Note that no liquid phase is involved here, its simply changing from a glass structure to a crystal structure.
No. Glass is a form of liquid - it has no translational symmetry at the molecular level. Rhomboedral or cubic structures are not glasses because they do have translational symmetry and are therefore crystalline. The change is between two types of crystal lattice.
It'll be heat sensitive - weak crystal bonds will 'fail' if the module gets too hot. This also means interesting challenges around soldering.
I do not see the connection. You want to write the contents of the chip and THEN solder it? Moreover the phase change temperature is above 400*C, so far higher than typical soldering temperatures. If there is a problem with soldering at all, it would be the other way around (hot memory melting solder joints during writes). Heating the memory above the phase change temperature will erase its contents, but other components of a PC will not survive 400*C either, so it is not a big concern. Finally, there is no such thing as "crystal bonds".
the static languages also "catch" a great deal of non-errors which the programmer is forced to deal with even though they never would have caused problems at run-time
The solution is templates and type inference, not moving type errors to runtime.
It is not about being able to customize (like game mods), it is about being able to learn. If you don't have source code, you have no real way of learning how software works.
1. Look here: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Sprints/Windows_Theme_Revamp/Direction_and_Feedback Does it look like the ribbon to you? Me neither. Ribbon is a tabbed toolbar. In the Firefox mockup they have no tabbed toolbars, they just removed the menu bar, and turned the two items that are actually used from it into toolbar buttons. PC Pro calling this a ribbon is disingenuous and misleading.
2. I have an impression that this is MS astroturfing that they deployed in order to justify spending a ton of money on an interface that is less usable that 15 year old menu bars, and loathed by a significant portion of their userbase.
99,9...% of random mutations cause premature death. Of the beneficial ones, exactly 0% cause the bacteria to transform into man-eating eldritch abominations. "Dangerous mutants" are a pop culture thing and pretending they are a real possibility is funny.
No, we need an ad where Windows is represented by a cheap whore, Mac by an expensive whore, Linux by a nerdy girlfriend (subtle STD reference for extra 'disturbingly appropriate metaphor' points), the first two have a cat fight, then a guy comes over and there's a lesbian threesome, then bestiality involving penguins and 800lb gorillas, wait, what were we talking about again?
Forkable = you can fork it (create a modified version without asking the original creator) So it means you can make your own Linux radio ad using parts of this one. Normal ads are 'unforkable' by design (because they include trademarks) and by circumstance (you have no permission to reuse the ad's content). This news means that if you want to market Linux, you no longer need to shell out money to create the advertising material, you pay only for air time.
Maybe the real reason is that Linux versions are no longer in stock because of MS pressure? How am I supposed to buy something that is not even offered to me?
The public perception of radiation is the best example that humans are generally stupid, and that stupidity has to be beaten out of them using blunt instruments. The Fallout games, Hulk, Spider-Man, etc. are NOT fact-based. They do NOT depict actual effects of radiation. Those are FAIRY TALES. There is no such thing as a Chinese syndrome. The nuclear power industry is not comspiring to destroy the world. Animals do not turn into monsters when heavily irradiated, they die! People do not turn into ghouls or zombies when heavily irradiated, they die as well! Please repeat this 100 times.
Now to answer this question, here is an example of a very radiation-resistant bacteria:
Unfortunately that is a physical impossibility, so your plan fails. Moreover the wide access to technology depends on it being accessible to stupid people - otherwise they wouldn't buy them and the technology companies would fold. There is just no solution to this problem: idiots will always get their computers hacked, fall for scams, get their credit cards stolen etc. no matter how secure we make them. The only way to cope with this is to minimize the effects they can have on other people.
btrfs is not ready yet. The chance to lose data due to an FS bug is small but still real. You wil be better off using reiserfs for/home and btrfs for root.
If the world suddenly switched massively to nuclear power, there would be about a decade worth of uranium to extract
How many times you "peak X" people need to be told that there is a difference between reserves and resources?
RESERVES: what we know we can dig up at *current* prices. RESOURCES: what we can theoretically dig up at *some* price.
Therefore, reserves are dependent on the current market price of uranium (shock!). Resources are immutable. Now, we have about 50 years of uranium RESERVES (mostly because nobody was actively looking for it - there is plenty from decommissioned nuclear warheads and existing mines, and generally speaking uranium is very cheap, so looking for more doesn't make much sense). We have RESOURCES of uranium for at least thousands of years, but they are extractable only at somewhat higher prices (let's say 1.5x the current price). But even if the price of uranium rose 10x, which is totally unlikely even when we extract it from seawater, the cost of electricity from a nuclear plant wouldn't be affected much: the cost of fuel is a very small component of running a nuclear power plant (about 1-2%)
consider modern reactors have passive saftey masures making a meltdown impossible.
I'll add to this that passive security measures don't mean "nobody needs to take action to turn off the reactor", or even "no computer is needed to shut the reactor down". Passive safety means "this reactor cannot undergo a meltdown because it is physically impossible". Just like you can't walk through walls or damage tank armor by throwing eggs at it, passively safe reactors cannot melt because the laws of physics say so.
nuclear fossil fuel
This GP nugget is funny. What fossilized into uranium? Fire-breathing radioactive dragons?
The main danger comes from alpha radioactivity, since it is the most destructive to organisms. However, it can be effectively blocked even by a piece of paper. As long as people are using proper cleansuits (which I assume are also required in other types of mines) they shouldn't be exposed to much more radiation than nuclear plant workers. Finally, the plant create some pollution, but because the energy density is so much more than coal, the adverse effects are comparatively really small.
There's some problem with your college. Here at the University of Warsaw the suggested book for the introductory calculus course is 40 years old, and I've never heard of anybody requiring you to buy some book. As long as you can solve the exam problems you're good.
there is FAR more CO2 emitted by nuclear than ANY OTHER form of energy on the planet!
You are a Greenpeace shill or supporter. This is their trademark bullshit. I don't even want to comment on this.
If we REALLY cared about the planet and future generations we would not leave behind such a toxic legacy.
Again, typical Greenpeace rhetoric. The future generations are more likely not to have such irrational fears, and actively mine for the waste from non-breeder reactors as a source of power.
The truly advanced know that to seek a nuclear nirvana is both a wasted effort that has moral implications that future generations will gravely judge us by.
Apparently you are also a 100% pure refined idiot that assigns moral value to means of energy generation based on gut feeling and miraculous knowledge of what the future generations will think.
Slashdot Mirror
A hair dryer that can heat to 446*C? You wash your hair with tar?
Note that no liquid phase is involved here, its simply changing from a glass structure to a crystal structure.
No. Glass is a form of liquid - it has no translational symmetry at the molecular level. Rhomboedral or cubic structures are not glasses because they do have translational symmetry and are therefore crystalline. The change is between two types of crystal lattice.
It'll be heat sensitive - weak crystal bonds will 'fail' if the module gets too hot. This also means interesting challenges around soldering.
I do not see the connection. You want to write the contents of the chip and THEN solder it? Moreover the phase change temperature is above 400*C, so far higher than typical soldering temperatures. If there is a problem with soldering at all, it would be the other way around (hot memory melting solder joints during writes). Heating the memory above the phase change temperature will erase its contents, but other components of a PC will not survive 400*C either, so it is not a big concern. Finally, there is no such thing as "crystal bonds".
It's more about the silt being help up by dams, the fish can manage just fine with fish ladders.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fish_ladder
the static languages also "catch" a great deal of non-errors which the programmer is forced to deal with even though they never would have caused problems at run-time
The solution is templates and type inference, not moving type errors to runtime.
It is not about being able to customize (like game mods), it is about being able to learn. If you don't have source code, you have no real way of learning how software works.
1. Look here: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Firefox/Sprints/Windows_Theme_Revamp/Direction_and_Feedback
Does it look like the ribbon to you? Me neither. Ribbon is a tabbed toolbar. In the Firefox mockup they have no tabbed toolbars, they just removed the menu bar, and turned the two items that are actually used from it into toolbar buttons. PC Pro calling this a ribbon is disingenuous and misleading.
2. I have an impression that this is MS astroturfing that they deployed in order to justify spending a ton of money on an interface that is less usable that 15 year old menu bars, and loathed by a significant portion of their userbase.
This one does, and it's very similar:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XO-2
99,9...% of random mutations cause premature death. Of the beneficial ones, exactly 0% cause the bacteria to transform into man-eating eldritch abominations. "Dangerous mutants" are a pop culture thing and pretending they are a real possibility is funny.
No, we need an ad where Windows is represented by a cheap whore, Mac by an expensive whore, Linux by a nerdy girlfriend (subtle STD reference for extra 'disturbingly appropriate metaphor' points), the first two have a cat fight, then a guy comes over and there's a lesbian threesome, then bestiality involving penguins and 800lb gorillas, wait, what were we talking about again?
Forkable = you can fork it (create a modified version without asking the original creator)
So it means you can make your own Linux radio ad using parts of this one. Normal ads are 'unforkable' by design (because they include trademarks) and by circumstance (you have no permission to reuse the ad's content). This news means that if you want to market Linux, you no longer need to shell out money to create the advertising material, you pay only for air time.
you do not have money automatically taken out of your pay check to go to Microsoft
Given that a lot of governments are locked into Microsoft platforms, and it's hard to buy a computer without Windows, I'd disagree
Australia Experiences Giant Website Traffic Drop
In Australia, Linux Spikes to 50% Market Share
Maybe the real reason is that Linux versions are no longer in stock because of MS pressure?
How am I supposed to buy something that is not even offered to me?
The public perception of radiation is the best example that humans are generally stupid, and that stupidity has to be beaten out of them using blunt instruments. The Fallout games, Hulk, Spider-Man, etc. are NOT fact-based. They do NOT depict actual effects of radiation. Those are FAIRY TALES. There is no such thing as a Chinese syndrome. The nuclear power industry is not comspiring to destroy the world. Animals do not turn into monsters when heavily irradiated, they die! People do not turn into ghouls or zombies when heavily irradiated, they die as well! Please repeat this 100 times.
Now to answer this question, here is an example of a very radiation-resistant bacteria:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deinococcus_radiodurans
we should make people less stupid.
Unfortunately that is a physical impossibility, so your plan fails.
Moreover the wide access to technology depends on it being accessible to stupid people - otherwise they wouldn't buy them and the technology companies would fold. There is just no solution to this problem: idiots will always get their computers hacked, fall for scams, get their credit cards stolen etc. no matter how secure we make them. The only way to cope with this is to minimize the effects they can have on other people.
btrfs is not ready yet. The chance to lose data due to an FS bug is small but still real. You wil be better off using reiserfs for /home and btrfs for root.
If the world suddenly switched massively to nuclear power, there would be about a decade worth of uranium to extract
How many times you "peak X" people need to be told that there is a difference between reserves and resources?
RESERVES: what we know we can dig up at *current* prices.
RESOURCES: what we can theoretically dig up at *some* price.
Therefore, reserves are dependent on the current market price of uranium (shock!). Resources are immutable. Now, we have about 50 years of uranium RESERVES (mostly because nobody was actively looking for it - there is plenty from decommissioned nuclear warheads and existing mines, and generally speaking uranium is very cheap, so looking for more doesn't make much sense). We have RESOURCES of uranium for at least thousands of years, but they are extractable only at somewhat higher prices (let's say 1.5x the current price). But even if the price of uranium rose 10x, which is totally unlikely even when we extract it from seawater, the cost of electricity from a nuclear plant wouldn't be affected much: the cost of fuel is a very small component of running a nuclear power plant (about 1-2%)
consider modern reactors have passive saftey masures making a meltdown impossible.
I'll add to this that passive security measures don't mean "nobody needs to take action to turn off the reactor", or even "no computer is needed to shut the reactor down". Passive safety means "this reactor cannot undergo a meltdown because it is physically impossible". Just like you can't walk through walls or damage tank armor by throwing eggs at it, passively safe reactors cannot melt because the laws of physics say so.
nuclear fossil fuel
This GP nugget is funny. What fossilized into uranium? Fire-breathing radioactive dragons?
The main danger comes from alpha radioactivity, since it is the most destructive to organisms. However, it can be effectively blocked even by a piece of paper. As long as people are using proper cleansuits (which I assume are also required in other types of mines) they shouldn't be exposed to much more radiation than nuclear plant workers. Finally, the plant create some pollution, but because the energy density is so much more than coal, the adverse effects are comparatively really small.
I took it to be about being able to run WoW in Wine...
There's some problem with your college. Here at the University of Warsaw the suggested book for the introductory calculus course is 40 years old, and I've never heard of anybody requiring you to buy some book. As long as you can solve the exam problems you're good.
Most of the problematic waste is fissile - they only require a different reactor design. There are no laws of physics broken.
And they are mostly harmless. I suppose that hospitals generate more of this kind of waste than nuclear plants.
there is FAR more CO2 emitted by nuclear than ANY OTHER form of energy on the planet!
You are a Greenpeace shill or supporter. This is their trademark bullshit. I don't even want to comment on this.
If we REALLY cared about the planet and future generations we would not leave behind such a toxic legacy.
Again, typical Greenpeace rhetoric. The future generations are more likely not to have such irrational fears, and actively mine for the waste from non-breeder reactors as a source of power.
The truly advanced know that to seek a nuclear nirvana is both a wasted effort that has moral implications that future generations will gravely judge us by.
Apparently you are also a 100% pure refined idiot that assigns moral value to means of energy generation based on gut feeling and miraculous knowledge of what the future generations will think.