Take it from me. I'm an American, and I *do* own several fully automatic weapons (and other things related), several of which were passed down to me, many are are not operable, and have more historic, intrinsic and collector value than anything else..
It is decidedly not easy to get and keep a machine gun legally, and there's no gurantee that Uncle Sam won't come and try to collect them one day. And if there's a crime in the area that involves a weapon similar to one you may own, the FBI might drop by and say "Hi, I wanna see your guns".
There's lots of paperwork and background checks. It takes a long time. You have to have an FFL to collect class 3 weapons (automatic weapons, silencers, and destructive devices--which applies to some shotguns, grenade, mortar launchers, etc. Even if they're decomissioned). It's not especially hard to get an FFL if you're not a felon, but it does take a while. It's $30 bucks yearly to just be liscensed to collect curios and relics. If you actually want to buy one of any sort, it's another form and $200 bucks yearly.
This of course assumes that these weapons types aren't banned in your specific area--namely in eastern states and California, Oregon, where they don't want anyone to have fun... Then you have to get signed off by your local law enforcement. Better be on the sheriff's good side. If there's a hint that you're an asshole up to no good, your chances of getting guns legally aren't favorable. Also, should you want to move, you have to get more signatures, etc.
Legal, registered automatic weapons are NOT common--neither are the unregistered illegal ones, for that matter.. They're very expensive to buy ($3000+ for an SMG), and if you should ever need a part, it's also expensive and difficult to get. Collector weapons are very very rarely used in a crime--probably about as many as ancient Japanese swords. Statistically undetectable, needless to say.
The attacks on 9/11 and every attack since then in the world is like the biggest christmas ever for the fascists in government. Are you kidding?! They couldn't be more pleased.
Indeed.. I know I'm not the only one that sees the parallels of the modern day to the 30's, the Reichstag fire, the NAZI party ursurpation of the government running on the fanatic anti-communism platform--anti-liberal, so to say.
I beginning to anticipate the placement of signs: "Work'll make y'all free!"... Any day now I think.
*sigh*
Re:For those who don't want to RTFA, the top 10:
on
Top 10 Web Fads
·
· Score: 1
A llama?! The Everyone knows vicuña are clearly the hottest of the camelids! Oh the gall your friend has!
No way... Lights are limited to 50-60 watts each. AC systems pretty well need to be in the multi-kW range to be at all effective in a car. There's lots of single pane non-coated windows, hot metal, etc. Etc. that you have to deal with, plus people would be pretty pissed off if their air wasn't insta-cold.
It's not like a house where you can take a 1kW window AC unit and cool a small room over the course of the whole day.
Power is power, guy. If it takes 10 horsepower to cool your car, then it dosen't really matter what path it takes, except for the sake of efficiency... Simple as that. The power to generate the electricity still comes directly from the engines' crankshaft, whether you care to believe otherwise. There's no magical Electricity Elves in that alternator, or the belt that powers it--which is often the same belt (which is about 98% efficient if tightened correctly, FYI) that powers the compressor.
The fact is that a standard car alternator will probably never produce more than 1200 watts (100 Amps). That's A little over 1.5 horsepower. A car AC sytem is probably at least 18,000 BTU/hr, maybe almost double that for a big car/SUV. So now you know why your alternator drags on your engine about 1/15th that of your AC. Furthermore, alternators do not always run at 100% capacity. The largest loads on an average alternator is often the the rear window defroster and stereo system, followed by replenishing the battery from it's ignition duties--except for those jerks that decide a 2kW Thunder Pumper(tm) sound system is in order, then the stereo wins..
Peltiers would have to be 95% efficient just to make up the losses in the alternator enough for them to be practical. Aint' gonna happen this decade.
The other sad facet of this is that if they intend to run this off the typical 12v system in a car it's going to need 83 amps of 12v per 3400BTU/hour (1000 watts) they intend to move even at 100% efficiency, ignoring losses in the cable.
Gonna need some real Monster Cable(tm) to handle much of that! You know.. You should be worried when they start looking for cable in the kcmil range.
Yeah, too bad it's only a fraction of the efficiency of common refrigeration systems, contrary to what the writeup/article says, or what the editors beleive.
Unless these kids invented some breakthrough in peltier chips, this will never, ever, be practical. If indeed they did invent semiconductors that will compete with what's in your car (since I can't read the article), they deserve some kudos, and oh, a Nobel Peace Prize.
You really think that hundreds of thousands of people more knoweldgable and experienced seeking a way to make their company's products better than everyone else's wouldn't have stumbled upon this idea long ago? Oh, I'm sure they did. And then they said "Back to the drawin' board, Cletus!".
Yeah, of course this contraption ain't gonna be anywhere close to the efficiency of a decent/good refrigeration system.. I'm no AC guru, but I understand that refrigeration systems can be very very efficient. 80% on the low end and 90+% on the high end. That's pretty astonishing in the mechanical world, where typical engines are less than half that efficient.
"Invent" is a pretty strong word when you can go and find those mini in-car/desktop "silent refrigerators" using peltier chips at Cost-Co for $100.. They're not at all efficient, but if the need scratches... Itch it.
If one determines that it takes 5kw to cool a space then that's what it takes. At that point, it dosen't matter except for efficiency and other factors (i.e. environmental concerns) what you use to move the heat, but that's the power you'll need to provide... Unless you're using magic or mutant powers or something.
Hrm, pretty interesting.. I didn't know they they ever ran funny cars on ethanol, always thought it was nitro/methanol. No doubt you're right since you've followed it and I've never, but I think the big thing at the moment is nitro.. So that's probably why I remember nitro.
I was remembering after I wrote previously that another problem with ethanol was the fuel absorbing water. Apparently it just loves to suck up water. If you had plain steel, galvanized or aluminum fuel lines, that could cause some trouble. Also--it just dosen't have the lubrication value that gasoline has, and on top of that, it tends to clean away the oil film layer between the cylinder and piston if the mixture is too rich.
Methane and dual fuel is good in thoery... But there's some big problems with that, too. We're running very short on the sand that they use to hydraulicly fracture many wells--to extract more gas faster. Apparently, they can compact the shit out of it, along with water and it will still let the gas through--and it's found in only few spots in the country. It's getting scarce and much more expensive recently. They can use alternatives but they're even more expensive.
There's also loads of gas in Alaska, but there's no way to get it to the mainland yet. We already use lots and lots of it for electricity, I just don't think it would be smart to rely on one non-renewable fuel source to do so many things.
It'd be great if we could use some landfill/biomass fuels in cars but there's just not enough demand because the price is too high.
I can't argue about the need for a good clean efficient to store and move fuel. We totally need it, unless we come up with some killer superconductor technology, that is. That story about the bio-diesel from algae on/. a while a go sounded really promising. Too bad it apparently needs hot gasses and co2 from the coal plants. Heck, even a more efficient battery technology that hasn't been around since the 70's would be a big plus.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that most, if not all, funny cars ran on a very specific nitromethane methanol mix, and ran really low compression ratios... Because the oxygen in the fuel made it much more prone to detonation. I think they're almost functionally identical in many respects to Top Fuel dragsters, except the body.
I'm admit, I'm not a dragster person, but I think NHRA rules are very strict regarding fuel types. Maybe you're thinking about pro mod class, or maybe there's an an ethanol funny car class. I admit, I'm not sure..
I've heard of problems with certian rubbers and plastics being eaten by ehtanol, but with the E10 and E85 mixes coming out, I'd assume that manufactuers have resolved those problems with better suited materials. It's also possible that these problems could be caused by the substances they use to "denature" the alcohol, which includes acetone, methanol, and used to include the ever so friendly M.E.K. Before it was a known cancer causer, that is.. Wouldn't want those poor bastards to get a cheap high and live to tell about it!
I've never heard of engine deposits resulting from ethanol... In fact I'd guess the exact opposite would happen. It's a great solvent, which is part of the rubber problem, and it's a very simple compound compared to gasoline's components... I'd guess that it would losen varnish deposits in the gasoline fuel system and foul the plugs/fuel lines/filters quickly until that stuff was out of the system.
I'll have to look into it, because I've not once heard an anecdote that indicates ethanol causes deposits, and I run around the sand-rail and rock crawling crowd, where some people use it all the time and have great success. It is cheaper and easier to use than race gas, afterall.
Honestly, if it weren't for the fact that someday MS is going to release some future version of DirectX that will eclipse Windows 2000 (and therefore it won't support the latest wiz-bang graphics) I'd never see it a point to upgrade to a newer version.
About the only thing I do with my Windows computer any more is play games. If there are winders only games (i.e. don't work on OSX or WINE) when this comes about I guess I'll have to upgrade if I want to continue playing, but I'll do so very reluctantly if at all.
Hopefully some game developers will take a stand and not use a DirectX version that won't work on Win2k, and instead use OpenGL, etc... But I sincerely doubt that, I must admit.
Also, people ignore that stuff that's already been fermented and dried (mash, or whatever it's called) can indeed be fed to cows, pigs and chickens, etc. also, you don't have to use the best part of the plant to get what the little microbes really want--the sugar and a bit of the other nutrients. Most of the protiens and other good stuff that the farm animals need is left intact.
So you can turn around and mix this stuff into their regular feed... Sounds good to me.
Indeed, IIRC Ethanol is equivalent to 115 Octane or so. That means higher compression ratios than you can do with premium unleaded (before detonation), which means higher thermal efficency.
I've heard of people designing their engines to run ethanol most of the time. They can get about 85-90% of the mileage that they get with gas in the same engine, and that's not bad at all. With turbos/superchargers you can get a bit of leverage, so you don't have to design an engine with a static compression ratio of the 11-12:1 that ethanol works best at--in other words that engine wouldn't run on gasoline.
I don't think it would be too hard to design an engine that had a static compression ratio of 8-9:1 for regular gas, and a few pounds of boost when it runs on ethanol. Best of both worlds, as they say.
Huh, that's pretty strange, I've seen it last week. I like to watch it every so often to affirm to myself how creepy this administration is.
Basically, the video has Donald Rumsfeld being interviewed by some talkshow type people. I don't know what show they're from. They ask him about stating that Iraq was an imminent threat to the US and, presumably, the rest of the world. He says that he never said or wrote that, and that someone else in the administration must have. They then confrot him with two specific quotations by himself explicitly using the words imminent threat. All he can do is sputter and act all abashed--like someone with an iron grip just latched onto his balls and called him on the spot. Fade to black. It's quite hilarious, really.
I imagine that it'll be back up, but I'll try to find a live copy of it. It's too good to be lost. Maybe archive.org has a copy... I'll reply when I find it.
Heck, that's okay... Let's equip the boats with a Phalanx system that can be remote activated/deactivated globally by the Coast Guard in case of emergency.
That'd be good against helicopters, speed boats, and pretty much anything a pirate or terrorist could get their hands on. BZZZZZZZZZZZT! Wooh! p1r4t3 gibs!
Not only that, but fuel for very large diesel engines contains lots of residual oil, and is very high in sulfur. 5000 ppm plus. I understand that England recently traced the source of some acid rain problems to maritime activity. They've practically eliminated their sulfur output from coal power plants, etc, so boats are now the biggest producer.
That heavy diesel fuel is nasty stuff. Basically, its what's left over after they boil off all of the gasses, gasoline, kerosene, road use diesel fuel and the lower grade heating oils. They have to pre-heat it quite a bit to get it to burn in an engine, otherwise it's about as good as filtered crude oil--slightly less viscous.
Nuclear power would be a huge step forward in this area... I can't agree more. Throw in some modern reactor and propulsion designs and you'd have a terribly efficient and manuverable ship. Might even make fuel a bit cheaper for the rest of us if it caught on... Bonus.
Is it any different than "screeners", where they take a video camera into a theatre, then turn around and sell it? Not at all, and they used to make millions doing exactly this.
People apparently aren't too worried about quality. If it means that pirates are going to invest in consumer HD cameras and software to edit it, and all of this, the end result will probably be somewhat better than NTSC. If there is a way around it and potential for profit, it'll be done.
You certianly can tell where you are with a compass and a halfway decent map. Never been a Boy Scout eh?... There's tons of compass tricks, and other ways to determine your location quite precisely with very basic items.
I'd love to share, but I've got to run. I'm sure that it would'nt be too hard to google.
Slashdot Mirror
Take it from me. I'm an American, and I *do* own several fully automatic weapons (and other things related), several of which were passed down to me, many are are not operable, and have more historic, intrinsic and collector value than anything else..
It is decidedly not easy to get and keep a machine gun legally, and there's no gurantee that Uncle Sam won't come and try to collect them one day. And if there's a crime in the area that involves a weapon similar to one you may own, the FBI might drop by and say "Hi, I wanna see your guns".
There's lots of paperwork and background checks. It takes a long time. You have to have an FFL to collect class 3 weapons (automatic weapons, silencers, and destructive devices--which applies to some shotguns, grenade, mortar launchers, etc. Even if they're decomissioned). It's not especially hard to get an FFL if you're not a felon, but it does take a while. It's $30 bucks yearly to just be liscensed to collect curios and relics. If you actually want to buy one of any sort, it's another form and $200 bucks yearly.
This of course assumes that these weapons types aren't banned in your specific area--namely in eastern states and California, Oregon, where they don't want anyone to have fun... Then you have to get signed off by your local law enforcement. Better be on the sheriff's good side. If there's a hint that you're an asshole up to no good, your chances of getting guns legally aren't favorable. Also, should you want to move, you have to get more signatures, etc.
Legal, registered automatic weapons are NOT common--neither are the unregistered illegal ones, for that matter.. They're very expensive to buy ($3000+ for an SMG), and if you should ever need a part, it's also expensive and difficult to get. Collector weapons are very very rarely used in a crime--probably about as many as ancient Japanese swords. Statistically undetectable, needless to say.
The attacks on 9/11 and every attack since then in the world is like the biggest christmas ever for the fascists in government. Are you kidding?! They couldn't be more pleased.
Indeed.. I know I'm not the only one that sees the parallels of the modern day to the 30's, the Reichstag fire, the NAZI party ursurpation of the government running on the fanatic anti-communism platform--anti-liberal, so to say.
I beginning to anticipate the placement of signs: "Work'll make y'all free!"... Any day now I think.
*sigh*
A llama?! The Everyone knows vicuña are clearly the hottest of the camelids! Oh the gall your friend has!
No way... Lights are limited to 50-60 watts each. AC systems pretty well need to be in the multi-kW range to be at all effective in a car. There's lots of single pane non-coated windows, hot metal, etc. Etc. that you have to deal with, plus people would be pretty pissed off if their air wasn't insta-cold.
It's not like a house where you can take a 1kW window AC unit and cool a small room over the course of the whole day.
Power is power, guy. If it takes 10 horsepower to cool your car, then it dosen't really matter what path it takes, except for the sake of efficiency... Simple as that. The power to generate the electricity still comes directly from the engines' crankshaft, whether you care to believe otherwise. There's no magical Electricity Elves in that alternator, or the belt that powers it--which is often the same belt (which is about 98% efficient if tightened correctly, FYI) that powers the compressor.
The fact is that a standard car alternator will probably never produce more than 1200 watts (100 Amps). That's A little over 1.5 horsepower. A car AC sytem is probably at least 18,000 BTU/hr, maybe almost double that for a big car/SUV. So now you know why your alternator drags on your engine about 1/15th that of your AC. Furthermore, alternators do not always run at 100% capacity. The largest loads on an average alternator is often the the rear window defroster and stereo system, followed by replenishing the battery from it's ignition duties--except for those jerks that decide a 2kW Thunder Pumper(tm) sound system is in order, then the stereo wins..
Peltiers would have to be 95% efficient just to make up the losses in the alternator enough for them to be practical. Aint' gonna happen this decade.
The other sad facet of this is that if they intend to run this off the typical 12v system in a car it's going to need 83 amps of 12v per 3400BTU/hour (1000 watts) they intend to move even at 100% efficiency, ignoring losses in the cable.
Gonna need some real Monster Cable(tm) to handle much of that! You know.. You should be worried when they start looking for cable in the kcmil range.
Yeah, too bad it's only a fraction of the efficiency of common refrigeration systems, contrary to what the writeup/article says, or what the editors beleive.
Unless these kids invented some breakthrough in peltier chips, this will never, ever, be practical. If indeed they did invent semiconductors that will compete with what's in your car (since I can't read the article), they deserve some kudos, and oh, a Nobel Peace Prize.
You really think that hundreds of thousands of people more knoweldgable and experienced seeking a way to make their company's products better than everyone else's wouldn't have stumbled upon this idea long ago? Oh, I'm sure they did. And then they said "Back to the drawin' board, Cletus!".
Yeah, of course this contraption ain't gonna be anywhere close to the efficiency of a decent/good refrigeration system.. I'm no AC guru, but I understand that refrigeration systems can be very very efficient. 80% on the low end and 90+% on the high end. That's pretty astonishing in the mechanical world, where typical engines are less than half that efficient.
/desktop "silent refrigerators" using peltier chips at Cost-Co for $100.. They're not at all efficient, but if the need scratches... Itch it.
"Invent" is a pretty strong word when you can go and find those mini in-car
If one determines that it takes 5kw to cool a space then that's what it takes. At that point, it dosen't matter except for efficiency and other factors (i.e. environmental concerns) what you use to move the heat, but that's the power you'll need to provide... Unless you're using magic or mutant powers or something.
In this car, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
If it's not at least a shrunken head with the all the essentials tattooed on it's forehead, then I'll be very disappointed!
Hrm, pretty interesting.. I didn't know they they ever ran funny cars on ethanol, always thought it was nitro/methanol. No doubt you're right since you've followed it and I've never, but I think the big thing at the moment is nitro.. So that's probably why I remember nitro.
/. a while a go sounded really promising. Too bad it apparently needs hot gasses and co2 from the coal plants. Heck, even a more efficient battery technology that hasn't been around since the 70's would be a big plus.
I was remembering after I wrote previously that another problem with ethanol was the fuel absorbing water. Apparently it just loves to suck up water. If you had plain steel, galvanized or aluminum fuel lines, that could cause some trouble. Also--it just dosen't have the lubrication value that gasoline has, and on top of that, it tends to clean away the oil film layer between the cylinder and piston if the mixture is too rich.
Methane and dual fuel is good in thoery... But there's some big problems with that, too. We're running very short on the sand that they use to hydraulicly fracture many wells--to extract more gas faster. Apparently, they can compact the shit out of it, along with water and it will still let the gas through--and it's found in only few spots in the country. It's getting scarce and much more expensive recently. They can use alternatives but they're even more expensive.
There's also loads of gas in Alaska, but there's no way to get it to the mainland yet. We already use lots and lots of it for electricity, I just don't think it would be smart to rely on one non-renewable fuel source to do so many things.
It'd be great if we could use some landfill/biomass fuels in cars but there's just not enough demand because the price is too high.
I can't argue about the need for a good clean efficient to store and move fuel. We totally need it, unless we come up with some killer superconductor technology, that is. That story about the bio-diesel from algae on
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that most, if not all, funny cars ran on a very specific nitromethane methanol mix, and ran really low compression ratios... Because the oxygen in the fuel made it much more prone to detonation. I think they're almost functionally identical in many respects to Top Fuel dragsters, except the body.
I'm admit, I'm not a dragster person, but I think NHRA rules are very strict regarding fuel types. Maybe you're thinking about pro mod class, or maybe there's an an ethanol funny car class. I admit, I'm not sure..
I've heard of problems with certian rubbers and plastics being eaten by ehtanol, but with the E10 and E85 mixes coming out, I'd assume that manufactuers have resolved those problems with better suited materials. It's also possible that these problems could be caused by the substances they use to "denature" the alcohol, which includes acetone, methanol, and used to include the ever so friendly M.E.K. Before it was a known cancer causer, that is.. Wouldn't want those poor bastards to get a cheap high and live to tell about it!
I've never heard of engine deposits resulting from ethanol... In fact I'd guess the exact opposite would happen. It's a great solvent, which is part of the rubber problem, and it's a very simple compound compared to gasoline's components... I'd guess that it would losen varnish deposits in the gasoline fuel system and foul the plugs/fuel lines/filters quickly until that stuff was out of the system.
I'll have to look into it, because I've not once heard an anecdote that indicates ethanol causes deposits, and I run around the sand-rail and rock crawling crowd, where some people use it all the time and have great success. It is cheaper and easier to use than race gas, afterall.
Honestly, if it weren't for the fact that someday MS is going to release some future version of DirectX that will eclipse Windows 2000 (and therefore it won't support the latest wiz-bang graphics) I'd never see it a point to upgrade to a newer version.
About the only thing I do with my Windows computer any more is play games. If there are winders only games (i.e. don't work on OSX or WINE) when this comes about I guess I'll have to upgrade if I want to continue playing, but I'll do so very reluctantly if at all.
Hopefully some game developers will take a stand and not use a DirectX version that won't work on Win2k, and instead use OpenGL, etc... But I sincerely doubt that, I must admit.
Also, people ignore that stuff that's already been fermented and dried (mash, or whatever it's called) can indeed be fed to cows, pigs and chickens, etc. also, you don't have to use the best part of the plant to get what the little microbes really want--the sugar and a bit of the other nutrients. Most of the protiens and other good stuff that the farm animals need is left intact.
So you can turn around and mix this stuff into their regular feed... Sounds good to me.
Indeed, IIRC Ethanol is equivalent to 115 Octane or so. That means higher compression ratios than you can do with premium unleaded (before detonation), which means higher thermal efficency.
I've heard of people designing their engines to run ethanol most of the time. They can get about 85-90% of the mileage that they get with gas in the same engine, and that's not bad at all. With turbos/superchargers you can get a bit of leverage, so you don't have to design an engine with a static compression ratio of the 11-12:1 that ethanol works best at--in other words that engine wouldn't run on gasoline.
I don't think it would be too hard to design an engine that had a static compression ratio of 8-9:1 for regular gas, and a few pounds of boost when it runs on ethanol. Best of both worlds, as they say.
Huh, that's pretty strange, I've seen it last week. I like to watch it every so often to affirm to myself how creepy this administration is.
Basically, the video has Donald Rumsfeld being interviewed by some talkshow type people. I don't know what show they're from. They ask him about stating that Iraq was an imminent threat to the US and, presumably, the rest of the world. He says that he never said or wrote that, and that someone else in the administration must have. They then confrot him with two specific quotations by himself explicitly using the words imminent threat. All he can do is sputter and act all abashed--like someone with an iron grip just latched onto his balls and called him on the spot. Fade to black. It's quite hilarious, really.
I imagine that it'll be back up, but I'll try to find a live copy of it. It's too good to be lost. Maybe archive.org has a copy... I'll reply when I find it.
They kick ass hardcore style! >:D
Heck, that's okay... Let's equip the boats with a Phalanx system that can be remote activated/deactivated globally by the Coast Guard in case of emergency.
That'd be good against helicopters, speed boats, and pretty much anything a pirate or terrorist could get their hands on. BZZZZZZZZZZZT! Wooh! p1r4t3 gibs!
Not only that, but fuel for very large diesel engines contains lots of residual oil, and is very high in sulfur. 5000 ppm plus. I understand that England recently traced the source of some acid rain problems to maritime activity. They've practically eliminated their sulfur output from coal power plants, etc, so boats are now the biggest producer.
That heavy diesel fuel is nasty stuff. Basically, its what's left over after they boil off all of the gasses, gasoline, kerosene, road use diesel fuel and the lower grade heating oils. They have to pre-heat it quite a bit to get it to burn in an engine, otherwise it's about as good as filtered crude oil--slightly less viscous.
Nuclear power would be a huge step forward in this area... I can't agree more. Throw in some modern reactor and propulsion designs and you'd have a terribly efficient and manuverable ship. Might even make fuel a bit cheaper for the rest of us if it caught on... Bonus.
No zoning? Holy crap. I thought I liked Tennessee before, but that's just awesome.
Stupid zoning...
Is it any different than "screeners", where they take a video camera into a theatre, then turn around and sell it? Not at all, and they used to make millions doing exactly this.
People apparently aren't too worried about quality. If it means that pirates are going to invest in consumer HD cameras and software to edit it, and all of this, the end result will probably be somewhat better than NTSC. If there is a way around it and potential for profit, it'll be done.
Wow. Just wow. That's where the country is going... And the motto there is "Suck it down bitch!"
Yeah. TV and Budweiser. Screw with those and you'll have a hundred thousand mullets decend upon you with the rage and fury of hell itself!
You certianly can tell where you are with a compass and a halfway decent map. Never been a Boy Scout eh?... There's tons of compass tricks, and other ways to determine your location quite precisely with very basic items.
I'd love to share, but I've got to run. I'm sure that it would'nt be too hard to google.
Depends... An African or European Al-Qaeda member? Laden or unladen--or Bin Laden?!
oO OMG... *I kill myself!* roflwtfbbw.
Really--.mob would be more apt in many ways.