns that your solution was too simplistic compared to a muti-strategy approach. From my experience, as wonderful as your algorithm may be, I would only use it in a multi-strategy approach taking into account the opinion of your algorithm (giving it a weight) as one of the multiple parameter making me take my final decision on tagging a message as spam or not.
Sorry, you would never get full control. You remind me more and more of that MS VP. You really don't seem to understand how on Earth combining open-source solutions could beat your proprietary product. Furthermore, you do not understand that I have nothing to prove, unlike you. I am just a happy user of Open-Source products reporting the facts. I have no interest in the solution I use, unlike you.
If you understood all that, you would realize that your bet offer, and now your conclusion are both silly.
The way slashdot works (at least with my settings) is that you reply to a message that I sent MYSELF and I get automatically notified by email. Of course, I don't read all messages posted on slashdot to check if somebody wants to bet money with me neither do I get notified by email every time somebody posts on /.
So, short story is reply to one of MY message if you want me to get notified and answer back to you. There is no need to reply to 2 of MY messages with the same text in order for me to get notified by email any faster.
I can send you my detailed configuration (no industrial secrets here) in order for you to reproduce my setup if you want to run comparative tests yourself.
Another important thing, automatically reporting Spam is quite effective. It takes at least a few months before you can see the effects but international spammers DO take your addresses off their lists when they see that spam to those addresses is systematically reported. For the spammers, those addresses could very well be spamtraps as far as they are concerned and they DO take spamtraps off their lists for obvious reasons. That's the MOST effective way to fight spam because you prevent it from being sent in the first place.
Another reason why I find your approach too simplistic I guess. You are missing too many nice features of a multi-strategy approach.
Cheers,
So I challenge that person (ls671) to prove it. I'll put up $10K and ls671 will put up $10K into an escrow account. We'll run the same realtime mailstream through both systems for 24 hours and if you get a lower total error count, you win the $10K. So ls671, this is easy money since you said we'd NEVER be able to match a system constructed of free components. If that were true, you'd accept my bet instantly because you'd always win. So this is easy money. Please accept my bet and post your acceptance here. Or post a retraction. What's your choice?
;-)
Quit spamming slashdot with your bet offer
dupe1 dupe2
Any other dupe I did not come across yet ?
By the way, you remind me of a Microsoft VP we got to meet for an afternoon in Redmond, have you ever worked there? In the end, we chose to use non-MS products.
Hahemm "eat the mail" and waste bandwidth ?
Here is how it usually works with Sendmail and most standard SMTP servers, they don't "eat the mail", they do not let the user upload it ! Have you really worked with SMTP servers before ?
telnet thevtek.com 25
Trying 74.15.178.5...
Connected to thevtek.com.
Escape character is '^]'.
220 arthas.thevtek.com ESMTP Sendmail 8.13.7/8.13.4; Wed, 5 Dec 2007 21:01:08 -0500
helo localhost
250 arthas.thevtek.com Hello cpu145.adsl.qc.bellglobal.com [207.236.226.149], pleased to meet you
mail from: green_smtp_admin@yahoo.com
250 2.1.0 green_smtp_admin@yahoo.com... Sender ok
data
503 5.0.0 Need RCPT (recipient)
data
503 5.0.0 Need RCPT (recipient)
rcpt to:
501 5.5.2 Syntax error in parameters scanning "to"
rcpt to: joe@sillyaddress
550 5.7.1 joe@sillyaddress... Relaying denied
data
503 5.0.0 Need RCPT (recipient)
Why do you post the same reply twice on different threads ?
This reply is a dupe of the reply you gave here
I would calm down if I were you because you are SPAMMING slashdot now with your bet offer, which is a kind of silly fact to consider.
No need for a bet I am not the gambling type anyway, are you?
I gave you a list all the open sources tools and tricks you can use to run your own comparative tests.
Unfortunately, I can't test your software unless you send me copy of it. Send me a copy +3000$ for my time and I will test your software in an independent manner. Then I will post the results back here on slashdot.
Note that I won't mind at all if your software beats my open source tools and tricks combination, I have no monetary interest at all in my open source solutions being better. It would simply prove you right and demonstrate that your product is far more superior than we first though here on slashdot. If your product gives better results, I will then consider the cost/gains ratio before using it.
Cheers,
"I don't know of any commercial system with numbers (accuracy or speed) better than ours."
;-)
This could very well be true. But the downside of any commercial system is that it will never do as good a job as smartly combining the many freely available tools to fit your use case. You would need several commercial products to do a good job.
I view it the same as security. I would never trust 1 commercial product to keep my system safe. It is much safer to use a combination of tools to keep your system secure.
So I guess I would say the weakness of your system is that it uses only one approach to fight spam.
I have results as good as the numbers you give if not better using this setup and a few other tricks given in another article on this thread.
Congratulation on your effort to fight spam and take care of yourself