It's all pretty funny really. They have malware because they're heavy uses of American Software. ie They NEED their hated enemy to make their software.
You are a tiny fraction of 1% of the population that the education system doesn't have to worry about. No need to be bitter about it. Afterall you're (apprently) earning a decent salary without having invested in years of your own education. Most of us have not been able to do that.
While Scientific Linux, Centos and RHEL are pervasive in World Large Hardon Collider computing grid (WLCG) and on the local computing clusters involved in LHC computing, Ubuntu isn't.
Full stop.
Ubuntu should get over itself and get back to actually supporting it's users as opposed to shipping half baked software (for example they shipped an early development release of abiword) from debian testing then not updating it even though it's full of bugs and upstream fixes them.
Debian-testing ships development software but it also updates it. This is fine. It is what it says it is. Ubuntu doesn't update, so why ship Debian-testing packages?
He's successful because NL batters have never seen a knuckleball before. Batters need to learn how to get hits off him, but they can't because they won't face him often enough. So he benefits by being a freak just like lefties and sidearms.
I don't think so. If it was just familiarity, catchers would have no trouble with their own pitcher. But catchers often have just as much trouble as the batters.
It's nice to see the pracitioner of a fine skill be successful where traditionally the best pitcher is the one who can throw the fastest (under control of course).
A similar scenario happens in cricker where a great spin bowler can dismantle a team. Until the 1990's bowling in cricket was dominated by extreme speed where the best bowlers could bowl at over 150 Km/Hr. Along comes Shane Warne, considered the 2nd most influential cricketer in the 20th century who bowls at less than 100 Km/Hr but with a wicked spin and fantastic control.
Check out the "Gatting ball" video below for a delivery of pure beauty.
The OLPC project specifically addresses tech support and is included in the budget. Also the software stackis totally different to a standard PC. It is focussed on collaborative learning and is totally open-sourced. It is very different to a standard commercial software distribution with canned teaching.
As many other people have pointed out travelling around the world's oceans with nothing but renewable energy has been done for several centuries now and far faster. The 2009 round the world race was won in 89 days http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vend%C3%A9e_Globe#2008-2009 as opposed to the 2 years required to complete the journey with solar power. There is a reason that wind is almost cost competitive (in some places) with fossil fuels and solar is still a factor 4 times more expensive even in the sunniest climates. The *power density* in a good stiff breeze is substantially greater than the energy density of direct sunlight. It costs money to build structures to concentrate direct sunlight into the kind of power density were used to from hydro, fossil fuels and nuclear.
Those 3 things are technologies developed by Experimental Particle Physicists who wanted to test Particle Physics Theory.
Then there is this little thing called the world-wide-web invented by this guy Tim Burners-Lee to enable Particle Physics working at CERN to better collaborate.
Do these spin-offs count to CERN or Particle Physics net economic worth?
WP7 has been on the market for over a year. In that time they've atacted 1.1 million FB users. Further up the thread you see there 99 million IOS FB users and 88 million Android FB users. So WP7 is around 1% of market. Like Linux on the desktop. It has no traction. On the other hand MS has a truck load of money in the bank and will keep on trying.
The orginal 1972 "Blue Marble" showed a beautiful collection of cold front spun up out of antartica. It would be great to get some composite images of the other side the world too.
How would you know it's a good story without reading more than a few chapters?
I think it's a good story because I've read it more than a dozen times. It is by far my most read book. I don't think I've managed to read another book more than twice.
"The steel containment vessel provides the heat transfer surface that removes heat from inside the containment and rejects it to the atmosphere. Heat is removed from the containment vessel by continuous natural circulation flow of air. During an accident, the air cooling is supplemented by evaporation of water. The water drains by gravity from a tank located on top of the containment shield building.
Calculations have shown the AP1000 to have a significantly reduced large release frequency following a severe accident core damage scenario. With only the normal PCS air cooling, the containment stays well below the predicted failure pressure for at least 24 hours. Other factors include improved containment isolation and reduced potential for LOCAs outside of containment. This improved containment performance supports the technical basis for simplification of offsite emergency planning.".......
"Long-term accident mitigation - A major safety advantage of the AP1000 versus current-day PWRs is that long-term accident mitigation is maintained by the passive safety systems without operator action and without reliance on offsite or onsite ac power sources. For the limiting design basis accidents, the core coolant inventory in the containment for recirculation cooling and boration of the core is sufficient to last for at least 30 days, even if inventory is lost at the design basis containment leak rate."......
Where does that document say things go to hell after 3 days if the coolant is not topped up? It seems to me that 60 MW of heat could easily be removed via natural convection over the large surface area of the steel containment vessel.
Shows the curve for the Fukoshima reactors. The table shows the decay heat dropping to 0.5% of full power after 3 days (not the 0.2% I stated above).
I agree that the sensible and prudent thing to do would be to top up the water in the tank (lets face it, you have 3 days to get a firetruck onsite) . In any case the most exhaustive analysis of the AP1000 estimates a large radiative leakage at 1x10^-7 per reactor year. I would happily take those odds. My per year risk of dying through accidents is 1x10-3 years. So I'm 10^-4 less likely to have an AP1000 reactor leak than die through some random accident.
Well the outer shell of the container vessel would get hotter without the evaporative cooling but by then the decay heat would have subsided to the point where convective and radiative cooling is sufficient to prevent a core melt. See post (#38469106)
wrong. there are passive *designs* like that, but this AP1000 needs someone to top off the passive cooling water tank within 72 hours of coolant failure, else the reactor is fucked
Not true. See above posts (#38469106) and (#38469070)
Slashdot Mirror
oh! I got that :-)
I responded to the bit that needed responding to. Clearly safety is an issue. It is addressed by the AP1000. What is the problem?
Clearly having a collection of billions of greys of radiation in one place is going to present safety issues...
The NRC however estimates that the AP1000 as having a major accident frequency of 2x10^-7 per year. That's pretty safe.
Here you go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AP1000
Under construction in China and Georgia (USA)
OK I bit...
awwwww cute!
It's all pretty funny really. They have malware because they're heavy uses of American Software. ie They NEED their hated enemy to make their software.
You are a tiny fraction of 1% of the population that the education system doesn't have to worry about. No need to be bitter about it. Afterall you're (apprently) earning a decent salary without having invested in years of your own education. Most of us have not been able to do that.
Not there either. This story was written by a Ubuntu fan site.
While Scientific Linux, Centos and RHEL are pervasive in World Large Hardon Collider computing grid (WLCG) and on the local computing clusters involved in LHC computing, Ubuntu isn't.
Full stop.
Ubuntu should get over itself and get back to actually supporting it's users as opposed to shipping half baked software (for example they shipped an early development release of abiword) from debian testing then not updating it even though it's full of bugs and upstream fixes them.
Debian-testing ships development software but it also updates it. This is fine. It is what it says it is. Ubuntu doesn't update, so why ship Debian-testing packages?
I don't think so. If it was just familiarity, catchers would have no trouble with their own pitcher. But catchers often have just as much trouble as the batters.
It's nice to see the pracitioner of a fine skill be successful where traditionally the best pitcher is the one who can throw the fastest (under control of course).
A similar scenario happens in cricker where a great spin bowler can dismantle a team. Until the 1990's bowling in cricket was dominated by extreme speed where the best bowlers could bowl at over 150 Km/Hr. Along comes Shane Warne, considered the 2nd most influential cricketer in the 20th century who bowls at less than 100 Km/Hr but with a wicked spin and fantastic control.
Check out the "Gatting ball" video below for a delivery of pure beauty.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOVei8iTyM8
It was Warne's first Test Match delivery in England!
Here it is...
http://www.fosspatents.com/2012/05/judge-says-google-only-used.html
You gotta say that he keeps his end of his Oracle employment contract.
The OLPC project specifically addresses tech support and is included in the budget. Also the software stackis totally different to a standard PC. It is focussed on collaborative learning and is totally open-sourced. It is very different to a standard commercial software distribution with canned teaching.
As many other people have pointed out travelling around the world's oceans with nothing but renewable energy has been done for several centuries now and far faster. The 2009 round the world race was won in 89 days http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vend%C3%A9e_Globe#2008-2009 as opposed to the 2 years required to complete the journey with solar power. There is a reason that wind is almost cost competitive (in some places) with fossil fuels and solar is still a factor 4 times more expensive even in the sunniest climates. The *power density* in a good stiff breeze is substantially greater than the energy density of direct sunlight. It costs money to build structures to concentrate direct sunlight into the kind of power density were used to from hydro, fossil fuels and nuclear.
It really is hard to beat basic Physics.
Please make an android version. I'll pay for it if it works well.
Thank you.
Back of the envolope calculation follows:
Distance to SN1987a = 1.9x10^5 light years
Distance to M95 = 4x10^7 light years
Ratio of neutrino flux SN1987a / M95 = (1.9/400)^2 = 2.2x10^-5
Number of neutrinos detected at Kamiokanda from SN1987a = 10
Sensitivity of Super-Kamiokanda (Super-K) = 20x that of Kamiokanda
Expected number of nu's from M95 at Super-K = 20x10x2.2x10^-5 = 0.004 :-(
Those 3 things are technologies developed by Experimental Particle Physicists who wanted to test Particle Physics Theory.
Then there is this little thing called the world-wide-web invented by this guy Tim Burners-Lee to enable Particle Physics working at CERN to better collaborate.
Do these spin-offs count to CERN or Particle Physics net economic worth?
WP7 has been on the market for over a year. In that time they've atacted 1.1 million FB users. Further up the thread you see there 99 million IOS FB users and 88 million Android FB users. So WP7 is around 1% of market. Like Linux on the desktop. It has no traction. On the other hand MS has a truck load of money in the bank and will keep on trying.
The orginal 1972 "Blue Marble" showed a beautiful collection of cold front spun up out of antartica. It would be great to get some composite images of the other side the world too.
How would you know it's a good story without reading more than a few chapters?
I think it's a good story because I've read it more than a dozen times.
It is by far my most read book. I don't think I've managed to read another book more than twice.
Whoops it's 15 MW of decay heat after 3 days..
From the document you posted:
"The steel containment vessel provides the heat transfer surface that removes heat from inside
the containment and rejects it to the atmosphere. Heat is removed from the containment vessel
by continuous natural circulation flow of air. During an accident, the air cooling is supplemented
by evaporation of water. The water drains by gravity from a tank located on top of the
containment shield building.
Calculations have shown the AP1000 to have a significantly reduced large release frequency .......
following a severe accident core damage scenario. With only the normal PCS air cooling, the
containment stays well below the predicted failure pressure for at least 24 hours. Other factors
include improved containment isolation and reduced potential for LOCAs outside of
containment. This improved containment performance supports the technical basis for
simplification of offsite emergency planning."
"Long-term accident mitigation - A major safety advantage of the AP1000 versus current-day ......
PWRs is that long-term accident mitigation is maintained by the passive safety systems without
operator action and without reliance on offsite or onsite ac power sources. For the limiting
design basis accidents, the core coolant inventory in the containment for recirculation cooling
and boration of the core is sufficient to last for at least 30 days, even if inventory is lost at the
design basis containment leak rate."
Where does that document say things go to hell after 3 days if the coolant is not topped up? It seems to me that 60 MW of heat could easily be removed via natural convection over the large surface area of the steel containment vessel.
Could you provide page numbers for the 0-3 days, 3-7 days, 7 days and beyond? I couldn't find them.
Hmm looks like my calculations were wrong by a factor of 2.
This web page from MIT:
http://mitnse.com/2011/03/16/what-is-decay-heat/
Shows the curve for the Fukoshima reactors. The table shows the decay heat dropping to 0.5% of full power after 3 days (not the 0.2% I stated above).
I agree that the sensible and prudent thing to do would be to top up the water in the tank (lets face it, you have 3 days to get a firetruck onsite) . In any case the most exhaustive analysis of the AP1000 estimates a large radiative leakage at 1x10^-7 per reactor year. I would happily take those odds. My per year risk of dying through accidents is 1x10-3 years. So I'm 10^-4 less likely to have an AP1000 reactor leak than die through some random accident.
Well the outer shell of the container vessel would get hotter without the evaporative cooling but by then the decay heat would have subsided to the point where convective and radiative cooling is sufficient to prevent a core melt. See post (#38469106)
Not true. See above posts (#38469106) and (#38469070)