I was commenting on the GPs misleading use of terms. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of chemistry (see his post) would not be able to understand why tiny amounts of additives can have such large effects. Surface effects and the use of different atomic species as dislocation stoppers are neither basic chemistry nor much of a help to understanding why all of forging, casting and powder/composite metallurgy behave as they do.
As Fred Schwed remarked all those years ago after the Wall Street Crash, you have to remember that every one of those shares that someone had to sell at the bottom of the market had a buyer who then watched them go up.
However, we now see share prices swing on relatively small trading volumes. Therefore, it is possible to show a big paper gain or loss based on a small amount of market manipulation; the actual total reported value of shares in the market shows a net gain or fall, though it can only be tested when they are actually sold.
And we tend to forget that herdthink (yes, market traders are sheep, just very aggressive sheep) determines share price and is often clueless. At one time all the traders thought that companies that actually made stuff were worthless and you could barely give away shares in Rolls-Royce. At that time the MD remarked "They seem not to realise that if we stopped making things tomorrow we would still be in business profitably servicing our products 70 years later". But (with exceptions like Warren Buffet) the idea is not to invest to make money; it is to fool other people into doing what you want, manipulating prices to your advantage: not only is modern investment a casino, but the actual objective is to tilt the roulette table without others noticing.
From that point of view Microsoft will always be badly run because it is quite hard to distort its share price owing to the very public visibility of its products. Google, Apple and other companies whose value is hard to work out are wonderful because traders can profit going down as well as up.
drinkypoos comment above is nonsense. There are many, many different sintered powder metal composites and their characteristics depend on the ingredients and their treatment, ranging from things like the common cobalt infused tungsten carbide used in cutting tools to low temperature sintered bearings which were available during WW2.
The author of this paper is obviously biased MPIF 2005 paper but it shows how active research is in this field, with the forging companies and powder metal companies constantly overtaking one another. The paper referenced actually demonstrates the superior fatigue strength of the powder technology used.
Forging involves the distortion of the metal grains, and as such there are always treatment issues with locked-in strain and the effects of any inclusions in the metal. Powder metallurgy has different problems. Neither is a perfect process. But the people who up-moderated drinkypoos comment certainly weren't metallurgists.
I think you mean "at the molecular or crystallographic level". Certainly where steels are concerned, the difference between forging and casting has a lot to do with grain structure as well as the pearlite/ferrite mix, and it is these that determine ductility, modulus, ultimate yield and so on. Chemistry has very little to do with it, a rudimentary knowledge nothing at all; irons of the same chemical composition can have very different properties indeed based entirely on the production processes applied to them. This is why welding by the uninstructed can be so dangerous: random heat treatment of steels (and aluminum alloys too) can have drastic effects on their behaviour.
In fact, the nodular cast iron of which many engine parts are made, is itself a composite. The iron (a metal) contains nodules of graphite (carbon) which are roughly spherical and give it a combination of strength and ductility. Although it isn't as strong as a steel forging, nodular cast iron is very versatile and can be cast easily. When I was involved in a British Government kickstarter project over 20 years ago, one of the key objectives for future manufacturing that was identified was a way of producing cast parts in strong materials economically to near finished size, i.e. to eliminate the need for forging.
However, your examples confute your last clause, " the guy who gets shafted because his 'views' aren't with the mainstream". Looking at Great Scientific Disasters, it is usually the non-mainstream guy who gets promoted by the media and then real science takes a long time to be recognised. There is no shortage of journalists trying to raise their profile (and income from right-wing newspaper owners) by AGW denial. In the UK, Lovelock, Wakefield and Laithwaite are all examples of non-mainstream view holders who have turned out simply to be wrong - though Lovelock has recently admitted this. It is quite hard to find someone whose views were non-mainstream and was subsequently found to be right - opposing the non-scientific mainstream doesn't count (e.g. Galileo was one of the foremost pre-scientists of his day and other pre-scientific workers were his enthusiastic supporters; the opposition of the foot-draggers in the Church doesn't count, they were simply the local equivalent of Limbaugh or Beck.)
I am afraid that Commander X would seem to have been introduced neither to the FSB nor to Mossad. We know that because he hasn't yet had either a polonium milkshake or a Semtex phone.
And who is going to overhaul the system and eliminate the garbage? I don't know about the USA, but in this country whenever a "system" needs "overhauling", all of a sudden the Government seems to employ a lot of lawyers on long contracts. Whereas reverting to a state in which neither algorithms nor their implementation in software could be patented would have the reverse effect.
You appear to have responded to my post without reading it. I suggested that it is the lawyers who benefit financially, and I didn't suggest anywhere that "law firms" are incorporated.
I think, given the number of lawyers involved and the kind of income they can make from corporates, that for "emotionally invested" read "benefiting financially". There are a few judges who, once they have a permanent appointment, suddenly start telling litigants to grow up and keep the courts out of it, but the majority are looking over their shoulders at their former colleagues and their children.
Blackberry phone with the remote kill enabled. Someone you really trust with the necessary information to use it. When travelling, carry cheap spare phone with PAYG in car boot.
Cheap laptop for travelling, good desktops at home and work, all synced via Dropbox, office desktop with Citrix. Also, spare laptop kept at the office and booted periodically to get updates.
The IRA could built one tonne bombs. A one tonne truck bomb with a few spent fuel rods from a reactor as the payload, and shielding made of cement blocks, could be quite hard to detect and do very significant damage in the wrong place - hundreds of deaths and an inner city uninhabitable for months. The IRA was funded by a few ex-Nazis living in Ireland and wanting revenge after WW2, by protection rackets and bank robberies. I imagine that Islamic terrorists actually have access to more resources and funding than that.
But...all the reviews say nobody would voluntarily buy a Blackberry nowadays because of the drop down menus with words in. Apparently I am the only person in the world who has trouble with all the random icons in Android.
Of course the reason is I18N. My Japanese satnav has little buttons which were obviously originally designed to hold Japanese symbols. The English version just about works, with words like "Route" and "Guide". The French and German options are simply full of abbreviations.
I am having to pay through my taxes to keep HMS Ocean in the Thames and half the Army on standby to protect the people who caused the financial crisis, when in a sane world we would be locking them up (along, in my doubtless undesirable opinion, with Tessa Jowell and Lord Coe who thought they would benefit from demanding this colossal waste of money). People who like football pay for football; people who like cricket pay for cricket: everybody has to pay for sham amateurs with trust funds to compete in a complete travesty of the original Olympics, a purely commercial operation in which, to make it even better, only junk food can be eaten at the performances!
If Heironymus Bosch was still around he'd be able to paint it, but sadly Britart is on the Ship of Fools, not observing it.
Basically, clear all the poor people out of East London and then charge so much for the tickets that only the rich can get in. Sonic guns are only needed to clear ordinary people off the roads when the Zil convoys go by (which is more or less what is going to happen).
Bitter? Twisted? Very glad that I live over 100km West of London? Yes.
Everything nowadays works on an abstraction layer. If it wasn't for that, modern functionality would be impossible; you just can't design modern graphical-based software in assembler. HTML5 is just a higher abstraction layer; the speed depends largely on the efficiency of the translation, but as the rate at which the constructs are converted to entities that can be handled with native code increases, the performance gap narrows.
High speed trading is done in Java because Java is actually fast enough, nowadays, and it is possible to write good enough quality code to do complex modelling. At my very inferior level, I have often knocked out little Swing applets in an hour or so to test an idea or model a process; nowadays I would probably do it in JS using a convenient xy plot environment I knocked up in a morning.
The upshot is that HTML5 means that you can economically produce little applications with a tiny user group. They won't be running long enough to deplete phone batteries, which in any case still suffer most from display and radio consumption.
But then - high user id and marketing bullshit ("vibrant app economy that Apple and even Microsoft has"). Since we heard just this week that MS isn't getting developers this is obviously a Microsoft PR troll. Welcome to your cubicle and good luck posting on Slashdot!
Kilburn is (used to be?) the Irish quarter of London. Superb music in the pubs, and believe me, they told one another far more "offensive" jokes than that. Dubliners think people from Cork are stupid, and both agree that people from the West Coast are really, really stupid.
True story: I was in an Irish glaziers in Kilburn when a man came in with an order. He started to read it out and the man behind the counter said "How do I know that comes from your boss? If I know him he'll deny all knowledge of it." The other guy said "Look, he's signed it at the bottom". The reply? "I know your boss, he's capable of forging his own signature." Yes, it's the sense of humour. They know precisely what they're saying.
Dr. Brian O'Nolan, aka Miles nCopaleen, one of Ireland's greatest humorous writers and a great student of the Irish language, once remarked that the only four words you really needed to know to get by in Western Ireland were downpour, eternity, whiskey and potatoes. The French, on the other hand, were frequently militarily successful until the start of WW2 (and, as the US discovered, weren't the only round-eyes who couldn't hold on to Vietnam), whereas the Russians themselves joke about the perversity of life in Russia. So: sarcastic exemplar fail.
All these Randians will expect the US Government to rescue them when their ship goes tits up. Perhaps the best answer is for the US Coastguard to quote them to provide emergency services - 35% of turnover?
The Guardian has moved politically to the right because so many of its page views are American. The Lib Dem party has liberals on the right and (social) democrats on the left, which is why it is now between a rock and a hard place with the Libs enthusiastically pro-conservative and the party in the country, mostly leftish, wringing its hands. Trad Guardian readers go for the. Independent nowadays - Lebedev isn't worried about US clicks.
Yes, but the GP was (accurately) decoupling liberalism from left/right. The confusion is in the minds of US bloviators, who like to confound socialists and social democrats as 'libruls', though socialists are usually far from liberal.
The article author wants to program without investing time up front in research. From my experience of consultants that puts him in my class D: wants us to do all the work so he can present the results back to us and get paid for it.
Slashdot Mirror
I was commenting on the GPs misleading use of terms. Anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of chemistry (see his post) would not be able to understand why tiny amounts of additives can have such large effects. Surface effects and the use of different atomic species as dislocation stoppers are neither basic chemistry nor much of a help to understanding why all of forging, casting and powder/composite metallurgy behave as they do.
However, we now see share prices swing on relatively small trading volumes. Therefore, it is possible to show a big paper gain or loss based on a small amount of market manipulation; the actual total reported value of shares in the market shows a net gain or fall, though it can only be tested when they are actually sold.
From that point of view Microsoft will always be badly run because it is quite hard to distort its share price owing to the very public visibility of its products. Google, Apple and other companies whose value is hard to work out are wonderful because traders can profit going down as well as up.
The author of this paper is obviously biased MPIF 2005 paper but it shows how active research is in this field, with the forging companies and powder metal companies constantly overtaking one another. The paper referenced actually demonstrates the superior fatigue strength of the powder technology used.
Forging involves the distortion of the metal grains, and as such there are always treatment issues with locked-in strain and the effects of any inclusions in the metal. Powder metallurgy has different problems. Neither is a perfect process. But the people who up-moderated drinkypoos comment certainly weren't metallurgists.
I think you mean "at the molecular or crystallographic level". Certainly where steels are concerned, the difference between forging and casting has a lot to do with grain structure as well as the pearlite/ferrite mix, and it is these that determine ductility, modulus, ultimate yield and so on. Chemistry has very little to do with it, a rudimentary knowledge nothing at all; irons of the same chemical composition can have very different properties indeed based entirely on the production processes applied to them. This is why welding by the uninstructed can be so dangerous: random heat treatment of steels (and aluminum alloys too) can have drastic effects on their behaviour.
In fact, the nodular cast iron of which many engine parts are made, is itself a composite. The iron (a metal) contains nodules of graphite (carbon) which are roughly spherical and give it a combination of strength and ductility. Although it isn't as strong as a steel forging, nodular cast iron is very versatile and can be cast easily. When I was involved in a British Government kickstarter project over 20 years ago, one of the key objectives for future manufacturing that was identified was a way of producing cast parts in strong materials economically to near finished size, i.e. to eliminate the need for forging.
However, your examples confute your last clause, " the guy who gets shafted because his 'views' aren't with the mainstream". Looking at Great Scientific Disasters, it is usually the non-mainstream guy who gets promoted by the media and then real science takes a long time to be recognised. There is no shortage of journalists trying to raise their profile (and income from right-wing newspaper owners) by AGW denial. In the UK, Lovelock, Wakefield and Laithwaite are all examples of non-mainstream view holders who have turned out simply to be wrong - though Lovelock has recently admitted this. It is quite hard to find someone whose views were non-mainstream and was subsequently found to be right - opposing the non-scientific mainstream doesn't count (e.g. Galileo was one of the foremost pre-scientists of his day and other pre-scientific workers were his enthusiastic supporters; the opposition of the foot-draggers in the Church doesn't count, they were simply the local equivalent of Limbaugh or Beck.)
I am afraid that Commander X would seem to have been introduced neither to the FSB nor to Mossad. We know that because he hasn't yet had either a polonium milkshake or a Semtex phone.
And who is going to overhaul the system and eliminate the garbage? I don't know about the USA, but in this country whenever a "system" needs "overhauling", all of a sudden the Government seems to employ a lot of lawyers on long contracts. Whereas reverting to a state in which neither algorithms nor their implementation in software could be patented would have the reverse effect.
You appear to have responded to my post without reading it. I suggested that it is the lawyers who benefit financially, and I didn't suggest anywhere that "law firms" are incorporated.
I think, given the number of lawyers involved and the kind of income they can make from corporates, that for "emotionally invested" read "benefiting financially". There are a few judges who, once they have a permanent appointment, suddenly start telling litigants to grow up and keep the courts out of it, but the majority are looking over their shoulders at their former colleagues and their children.
Cheap laptop for travelling, good desktops at home and work, all synced via Dropbox, office desktop with Citrix. Also, spare laptop kept at the office and booted periodically to get updates.
What's the tablet? Is its data synced?
Kindle - can't help there.
The IRA could built one tonne bombs. A one tonne truck bomb with a few spent fuel rods from a reactor as the payload, and shielding made of cement blocks, could be quite hard to detect and do very significant damage in the wrong place - hundreds of deaths and an inner city uninhabitable for months. The IRA was funded by a few ex-Nazis living in Ireland and wanting revenge after WW2, by protection rackets and bank robberies. I imagine that Islamic terrorists actually have access to more resources and funding than that.
Of course the reason is I18N. My Japanese satnav has little buttons which were obviously originally designed to hold Japanese symbols. The English version just about works, with words like "Route" and "Guide". The French and German options are simply full of abbreviations.
If Heironymus Bosch was still around he'd be able to paint it, but sadly Britart is on the Ship of Fools, not observing it.
Bitter? Twisted? Very glad that I live over 100km West of London? Yes.
High speed trading is done in Java because Java is actually fast enough, nowadays, and it is possible to write good enough quality code to do complex modelling. At my very inferior level, I have often knocked out little Swing applets in an hour or so to test an idea or model a process; nowadays I would probably do it in JS using a convenient xy plot environment I knocked up in a morning.
The upshot is that HTML5 means that you can economically produce little applications with a tiny user group. They won't be running long enough to deplete phone batteries, which in any case still suffer most from display and radio consumption.
But then - high user id and marketing bullshit ("vibrant app economy that Apple and even Microsoft has"). Since we heard just this week that MS isn't getting developers this is obviously a Microsoft PR troll. Welcome to your cubicle and good luck posting on Slashdot!
True story: I was in an Irish glaziers in Kilburn when a man came in with an order. He started to read it out and the man behind the counter said "How do I know that comes from your boss? If I know him he'll deny all knowledge of it." The other guy said "Look, he's signed it at the bottom". The reply? "I know your boss, he's capable of forging his own signature." Yes, it's the sense of humour. They know precisely what they're saying.
Dr. Brian O'Nolan, aka Miles nCopaleen, one of Ireland's greatest humorous writers and a great student of the Irish language, once remarked that the only four words you really needed to know to get by in Western Ireland were downpour, eternity, whiskey and potatoes. The French, on the other hand, were frequently militarily successful until the start of WW2 (and, as the US discovered, weren't the only round-eyes who couldn't hold on to Vietnam), whereas the Russians themselves joke about the perversity of life in Russia. So: sarcastic exemplar fail.
All these Randians will expect the US Government to rescue them when their ship goes tits up. Perhaps the best answer is for the US Coastguard to quote them to provide emergency services - 35% of turnover?
The Guardian has moved politically to the right because so many of its page views are American. The Lib Dem party has liberals on the right and (social) democrats on the left, which is why it is now between a rock and a hard place with the Libs enthusiastically pro-conservative and the party in the country, mostly leftish, wringing its hands. Trad Guardian readers go for the. Independent nowadays - Lebedev isn't worried about US clicks.
Yes, but the GP was (accurately) decoupling liberalism from left/right. The confusion is in the minds of US bloviators, who like to confound socialists and social democrats as 'libruls', though socialists are usually far from liberal.
The article author wants to program without investing time up front in research. From my experience of consultants that puts him in my class D: wants us to do all the work so he can present the results back to us and get paid for it.
Someone who CONs the management and inSULTs the workforce (that's consultants to Government and the public sector though).
brainphysicalexpressionofsexualattraction