Actually, there is only one android driver. However, each device has it's own unique identifier, and on Windows for some reason instead of a generic driver with a "register this device" utility, you have separate, identical drivers that only connect to one device.
I do Android dev from Linux, and I just add the device's USB ID to a list that connects it to the appropriate driver. Still a bit of a hassle.
This is an argument against cars. "People are fucking incompetent. And, yea, there will always be incompetent people. And, yea, they will screw things up. And, yea, that's why you shouldn't let them drive a 2 ton kinetic weapon that won't run into something without constant action/supervision by some incompetent people."
As an example of competence, I point you to the USA. Only three people have died from nuclear power in the US, back in 1961. For comparison, that many people die from car accidents in the US every hour.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents
I thought it was obvious. I'm pro nuke for whoever is willing to be responsible and own up to the risks involved. Take the US, for example. Three Mile Island is the worst accident they've had, and it killed a shocking 0 people.
I think, when things go wrong, people should be held accountable for their mistakes (see: wall street meltdown. Didn't happen there, either). Here I think the issue is with Tokyo Electric, and some people should be canned, some fined personally, and the company as a whole held responsible. People in charge of regulating and overseeing nuclear power in Japan should also be held accountable, as the potential for disaster was not exactly news. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20040523x2.html
Fukushima was. The tsunami took out the diesel generators which were used for backup cooling. Having redundant systems (note: redundant does not mean more of the same system) and placing them further inland would have made this controllable.
As for "was I there when the accident happened," I believe that amounts to an argument for believing the world didn't exist until I was born.
My point exactly. If you want to use this example to state "we should not continue to operate 60 year old nuclear power plants," I would agree with you for the same reason I do not believe we should operate 60 year old aircraft (which we don't, because that would be stupid.) In fact, your citation only demonstrates a small percentage of aircraft are even their early 40's, which is in line with my "few aircraft are over 30 years old".
I apologize if my analogies and comparisons are a bit rough, but it started as an apples to oranges comparison.
Absolutely agree with this report. Incompetence and high risk activities do not belong together. That goes from building a dam to driving a car, all of which have had their share of preventable accidents.
As a nuclear advocate, I find the nytimes summary of the report indicates it is a little too weak and toothless, as they say, "the interim report seems to leave ultimate responsibility for the disaster ambiguous."
Not only that, but the report states that a "quicker response" would have helped, as opposed to the obvious "design flaws in the redundant cooling systems should have been fixed previously." Most everything that should have been done to prevent this should have been done decades before.
How many cars have you driven 24/6 for 60 years? Hell, few airplanes are in the air after 30 years.
On top of that, 0.4% of all cars get in accidents every year. Every year more people die in the US from traffic accidents then in every nuclear power incident ever.
In socialist Canada, the exploration of our west was privately funded by the Hudson Bay Company, and they covered a lot more area and were at it before Lewis and Clark.
Really? And how many times has the public been exposed to danger from Nuclear reactors in the US? In France?
If you want to count the 60 year old reactor getting hit by a tsunami proof that they can't be built safely, then by the same criteria houses can't be built safely and we should avoid their use.
Still, often safety and environmental impact are hugely influenced by the quality of engineering, though the particular technology used will place constraints on those limits. ie, nuclear is harder to make safe, but is inherently low impact in terms of land displacement.
I, personally, believe modern nuclear reactors are a good source of power. However, to use you're words, "they are in no way really being used in any meaningful way." The fact that they aren't being used in a meaningful way does not mean they cannot be part of a viable solution.
Actually going to disagree with you. Read your own article, the first two tidal power plants it lists are around 250 MW, it lists a lot more than three, and lists several currently under construction that are over 1000 MW.
This is a chart from 2004, but even when you count all energy sources (gasoline included) nuclear is still 40%. Electricity is around 50% of power usage, I had no idea that half started being "relatively small."
If how to change the background on KDE4 doesn't make sense and isn't intuitive, nothing short of logging in and being prompted with the change background dialog will be in your grasp.
Customers were used to using drivers for scanners and etc, Apple took that away (effectively taking away the supported hardware) in Snow Leopard by breaking tons of them -- and never going back to fix them.
That's a third party problem, they need to support their own devices.
Yeah, which is why ypu should shut up about Linux not having a stable ABI. Wait... what OS are we talking about?
newsflash: users don't care about who's responsibility it is, they blame whoever changed the system. I have a client who is upset that their 8 year old office printer isn't fully functional under Windows 7, and they can't be convinced that that isn't Microsoft's fault.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe you should click and read the link again... the gaming tests were as you described (because of the superior CPU performance)
However, A8 beat the 4000 in ALL of the graphics tests.
And by all, I mean Crysis, Metro, SC2, Dirt, and Skyrim. At all tested resolutions.
DX11 Compute was different, there the 4000 was ahead by 10%ish.
Actually, there is only one android driver. However, each device has it's own unique identifier, and on Windows for some reason instead of a generic driver with a "register this device" utility, you have separate, identical drivers that only connect to one device.
I do Android dev from Linux, and I just add the device's USB ID to a list that connects it to the appropriate driver. Still a bit of a hassle.
This is an argument against cars.
"People are fucking incompetent. And, yea, there will always be incompetent people. And, yea, they will screw things up. And, yea, that's why you shouldn't let them drive a 2 ton kinetic weapon that won't run into something without constant action/supervision by some incompetent people."
As an example of competence, I point you to the USA. Only three people have died from nuclear power in the US, back in 1961. For comparison, that many people die from car accidents in the US every hour.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_and_radiation_accidents
Foresight. Article from 2004: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20040523x2.html
It's not as if this particular reactor was on anybody's list of "this is safe."
I thought it was obvious. I'm pro nuke for whoever is willing to be responsible and own up to the risks involved. Take the US, for example. Three Mile Island is the worst accident they've had, and it killed a shocking 0 people.
I think, when things go wrong, people should be held accountable for their mistakes (see: wall street meltdown. Didn't happen there, either). Here I think the issue is with Tokyo Electric, and some people should be canned, some fined personally, and the company as a whole held responsible. People in charge of regulating and overseeing nuclear power in Japan should also be held accountable, as the potential for disaster was not exactly news.
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/fl20040523x2.html
Fukushima was. The tsunami took out the diesel generators which were used for backup cooling. Having redundant systems (note: redundant does not mean more of the same system) and placing them further inland would have made this controllable.
As for "was I there when the accident happened," I believe that amounts to an argument for believing the world didn't exist until I was born.
My point exactly. If you want to use this example to state "we should not continue to operate 60 year old nuclear power plants," I would agree with you for the same reason I do not believe we should operate 60 year old aircraft (which we don't, because that would be stupid.) In fact, your citation only demonstrates a small percentage of aircraft are even their early 40's, which is in line with my "few aircraft are over 30 years old".
I apologize if my analogies and comparisons are a bit rough, but it started as an apples to oranges comparison.
Absolutely agree with this report. Incompetence and high risk activities do not belong together. That goes from building a dam to driving a car, all of which have had their share of preventable accidents.
As a nuclear advocate, I find the nytimes summary of the report indicates it is a little too weak and toothless, as they say, "the interim report seems to leave ultimate responsibility for the disaster ambiguous."
Not only that, but the report states that a "quicker response" would have helped, as opposed to the obvious "design flaws in the redundant cooling systems should have been fixed previously." Most everything that should have been done to prevent this should have been done decades before.
How many cars have you driven 24/6 for 60 years? Hell, few airplanes are in the air after 30 years.
On top of that, 0.4% of all cars get in accidents every year. Every year more people die in the US from traffic accidents then in every nuclear power incident ever.
Sources:
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1103.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passenger_vehicles_in_the_United_States#Total_number_of_vehicles
Another Linode vote. Pick your own distro, good tools, solid service.
In socialist Canada, the exploration of our west was privately funded by the Hudson Bay Company, and they covered a lot more area and were at it before Lewis and Clark.
So building a 10' Tesla coil is probably not the hard problem
It's not 10'. It's 10 stories, so more like 100' Tesla coils. I would call that hard.
Because it's not actually a reduction.
Really? And how many times has the public been exposed to danger from Nuclear reactors in the US? In France?
If you want to count the 60 year old reactor getting hit by a tsunami proof that they can't be built safely, then by the same criteria houses can't be built safely and we should avoid their use.
France does over 70%. So yes, significantly over.
Chart with more information about the current state of electricity generation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_generation#Production_by_country
Still, often safety and environmental impact are hugely influenced by the quality of engineering, though the particular technology used will place constraints on those limits. ie, nuclear is harder to make safe, but is inherently low impact in terms of land displacement.
More than 3. Largest is more than 80MW. Under construction plant over 1000MW.
I, personally, believe modern nuclear reactors are a good source of power. However, to use you're words, "they are in no way really being used in any meaningful way." The fact that they aren't being used in a meaningful way does not mean they cannot be part of a viable solution.
Actually going to disagree with you. Read your own article, the first two tidal power plants it lists are around 250 MW, it lists a lot more than three, and lists several currently under construction that are over 1000 MW.
You mean it's less dangerous, don't your?
Take all the people who died from Chernobyl. Add the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima. Still killed fewer people than hydro power.
OP mentioned discounts and rebates from insurance, which he had presumably factored in.
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/energy_policy/doc/factsheets/mix/mix_fr_en.pdf
This is a chart from 2004, but even when you count all energy sources (gasoline included) nuclear is still 40%. Electricity is around 50% of power usage, I had no idea that half started being "relatively small."
s/their/they're/
Here's your citation for what their replacing nuclear with http://www.thelocal.de/national/20110713-36277.html
I find it interesting that you call coal "renewable," though now that I think of it hydrocarbons are much more renewable than isotopes.
If how to change the background on KDE4 doesn't make sense and isn't intuitive, nothing short of logging in and being prompted with the change background dialog will be in your grasp.
Customers were used to using drivers for scanners and etc, Apple took that away (effectively taking away the supported hardware) in Snow Leopard by breaking tons of them -- and never going back to fix them.
That's a third party problem, they need to support their own devices.
Yeah, which is why ypu should shut up about Linux not having a stable ABI. Wait... what OS are we talking about?
newsflash: users don't care about who's responsibility it is, they blame whoever changed the system. I have a client who is upset that their 8 year old office printer isn't fully functional under Windows 7, and they can't be convinced that that isn't Microsoft's fault.