Personally, I think driver's licenses should not be awarded to new drivers unless they pass a course involving 15 hours of driving a go-kart with an instructor shouting at them through their helmet-radio (simulating a cell phone conversation), and random objects moving about the track, from simulated squirrels to kids with a ball.
The last phase of the class includes a (simulated) go-kart-driving chainsaw-murderer, so you have to run away from him, with the instructor simulating 3 children in the back seat over the radio, and the simulated squirrels running out in front of you... You lose points if you run over the squirrels or get caught by the chainsaw-murderer. Screw the mini-formula stuff; we need to teach people how to drive in real-life situations!
No spike protection? I wear a pair of these when I'm working around nails and debris and whatnot, stepping on nails or sharp pieced of wood is no fun. They've got a steel shim, and it seems to work well though they're relatively stiff. I've stepped on a few nails with them, with no event, thankfully. They also ventilate well enough, which is always nice.
Like you say, it would be a very good idea to look through some of the safety shoe places too. Good footwear might be expensive, but it's worth every penny. Also, in case you're not used to boots, break them in slowly before you've really got to hoof it. Walk around with them at least a few miles a couple days before you get serious, your feet will thank you.
The sad thing is, I've met and been around professional and student engineers that exactly mirrors what Andy said, and I equate it to inexperience and apathy. Why do they want to be enginners? I sure don't know--but I do know it can't be because Engineering classes are flooded with attractive females. For whatever reason, they can't take some 2x4s and make something to solve a problem. It's downright pathetic that a budding mechanical engineer is expected to take a year or two of calc in highschool, but not expected to take a shop class, where he can learn to run a bead of weld, or turn the cranks on a mill, and otherwise actually apply all of that fun stuff he learned in geometry and trig... That's what it's all about, where the rubber meets the road.
Good engineers, in my experience, have a background in what they come to do and love. I've met engineers who just plain can't understand that its beneficial to know what the non-engineers (the lesser-folk to these kind) think when they're working with their products, and I've met engineers who have had experience in their trades.. 100% of the engineers with real trade experience were the better engineers, probably because they can better relate to the poor slob doing the work, at least that's the way I see it.
This is exactly why I think every engineer should work with the guy that has to maintain/install his product--because at that moment when the engineer is turning the wrench, if his design sucks, he aught to realize it... The end result is a better product. These are the "If it's not broken, make it better" guys, and in many facilities they've been completely abstracted from the Real World, and they therefore can't get a grasp on why their stuff isn't working well.
No doubt, I wouldn't want to be any where close to a bombload of 500lb JDAMS, because hell is going to be let loose. Nobody sane would want to be there. And therein lies the problem, we love to send in embedded reporters. If all those bombs don't hit the target, and instead hit heavy civilian populations, there's gonna be a circus. Some of our armament aren't just bombs. There's missles that pretty well require GPS, and lord knows how our forces love to use those.
Inertial guidance is great, especially as a supplement to GPS, but it's not quite to the level where it can accurately guide a "flying" bomb the several miles they're capable of, let alone a cruise missile over several hundred miles. It will hit close, if GPS was jammed for the whole flight, again close than I'd like to be, but it could be off by a hundred yards--which is no good if you're gunning for SAM sites or tanks, or other hardned targets. Probably dosen't matter too much if your targets are people or buildings.
That's no problem, naturally. So what if they can find the transmitters? Put the jammers in churches/mosques, in heavily populated civilian areas, orphanages, POW camps, etc. Sure, you can blow all of those things up from a thousand miles like it were nothing, or you can try to send troops in to capture it--and in a time when you need your GPS to bomb stuff, you're all too likely to get your boys massacared. It would be very easy to use our own politics against a country like ours, in a war like the one we're in. Too fairly, if we blew all sorts of elementry schools because of GPS jammers, well, whoever was ultimately responsible for the command should be hung...But not before being raped with a 12" spiked dildo.
You're confused by the terminology, I think. The guys in the article want to capture a full spherical image (which is possible with 180 degree fisheye lenses, taking 6 pictures at various angles, and stitching them together), those lenses you presented capture 360 degrees in a cylindrical fashion, also cool, but not what they want.
I've seen sperical quicktime files, a LONG time ago. They were neat.
In all fairness, have you ever tasted NAZI soup? I can't say I have, I'm not afraid to say! For all we know, it very well could've been what made those crackers get all uppity. Maybe they were jealous of the jew's good taste in soup?! The world will never know! I know I'll never again take soup in vain, this I can tell you!
This guy's math AND science is bunk, I think. I mean, 14kWh/month would require to not live in your house, or do much of anything at all. If he's comfortable doing that or investing in a solar farm that won't ever realistically pay for itself, that's his thing, but just to run a TV 4 hours a day almost triples 14kWh/month. So he musn't have a fridge, microwave, water heater, cloths washer/dryer, computer, etc.
The house I'm in was built in the 1920's. It had a single 15 amp circuit which ran the fridge, lights and TV, and little else. I guess if one is comfortable living that way, all the more power to them--though not literally...
Let's see. You've got your power/energy units mixed up. Watts is the power unit, and to qualiy that in terms of energy used, you need to know time. The convinent unit for our application is the kilo-Watt-hour (kWh), which is just an average of the power applied over an hour. No big deal, but let's try to see what's really going on, because I think your average Watt usage is about an order of magnitude off, just guessing. Personally, I have a mini-machine shop complete with 200 Amp 480 service, welders, compressors, plasma cutters, lights that turn night into day, enough 120V to run the entire block if I wanted and all sorts of other good stuff that I use often, and I don't come close to using 20kW on a consistent basis, or basically ever. I can only use one machine at a time, afterall. Unless I splurge on some good CNC equipment, anyway:D
From UCI, they say that the average home in 1999 used 866kWh/month, it probably hasn't changed drastically. If we call a month 30 days, that's 866/kWh/720 hours. Hours cancel out, we get 866/720kW, or about 1.2kW average over 70 days. With AC and fridges, that seems entirely reasonable, if a bit low. Also, computers rarely used the full rated output of the power supply, so if you're a geek with a bunch, you've got to take that into consideration.
I've had a hard time with finding exactly how much energy is contained in an average lightning bolt, I must admit. I've seen anything from 5,000 Amps at 2,000,000 Volts (which sounds reasonable) over 200 miliseconds to a hundred or a thousand times that (which dosen't very sound reasonable) Watts=Volts*Amps, so my reasonable sounding lightning strike will discharge 10 GigaWatts over 200ms. With 3.6 million miliseconds in an hour and a bit of division, it looks like our bolt will do 2777kWh if entirely captured, which is enough to run our average house for 3 months and some change, not bad. Shame there's no way to capture it.
Truthfully, I have no idea how close that figure is to an average lightning bolt, it seems that most of the numbers out there people just pulled out of the air. I could be off very far either direction, and likely am, for all I know. Nature is pretty fantastic, though, isn't it?
Hrm, marshmallows... And scalding hot chocolate! I can see it now! I need go file a patent on MJHPs (Marshmallow Jacketed Hollow Points) so I can capitolize on all the would-be confectioner/assassins in the world. It's gonna make millions!
Oh, yeah, I've seen that before, and yeah, that's neat and all... This is the same idea on another level of geekdom, though! Plus you've got to love that you'll likely hit your victim with a good blast of water rather than probably scaring them off with the noise before they get wet!
Heck, tie it to the garden hose, can't get much more non-lethal than that... Unless it's 40 below in Minnesota or something. It'd be great for keeping the neighbor's cats from shitting in the garden, and it would also be great for Jehovah's Witnesses and people who listen to John Tesh.
What the hell are you talking about? The generation that listened to the Beatles is still alive today.
No shit. They were an example--legends with music that transcends time, they WILL be heard for generations after anyone involved with them has gone! Perhaps you missed the forward pointing language, but I don't think that's my fault. Yeah, they're still alive and kicking, they deserve the fruits of their labor, but it's all too likely that the bigwigs who invested in their music have kicked the can--corporations excepted, they can live forever. Should their great-grandkids still be collecting royalties after they're gone? Should King's Quest I be tied up until 2078? Is it right that some Vanilla Ice wannabe in the year 2075 would have to liscense that famous loop from Under Pressure? I don't think so. Its insane.
There's plenty of music, video, photos, and stuff that has been produced since 1923, which is still copyrighted, and that stuff won't become public domain until 2019--if they don't decide to extend copyrights again, that is. Do you think it was a mistake that the copyright extension act was Sonny Bono's pet project? Talk about a guy with vested interests, too bad he couldn't stick around to gain from it. Many (most, nearly all) of the people who were adults when they created works in the 30's are gone now. Some of the stuff is still relevant, but it's sad that photos, newspaper articles, and even floor plans from the 30's and 40's could still belong to someone/something, I think.
I think milking copyrights in perpetuity is wrong. 40 years isn't unreasonable. 50 years isn't necessarily pushing it. I think the current 70 years for personal authorship is a little long (even if you create something at 18, you're covered till you're 88, that aught to be long enough to get your share out of your works). 95 years for corporate authorship is simply disgusting, though.
The thing is, they only need to find another Sonny Bono to push their agenda, and they've got it in the bag. That's not right or fair, and this is from someone who makes pretty good money on the side doing creative stuff, which is covered by copyright. In a world where nearly all arts are built upon the foundation of previous works, super long copyrights are a burden and a hindrance.
Change the law? Are you serious? With all of the money involved on the opposing side, it would be just about as easy to work at minimum wage with the goal of saving up enough money to buy a private island and enough yes-men so you can create your own little dictatorship that dosen't recognize copyright on materials older than a reasonable life span--all so you can thumb your nose at Mickey Mouse.
The Beatles, for example, are legends, and their works will continue to generate money well after the generation that first heard them have entirely turned to worm food. Michael Jackson makes a buttload off them, and they're just a drop in the bucket. It's in this industry's interest to make copyrights infinitely long, I realize this, they realize it, we all realize it. They have the money and the support to do it, and everyone else can eat shit. That's the reality. Unless someone cares to pull a few billion out of their ass to buy up and free all this good stuff, it will be tied up forever.
Somehow, to me, it dosen't seem unethical to copy music or other materials that have outlived everyone involved in its creation and its original investers, regardless of the legality.
Does it really lower the combustion temperature signifigantly? I'm sure the specific heat of water vapor is nearly quadrouple that of air, so it has the capacity to absorb more energy without raising so much in temperature, but I'm just not sure weather it can have that much of an impact because the water/fuel ratio probably dosen't need to be that high to be effective--in fact, I'd guess that much more than 1:10 would be bad all around--for the engine, for efficiency and for power.
As I understand it, water mist can be used to basically lower the effective compression ratio via evaporation--basically the same effect of an intercooler, increasing intake air density by reducing its temperature. You wouldn't want to inject it straight into the cylinders, but into the intake manifold to give it time to cool the air. If it were injected straight into the cylinders, it would soak up all that lovely heat and have little opportunity to cool the air.
I have no doubt that you're right in that it will reduce overall efficiency, just to be clear, I'm just not sure how much so (this surely warrants some testing:P). But, of course the goal of water injection and forced induction is almost always not about being more efficient, but rather to boost power output. So, if you're trying to build a very efficient engine, you're not going to be interested in those things, period.
I could never figure out why women like cats so much, seems like if you took every masculine charecteristic that women hate, multiply it by 10 would'd have a cat's personality.
Funny, I've always thought of it the other way around, which would explain why women love cats. Thankfully, she dosen't puke on the carpet like pussycat does.
Yeah, you can't charge a subscription fee to do that (which could be a big thing in itself), but more importantly, neither can the dealerships charge you to do it at that point! That, by far, would be the bigger hangup. You think these dealerships who have contracts and liscenses and $5,000 diagnostic readers would be happy that the same functionality was embedded in the radio or somesort; all revealing and freely, easily accessed by the consumer--AND their much more affordable mechanic?
Dealerships are the gate trolls on GM's road to money, don't forget. If GM wants the riches, they have to satisfy the trolls. If they tried that, you'd see GM offices implode under the shear force of angry dealer's angry telephone calls!
Heck, it could have a fleet worth of guns ala the AC-130H Spectre, probably a phalanx system--or a dozen for that matter... With countermeasures out the ass, and missile batteries, it could be quite formidable. For that reason, it might actually make a very good "peace keeping" type vehicle, besides just being a vehicle for transport. It could be a very valuable asset in the type of war we're in now: one where we're not really battling a military with actual modern weapons, and a functioning air force...
How imposing would a gunship like an AC-130U be if it could basically just sit off in the distance (out of range of RPGs and shoulder launched SAMs) without need or want for refuel or re-equip? Very. On top of that, it could spot for artillery, laser and GPS guided bombs, have an AWACs type radar system (part of it's defense), a compliment of Air to ground missiles and otherwise it could be a massive part of the local communication and command structure.
Riots? No problem! That's what the 20mm gun is for! >:P With good optics, it could effectively guard a very wide area--like when bases and hospital units were getting mortared after we ousted the military, a few burps of the guns and they're toast. With an enforced curfew, it could guard wide areas from transport of weapons and troops--especially at night. It's sort of a silly thing that balloons could still be relevant in the 21st century, but in some ways, it's positively brilliant.
Oh, that's not to say that I haven't run across the archetypal suited monkey who normally wouldn't be able to hold his job if it weren't for tenure, office politics and bureaucracy, or because he's related to the owner or even worse: some higher ranking suited monkey. They're all too common... Who hasn't encountered one or more? I figure that's because nerds with breadth of interest and the ability and the desire to lead or manage are too rare.
Having worked under a geek supervisor (someone who understands and appreciates what his minions do, with the ability to act as a conduit to people who don't), and the monkey (who's not understanding and is sometimes belligerent), I can definitely say which is superior.
Of course, it's highly intuitive, I think: most geeks are geeks because they enjoy learning and applying their skills and knowledge, sometimes regardless of what their dedication does to them socially. Pretty much everyone else in a corporate environment is in it for the money. All else being equal, who's going to be better at their job: someone who's competent, and also loves what they do, or someone who's just as competent but doesn't really care what he does or who he steps on, so long as it pays well. I've met and gone to school with far more of the former type, and the attitude is distressing to me, but oh well. I have no doubt that many of them are now in managerial positions bossing around more talented people. And that's okay with me, because I can be reasonably sure they're living in their own personal hell, one way or the next.
I'd also like to add that some nerds appreciate all knowledge and wisdom and are considerably more versatile at trades other than being a computer nerd. Those ubernerds are probably called "boss" by the rest--if they've made it out of their parent's basement that is...
And hey, if you don't know where you came from, it's hard to know where you're going, right? Now where did I put my martini?
No doubt, this thing's got to be more expensive. I mean, I could afford it and perhaps a lake to put it in, and I could sell what electricity I don't use (it's supposed to supply a town of 200,000) and recoup my money. Plus, it would be much more fun to be able to say to some Ferrari jerkoff that I *own* the nuclear power plant that powers (and unbeknownst to him provided the funds for) the electric car that just dusted his precious ride. Heh.
Seriously, even if this thing cost ten times as much it wouldn't be far out of the grasp of people on the low end of the wealthy spectrum, and someone like Bill Gates could reasonably afford to provide electricity and desalinated water to all of the third world.
I'm afraid there's simply no way that this is going to cost less than 500 times the price they've quoted, not because it's unfeasible even with huge mass production (heck, maybe it is possible), or because it's unsafe, or because people are afraid of it--but because under pressure of the Oil Companies the US will invade whoever has one.
Slashdot Mirror
Personally, I think driver's licenses should not be awarded to new drivers unless they pass a course involving 15 hours of driving a go-kart with an instructor shouting at them through their helmet-radio (simulating a cell phone conversation), and random objects moving about the track, from simulated squirrels to kids with a ball.
The last phase of the class includes a (simulated) go-kart-driving chainsaw-murderer, so you have to run away from him, with the instructor simulating 3 children in the back seat over the radio, and the simulated squirrels running out in front of you... You lose points if you run over the squirrels or get caught by the chainsaw-murderer. Screw the mini-formula stuff; we need to teach people how to drive in real-life situations!
Where the heck do you live where racoons grow to 5 feet and 300 lbs?! Amazing.
No spike protection?
I wear a pair of these when I'm working around nails and debris and whatnot, stepping on nails or sharp pieced of wood is no fun. They've got a steel shim, and it seems to work well though they're relatively stiff. I've stepped on a few nails with them, with no event, thankfully. They also ventilate well enough, which is always nice.
Like you say, it would be a very good idea to look through some of the safety shoe places too. Good footwear might be expensive, but it's worth every penny. Also, in case you're not used to boots, break them in slowly before you've really got to hoof it. Walk around with them at least a few miles a couple days before you get serious, your feet will thank you.
The sad thing is, I've met and been around professional and student engineers that exactly mirrors what Andy said, and I equate it to inexperience and apathy. Why do they want to be enginners? I sure don't know--but I do know it can't be because Engineering classes are flooded with attractive females. For whatever reason, they can't take some 2x4s and make something to solve a problem. It's downright pathetic that a budding mechanical engineer is expected to take a year or two of calc in highschool, but not expected to take a shop class, where he can learn to run a bead of weld, or turn the cranks on a mill, and otherwise actually apply all of that fun stuff he learned in geometry and trig... That's what it's all about, where the rubber meets the road.
Good engineers, in my experience, have a background in what they come to do and love. I've met engineers who just plain can't understand that its beneficial to know what the non-engineers (the lesser-folk to these kind) think when they're working with their products, and I've met engineers who have had experience in their trades.. 100% of the engineers with real trade experience were the better engineers, probably because they can better relate to the poor slob doing the work, at least that's the way I see it.
This is exactly why I think every engineer should work with the guy that has to maintain/install his product--because at that moment when the engineer is turning the wrench, if his design sucks, he aught to realize it... The end result is a better product. These are the "If it's not broken, make it better" guys, and in many facilities they've been completely abstracted from the Real World, and they therefore can't get a grasp on why their stuff isn't working well.
No doubt, I wouldn't want to be any where close to a bombload of 500lb JDAMS, because hell is going to be let loose. Nobody sane would want to be there. And therein lies the problem, we love to send in embedded reporters. If all those bombs don't hit the target, and instead hit heavy civilian populations, there's gonna be a circus. Some of our armament aren't just bombs. There's missles that pretty well require GPS, and lord knows how our forces love to use those.
Inertial guidance is great, especially as a supplement to GPS, but it's not quite to the level where it can accurately guide a "flying" bomb the several miles they're capable of, let alone a cruise missile over several hundred miles. It will hit close, if GPS was jammed for the whole flight, again close than I'd like to be, but it could be off by a hundred yards--which is no good if you're gunning for SAM sites or tanks, or other hardned targets. Probably dosen't matter too much if your targets are people or buildings.
That's no problem, naturally. So what if they can find the transmitters? Put the jammers in churches/mosques, in heavily populated civilian areas, orphanages, POW camps, etc. Sure, you can blow all of those things up from a thousand miles like it were nothing, or you can try to send troops in to capture it--and in a time when you need your GPS to bomb stuff, you're all too likely to get your boys massacared. It would be very easy to use our own politics against a country like ours, in a war like the one we're in. Too fairly, if we blew all sorts of elementry schools because of GPS jammers, well, whoever was ultimately responsible for the command should be hung...But not before being raped with a 12" spiked dildo.
Is that Sharon as in "My Sharon-a" or "Ariel Sha-ron"?
Da da dah dah dah. Is it sad that I see Janet Reno groovig to that? Why, yes, I think so.
You're confused by the terminology, I think. The guys in the article want to capture a full spherical image (which is possible with 180 degree fisheye lenses, taking 6 pictures at various angles, and stitching them together), those lenses you presented capture 360 degrees in a cylindrical fashion, also cool, but not what they want.
I've seen sperical quicktime files, a LONG time ago. They were neat.
This is very relevant to the topic of conversation.
Pasta la vista, brother.
"They eat soup just like the Nazi's did!"
In all fairness, have you ever tasted NAZI soup? I can't say I have, I'm not afraid to say! For all we know, it very well could've been what made those crackers get all uppity. Maybe they were jealous of the jew's good taste in soup?! The world will never know! I know I'll never again take soup in vain, this I can tell you!
This guy's math AND science is bunk, I think. I mean, 14kWh/month would require to not live in your house, or do much of anything at all. If he's comfortable doing that or investing in a solar farm that won't ever realistically pay for itself, that's his thing, but just to run a TV 4 hours a day almost triples 14kWh/month. So he musn't have a fridge, microwave, water heater, cloths washer/dryer, computer, etc.
The house I'm in was built in the 1920's. It had a single 15 amp circuit which ran the fridge, lights and TV, and little else. I guess if one is comfortable living that way, all the more power to them--though not literally...
Let's see. You've got your power/energy units mixed up. Watts is the power unit, and to qualiy that in terms of energy used, you need to know time. The convinent unit for our application is the kilo-Watt-hour (kWh), which is just an average of the power applied over an hour. No big deal, but let's try to see what's really going on, because I think your average Watt usage is about an order of magnitude off, just guessing. Personally, I have a mini-machine shop complete with 200 Amp 480 service, welders, compressors, plasma cutters, lights that turn night into day, enough 120V to run the entire block if I wanted and all sorts of other good stuff that I use often, and I don't come close to using 20kW on a consistent basis, or basically ever. I can only use one machine at a time, afterall. Unless I splurge on some good CNC equipment, anyway :D
From UCI, they say that the average home in 1999 used 866kWh/month, it probably hasn't changed drastically. If we call a month 30 days, that's 866/kWh/720 hours. Hours cancel out, we get 866/720kW, or about 1.2kW average over 70 days. With AC and fridges, that seems entirely reasonable, if a bit low. Also, computers rarely used the full rated output of the power supply, so if you're a geek with a bunch, you've got to take that into consideration.
I've had a hard time with finding exactly how much energy is contained in an average lightning bolt, I must admit. I've seen anything from 5,000 Amps at 2,000,000 Volts (which sounds reasonable) over 200 miliseconds to a hundred or a thousand times that (which dosen't very sound reasonable) Watts=Volts*Amps, so my reasonable sounding lightning strike will discharge 10 GigaWatts over 200ms. With 3.6 million miliseconds in an hour and a bit of division, it looks like our bolt will do 2777kWh if entirely captured, which is enough to run our average house for 3 months and some change, not bad. Shame there's no way to capture it.
Truthfully, I have no idea how close that figure is to an average lightning bolt, it seems that most of the numbers out there people just pulled out of the air. I could be off very far either direction, and likely am, for all I know. Nature is pretty fantastic, though, isn't it?
Hrm, marshmallows... And scalding hot chocolate! I can see it now! I need go file a patent on MJHPs (Marshmallow Jacketed Hollow Points) so I can capitolize on all the would-be confectioner/assassins in the world. It's gonna make millions!
Oh, yeah, I've seen that before, and yeah, that's neat and all... This is the same idea on another level of geekdom, though! Plus you've got to love that you'll likely hit your victim with a good blast of water rather than probably scaring them off with the noise before they get wet!
Heck, tie it to the garden hose, can't get much more non-lethal than that... Unless it's 40 below in Minnesota or something. It'd be great for keeping the neighbor's cats from shitting in the garden, and it would also be great for Jehovah's Witnesses and people who listen to John Tesh.
Is that like synergizing capability aggregations?
Just askin'.
What the hell are you talking about? The generation that listened to the Beatles is still alive today.
No shit. They were an example--legends with music that transcends time, they WILL be heard for generations after anyone involved with them has gone! Perhaps you missed the forward pointing language, but I don't think that's my fault. Yeah, they're still alive and kicking, they deserve the fruits of their labor, but it's all too likely that the bigwigs who invested in their music have kicked the can--corporations excepted, they can live forever. Should their great-grandkids still be collecting royalties after they're gone? Should King's Quest I be tied up until 2078? Is it right that some Vanilla Ice wannabe in the year 2075 would have to liscense that famous loop from Under Pressure? I don't think so. Its insane.
There's plenty of music, video, photos, and stuff that has been produced since 1923, which is still copyrighted, and that stuff won't become public domain until 2019--if they don't decide to extend copyrights again, that is. Do you think it was a mistake that the copyright extension act was Sonny Bono's pet project? Talk about a guy with vested interests, too bad he couldn't stick around to gain from it. Many (most, nearly all) of the people who were adults when they created works in the 30's are gone now. Some of the stuff is still relevant, but it's sad that photos, newspaper articles, and even floor plans from the 30's and 40's could still belong to someone/something, I think.
I think milking copyrights in perpetuity is wrong. 40 years isn't unreasonable. 50 years isn't necessarily pushing it. I think the current 70 years for personal authorship is a little long (even if you create something at 18, you're covered till you're 88, that aught to be long enough to get your share out of your works). 95 years for corporate authorship is simply disgusting, though.
The thing is, they only need to find another Sonny Bono to push their agenda, and they've got it in the bag. That's not right or fair, and this is from someone who makes pretty good money on the side doing creative stuff, which is covered by copyright. In a world where nearly all arts are built upon the foundation of previous works, super long copyrights are a burden and a hindrance.
Change the law? Are you serious? With all of the money involved on the opposing side, it would be just about as easy to work at minimum wage with the goal of saving up enough money to buy a private island and enough yes-men so you can create your own little dictatorship that dosen't recognize copyright on materials older than a reasonable life span--all so you can thumb your nose at Mickey Mouse.
The Beatles, for example, are legends, and their works will continue to generate money well after the generation that first heard them have entirely turned to worm food. Michael Jackson makes a buttload off them, and they're just a drop in the bucket. It's in this industry's interest to make copyrights infinitely long, I realize this, they realize it, we all realize it. They have the money and the support to do it, and everyone else can eat shit. That's the reality. Unless someone cares to pull a few billion out of their ass to buy up and free all this good stuff, it will be tied up forever.
Somehow, to me, it dosen't seem unethical to copy music or other materials that have outlived everyone involved in its creation and its original investers, regardless of the legality.
Does it really lower the combustion temperature signifigantly? I'm sure the specific heat of water vapor is nearly quadrouple that of air, so it has the capacity to absorb more energy without raising so much in temperature, but I'm just not sure weather it can have that much of an impact because the water/fuel ratio probably dosen't need to be that high to be effective--in fact, I'd guess that much more than 1:10 would be bad all around--for the engine, for efficiency and for power.
:P). But, of course the goal of water injection and forced induction is almost always not about being more efficient, but rather to boost power output. So, if you're trying to build a very efficient engine, you're not going to be interested in those things, period.
As I understand it, water mist can be used to basically lower the effective compression ratio via evaporation--basically the same effect of an intercooler, increasing intake air density by reducing its temperature. You wouldn't want to inject it straight into the cylinders, but into the intake manifold to give it time to cool the air. If it were injected straight into the cylinders, it would soak up all that lovely heat and have little opportunity to cool the air.
I have no doubt that you're right in that it will reduce overall efficiency, just to be clear, I'm just not sure how much so (this surely warrants some testing
I could never figure out why women like cats so much, seems like if you took every masculine charecteristic that women hate, multiply it by 10 would'd have a cat's personality.
Funny, I've always thought of it the other way around, which would explain why women love cats. Thankfully, she dosen't puke on the carpet like pussycat does.
Yeah, you can't charge a subscription fee to do that (which could be a big thing in itself), but more importantly, neither can the dealerships charge you to do it at that point! That, by far, would be the bigger hangup. You think these dealerships who have contracts and liscenses and $5,000 diagnostic readers would be happy that the same functionality was embedded in the radio or somesort; all revealing and freely, easily accessed by the consumer--AND their much more affordable mechanic?
Dealerships are the gate trolls on GM's road to money, don't forget. If GM wants the riches, they have to satisfy the trolls. If they tried that, you'd see GM offices implode under the shear force of angry dealer's angry telephone calls!
Heck, it could have a fleet worth of guns ala the AC-130H Spectre, probably a phalanx system--or a dozen for that matter... With countermeasures out the ass, and missile batteries, it could be quite formidable. For that reason, it might actually make a very good "peace keeping" type vehicle, besides just being a vehicle for transport. It could be a very valuable asset in the type of war we're in now: one where we're not really battling a military with actual modern weapons, and a functioning air force...
How imposing would a gunship like an AC-130U be if it could basically just sit off in the distance (out of range of RPGs and shoulder launched SAMs) without need or want for refuel or re-equip? Very. On top of that, it could spot for artillery, laser and GPS guided bombs, have an AWACs type radar system (part of it's defense), a compliment of Air to ground missiles and otherwise it could be a massive part of the local communication and command structure.
Riots? No problem! That's what the 20mm gun is for! >:P With good optics, it could effectively guard a very wide area--like when bases and hospital units were getting mortared after we ousted the military, a few burps of the guns and they're toast. With an enforced curfew, it could guard wide areas from transport of weapons and troops--especially at night. It's sort of a silly thing that balloons could still be relevant in the 21st century, but in some ways, it's positively brilliant.
Oh, that's not to say that I haven't run across the archetypal suited monkey who normally wouldn't be able to hold his job if it weren't for tenure, office politics and bureaucracy, or because he's related to the owner or even worse: some higher ranking suited monkey. They're all too common... Who hasn't encountered one or more? I figure that's because nerds with breadth of interest and the ability and the desire to lead or manage are too rare.
Having worked under a geek supervisor (someone who understands and appreciates what his minions do, with the ability to act as a conduit to people who don't), and the monkey (who's not understanding and is sometimes belligerent), I can definitely say which is superior.
Of course, it's highly intuitive, I think: most geeks are geeks because they enjoy learning and applying their skills and knowledge, sometimes regardless of what their dedication does to them socially. Pretty much everyone else in a corporate environment is in it for the money. All else being equal, who's going to be better at their job: someone who's competent, and also loves what they do, or someone who's just as competent but doesn't really care what he does or who he steps on, so long as it pays well. I've met and gone to school with far more of the former type, and the attitude is distressing to me, but oh well. I have no doubt that many of them are now in managerial positions bossing around more talented people. And that's okay with me, because I can be reasonably sure they're living in their own personal hell, one way or the next.
I'd also like to add that some nerds appreciate all knowledge and wisdom and are considerably more versatile at trades other than being a computer nerd. Those ubernerds are probably called "boss" by the rest--if they've made it out of their parent's basement that is...
And hey, if you don't know where you came from, it's hard to know where you're going, right? Now where did I put my martini?
No doubt, this thing's got to be more expensive. I mean, I could afford it and perhaps a lake to put it in, and I could sell what electricity I don't use (it's supposed to supply a town of 200,000) and recoup my money. Plus, it would be much more fun to be able to say to some Ferrari jerkoff that I *own* the nuclear power plant that powers (and unbeknownst to him provided the funds for) the electric car that just dusted his precious ride. Heh.
Seriously, even if this thing cost ten times as much it wouldn't be far out of the grasp of people on the low end of the wealthy spectrum, and someone like Bill Gates could reasonably afford to provide electricity and desalinated water to all of the third world.
I'm afraid there's simply no way that this is going to cost less than 500 times the price they've quoted, not because it's unfeasible even with huge mass production (heck, maybe it is possible), or because it's unsafe, or because people are afraid of it--but because under pressure of the Oil Companies the US will invade whoever has one.