For many years, people said that nuclear power is very cheap. This was its major selling point. No need to buy large quantities of fuel. Now, it turns out that the costs of the energy are paid by the generations living when the power plant is already shut down.
Sure, we can then move the goal posts of this old discussion to talk about CO2 emissions and other pollution, but it would only be fair to compare nuclear to sustainable sources such as wind/solar. On a CO2 emission, they may be comparable, but since nuclear is apparently a little more costly than we previously thought, perhaps wind and solar energy are becoming more attractive?
Too much miniaturization is dumb, unless you want a portable device.
I agree. If it was never meant to be carried around, why make it so small? Sounds like it needed a slightly larger cooling system to make it work properly.
Cooling capabilities of any device are proportional to the outside surface area of the device (where it can get rid of the heat), and this thing has too little outside surface area. Sometimes the marketing guys really should listen to the engineers.
Only the mad conspiracy hatters will be disappointed, because they already know that planet X is on a collision course with us. But then, they don't care about new findings,unless they support their theory. Amateur astronomers however will be just as excited when a planet is found much further away.
It's actually a very exciting and interesting article... it means that in the near future, we won't be searching for a needle in a haystack. We know pretty much where to find the needle, if there is any. To me, that is even more reason to search, which hopefully opens up some funding for the scientists who produce these awesome results. For me personally, the really exciting thing is that there is so much out there. Perhaps no earth-sized planet, many more dwarf planet than I had ever dreamed...
There's basically 3 types of information for traders: 1. Official public information from the company itself (press releases, annual report, etc). 2. Analysis by external parties 3. Unofficial (non-public) information from within the company - trading using this is called insider trading, and this is already against the law.
So, when companies release information (category 1), everybody can trade. I do realize now that large companies have press releases on a daily basis. So, maybe the timespan of a week/month was a little long. But at least something that reflects the timespan between press releases (hours? at least not milliseconds) would still be a good idea.
The way I understand it is that traders (computers) have to hold on to shares for a minimum of 500 ms, which means that whatever the market does in those milliseconds cannot be acted upon. However, others can act in the meantime.
Personally, I think that it should be law that if you buy shares in any company (or fund or whatever), you have to hold on to them for a minimum of a week or a month. Shares represent actual physical companies which own factories and employ real people. Those things don't change in 500 ms. They change over a much larger amount of time. And I believe that the stock market would be healthier if this was reflected in its trading. Obviously, when new information comes out (press release: "The factory of company X has just gone up in flames"), everybody's counter should be set to zero, but shares sold in such a case cannot be bought back a fraction of a second later (because whoever just bought them has to hold on to them for a week/month).
I don't pretend that this plan is waterproof. I'm sure someone will shoot a big hole in it in the replies below... I just wish that the stock market would represent what it's supposed to represent: a place where people can invest in our real economy.
Pants have pockets. Phones fit in pockets. Problem solved. And I know that women tend to not use pockets - I cannot understand why - but they have purses and handbags that are specially designed to hold many things including a phone. Either way, the problem that a wearable smart gadget tries to solve is not a problem in the first place.
Also, I don't have to track my fitness, because I am usually there myself to observe my fitness with my own eyes.
Also: I get the feeling that European English speaking people swear a lot more than in the USA, and I wonder if this will be reflected in the moderation.
There is absolutely no way that soar losers will totally abuse this.
Also, there is no way that people will get upset buying an expensive gaming system, and subsequently being unable to play with the 'green' accounts because of some highly subjective moderation system.
The difference is that, together with Sedna, this is only the 2nd object found so far out.
From what I understood, the importance of this is that it may shed a new light on how the solar system came to be. I thought that the general theory of small dwarf planets in weird orbits is that they were flung into that orbit by the larger planets that passed by them at some point in the past. However, Sedna and the new object are so far out that they don't cross any orbit of a larger planet. So, something else is going on.
Contrary to popular belief, scientists get excited when observations do not match the current theories (they're often accused of defending the old models).
Many people wear cheap sunglasses - I guess "80% of the eyewear market" is in terms of value, not volume, since 1 Ray-ban costs about as much as 100 cheap sunglasses?
I'm impressed that Lego can do such heavy tasks nowadays. I am sure that my old technic Lego blocks would simply have snapped in two under such stresses. However, I think that the new Lego is so customized that there may exist thousands of different blocks, which means you must now design first, and then order the blocks. It's no longer a matter of having a box full of blocks and just start building. It seems also many blocks are specialized and can only be used in one (maybe two) different way(s), whereas I seem to remember that I invented new ways to use my old blocks all the time.
Call me an old fart, but I am not sure all of this is actually progress.
Although it’s located moderately far from Earth, HR 5171 can just about be seen on a clear night in the constellation of Centaurus with the naked eye and has been measured to have a magnitude of between 6.10 and 7.30.
So, the title "Monster Hypergiant Star Discovered" is a little exaggerated. "Observations reveal new information about hypergiant star" would be better. Then again, it is the Discovery Channel who put this on their website. Maybe we should just be happy they don't express the size of the star in terms of football fields, and the volume in terms of schoolbuses.
Men just don't trust that women can do something important right. This includes math problems, but also meeting an important deadline, hiring important people, or taking decisions.
I know this sounds like a troll post, but I am serious. The gender gap is not just a problem with maths, or because women get pregnant and care for a baby for several months. It is much broader, and women are indeed held back by men, because men prefer to stay in control in certain cases.
However, I think we should approach it from another perspective: Those in charge (in a company, government) don't trust many people to take important decisions or to do any calculations right. However, women are overrepresented in the group of people who are not trusted with these tasks, but men are present in that group too.
I'm totally not an expert, but I do have some questions that the news do not answer:
If the 777 took a rapid dive to nearly ground level, and then changed course, and continued flying at an elevation of mere meters above the water, would the radars in the area have picked it up? And once such an airplane is hundreds of kilometers off course, would anyone notice if it increases its altitude to a few hundred meters, before attempting a landing on a straight stretch of road somewhere in Cambodia, Borneo (in Indonesia), or Myanmar (aka Birma)?
I admit that it is unlikely, but then, so is everything else. Can this be ruled out completely?
Looking at the population density of the area, there is a chance that a low-flying airplane does not attract too much attention. There are bits of land that are very empty.
Ok, I actually take back everything I just wrote (above). If basic things like 'bringing food into a lab' or 'wearing lab coats and gloves in an office' actually still go wrong, then they should just start acting professional, and this is a good thing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v... In my university (in the Netherlands), this is already common for at least 15 years.
Typical research at a university involves trying to find out what happens when you do something new. They keep trying until they find something that works or that is interesting. It's fundamental research. Companies typically do more applied research - optimizing things.
At a company, you have to gather 15 signatures before you can start a fundamenal science experiment with unknown outcome. At university, you just go ahead. Companies typically outsource such experiments to universities (or they just pick up on the research after a PhD student put in a few years of good work). It's not the same type of work, so you should not compare the risks. Test pilots also have a higher risk of injury than a commercial pilot.
With such an attitude, you must be terrified everywhere, all the time. The bomb can be hidden everywhere, and often you don't know who is driving that car/truck or who is flying that airplane. The terrrorist might even be a pedestrian. Can you tell the difference at a distance?
Frankly, with such an attitude, the only thing you should really be afraid of it your own head. Your paranoia is making your life miserable. Also, such a remark is pure discrimination.
Slashdot Mirror
In those days, tax was not a percentage. You just had to pay a certain amount, or else. That's not a system that I'd like to see reinstalled.
Dalton already has a unit named after him (the unit used to indicate atomic/molecular mass), although it is not an SI unit...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A...
For many years, people said that nuclear power is very cheap. This was its major selling point. No need to buy large quantities of fuel. Now, it turns out that the costs of the energy are paid by the generations living when the power plant is already shut down.
Sure, we can then move the goal posts of this old discussion to talk about CO2 emissions and other pollution, but it would only be fair to compare nuclear to sustainable sources such as wind/solar. On a CO2 emission, they may be comparable, but since nuclear is apparently a little more costly than we previously thought, perhaps wind and solar energy are becoming more attractive?
Too much miniaturization is dumb, unless you want a portable device.
I agree. If it was never meant to be carried around, why make it so small? Sounds like it needed a slightly larger cooling system to make it work properly.
Cooling capabilities of any device are proportional to the outside surface area of the device (where it can get rid of the heat), and this thing has too little outside surface area. Sometimes the marketing guys really should listen to the engineers.
Universal Hydrogen shortages expected soon!! -- that better?
It's an interesting read... and although none of it is breaking news, it's definitely stuff for nerds and I am happy that /. link to it.
Yeah, yeah... tl;dr. Not interesting if you're living in New York, capital of the USA.
Only the mad conspiracy hatters will be disappointed, because they already know that planet X is on a collision course with us. But then, they don't care about new findings,unless they support their theory. Amateur astronomers however will be just as excited when a planet is found much further away.
It's actually a very exciting and interesting article... it means that in the near future, we won't be searching for a needle in a haystack. We know pretty much where to find the needle, if there is any. To me, that is even more reason to search, which hopefully opens up some funding for the scientists who produce these awesome results.
For me personally, the really exciting thing is that there is so much out there. Perhaps no earth-sized planet, many more dwarf planet than I had ever dreamed...
There's basically 3 types of information for traders:
1. Official public information from the company itself (press releases, annual report, etc).
2. Analysis by external parties
3. Unofficial (non-public) information from within the company - trading using this is called insider trading, and this is already against the law.
So, when companies release information (category 1), everybody can trade. I do realize now that large companies have press releases on a daily basis. So, maybe the timespan of a week/month was a little long. But at least something that reflects the timespan between press releases (hours? at least not milliseconds) would still be a good idea.
The way I understand it is that traders (computers) have to hold on to shares for a minimum of 500 ms, which means that whatever the market does in those milliseconds cannot be acted upon. However, others can act in the meantime.
Personally, I think that it should be law that if you buy shares in any company (or fund or whatever), you have to hold on to them for a minimum of a week or a month. Shares represent actual physical companies which own factories and employ real people. Those things don't change in 500 ms. They change over a much larger amount of time. And I believe that the stock market would be healthier if this was reflected in its trading. Obviously, when new information comes out (press release: "The factory of company X has just gone up in flames"), everybody's counter should be set to zero, but shares sold in such a case cannot be bought back a fraction of a second later (because whoever just bought them has to hold on to them for a week/month).
I don't pretend that this plan is waterproof. I'm sure someone will shoot a big hole in it in the replies below... I just wish that the stock market would represent what it's supposed to represent: a place where people can invest in our real economy.
Pants have pockets. Phones fit in pockets. Problem solved. And I know that women tend to not use pockets - I cannot understand why - but they have purses and handbags that are specially designed to hold many things including a phone. Either way, the problem that a wearable smart gadget tries to solve is not a problem in the first place.
Also, I don't have to track my fitness, because I am usually there myself to observe my fitness with my own eyes.
So, not using the phone is far more dangerous than using it.
Also: I get the feeling that European English speaking people swear a lot more than in the USA, and I wonder if this will be reflected in the moderation.
There is absolutely no way that soar losers will totally abuse this.
Also, there is no way that people will get upset buying an expensive gaming system, and subsequently being unable to play with the 'green' accounts because of some highly subjective moderation system.
The difference is that, together with Sedna, this is only the 2nd object found so far out.
From what I understood, the importance of this is that it may shed a new light on how the solar system came to be. I thought that the general theory of small dwarf planets in weird orbits is that they were flung into that orbit by the larger planets that passed by them at some point in the past. However, Sedna and the new object are so far out that they don't cross any orbit of a larger planet. So, something else is going on.
Contrary to popular belief, scientists get excited when observations do not match the current theories (they're often accused of defending the old models).
Some more about these 'detached objects' can be found on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
Many people wear cheap sunglasses - I guess "80% of the eyewear market" is in terms of value, not volume, since 1 Ray-ban costs about as much as 100 cheap sunglasses?
I'm impressed that Lego can do such heavy tasks nowadays. I am sure that my old technic Lego blocks would simply have snapped in two under such stresses. However, I think that the new Lego is so customized that there may exist thousands of different blocks, which means you must now design first, and then order the blocks. It's no longer a matter of having a box full of blocks and just start building. It seems also many blocks are specialized and can only be used in one (maybe two) different way(s), whereas I seem to remember that I invented new ways to use my old blocks all the time.
Call me an old fart, but I am not sure all of this is actually progress.
From TFA:
Although it’s located moderately far from Earth, HR 5171 can just about be seen on a clear night in the constellation of Centaurus with the naked eye and has been measured to have a magnitude of between 6.10 and 7.30.
So, the title "Monster Hypergiant Star Discovered" is a little exaggerated. "Observations reveal new information about hypergiant star" would be better. Then again, it is the Discovery Channel who put this on their website. Maybe we should just be happy they don't express the size of the star in terms of football fields, and the volume in terms of schoolbuses.
Aww! Look, they're feeding the lawyers again!
Men just don't trust that women can do something important right. This includes math problems, but also meeting an important deadline, hiring important people, or taking decisions.
I know this sounds like a troll post, but I am serious. The gender gap is not just a problem with maths, or because women get pregnant and care for a baby for several months. It is much broader, and women are indeed held back by men, because men prefer to stay in control in certain cases.
However, I think we should approach it from another perspective: Those in charge (in a company, government) don't trust many people to take important decisions or to do any calculations right. However, women are overrepresented in the group of people who are not trusted with these tasks, but men are present in that group too.
Yeah, but other saying goes: You don't have to help the terrorists by making it easy for them.
I'm totally not an expert, but I do have some questions that the news do not answer:
If the 777 took a rapid dive to nearly ground level, and then changed course, and continued flying at an elevation of mere meters above the water, would the radars in the area have picked it up? And once such an airplane is hundreds of kilometers off course, would anyone notice if it increases its altitude to a few hundred meters, before attempting a landing on a straight stretch of road somewhere in Cambodia, Borneo (in Indonesia), or Myanmar (aka Birma)?
I admit that it is unlikely, but then, so is everything else. Can this be ruled out completely?
Looking at the population density of the area, there is a chance that a low-flying airplane does not attract too much attention. There are bits of land that are very empty.
Without the fish, your rivers will die.
Why would you want to sacrifice your own healthy river for cattle feed in China?
Ok, I actually take back everything I just wrote (above). If basic things like 'bringing food into a lab' or 'wearing lab coats and gloves in an office' actually still go wrong, then they should just start acting professional, and this is a good thing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
In my university (in the Netherlands), this is already common for at least 15 years.
Typical research at a university involves trying to find out what happens when you do something new. They keep trying until they find something that works or that is interesting. It's fundamental research. Companies typically do more applied research - optimizing things.
At a company, you have to gather 15 signatures before you can start a fundamenal science experiment with unknown outcome. At university, you just go ahead. Companies typically outsource such experiments to universities (or they just pick up on the research after a PhD student put in a few years of good work). It's not the same type of work, so you should not compare the risks. Test pilots also have a higher risk of injury than a commercial pilot.
With such an attitude, you must be terrified everywhere, all the time. The bomb can be hidden everywhere, and often you don't know who is driving that car/truck or who is flying that airplane. The terrrorist might even be a pedestrian. Can you tell the difference at a distance?
Frankly, with such an attitude, the only thing you should really be afraid of it your own head. Your paranoia is making your life miserable.
Also, such a remark is pure discrimination.