Li-ion batteries can be pretty dangerous if quality control isn't kept tight. That's not usually something the consumer has a lot of direct control over. It's a lot easier to spot a leaky gas tank than a poorly-built battery.
That said, Li-Po batteries are a much safer design.
"Reserves", for anything (Lithium, oil, whatever), are calculated according to what is predicted to be economically feasible to extract within the near future. If something suddenly spikes demand, resulting in a higher price, then new sources "magically" become available. That's why Malthusian disasters haven't happened.
But broadly speaking, yes, there's probably not enough Lithium in the Earth's crust to run all the cars and houses like this.
'The fear is that if you pursue computer science, you will be stuck in a basement, writing code. That is absolutely not the reality.'"
Instead, you'll be stuck in a cube farm doing TPS reports. Which is much, much worse than a basement. I've done the cube farm thing and they'd have to drag me back.
And when the 1st world countries started forcing scrubbers on coal-burning plants, the companies were complaining about lost profits. Somehow, things still went along.
Algebra is such a hack, too. People should stick with addition and subtraction. And even subtraction should just be done with addition of negative numbers.
mod_php has never integrated into Apache nearly as deep as mod_perl did. That is, lower level Apache APIs are not exposed to PHP. Using mod_php is an acceptable replacement for CGIs, but mod_perl does a lot more than that. That means taking over the entire server life cycle handlers to the point where, in Apache2, you can implement (say) a Gopher server if you want.
mod_perl is not a hack. PHP, as a language and an API, very much is.
Do emails to a congressman really have any influence whatsoever?
The answer is a firm "it depends". On an issue like health care, where everybody has an opinion and it's talked about endlessly in the media, it wouldn't. But issues like that make up only a small part of what congress does. Even one email (or better, print it out and snail mail it) on a lesser known issue is probably the only communication a given congress critter has from their constituents on an issue, and ten saying broadly the same thing would be huge. Doubly so if your congress critter is on a committee for that issue.
Ultimately, all that lobbying money is for the express purpose of getting reelected, and all the money in the world won't get them that if they're fundamentally opposed to their voters' preferences.
You couldn't buy it because 2-strokes put out much worse NOx emissions due to burning oil by design. Those kinds of emissions are regulated more heavily in the US than Europe. Oil injection/direct injection helps with this, but NOx regulations keep getting tighter, especially in California. Not just because California is a nanny state (although that's part of it), but also because they have some of the smoggiest cities in the world due to geography.
2-strokes also have a very tight power curve due to losing some of the fresh charge out the exhaust up until exhaust harmonics kick in to push it back. The Lotus design here specifically addresses that problem with a mechanism to shut the exhaust port before the cylinder rises to cover it. Quite clever!
I'm surprised this is coming out of Lotus. They're normally thought of as a chassis company, not a powertrain company. They build supercars with an engine out of a Corolla, after all.
The problem with food shortages isn't a matter of having enough food, it's getting it to where it needs to go. The US alone can massively overshoot what the world needs in food production, but then the food rots in harbors while petty local bureaucrats and dictators hold up the paperwork.
They were vital at Midway 6 months after Pearl. The result there fundamentally changed how the war in the Pacific was fought, but probably didn't change the ultimate outcome. The Axis powers combined simply didn't have the industrial output to keep up in a prolonged war.
Also, it should be noted that most of those carriers that came later were "jeep" carriers; smaller ones intended to hang back and resupply the bigger ones. With all the island-hopping necessary in the South Pacific, they were logistically valuable, but they weren't the full sized ones.
Not claimed, really--American codebreakers knew about it before their ambassador did. And then the codebreakers got held up in bureaucracy around the military and couldn't warn Pearl Harbor in time. Which is oddly symmetrical, somehow.
You're missing the point, denying the Japanese access to steal and other resources during wartime was, for all intents and purposes, and act of war.
Except in one important way: letting Japan shoot the first actual bullet gave Hitler a reason to ignore the mutual defense treaty of the Axis powers, since the treaty specified that they'd only have to come to each other's aid if they were attacked first. Hitler choose not to interpret it that way, but you could have theoretically had a situation where the US mopped up Japan before committing to anything in Europe.
There's also the thought that Roosevelt wasn't naive like Wilson during the last go-round, and knew that the US going to war was inevitable. You might as well stage things beforehand to give the best possible position from the outset.
Finally, Japan at the time had an almost savage military, invading islands all over the Pacific Rim and breaking into China when it was in the middle of a civil war. Villages were burned, and women were raped. Blockading supplies was not only strategically sound, but morally praiseworthy.
Granted, this was from the movie, but leaving planes out on the airfield and lots of shore leave for the sailors on the ships docked at Pearl Harbor is not what I'd call being on alert.
Planes were out on the field because they thought the biggest threat was from Japanese spys laying bombs in the hangers. They put them all together so they'd be easier to guard. To their credit, not one plane was lost due to a Japanese spy.
It's an interesting case of a defense against one form of attack making you more vulnerable against another.
Today's intelligence agencies have another problem altogether — more information than they can deal with . ..
This is the ultimate argument against those defending increased surveillance activities to fight terrorism (or any other crime). Intelligence agencies already have way more information than they can deal with just from public sources. 99.999% of it is the noise of people going about their normal lives. Getting out the interesting bits is a hard problem, and adding more is only going to slow you down. It can help if you've already nailed down a good list of suspects and therefore have a small, targeted list of people to watch. But if that's the case, what's the big deal about getting a warrant?
No, you were quite clear. I'm saying you're simply wrong. Scientists rabidly tear apart each other's work to find flaws. "Buying facts" is not something you can get away with in the peer review process.
Accept the results of the peer review process or don't. If you don't, have a specific reason. If you do, you can always change your mind later. That's how science works.
In many ways, the parts lacking in realism make the game harder then real life. Standard gamepad controllers don't have nearly the range of motion of an actual wheel, and smoothly applying acceleration through a corner is almost impossible. While that much can be fixed by buying a good racing wheel and pedal setup, there are more fundamental limitations, too. It important to be able to feel how the car responds via g-forces, and until somebody invents artificial gravity, it's simply impossible to simulate this except through very crude methods. The effect becomes more dramatic as the car's performance goes up. Shutting off one of your senses is bound to have an affect.
On the plus side for games (that is, things that increase your times over the real world), the simulation will remove any fear you might have from smashing into a wall. This is probably the main reason why game times tend to be higher than real world times around the same track.
The best way to think about Gran Turismo compared to real racing is to consider a similar but different type of racing, much like difference between a track day car and a go kart. Go karts need many of the same skills, but they're not exactly alike. That hasn't stopped F1 teams from recruiting promising young go kart drivers before they're even old enough to have a license. The differences can be smoothed out later with training.
The peer review process already takes care of that. If the data is correct, and the analysis is correct, then the conclusions are likely correct. If you still think the funding matters, then repeat the experiment. If you get the same results, then repeat it again. Repeat as much as you want. If you're still getting the same results, then accept the conclusions as stated.
Complaining about who funded the research is a waste of effort. Somebody with a stake in the results funded the research; otherwise, why did they spend the money? Governments might invest in research without a specific reason, but there's only so much government funding to go around, and for high political studies, people will still claim there was a special interest somewhere in the background. It's all nonsense--either find a flaw in the study itself or accept the results.
My sister was just fine for years. Then I bought a pet rock. After I got the pet rock, my sister was bitten by a moose. How can the government allow these things to be sold?!!
Still, without getting really expensive, there isn't much homeowners can do about dirty power, except scream uselessly into the brick wall known as the power company. New lighting technology is going to have to cope with this situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Alternatively: doing a few launches a year makes it impossible to take advantage of economies of scale.
Li-ion batteries can be pretty dangerous if quality control isn't kept tight. That's not usually something the consumer has a lot of direct control over. It's a lot easier to spot a leaky gas tank than a poorly-built battery.
That said, Li-Po batteries are a much safer design.
"Reserves", for anything (Lithium, oil, whatever), are calculated according to what is predicted to be economically feasible to extract within the near future. If something suddenly spikes demand, resulting in a higher price, then new sources "magically" become available. That's why Malthusian disasters haven't happened.
But broadly speaking, yes, there's probably not enough Lithium in the Earth's crust to run all the cars and houses like this.
'The fear is that if you pursue computer science, you will be stuck in a basement, writing code. That is absolutely not the reality.'"
Instead, you'll be stuck in a cube farm doing TPS reports. Which is much, much worse than a basement. I've done the cube farm thing and they'd have to drag me back.
And when the 1st world countries started forcing scrubbers on coal-burning plants, the companies were complaining about lost profits. Somehow, things still went along.
Algebra is such a hack, too. People should stick with addition and subtraction. And even subtraction should just be done with addition of negative numbers.
You realize there's way more to the Apache API than URL handling, right?
[citation needed]. I've been googling around, and it does not appear that the Apache API is exposed to PHP at all.
mod_php has never integrated into Apache nearly as deep as mod_perl did. That is, lower level Apache APIs are not exposed to PHP. Using mod_php is an acceptable replacement for CGIs, but mod_perl does a lot more than that. That means taking over the entire server life cycle handlers to the point where, in Apache2, you can implement (say) a Gopher server if you want.
mod_perl is not a hack. PHP, as a language and an API, very much is.
Let's put it this way: I'm not even sure if my own comment was in support of endlessly quoting Monty Python, or in satirizing that position.
The Monty Python joke wasn't the first post on this story? Fail.
Do emails to a congressman really have any influence whatsoever?
The answer is a firm "it depends". On an issue like health care, where everybody has an opinion and it's talked about endlessly in the media, it wouldn't. But issues like that make up only a small part of what congress does. Even one email (or better, print it out and snail mail it) on a lesser known issue is probably the only communication a given congress critter has from their constituents on an issue, and ten saying broadly the same thing would be huge. Doubly so if your congress critter is on a committee for that issue.
Ultimately, all that lobbying money is for the express purpose of getting reelected, and all the money in the world won't get them that if they're fundamentally opposed to their voters' preferences.
You couldn't buy it because 2-strokes put out much worse NOx emissions due to burning oil by design. Those kinds of emissions are regulated more heavily in the US than Europe. Oil injection/direct injection helps with this, but NOx regulations keep getting tighter, especially in California. Not just because California is a nanny state (although that's part of it), but also because they have some of the smoggiest cities in the world due to geography.
2-strokes also have a very tight power curve due to losing some of the fresh charge out the exhaust up until exhaust harmonics kick in to push it back. The Lotus design here specifically addresses that problem with a mechanism to shut the exhaust port before the cylinder rises to cover it. Quite clever!
I'm surprised this is coming out of Lotus. They're normally thought of as a chassis company, not a powertrain company. They build supercars with an engine out of a Corolla, after all.
The problem with food shortages isn't a matter of having enough food, it's getting it to where it needs to go. The US alone can massively overshoot what the world needs in food production, but then the food rots in harbors while petty local bureaucrats and dictators hold up the paperwork.
They were vital at Midway 6 months after Pearl. The result there fundamentally changed how the war in the Pacific was fought, but probably didn't change the ultimate outcome. The Axis powers combined simply didn't have the industrial output to keep up in a prolonged war.
Also, it should be noted that most of those carriers that came later were "jeep" carriers; smaller ones intended to hang back and resupply the bigger ones. With all the island-hopping necessary in the South Pacific, they were logistically valuable, but they weren't the full sized ones.
Not claimed, really--American codebreakers knew about it before their ambassador did. And then the codebreakers got held up in bureaucracy around the military and couldn't warn Pearl Harbor in time. Which is oddly symmetrical, somehow.
You're missing the point, denying the Japanese access to steal and other resources during wartime was, for all intents and purposes, and act of war.
Except in one important way: letting Japan shoot the first actual bullet gave Hitler a reason to ignore the mutual defense treaty of the Axis powers, since the treaty specified that they'd only have to come to each other's aid if they were attacked first. Hitler choose not to interpret it that way, but you could have theoretically had a situation where the US mopped up Japan before committing to anything in Europe.
There's also the thought that Roosevelt wasn't naive like Wilson during the last go-round, and knew that the US going to war was inevitable. You might as well stage things beforehand to give the best possible position from the outset.
Finally, Japan at the time had an almost savage military, invading islands all over the Pacific Rim and breaking into China when it was in the middle of a civil war. Villages were burned, and women were raped. Blockading supplies was not only strategically sound, but morally praiseworthy.
Strictly speaking, they intended to declare war first. Things just got held up in the bureaucracy around the embassy.
Granted, this was from the movie, but leaving planes out on the airfield and lots of shore leave for the sailors on the ships docked at Pearl Harbor is not what I'd call being on alert.
Planes were out on the field because they thought the biggest threat was from Japanese spys laying bombs in the hangers. They put them all together so they'd be easier to guard. To their credit, not one plane was lost due to a Japanese spy.
It's an interesting case of a defense against one form of attack making you more vulnerable against another.
Today's intelligence agencies have another problem altogether — more information than they can deal with . . .
This is the ultimate argument against those defending increased surveillance activities to fight terrorism (or any other crime). Intelligence agencies already have way more information than they can deal with just from public sources. 99.999% of it is the noise of people going about their normal lives. Getting out the interesting bits is a hard problem, and adding more is only going to slow you down. It can help if you've already nailed down a good list of suspects and therefore have a small, targeted list of people to watch. But if that's the case, what's the big deal about getting a warrant?
No, you were quite clear. I'm saying you're simply wrong. Scientists rabidly tear apart each other's work to find flaws. "Buying facts" is not something you can get away with in the peer review process.
Accept the results of the peer review process or don't. If you don't, have a specific reason. If you do, you can always change your mind later. That's how science works.
In many ways, the parts lacking in realism make the game harder then real life. Standard gamepad controllers don't have nearly the range of motion of an actual wheel, and smoothly applying acceleration through a corner is almost impossible. While that much can be fixed by buying a good racing wheel and pedal setup, there are more fundamental limitations, too. It important to be able to feel how the car responds via g-forces, and until somebody invents artificial gravity, it's simply impossible to simulate this except through very crude methods. The effect becomes more dramatic as the car's performance goes up. Shutting off one of your senses is bound to have an affect.
On the plus side for games (that is, things that increase your times over the real world), the simulation will remove any fear you might have from smashing into a wall. This is probably the main reason why game times tend to be higher than real world times around the same track.
The best way to think about Gran Turismo compared to real racing is to consider a similar but different type of racing, much like difference between a track day car and a go kart. Go karts need many of the same skills, but they're not exactly alike. That hasn't stopped F1 teams from recruiting promising young go kart drivers before they're even old enough to have a license. The differences can be smoothed out later with training.
The peer review process already takes care of that. If the data is correct, and the analysis is correct, then the conclusions are likely correct. If you still think the funding matters, then repeat the experiment. If you get the same results, then repeat it again. Repeat as much as you want. If you're still getting the same results, then accept the conclusions as stated.
Complaining about who funded the research is a waste of effort. Somebody with a stake in the results funded the research; otherwise, why did they spend the money? Governments might invest in research without a specific reason, but there's only so much government funding to go around, and for high political studies, people will still claim there was a special interest somewhere in the background. It's all nonsense--either find a flaw in the study itself or accept the results.
My sister was just fine for years. Then I bought a pet rock. After I got the pet rock, my sister was bitten by a moose. How can the government allow these things to be sold?!!
Still, without getting really expensive, there isn't much homeowners can do about dirty power, except scream uselessly into the brick wall known as the power company. New lighting technology is going to have to cope with this situation.