This discussion is getting very far away from the point I originally made
you would be forever having to replace the chemicals because they have evaporated away.
Is rather at odds with
The point is not that it's impossible. The point is that it's a very difficult (more difficult than ink jet printing) and multi-faceted problem.
If the underlying meaning of your statement was that keeping it in a closed container was difficult because of the differences in volatility, viscosity and chemical stability, then why did you word it in such an absolute manner? Or not make any hint to the reasoning behind the statement. If you don't do that, someone is going to come along and point out the flaw in your statement.
Just because I didn't feel the need to enumerate all the problems in my first post I seem to have deeply offended you. Odd.
I was not offended by your not pointing out all the problems, what is irritating is when you respond to my critique of your point as if you had already suggested that there were possible solutions. It is also rather infuriating when you try to nitpick my point, when it was entirely correct, and therefore make an incorrect statement, and then accuse me of splitting hairs when I point that out.
Actually I could imagine some (e.g. vanillin, melting point 80C and a VERY important aroma chemical) could clog the heads.
That is rather interesting. In the non-synthesised world is this carried to the nose as a solid, and then dissolved in mucus? Or is it dissolved in moisture in the air?
The solvent in printer ink is volatile, not the ink itself.
Not only is that attempting to split hairs, it is also wrong.
You are shifting ground. No where in
Couple that with the fact that aroma chemicals are, by necessity, volatile (otherwise you couldn't smell them) and you have a real problem with shelf-life too. If you had an olfactometer with a few hundred chemicals for producing smells, you would be forever having to replace the chemicals because they have evaporated away.
do you hint at material selection or seal problems. Reading through your post, the implication is that volatility isn't a problem that had to be overcome with printers.
As for different viscosities; you could mix them with additives to reduce volatility and viscosity.
One of the main problems with ink jets was clogging, because the ink has suspended solids in it, so as it dried it left gunge on the head. You would not have this problem with scents as they will evaporate completely. Also they do not need to be fired accurately only a piece of paper, they just need to be allowed to escape.
Something like an aerosol can is a good example of how volatility and viscosity wouldn't be much of an issue. You can have extremely volatile and low viscosity chemicals (for example propanone) contained within a canister, under pressure (making the whole thing even harder!), yet it can all be effectively held back with a simple, cheap valve.
The solvent in printer ink is volatile, not the ink itself.
Incorrect. Inks are liquids with suspended pigments/dyes in them. Once the solvent (water in most cases) evaporates it leaves the pigment/dye. At that point it is no longer ink. Therefore, it is correct to say that the ink is volatile, but not the pigments within them.
I can see that you would need to choose the material you manufactured your cartridge out of carefully, but I think something like polyethylene would be suitable. However that is not the problem you implied in this quote:
Couple that with the fact that aroma chemicals are, by necessity, volatile (otherwise you couldn't smell them) and you have a real problem with shelf-life too. If you had an olfactometer with a few hundred chemicals for producing smells, you would be forever having to replace the chemicals because they have evaporated away.
It seemed to me strange that you would bring up that problem when it had already been solved by the product you were making a comparison with (a printer).
you would be forever having to replace the chemicals because they have evaporated away.
I can't see that that would be a problem. Printer ink is volatile, but that has a reasonable shelf life. You just keep it in a closed container until it is actually needed. In fact, if you didn't do that then your "olfactometer" (surely it would be more a olfactoducer) would constantly be producing the biggest concoction of scents it could muster.
The silica particles are extremely fine. They are invisible to the naked eye. I can vouch for that as I have them drifting over me now in Cambridge, England. You could not mount a filter nearly big enough for it to effectively filter out the particles yet allow enough airflow to keep the engines running.
Actually the problem, as I understand it, is that the silica particles in the ash cloud (similar to very fine grains of sand, or glass) are melted by the heat of the engine, then then collide with the leading edge of the turbine blades and condense. This is bad for a number of reasons, firstly it expands that surface and significantly reduces the efficiency of the engine. More importantly however, it has a different coefficient of thermal expansion to the titanium blade, and very quickly it will start to crack and break away. In this process it takes small chunks of the blade with it. The process causes a lot of pitting in the leading edge of the blade.
The thermal spraying department at my work do a lot of research into repairing blades that have suffered from this problem. Most often it has been caused by planes flying through sand storms in a desert, but the effect is just the same. One of the methods of repairing the blade is to remove enough of the titanium so that you can plasma spray a ceramic in its place to make the blade the right size again.
Yes that is very true, however they can also choose the market that they want/can afford to aim at. If they want blu-ray to become universal then they know that they have to price low. But they will not be willing to price at the same price as DVD drives because they need to get the money back on their investment pronto. It would also be a marketing nightmare; consumers want to feel that they are buying something that is better than what they already have. If it costs the same price, then they wont feel that they are investing in something better, and wont be motivated to buy. As for whether Blu-rays are worth it, I have to say when I took the plunge and bought an HD monitor and blu-ray drive there was not as bigger improvement as I was hoping for. However I definitely think that there is a worthwhile improvement, and I am glad I took the plunge. Plus the extra res for my desktop is really nice.
That is ridiculous, do you really think that when you buy hardware it should be priced purely on how much it cost to manufacture that unit? No, you are paying for the research. Optical drive companies have just spent incredibly sums of money researching, designing, and putting into manufacture blu-ray drives, they are not going to sell them at the same price as technology which has paid back all of its investment years ago. If they have been colluding on prices, then that is a totally different matter, and they should be made to pay dearly for it.
You completely misunderstood his post. His point was that grad students conducting a long term research project probably would have thought about this and would have designed their experiments and analysis accordingly. Simply writing off the study by saying "Correlation does not equal Causation" is unfair and, unfortunately for Chapter80, demonstrates a certain amount idiocy.
I don't agree. Demand for PC games is still very high, and although they may not be coming out at the same time, PC versions of games are still coming out in decent numbers. There are also plenty of titles that are released exclusively on PC, like Crysis.
Also most hardcore gamers with the will to get the best out of their system use Vista64. There are just so many advantages, like DX10, proper 64bit support, better multi-core support, etc... I use Vista and have appsolutely no problems with it. You just have to set it up correctly, get rid of the stupid theme and animations, and disable things like the UAC and you have a brilliant OS with basically no drawbacks compared to XP (on a recent computer). And I'm not a M$ lover, I use Ubuntu for a lot of my desktop work.
This is the censored database, there is nothing interesting or even slightly embarrassing left in here. Almost all of the scandals exposed by the Telegraph from their database has been censored out of this one, and there are huge amounts of other blanked out parts. I'm afraid that we will never know just how bad this got.
I don't think I am stressing my computer as much as you, I am using it as a desktop and occasional gaming computer. I have done some serious re encoding of HD video which meant that I needed to leave it of for a few days straight with all 4 cores maxed out constantly, it handled that fine. I also find that it runs Autodesk AutoDAC, Inventor and Mechanical all very well, AutoCAD and Inventor are 64bit, and load noticeably quicker than in XP 32bit. As Allador said, it may well be that you have a shoddy driver or something that is causing instabilities, with some background checks on your hardware Google could throw some light on it, but you may spend a long time trawling.
This guy will be modded down, unfortunately. I totally agree, I have been using Vista 64bit for over a year now, it has crashed on me twice in that time. My XP machine is far less stable. Also, because of its 64bit capabilities and its far better use of multiple cores (I have a quad core), I have found a performance increase over XP. Its performance has also remained, even though I have added a large amount of apps to it, it does not seem to suffer from slowing down to a slow grind after a few months of use, like XP does. There are some stupid, irritating features to it, like the UAC, driver signing, aero theme...etc. Luckily all of these features can be turned off. The only 2 problems I have with it is the integration of DRM, and the lack of EAX support (although this is being solved by drivers).
Just because there are three negatives in a sentence doesn't mean it is a triple negative; for that the negatives need to be applied to the same subject, which they are not.
Mathmatically that would decrease the rate of crime a bit when it was introduced, then it would level off, because you would just have a few more criminals in prison all the time. Also cameras are their own worst enemy when it comes to judging them with statistics. Obviously crime rates are actually just reported crime/crime that we know about. Obviously cameras mean that we see more of the crime that happens, thus their effect of reducing crime can be cancelled out in the statistics by the extra crime they let us know about.
Placing that information in a database that the government can access at will is quite another.
They will not access the data without having reason to. The legal position of keeping data on somebody and actually looking up the data is completely different, the former is not spying, the latter is; therefore doing it without due cause is against the law.
I can understand cameras limited to busy public areas like train stations, but surveillance for surveillance's sake is a solution to what problem?
So you accept that they are placed in very busy places with good reason, logically less busy places it would have a similar effect, but obviously not as often, because there are less people around. Myself I think that very busy places are not as important to CCTV as less busy places (obviously there is a line beyond which this does not apply, I wouldn't put CCTV atop a mountain) because places that are very busy will be regulated by the vast proportion of well meaning citizens that are present.
Overall I don't think that your argument linking the two matters stands, because you cant access a CCTV system like you can a database of bank card and mobile phone records. You cant just shove "John Smith" into a search engine and it show you the instances he has appeared on camera (unless they have been working on some serious advances in facial recognition software, and increased the quality of the average CCTV system ten fold).
Slashdot Mirror
This discussion is getting very far away from the point I originally made
you would be forever having to replace the chemicals because they have evaporated away.
Is rather at odds with
The point is not that it's impossible. The point is that it's a very difficult (more difficult than ink jet printing) and multi-faceted problem.
If the underlying meaning of your statement was that keeping it in a closed container was difficult because of the differences in volatility, viscosity and chemical stability, then why did you word it in such an absolute manner? Or not make any hint to the reasoning behind the statement. If you don't do that, someone is going to come along and point out the flaw in your statement.
Just because I didn't feel the need to enumerate all the problems in my first post I seem to have deeply offended you. Odd.
I was not offended by your not pointing out all the problems, what is irritating is when you respond to my critique of your point as if you had already suggested that there were possible solutions. It is also rather infuriating when you try to nitpick my point, when it was entirely correct, and therefore make an incorrect statement, and then accuse me of splitting hairs when I point that out.
Actually I could imagine some (e.g. vanillin, melting point 80C and a VERY important aroma chemical) could clog the heads.
That is rather interesting. In the non-synthesised world is this carried to the nose as a solid, and then dissolved in mucus? Or is it dissolved in moisture in the air?
I'm splitting hairs!?
The solvent in printer ink is volatile, not the ink itself.
Not only is that attempting to split hairs, it is also wrong.
You are shifting ground. No where in
Couple that with the fact that aroma chemicals are, by necessity, volatile (otherwise you couldn't smell them) and you have a real problem with shelf-life too. If you had an olfactometer with a few hundred chemicals for producing smells, you would be forever having to replace the chemicals because they have evaporated away.
do you hint at material selection or seal problems. Reading through your post, the implication is that volatility isn't a problem that had to be overcome with printers.
As for different viscosities; you could mix them with additives to reduce volatility and viscosity.
One of the main problems with ink jets was clogging, because the ink has suspended solids in it, so as it dried it left gunge on the head. You would not have this problem with scents as they will evaporate completely.
Also they do not need to be fired accurately only a piece of paper, they just need to be allowed to escape.
Something like an aerosol can is a good example of how volatility and viscosity wouldn't be much of an issue. You can have extremely volatile and low viscosity chemicals (for example propanone) contained within a canister, under pressure (making the whole thing even harder!), yet it can all be effectively held back with a simple, cheap valve.
The solvent in printer ink is volatile, not the ink itself.
Incorrect. Inks are liquids with suspended pigments/dyes in them. Once the solvent (water in most cases) evaporates it leaves the pigment/dye. At that point it is no longer ink. Therefore, it is correct to say that the ink is volatile, but not the pigments within them.
I can see that you would need to choose the material you manufactured your cartridge out of carefully, but I think something like polyethylene would be suitable. However that is not the problem you implied in this quote:
Couple that with the fact that aroma chemicals are, by necessity, volatile (otherwise you couldn't smell them) and you have a real problem with shelf-life too. If you had an olfactometer with a few hundred chemicals for producing smells, you would be forever having to replace the chemicals because they have evaporated away.
It seemed to me strange that you would bring up that problem when it had already been solved by the product you were making a comparison with (a printer).
you would be forever having to replace the chemicals because they have evaporated away.
I can't see that that would be a problem. Printer ink is volatile, but that has a reasonable shelf life. You just keep it in a closed container until it is actually needed. In fact, if you didn't do that then your "olfactometer" (surely it would be more a olfactoducer) would constantly be producing the biggest concoction of scents it could muster.
The silica particles are extremely fine. They are invisible to the naked eye. I can vouch for that as I have them drifting over me now in Cambridge, England. You could not mount a filter nearly big enough for it to effectively filter out the particles yet allow enough airflow to keep the engines running.
Actually the problem, as I understand it, is that the silica particles in the ash cloud (similar to very fine grains of sand, or glass) are melted by the heat of the engine, then then collide with the leading edge of the turbine blades and condense. This is bad for a number of reasons, firstly it expands that surface and significantly reduces the efficiency of the engine. More importantly however, it has a different coefficient of thermal expansion to the titanium blade, and very quickly it will start to crack and break away. In this process it takes small chunks of the blade with it. The process causes a lot of pitting in the leading edge of the blade.
The thermal spraying department at my work do a lot of research into repairing blades that have suffered from this problem. Most often it has been caused by planes flying through sand storms in a desert, but the effect is just the same. One of the methods of repairing the blade is to remove enough of the titanium so that you can plasma spray a ceramic in its place to make the blade the right size again.
Yeah, it was done by a group of students at MIT on a budget of about half this one I believe. I'm pretty sure it appeared on slashdot.
You are completely underestimating the amount of money they have put into R&D here. I would not be surprised if they are still in the red.
They price at what the market will bear.
Yes that is very true, however they can also choose the market that they want/can afford to aim at. If they want blu-ray to become universal then they know that they have to price low. But they will not be willing to price at the same price as DVD drives because they need to get the money back on their investment pronto. It would also be a marketing nightmare; consumers want to feel that they are buying something that is better than what they already have. If it costs the same price, then they wont feel that they are investing in something better, and wont be motivated to buy.
As for whether Blu-rays are worth it, I have to say when I took the plunge and bought an HD monitor and blu-ray drive there was not as bigger improvement as I was hoping for. However I definitely think that there is a worthwhile improvement, and I am glad I took the plunge. Plus the extra res for my desktop is really nice.
That is ridiculous, do you really think that when you buy hardware it should be priced purely on how much it cost to manufacture that unit?
No, you are paying for the research. Optical drive companies have just spent incredibly sums of money researching, designing, and putting into manufacture blu-ray drives, they are not going to sell them at the same price as technology which has paid back all of its investment years ago.
If they have been colluding on prices, then that is a totally different matter, and they should be made to pay dearly for it.
I thought the only rule of first post is that you do not talk about first post.
nice parallel. same happens with "Rocking in the Free World"
You completely misunderstood his post.
His point was that grad students conducting a long term research project probably would have thought about this and would have designed their experiments and analysis accordingly. Simply writing off the study by saying "Correlation does not equal Causation" is unfair and, unfortunately for Chapter80, demonstrates a certain amount idiocy.
Please keep bigoted opinions to yourself.
I don't agree. Demand for PC games is still very high, and although they may not be coming out at the same time, PC versions of games are still coming out in decent numbers. There are also plenty of titles that are released exclusively on PC, like Crysis.
Also most hardcore gamers with the will to get the best out of their system use Vista64. There are just so many advantages, like DX10, proper 64bit support, better multi-core support, etc... I use Vista and have appsolutely no problems with it. You just have to set it up correctly, get rid of the stupid theme and animations, and disable things like the UAC and you have a brilliant OS with basically no drawbacks compared to XP (on a recent computer). And I'm not a M$ lover, I use Ubuntu for a lot of my desktop work.
Also, PCs have DRM too, its bloody irritating!
Man, they are really taking this obesity crisis seriously!
This is the censored database, there is nothing interesting or even slightly embarrassing left in here. Almost all of the scandals exposed by the Telegraph from their database has been censored out of this one, and there are huge amounts of other blanked out parts. I'm afraid that we will never know just how bad this got.
Hahahaha! Funniest wit I have heard all day, thank you good sir! If I had mod points you would get one.
I for one welcome our new pirate overlords.
I don't think I am stressing my computer as much as you, I am using it as a desktop and occasional gaming computer. I have done some serious re encoding of HD video which meant that I needed to leave it of for a few days straight with all 4 cores maxed out constantly, it handled that fine. I also find that it runs Autodesk AutoDAC, Inventor and Mechanical all very well, AutoCAD and Inventor are 64bit, and load noticeably quicker than in XP 32bit. As Allador said, it may well be that you have a shoddy driver or something that is causing instabilities, with some background checks on your hardware Google could throw some light on it, but you may spend a long time trawling.
This guy will be modded down, unfortunately. I totally agree, I have been using Vista 64bit for over a year now, it has crashed on me twice in that time. My XP machine is far less stable. Also, because of its 64bit capabilities and its far better use of multiple cores (I have a quad core), I have found a performance increase over XP. Its performance has also remained, even though I have added a large amount of apps to it, it does not seem to suffer from slowing down to a slow grind after a few months of use, like XP does. There are some stupid, irritating features to it, like the UAC, driver signing, aero theme...etc. Luckily all of these features can be turned off. The only 2 problems I have with it is the integration of DRM, and the lack of EAX support (although this is being solved by drivers).
darn, used up all my mod points, for the love of all that is holy, mod this guy up!
Just because there are three negatives in a sentence doesn't mean it is a triple negative; for that the negatives need to be applied to the same subject, which they are not.
Mathmatically that would decrease the rate of crime a bit when it was introduced, then it would level off, because you would just have a few more criminals in prison all the time.
Also cameras are their own worst enemy when it comes to judging them with statistics. Obviously crime rates are actually just reported crime/crime that we know about. Obviously cameras mean that we see more of the crime that happens, thus their effect of reducing crime can be cancelled out in the statistics by the extra crime they let us know about.
Placing that information in a database that the government can access at will is quite another.
They will not access the data without having reason to. The legal position of keeping data on somebody and actually looking up the data is completely different, the former is not spying, the latter is; therefore doing it without due cause is against the law.
I can understand cameras limited to busy public areas like train stations, but surveillance for surveillance's sake is a solution to what problem?
So you accept that they are placed in very busy places with good reason, logically less busy places it would have a similar effect, but obviously not as often, because there are less people around. Myself I think that very busy places are not as important to CCTV as less busy places (obviously there is a line beyond which this does not apply, I wouldn't put CCTV atop a mountain) because places that are very busy will be regulated by the vast proportion of well meaning citizens that are present.
Overall I don't think that your argument linking the two matters stands, because you cant access a CCTV system like you can a database of bank card and mobile phone records. You cant just shove "John Smith" into a search engine and it show you the instances he has appeared on camera (unless they have been working on some serious advances in facial recognition software, and increased the quality of the average CCTV system ten fold).