Off-shore wind farms have a problem of wind blowing too fast, forcing shut down of the farm. This is something that danish and german folks discovered early in their attempts to get wind farms to produce meaningful amounts of power.
Has nobody invented a way to handle this other than shutting down the farm? It seems like it could be handled more gracefully by feathering or partially retracting the vanes, or lowering the tower, or switching to a higher gear, or something...
Huh? Apple hasn't "created" a single damn thing in 30 years. They've pulled a Japan to be honest, streamlined existing products and made em pretty.
... and that isn't nothing. Making a product streamlined, pretty, and easy to use is the difference between a niche techy product and a wildly profitable mass-produced consumer item.
I think there is a fairly straightforward solution to your dilemma -- buy an electric car, and then for your occasional long-distance trip, rent a car.
Car rentals isn't too expensive (at least not for anyone who can afford to buy an electric car), and your own car's auto insurance will typically cover you while driving the rental car also.
Steve Jobs made a lot of money but he's dead now. Why is his monopolistic anti-competitiveness continuing to cripple Apple devices?
I think Apple feels that in order to provide a high quality user experience, they need to have as much control over their products as possible, in order to avoid unintended adverse consequences.
Whether or not that is the best strategy or not is something we'll see over the next few years, as the closed/controlled iPad model competes against the open/uncontrolled Android model.
Start to get the point? Just because something sells well does[n't] make it good.
For your own personal definition of "good", that's true. But if you were a fly, or someone who likes cheap hamburgers, or a Britney Spears fan, your tastes would be different and you would probably find those products perfectly satisfactory, and buy them.
So the point is, prescribing your own medicine to other people doesn't do them any good.
Too bad your self worth seems to be based around being a smug hipster ahead of the "old fogies" based on your devotion to your overpriced toy computer with a crippled interface.
I don't actually own a tablet, nor do I plan to own one. But that doesn't prevent me from understanding why other people like them. Nor does my lack of desire for a tablet require me to get mad and insult the people who do like them.
What is the point of paying more for a mobile computer that you don't use the mobility on?
Because that way if/when you ever do want to use the mobility, you can. People can't predict their future needs with 100% accuracy, so some like to leave their options open. e.g. even if my laptop never leaves my desk for 3 years, that one day in year 4 when I absolutely need to take it to a client's location to show them a demo will make the extra investment worthwhile.
And why are even supposedly educated radio announcers on NPR are typically oblivious that tablet computing has existed since the early 90's? In fact those devices are actually more USEFUL in trained hands than the current crop.
Trained hands are irrelevant. The public never had, and never will have, trained hands.
The real question is, what is it about iPads that makes Slashdot nerds so bitter and angry? It's not like they are being forced to buy one or use one. I think it is because their sense of self-worth is based around their competence with traditional computing, and they see the value of all their hard-earned expertise draining away as more and more people find that they no longer need to "know computers", or ask for help from someone who does.
Idiotic analogy. Bridges serve a solitary purpose.
Actually, the analogy is apt. iPads also serve a solitary purpose. They are not meant to be general purpose computers.
If/when Apple starts placing the same restrictions on their Macintosh computers, then your side of the argument will be valid. But iPads are designed to be locked-down devices (like your Nintendo), not PCs or development/hacking platforms.
In real security tests/contests Apple always fairs worse than even Windows.
On the other hand, most users never run a security test, or enter their computer into a security contest. Instead, they run their day-to-day apps, check email, and browse the web. And in that scenario (i.e. the one people actually operate under, not an artificially constructed one), Apple fares better than Windows. So far, anyway.
Wrong! The bulk of the universe -- about 70% -- is made of dark energy and we have no idea what that's made of. Then there's dark matter -- about 25% (no idea what that's made of either)
I think you'll find that Sturgeon's Law gives us a pretty good indication of what this 'mysterious 90% of the universe' is made of.
Man how many times have we seen these stories already - "cheap solar power discovery, will make solar pv affordable" but then years later nothing has changed.
If you think "nothing has changed" over the years then you haven't been paying attention. As shown in the graph at the link, the price has declined dramatically in the last decade.
I would set up solar pv all over my property if it was just a bit more cost effective...
So would a lot of people, as soon as the cost of solar power becomes less than the cost of (whatever power source they are using now). For most people (barring subsidies) that hasn't happened yet, but it's looking pretty inevitable that the lines will cross for many within the next few years. And when they do, it will be largely thanks to the eventual productization of the technologies you kept reading about over the years (and other efficiency advances that you didn't read about, since they didn't make for an interesting new article).
So to sum up: quit complaining, the articles you read here are the first stage of a pipelined process, the fruits of which always lag a number of years behind the news, but the advances do arrive eventually.
But are you retarded? You can't remember the name of something but you can recognize thousands of icons designed for 16x16 display?
You don't have to be retarded to be slowed down by a less-than-optimal interface. Every brain cycle you have to burn figuring out a sub-optimal GUI is one less brain cycle available for actually getting your work done.
Little things like this might seem trivial, and they are, but the cumulative effect can build up to the point where your productivity is significantly less than it could have been.
At what point will the technology provide more useful energy output than is required to manufacture and maintain the system? Will it substantially reduce fossil fuel usage, or is it another ruse, like the wind farms?
Oh dear, a Slashdot poster has made what appears to be a false claim about the EROI of wind farms.
Time to google around a bit and see if there's anything to it....
This analysis reviews and synthesizes the literature on net energy return for electric power generation by wind turbines. Energy return on investment (EROI) is the ratio of energy delivered to energy costs. [...] Our survey shows an average EROI for just the operational studies is 19.8 (n=60; std. dev=13.7) This places wind in a favorable position relative to fossil fuels, nuclear, and solar power generation technologies in terms of EROI."
So, to sum up the above summary -- parent poster is wrong. As a matter of historical record, the average wind farm produces about 20 times more much energy than it expends on construction and maintenance.
Saying what we have now is BS != saying we should have nothing
Yup, I'm aware of that. However, if someone is going to criticize the existing system, I think they ought to be able to suggest something better that could be done instead -- and be prepared to show that the practicality and security of their own proposal is at least equal to the level of the existing system. If they can't suggest something that would be more effective, then their criticism is just bellyaching. Some problems are just inherently difficult to solve well, and this is one of them.
and your statements avoid the FACT that they are NOT doing the most efficient/effective methods.
And those are? The Israeli system might work here, but then again it might not. It would be worthwhile to try out though.
See, in order for it to be a joke, there needs to be some element of truth in it. For example, if it was the case that a new iPad immediately downloads a 5GB OS update when it's first plugged in, then there might be a joke there. But simply stating something that obviously isn't true isn't a joke -- it's just dumb.
for everyone to sell their old iPad! My biggest pet peeve, it's the most expensive "disposable" personal electronic device. It seems like it's embarrassing to be seen with the not-quite-latest version
Indeed it is! Everybody must sell their old iPad for cheap! To penny-pinching bastards like myself, who would like an iPad to play with, but can't justify handing over $500+ for one...
Anyone know the best place to get a good deal on a used-but-still-working-reliably iPad?
Slashdot Mirror
why wind is ever considered over solar? I mean, if the Sun dies, so do we, whereas if the wind stop blowing... no power.
As far as a solar power plant is concerned, the sun 'dies' every evening, and stays 'dead' until sunrise the next day.
Off-shore wind farms have a problem of wind blowing too fast, forcing shut down of the farm. This is something that danish and german folks discovered early in their attempts to get wind farms to produce meaningful amounts of power.
Has nobody invented a way to handle this other than shutting down the farm? It seems like it could be handled more gracefully by feathering or partially retracting the vanes, or lowering the tower, or switching to a higher gear, or something...
Your shopping cart currently contains:
[1] Microsoft 3D visualization/manipulation interface
[1] RealDoll
[1] 3-gallon tub of Vaseline
Checkout now, or continue shopping?
Huh? Apple hasn't "created" a single damn thing in 30 years. They've pulled a Japan to be honest, streamlined existing products and made em pretty.
... and that isn't nothing. Making a product streamlined, pretty, and easy to use is the difference between a niche techy product and a wildly profitable mass-produced consumer item.
I think there is a fairly straightforward solution to your dilemma -- buy an electric car, and then for your occasional long-distance trip, rent a car.
Car rentals isn't too expensive (at least not for anyone who can afford to buy an electric car), and your own car's auto insurance will typically cover you while driving the rental car also.
Cars with only one moving part lack the service requirements and will never be sold by the existing car companies.
Then they'll get sold by the Teslas of the world instead... or any of the 10,000 Chinese companies now getting into low-end electric vehicles.
The existing car companies can sell them too if they want; but if they don't, someone else will.
Steve Jobs made a lot of money but he's dead now. Why is his monopolistic anti-competitiveness continuing to cripple Apple devices?
I think Apple feels that in order to provide a high quality user experience, they need to have as much control over their products as possible, in order to avoid unintended adverse consequences.
Whether or not that is the best strategy or not is something we'll see over the next few years, as the closed/controlled iPad model competes against the open/uncontrolled Android model.
Start to get the point? Just because something sells well does[n't] make it good.
For your own personal definition of "good", that's true. But if you were a fly, or someone who likes cheap hamburgers, or a Britney Spears fan, your tastes would be different and you would probably find those products perfectly satisfactory, and buy them.
So the point is, prescribing your own medicine to other people doesn't do them any good.
Too bad your self worth seems to be based around being a smug hipster ahead of the "old fogies" based on your devotion to your overpriced toy computer with a crippled interface.
I don't actually own a tablet, nor do I plan to own one. But that doesn't prevent me from understanding why other people like them. Nor does my lack of desire for a tablet require me to get mad and insult the people who do like them.
What is the point of paying more for a mobile computer that you don't use the mobility on?
Because that way if/when you ever do want to use the mobility, you can. People can't predict their future needs with 100% accuracy, so some like to leave their options open. e.g. even if my laptop never leaves my desk for 3 years, that one day in year 4 when I absolutely need to take it to a client's location to show them a demo will make the extra investment worthwhile.
And why are even supposedly educated radio announcers on NPR are typically oblivious that tablet computing has existed since the early 90's? In fact those devices are actually more USEFUL in trained hands than the current crop.
Trained hands are irrelevant. The public never had, and never will have, trained hands.
The real question is, what is it about iPads that makes Slashdot nerds so bitter and angry? It's not like they are being forced to buy one or use one. I think it is because their sense of self-worth is based around their competence with traditional computing, and they see the value of all their hard-earned expertise draining away as more and more people find that they no longer need to "know computers", or ask for help from someone who does.
Idiotic analogy. Bridges serve a solitary purpose.
Actually, the analogy is apt. iPads also serve a solitary purpose. They are not meant to be general purpose computers.
If/when Apple starts placing the same restrictions on their Macintosh computers, then your side of the argument will be valid. But iPads are designed to be locked-down devices (like your Nintendo), not PCs or development/hacking platforms.
In real security tests/contests Apple always fairs worse than even Windows.
On the other hand, most users never run a security test, or enter their computer into a security contest. Instead, they run their day-to-day apps, check email, and browse the web. And in that scenario (i.e. the one people actually operate under, not an artificially constructed one), Apple fares better than Windows. So far, anyway.
they build exciting and reliable sports cars, too
Actually it's German technology, the British merely bought a couple (and will sell them back to the German's when they're done with them).
Wrong! The bulk of the universe -- about 70% -- is made of dark energy and we have no idea what that's made of. Then there's dark matter -- about 25% (no idea what that's made of either)
I think you'll find that Sturgeon's Law gives us a pretty good indication of what this 'mysterious 90% of the universe' is made of.
This is the advance we've been waiting for.... the one that will finally make kink-spring energy storage practical.
the one working in python will literally run circles around the guy working in C/C++
Pedant police here. You are under arrest for abusing the word 'literally'. Hand over your poetic license and step away from the keyboard.
In the Mariana Trench? porn. Bermuda Triangle? porn.
Didn't Mariana Trench and Bermuda Triangle star together in "Deep Diving III: Plumbing the Depths"?
Man how many times have we seen these stories already - "cheap solar power discovery, will make solar pv affordable" but then years later nothing has changed.
If you think "nothing has changed" over the years then you haven't been paying attention. As shown in the graph at the link, the price has declined dramatically in the last decade.
I would set up solar pv all over my property if it was just a bit more cost effective...
So would a lot of people, as soon as the cost of solar power becomes less than the cost of (whatever power source they are using now). For most people (barring subsidies) that hasn't happened yet, but it's looking pretty inevitable that the lines will cross for many within the next few years. And when they do, it will be largely thanks to the eventual productization of the technologies you kept reading about over the years (and other efficiency advances that you didn't read about, since they didn't make for an interesting new article).
So to sum up: quit complaining, the articles you read here are the first stage of a pipelined process, the fruits of which always lag a number of years behind the news, but the advances do arrive eventually.
But are you retarded? You can't remember the name of something but you can recognize thousands of icons designed for 16x16 display?
You don't have to be retarded to be slowed down by a less-than-optimal interface. Every brain cycle you have to burn figuring out a sub-optimal GUI is one less brain cycle available for actually getting your work done.
Little things like this might seem trivial, and they are, but the cumulative effect can build up to the point where your productivity is significantly less than it could have been.
At what point will the technology provide more useful energy output than is required to manufacture and maintain the system? Will it substantially reduce fossil fuel usage, or is it another ruse, like the wind farms?
Oh dear, a Slashdot poster has made what appears to be a false claim about the EROI of wind farms.
Time to google around a bit and see if there's anything to it....
This analysis reviews and synthesizes the literature on net energy return for electric power generation by wind turbines. Energy return on investment (EROI) is the ratio of energy delivered to energy costs. [...] Our survey shows an average EROI for just the operational studies is 19.8 (n=60; std. dev=13.7) This places wind in a favorable position relative to fossil fuels, nuclear, and solar power generation technologies in terms of EROI."
So, to sum up the above summary -- parent poster is wrong. As a matter of historical record, the average wind farm produces about 20 times more much energy than it expends on construction and maintenance.
Saying what we have now is BS != saying we should have nothing
Yup, I'm aware of that. However, if someone is going to criticize the existing system, I think they ought to be able to suggest something better that could be done instead -- and be prepared to show that the practicality and security of their own proposal is at least equal to the level of the existing system. If they can't suggest something that would be more effective, then their criticism is just bellyaching. Some problems are just inherently difficult to solve well, and this is one of them.
and your statements avoid the FACT that they are NOT doing the most efficient/effective methods.
And those are? The Israeli system might work here, but then again it might not. It would be worthwhile to try out though.
I would 'Woosh' you, but I hit my quota...
See, in order for it to be a joke, there needs to be some element of truth in it. For example, if it was the case that a new iPad immediately downloads a 5GB OS update when it's first plugged in, then there might be a joke there. But simply stating something that obviously isn't true isn't a joke -- it's just dumb.
for everyone to sell their old iPad! My biggest pet peeve, it's the most expensive "disposable" personal electronic device. It seems like it's embarrassing to be seen with the not-quite-latest version
Indeed it is! Everybody must sell their old iPad for cheap! To penny-pinching bastards like myself, who would like an iPad to play with, but can't justify handing over $500+ for one...
Anyone know the best place to get a good deal on a used-but-still-working-reliably iPad?
It's an Apple product, I'm more of an Orange guy.
Okay, but I think you'll find that portability will be an issue.