While I do not use the computer setup, I do use a $10.00 corn popper, and high-quality green coffee beans.
If you are looking around for green coffee beans, just ask at coffee shops that are not like Starbucks. You will eventually find one that roasts their own beans.
When you buy green beans, they will usually be less expensive than the pre-roasted variety. Also, remember that during roasting the beans double in size.
Note: the popcorn popper should be of the "swirl" type. That is, the vents at the bottom of the roasting container should cause the beans or popcorn to "spin" while roasting. Do not use one that channels the air straight through.
Fill the "butter warmer" so that it is level with green beans, then pour these beans into the popper.
Plug the popper in.
Now - one warning - roasting coffee beans produce LARGE volumes of smoke, and most of the smoke occurs during the end of the roasting process. You cannot put the roaster outside unless it is a very warm day (the air will not be warm enough to roast the beans properly if the incoming air is cold). So, you need to keep the roaster at room tempurature. What I do is open a window, and stick the output part of the popper out the window, while keeping the rest inside. You can also use the fume hood of your stove.
Once you turn the popper on, the beans will begin to spin. After a min or so, the "chaff" (bean covering) will begin to fly out of the popper. Collect this in a bowl to prevent a mess, or do as I do and point it outside.
At 3-4 min, the beans will have gone from green to red or yellow, and from there they begin to progress to brown.
During this process you will start to hear the beans cracking and popping. This is called "First crack" and is entirely normal. Finally, as the beans get darker, monitor them so that you can stop the popper when the beans are the roasting color you desire. (For me, this is about 8-10 min total). Finally, near the end of the roasting process, the beans will begin to pop and crack again, (known as second crack) and small round discs will flake off the beans. (Due to escaping moisture I belive). This is around the time that most people consider them well roasted.
Now - unplug the popper (IT IS VERY HOT NOW! BE CAREFUL!!!) and dump the beans into a container. I use a glass jar. They will still be smoking. I cover the container with saran-wrap and let it sit 24 hours. I have read that the CO2 "gassing out" from the beans can break mason jars that are sealed in with hot roasted beans in them. (It could be myth, I dont know, never saw it myself).
You can use the beans right away, but I reccomend that you wait a few hours to grind them. About 24 is best. (Freshly roasted beans don't yet have a full flavour - they are very "flat" waiting 24 hours greatly improves the experience.) The beans will keep their excellent flavour for about a week - after that, the oils will start to evaporate, and you will end up with basic storebought beans.
This sounds complex, but it is pretty simple. And in the end you have incredible coffee - and it costs less!
So you live the the greater Toronto area - and north of you is detroit.
Toronto - God help you...
(Born and raised in Montreal)
Works for me - now if only the drivers...
on
Steam Users Steamed
·
· Score: 1
Steam seems to work just fine. Now if only the new ATi drivers were the same. Got a bit of a boost on the framerate with the 5.1 drivers... But models keep turning INVISIBLE in couterstrike. I can only see the weapon model - not the character model.
My next camera purchase will be the Canon Digital rebel - for the very simple reason that it runs DOS - and it is fully hackable. I don't know if you would consider this to be "open" but it is open enough to be hacked...
http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digit al -rebel-tricks.html
AVG went crazy. It is possible that it is just the latest version of lop, and that it gives you the ability to uninstall it with the latest version... all I know is that AVG went nuts.
Actually, I am considering going back to dual-booting. I will probably install the latest Mandrake Distro on this machine as I have plenty of space remaining.
The only reason that I have not done so sooner is that I have a Linux box next to me (Samba, Firewall, and a bunch of other stuff) and any time I need some "Unixy" stuff I just fire up Putty and connect, so I get my Bash fix as I need it.:)
However, the DVD burning issue is really starting to irk me, and I am thinking about the Mandrake option. Other than games, everything I use works just fine on Linux (Firefox, Thunderbird, Miranda Instant Messenger...)
I am complaining specifically about the effort involved. To install HL2 on this machine it was a case of: Pay Valve, start steam, play game, done.
I don't want to dick around with a machine that I use basically as a gaming console - and you cannot tell me that my framerate will be as good under Linux - because it will not be.
I want to play my game and NOT take the extra "20" min involved - for each game I play that is 20 min too long. Not worth my time. I prefer to use the right tool for the right job. Linux is not the right tool for gaming. Sorry to burst your bubble.
No idea - I do know that there is some issue with "run DLL as an app" on this machine and it is somehow related to my DVD burner. (Burning a DVD results in some quite strange behaviour from XP - generally requiring a reboot after each burn.)
Some years ago I abandoned Windows on the desktop and switched entirely to Linux. I bought every game from Lokigames with the exception of Eric's ultimate solitare. (I hate solitaire). I purchased Unreal Tournament and other linux compatable games and wrote on the cards "PURCHASED FOR USE WITH LINUX" on the cards that I mailed back.
Problem was, as an advocate (zealot?) I could not play Half-Life with my friends, and they were all into Half-Life. Now, don't tell me that you can run Half-Life on Linux by doing this or by doing that... I know all the things needed to make it work (it works now much better than it did then). However, it really never worked on Linux, or at least I should say it BARELY worked. I certanly could not use it for deathmatching.
When Q3A came out, I bought a Matrox card specifically because of the Linux compatible drivers, and their support of Linux. But Q3A did not run all that great on my machine, even if Linux did have a higher FPS at some of the more esoteric resolutions (Like 640X480 or LESS).
Now, as I type this, I am typing from an XP machine. It is not nearly as stable as I would like - nothing like the non-gui server I have next to me running RH 6.2 (Never bothered to upgrade it, it is still running just fine thanks.) I work on Linux all day, and I now do all my work with Putty to connect to the servers I work on. I am considering going back to Linux on the desktop for browsing, email and chat as I have been having stablity issues with XP and my DVD burner. However, I like my games, and I like playing them well. Furthermore, I like having the highest FPS and quality settings avaliable.
I use my computers as a tool, and when I get home and I want to play Counter Strike Source, Desert Combat or America's Army with my friends I use Windows XP. Don't tell me that these can work on Linux - I already know - and I don't care. I wasted too much of my time in zealotry trying to get some of my older games to run as well under Linux as they do on windows. I don't love XP - but it runs my games. You see, I like Windows for the ability to play games with my friends. I like Linux to run as a server and have the stability and power that a server should have. I don't use Windows servers myself, and I dont use Linux gaming machines. I would like it to change, but when I get home after work, I just want to game with my friends. I have no desire to poke a Linux box more. I get paid to do that at work, I dont want to do it at home.
Would I like to see it change? Sure, but it won't happen for some time if it does, and I have better things to do with my time than be a zealot.
Hey buddy - got six quarters for a dollar? Consider yourself "shown".
I am not speaking of general math - rather I am speaking of the esoteric stuff such as "new math" stuff that has no "purpose" other than to be a neat trick.
I was deeply impressed by Richard Feynmans chapter on his reviewing high school math books. He was livid that a number of things being taught were useless. He wanted the books to teach the students not only what they were learning, but why. One example has him in an uproar because there was a question about taking the average tempurature of a number of stars. This made Feynman angry because there is no reason to get an average star tempurature for a number of stars, it is just not something that you do. Feynman called it "a trick to get the students to add".
Furthermore, he was furious at a physics problem in one book, that had wrong answers, and in fact, Feynman actually performed the experiment listed in the book, and found out the "observed" results were wrong. The author did not even take the time to DO the experiment listed.
Again, this made him furious because he felt that teaching students math in a deceptive manner would never give them a feeling as to where the math can take you in fields in the sciences. I agree.
So, I don't want to learn fluff. I was at a disadvantage because I was just told "learn this" and in answer to the question of "why?" I was only given "so you can pass the exams."
In high school I deeply wanted the answers to some questions in Physics, that were available with mathematics, but I was not shown these, and I developed an unfortunate disgust with mathematics because of this.
So many people here on slashdot can take me to task for being bad at math - and I know I am. I don't know if you would have been so interested in it either if it was drilled into you in a dull manner, and a feeling that it lacked a purpose.
Am I learning math now? Yes, but then I understand much more about the why, the how, and the history now than I did then. I don't know about the rest of you but I detest rote learning. So take me to task on my math skills if you wish (or my typing:) ) but I can see enough in myself that I want to change, and I am making the effort. Not all people can say the same of themselves.
I consider myself a lay person. I always did poory in mathematics because I did not care about it. The reason I did not care, is that throughout high school no one could show me a use for it. Granted, certain function such as compounded interest held me with a grand fascination - but the rest bored me to no end.
I am always looking for "laypersons" math books, because after reading Richard Feynmans (non-math) works, I want to understand his Physics Lectures.
SSP as mentioned on Slashdots pior story for having solar "denim" has small flexible solar panels avaliable now in Canadian Tire. Not that this helps those of you not in Canada... But you can buy them now.
Math was always the worst subject for me, I passed it, but not well. The reason I never did very well at it is that at the schools I went to it was all rote learning, and it drove me insane. Therefore, I had no grounding when it came to calculus... Which also turned out to be rote learning in the classes I took. I failed college-level calculus... Mostly because I did not care.
Now, more recently I have read Richard Feynman's "Surely You are Joking Mr. Feynman" And I find it fascinating, I am also reading his book: "What do you care what other people think?"
Now, after Feynman's writing, I want to learn calculus, because I find physics so interesting, but I can't grasp the higher math without calculus. I know why it is important, but I can't find any resources that explain it well.
So, those of you who are good at calc out there, what do you reccomend for learning? Almost all the books I have looked at on calc are really boring - with "This is an integral" You do this.... With absolutely no explanation as to the WHY. That is, I know why it is needed, but I want to know why do do "this" to an equation when you see "that" sort of stuff. The book can be wordy - in fact I would prefer one that showed the history of mathematics, and how these things were found out (like how Newton was on of the co-inventors of mathematics, and why he invented calculus, I have an idea, but no good grasp of the subject.)
So, slashbot math geeks, I would appreciate your input.
While Giant Mechas would have points in the Cool factor.. They lose points due to physics. Strength to weight ratio is one. The reason that a pit bull is the most efficent fighting dog is that it is strong for its weight. You can breed a larger dog, but the ratio of muscle to mass becomes skewed, and the dog is actually a less effective fighter even though it is larger. There are diminishing returns.
Also, a large mech would have a large mass. With a large mass it would deform the ground it stood upon to a great degree - it would sink in moderately normal terrain. Also, because of the high profile even if it had AI capable of monitoring a large area, all that would be required to cause signifigant damage to the mech would be a single insurgent with a rocket launcher. Or, better still, a smart missile. Believe me, the smart missile would be signifigantly cheaper to produce. And there lies another problem. Cost.
The return on investment of battle effectiveness to money spent would be skewed in a bad way with a large mech. Imagine a billion dollar mech that gets taken down by a 1 million or less dollar missile? In a war of economics, the cheaper combatant wins. (Notice how the insurgents in Iraq have far less funding, but are still causing havoc.)
And, again, being large and visible violates a simple battlefield principle. DONT GET HIT. If you dont get hit, you dont get hurt. The easier you are to see, the more likely you are to get hit. A 15 M Mecha would be very easy to see.
That was kind of my idea at the end of my paragraph. Having a medium sized mech would be viable - either as an exoskeleton or some other variant. As other ppl have mentioned, as soon as you start to scale the vehicle above a certain size, the mass of the mech begins to put too much weight on the ground beneath it. The Abrams is a specific size because that size is the most efficient for the platform. Start scaling it up larger, and it becomes heavier, likely slower, and requires more energy. I picked the Abrams as a platform for size/mass of a Mech because scaling beyond that point is likely inefficent from a power to weight ratio.
Your idea of the 2X a human profile is quite correct - this would likely weigh much less than an Abrams, and thus consume less energy to operate, and would be more effective than an unarmored (or lightly armored) human trooper.
Slashdot Mirror
Intel continues to believe its business practices are both fair and lawful.
And I believe my actions are both fair and lawful... Now, to go rob that bank...
While I do not use the computer setup, I do use a $10.00 corn popper, and high-quality green coffee beans.
If you are looking around for green coffee beans, just ask at coffee shops that are not like Starbucks. You will eventually find one that roasts their own beans.
When you buy green beans, they will usually be less expensive than the pre-roasted variety. Also, remember that during roasting the beans double in size.
Note: the popcorn popper should be of the "swirl" type. That is, the vents at the bottom of the roasting container should cause the beans or popcorn to "spin" while roasting. Do not use one that channels the air straight through.
Fill the "butter warmer" so that it is level with green beans, then pour these beans into the popper.
Plug the popper in.
Now - one warning - roasting coffee beans produce LARGE volumes of smoke, and most of the smoke occurs during the end of the roasting process. You cannot put the roaster outside unless it is a very warm day (the air will not be warm enough to roast the beans properly if the incoming air is cold). So, you need to keep the roaster at room tempurature. What I do is open a window, and stick the output part of the popper out the window, while keeping the rest inside. You can also use the fume hood of your stove.
Once you turn the popper on, the beans will begin to spin. After a min or so, the "chaff" (bean covering) will begin to fly out of the popper. Collect this in a bowl to prevent a mess, or do as I do and point it outside.
At 3-4 min, the beans will have gone from green to red or yellow, and from there they begin to progress to brown.
During this process you will start to hear the beans cracking and popping. This is called "First crack" and is entirely normal. Finally, as the beans get darker, monitor them so that you can stop the popper when the beans are the roasting color you desire. (For me, this is about 8-10 min total). Finally, near the end of the roasting process, the beans will begin to pop and crack again, (known as second crack) and small round discs will flake off the beans. (Due to escaping moisture I belive). This is around the time that most people consider them well roasted.
Now - unplug the popper (IT IS VERY HOT NOW! BE CAREFUL!!!) and dump the beans into a container. I use a glass jar. They will still be smoking. I cover the container with saran-wrap and let it sit 24 hours. I have read that the CO2 "gassing out" from the beans can break mason jars that are sealed in with hot roasted beans in them. (It could be myth, I dont know, never saw it myself).
You can use the beans right away, but I reccomend that you wait a few hours to grind them. About 24 is best. (Freshly roasted beans don't yet have a full flavour - they are very "flat" waiting 24 hours greatly improves the experience.) The beans will keep their excellent flavour for about a week - after that, the oils will start to evaporate, and you will end up with basic storebought beans.
This sounds complex, but it is pretty simple. And in the end you have incredible coffee - and it costs less!
So you live the the greater Toronto area - and north of you is detroit.
Toronto - God help you...
(Born and raised in Montreal)
Steam seems to work just fine. Now if only the new ATi drivers were the same. Got a bit of a boost on the framerate with the 5.1 drivers... But models keep turning INVISIBLE in couterstrike. I can only see the weapon model - not the character model.
Makes for an interesting time....
*Sigh*
Time to roll back the drivers.
So, I downoad the code, and I take a look at it - the first thing through my mind, is "OMG - look at all the spagetti code!"
Then I realized I opened a C file with Unix returns with notepad.
Oops.
Damn slashcode and their silly URL tags: HERE is the link:
Digital Rebel Hacks.
My next camera purchase will be the Canon Digital rebel - for the very simple reason that it runs DOS - and it is fully hackable. I don't know if you would consider this to be "open" but it is open enough to be hacked...
t al -rebel-tricks.html
http://www.bahneman.com/liem/photos/tricks/digi
LOL. Good point.
Of course, I assumed it was totally toast because it refuses to interface with the USB port.
Well *THAT* is why my Muvo is dead. Thanks for that, I had no idea why my Muvo died after about 3 months worth of use.
AVG went crazy. It is possible that it is just the latest version of lop, and that it gives you the ability to uninstall it with the latest version... all I know is that AVG went nuts.
Believe it or not the makers of the LOP provide their own removal tool.
http://lop.com/new_uninstall.exe
Checked it out - Antivirus software goes insane: It detects 2 trojans within the exe. Both newer versions of lop...
Yeah, that is my preffered option, and I will likely carry it out. It is however, a co-workers machine and not mine.
But what the hell gets rid of the crap from lop dot com? (I dont reccomend going there if you use IE...)
I have one system here at work that is infested - and Spybot Search and Destroy, Ad Aware, Giant (Microsoft) dont touch it.
I have tried the suggestions on sites via google, but none have worked (and most are spam anyways).
Who here has managed to remove the cancer that is Lop?
Actually, I am considering going back to dual-booting. I will probably install the latest Mandrake Distro on this machine as I have plenty of space remaining.
:)
The only reason that I have not done so sooner is that I have a Linux box next to me (Samba, Firewall, and a bunch of other stuff) and any time I need some "Unixy" stuff I just fire up Putty and connect, so I get my Bash fix as I need it.
However, the DVD burning issue is really starting to irk me, and I am thinking about the Mandrake option. Other than games, everything I use works just fine on Linux (Firefox, Thunderbird, Miranda Instant Messenger...)
I am complaining specifically about the effort involved. To install HL2 on this machine it was a case of: Pay Valve, start steam, play game, done.
I don't want to dick around with a machine that I use basically as a gaming console - and you cannot tell me that my framerate will be as good under Linux - because it will not be.
I want to play my game and NOT take the extra "20" min involved - for each game I play that is 20 min too long. Not worth my time. I prefer to use the right tool for the right job. Linux is not the right tool for gaming. Sorry to burst your bubble.
No idea - I do know that there is some issue with "run DLL as an app" on this machine and it is somehow related to my DVD burner. (Burning a DVD results in some quite strange behaviour from XP - generally requiring a reboot after each burn.)
Some years ago I abandoned Windows on the desktop and switched entirely to Linux. I bought every game from Lokigames with the exception of Eric's ultimate solitare. (I hate solitaire). I purchased Unreal Tournament and other linux compatable games and wrote on the cards "PURCHASED FOR USE WITH LINUX" on the cards that I mailed back.
Problem was, as an advocate (zealot?) I could not play Half-Life with my friends, and they were all into Half-Life. Now, don't tell me that you can run Half-Life on Linux by doing this or by doing that... I know all the things needed to make it work (it works now much better than it did then). However, it really never worked on Linux, or at least I should say it BARELY worked. I certanly could not use it for deathmatching.
When Q3A came out, I bought a Matrox card specifically because of the Linux compatible drivers, and their support of Linux. But Q3A did not run all that great on my machine, even if Linux did have a higher FPS at some of the more esoteric resolutions (Like 640X480 or LESS).
Now, as I type this, I am typing from an XP machine. It is not nearly as stable as I would like - nothing like the non-gui server I have next to me running RH 6.2 (Never bothered to upgrade it, it is still running just fine thanks.) I work on Linux all day, and I now do all my work with Putty to connect to the servers I work on. I am considering going back to Linux on the desktop for browsing, email and chat as I have been having stablity issues with XP and my DVD burner. However, I like my games, and I like playing them well. Furthermore, I like having the highest FPS and quality settings avaliable.
I use my computers as a tool, and when I get home and I want to play Counter Strike Source, Desert Combat or America's Army with my friends I use Windows XP. Don't tell me that these can work on Linux - I already know - and I don't care. I wasted too much of my time in zealotry trying to get some of my older games to run as well under Linux as they do on windows. I don't love XP - but it runs my games. You see, I like Windows for the ability to play games with my friends. I like Linux to run as a server and have the stability and power that a server should have. I don't use Windows servers myself, and I dont use Linux gaming machines. I would like it to change, but when I get home after work, I just want to game with my friends. I have no desire to poke a Linux box more. I get paid to do that at work, I dont want to do it at home.
Would I like to see it change? Sure, but it won't happen for some time if it does, and I have better things to do with my time than be a zealot.
Hey buddy - got six quarters for a dollar?
:) ) but I can see enough in myself that I want to change, and I am making the effort. Not all people can say the same of themselves.
Consider yourself "shown".
I am not speaking of general math - rather I am speaking of the esoteric stuff such as "new math" stuff that has no "purpose" other than to be a neat trick.
I was deeply impressed by Richard Feynmans chapter on his reviewing high school math books. He was livid that a number of things being taught were useless. He wanted the books to teach the students not only what they were learning, but why. One example has him in an uproar because there was a question about taking the average tempurature of a number of stars. This made Feynman angry because there is no reason to get an average star tempurature for a number of stars, it is just not something that you do. Feynman called it "a trick to get the students to add".
Furthermore, he was furious at a physics problem in one book, that had wrong answers, and in fact, Feynman actually performed the experiment listed in the book, and found out the "observed" results were wrong. The author did not even take the time to DO the experiment listed.
Again, this made him furious because he felt that teaching students math in a deceptive manner would never give them a feeling as to where the math can take you in fields in the sciences. I agree.
So, I don't want to learn fluff. I was at a disadvantage because I was just told "learn this" and in answer to the question of "why?" I was only given "so you can pass the exams."
In high school I deeply wanted the answers to some questions in Physics, that were available with mathematics, but I was not shown these, and I developed an unfortunate disgust with mathematics because of this.
So many people here on slashdot can take me to task for being bad at math - and I know I am. I don't know if you would have been so interested in it either if it was drilled into you in a dull manner, and a feeling that it lacked a purpose.
Am I learning math now? Yes, but then I understand much more about the why, the how, and the history now than I did then. I don't know about the rest of you but I detest rote learning. So take me to task on my math skills if you wish (or my typing
I consider myself a lay person. I always did poory in mathematics because I did not care about it. The reason I did not care, is that throughout high school no one could show me a use for it. Granted, certain function such as compounded interest held me with a grand fascination - but the rest bored me to no end.
0 23946 pointed out to me in a post, "Calculus Made Easy" has been helping immensely.
I am always looking for "laypersons" math books, because after reading Richard Feynmans (non-math) works, I want to understand his Physics Lectures.
As a helpful AC http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=131989&cid=11
I fully admit that I don't know calc, and that in this regard I am a layperson. I however, don't wish to remain a layperson forever.
So who is this book for?
I would say it is for someone like me.
As I remember, the concept was that they could be draped across roof-tops and whatnot. Never heard anything after that.e fault.asp
http://www.atsautomation.com/solar_technologies/d
SSP as mentioned on Slashdots pior story for having solar "denim" has small flexible solar panels avaliable now in Canadian Tire. Not that this helps those of you not in Canada... But you can buy them now.
Great article - one has to wonder what "wanker" was like on the other end... I suspect he was just like this:
http://www.pwned.nl/
Thanks! I just ordered it. I is always funny when you order a book for $2.00, and the shipping is $9.00....
Disclaimer - I am Canadian not American.
Math was always the worst subject for me, I passed it, but not well. The reason I never did very well at it is that at the schools I went to it was all rote learning, and it drove me insane. Therefore, I had no grounding when it came to calculus... Which also turned out to be rote learning in the classes I took. I failed college-level calculus... Mostly because I did not care.
Now, more recently I have read Richard Feynman's "Surely You are Joking Mr. Feynman" And I find it fascinating, I am also reading his book: "What do you care what other people think?"
Now, after Feynman's writing, I want to learn calculus, because I find physics so interesting, but I can't grasp the higher math without calculus. I know why it is important, but I can't find any resources that explain it well.
So, those of you who are good at calc out there, what do you reccomend for learning? Almost all the books I have looked at on calc are really boring - with "This is an integral" You do this.... With absolutely no explanation as to the WHY. That is, I know why it is needed, but I want to know why do do "this" to an equation when you see "that" sort of stuff. The book can be wordy - in fact I would prefer one that showed the history of mathematics, and how these things were found out (like how Newton was on of the co-inventors of mathematics, and why he invented calculus, I have an idea, but no good grasp of the subject.)
So, slashbot math geeks, I would appreciate your input.
While Giant Mechas would have points in the Cool factor.. They lose points due to physics. Strength to weight ratio is one. The reason that a pit bull is the most efficent fighting dog is that it is strong for its weight. You can breed a larger dog, but the ratio of muscle to mass becomes skewed, and the dog is actually a less effective fighter even though it is larger. There are diminishing returns.
Also, a large mech would have a large mass. With a large mass it would deform the ground it stood upon to a great degree - it would sink in moderately normal terrain. Also, because of the high profile even if it had AI capable of monitoring a large area, all that would be required to cause signifigant damage to the mech would be a single insurgent with a rocket launcher. Or, better still, a smart missile. Believe me, the smart missile would be signifigantly cheaper to produce. And there lies another problem. Cost.
The return on investment of battle effectiveness to money spent would be skewed in a bad way with a large mech. Imagine a billion dollar mech that gets taken down by a 1 million or less dollar missile? In a war of economics, the cheaper combatant wins. (Notice how the insurgents in Iraq have far less funding, but are still causing havoc.)
And, again, being large and visible violates a simple battlefield principle. DONT GET HIT. If you dont get hit, you dont get hurt. The easier you are to see, the more likely you are to get hit. A 15 M Mecha would be very easy to see.
That was kind of my idea at the end of my paragraph. Having a medium sized mech would be viable - either as an exoskeleton or some other variant. As other ppl have mentioned, as soon as you start to scale the vehicle above a certain size, the mass of the mech begins to put too much weight on the ground beneath it. The Abrams is a specific size because that size is the most efficient for the platform. Start scaling it up larger, and it becomes heavier, likely slower, and requires more energy. I picked the Abrams as a platform for size/mass of a Mech because scaling beyond that point is likely inefficent from a power to weight ratio.
Your idea of the 2X a human profile is quite correct - this would likely weigh much less than an Abrams, and thus consume less energy to operate, and would be more effective than an unarmored (or lightly armored) human trooper.