Remove just the word videogames, and imagine how much ridiculous NRA'esque rhetoric we could expect to see (even here on/.) about how "they" (big brother, gov't, democrats, Obama etc.) are literally trying to brainwash us and take away our rights!
The first CAES plant, a 290 megawatt facility, was built in Huntorf, Germany in 1978.
The Bethel Energy Center is slated to be a 317 megawatt facility which is about one-quarter of the size of a gas-powered plant near Richland Chambers in Freestone County, according to Farley.
So a few decades later, we are going to be the cutting edge in building something with effectively the same operational capacity as the original? Keep in mind these things are just giant batteries that use air pressure, and I'm assuming the same electric motors that pump air in will extract energy when the air comes back out, with a ~80-90% efficiency either way.
We spending a third of a billion dollars to push air around like they did in the 70's.
There will be an immediate and nearly catastrophic increase in the amount of bad science, pseudo-science and technobabble-based science fiction in popular media.
It could be years before the world recovers from this.
Malignancy due to radiation is not deterministic. To treat it as "worst case scenario" is very irresponsible. Also, electron dose drops off in a non-analytical fashion dependent on the spectrum of the incident beam.
According to Wiki it beta decays into an electron which can be blocked with "5 mm of perspex". I'm not sure how human tissue compares with the blocking power of perspex. The other particle is an electron anti-neutrino (!) which passes harmlessly through almost everything. No gamma radiation is produced. No neutrons are produced.
If I had to be irradiated with something, Phosphorus 32 doesn't sound that bad.
Ionizing radiation can both cause and cure cancer via DNA damage. If this patch can destroy cancerous DNA, it also has a nonzero chance of creating more cancerous cells in healthy cells. So no, you can't make-believe that it's curing cancer while the rest of your skin is immune to its effects.
Additionally, most polymers can roughly be approximated as tissue-equivalent as far as penetration depth goes (only density matters to first order), which means that these electrons will penetrate up to 5mm (half a centimeter, mind you) of skin. That's well beyond the ~1mm of dead epidermal skin, and can reach the dermal stem cells.
Moral is if you're ever drunk at a party and see 32P laying around, remember that Wikipedia doesn't empower you to be immune to cancer.
Radiation differentially kills rapidly dividing cells more than non-dividing cells. Hence it is a poison that affects cancer cells more than normal cells.
Never said radiation wasn't a specialized poison.
I'm not trying to comment on the biochemistry of the form of damage that radiation is good at creating, nor am I commenting on the biology of why these free radicals preferentially kills cancer cells (rapid proliferation sure, but more importantly you should mention lack of repair mechanisms, or else you'd be guaranteed more cancer in the healthy cells after radiation therapy, just with a time-delay based on the difference in proliferation rates).
I trying to say that radiation is a form of poison, and has a mixture of qualities about it that are separately are neither magical, nor unique among poisons. Yet TFA makes it seem like you rub "radiation" on a patch and it can make cancer "disappear".
It's stupid shit like this that makes people keep thinking radiation is some form of magic.
I might as well call radiation therapy devices like tomotherapy "giant cancer-fighting plastic donuts", or refer to brachytherapy seeds as "Curative metal rice grains".
Radiation is a highly effective type of poison. Just like certain poisons, radiation sometimes causes cancer, and like other poisons, sometimes it cures cancer.
To put an article like "patch cures cancer" on a "news for nerds" website and have the punchline be that it's just topical brachytherapy is pathetic.
It's a step in the right direction, but I'm not sure if it's out of any charity towards their customer base....
Honestly though, no corporation will ever act strictly out of charity (the strict definition being having nothing to gain), even towards their customer base.
The benefit that we see is hilariously enough, actually a twisted form of competition induced by capitalism that actually behaves in the way ideological competition should: to benefit the consumer.
Helped a bit, sure, but given blacks historically vote about 90% Democrat, it's not as big a factor as you're trying to make. Can't we just say "Anybody can be racist" and get on with our lives?
Compelling argument, but how does that refute the smartassery contained within the article's last sentence?
Wait, so which of those does installing Linux fall under? Improper use, physical damage, or missing accessories?
Seriously though, some guy who confused the crap out of some guy trained to handle rice-cooker and wristwatch returns and his logical next step is to bitch and moan about it everywhere.
it's up to the store to provide good customer service. If they don't the customer is absolutely entitled to bitch and moan.
To answer your question, read where I bring up flashing modem flashing lights as an example. Having moved 4 times in undergrad alone and taking my DSL service with me, I can't count the number of times I've had a person from India read through a flow-chart of resetting the modem, only to escalate my call to (eventually) a local tier-3 engineer that could literally identify and fix the problem (on their end) remotely.
It's pretty clear that installing something that boots up looking nothing like what every other laptop returned to them has looked like is going to be outside the operating parameters of what an entry level customer support person will handle. I will agree that it's disappointing for the "manager" (i.e. first guy to not read from a flow-chart) to not understand the real issue, but to have it result in a pathetic attempt for an article conclucing "SO WHICH ONE IS IT, HARDWARE OR MISSING ACCESSORY? HAHA GOTCHA NEWEGG!" is pretty pathetic.
Sure it's up to a company to provide good customer service, but it's also up to any human living in society to understand the operational limits of what are and aren't economically possible. If you had a sports car, but the muffler rusted off and you violated noise limits, what's more likely? That a policeman gives you a fix-it ticket on your way to the muffler shop because they figure it's intentional? Or that same policeman, going against every bit of their training and experience, understands your unique situation, and waves you on by?
Or how about if your job was the customer service guy? You handle every form of return on Newegg, from rice cookers, to watches, to this laptop. You see something COMPLETELY out of the ordinary that could only be due to user intervention, along with some other claimed hardware issue involving some bisexual o's. Do you risk your own job performance by letting something this crazy through, or send a generic rejection letter?
And finally, there's enough of the feeling entitled to bitch and moan in this fucking society. And my point is that without shit for due diligence based on realistic expectations, no he's not entitled to feel special.
If you get your ceasefire broken once, that makes you a victim of betrayal, but the third time it happens you're just being gullible.
Why does that logic sound so familiar? Ah yes, ages 4-7:
The child has an intuitive grasp of logical concepts in some areas. However, there is still a tendency to focus attention on one aspect of an object while ignoring others. Concepts formed are crude and irreversible. Perceptions dominate judgment. In moral-ethical realm, the child is not able to show principles underlying best behavior.
Once again, display of maturity and an attempt to build an actual society.
He must be a pretty crappy gamer if, in all that time, there are still other civilizations in his way with which to have constant nuclear warfare. If he'd actually eliminated the other civilizations, he could easily rebuild everything.
Also, how on earth did he have so much global warming? That can really only be the effect of poor decisions or poorly waged nuclear war.
Considering how his biggest gripes are when other countries violate ceasefires, as well as his reluctance in switching away from democracy, it looks like he was trying create an actual society that co-inhabits the world with other societies, rather than just play king of the resource mountain.
Looks like the due-diligence for this special circumstance (a customer service trained to handle basic situations making the wrong judgement call) consisted of:
I spoke with a support agent, as well as a manager who couldn't comprehend the difference between an obvious hardware failure that could be found running the BIOS provided diagnostics, and the Linux installation.
The logical next step? Well Norm here manages to get it on some moronic newsblog article, that is comprised of: one screenshot of a generic rejection letter, a sentence of what comprised the followup, as well as a snippet of their expansive return policy, ending in a retarded red-herring speculation.
For a customer that supposedly
used Newegg for years and spent tens of thousands on tech gear with them, so I'm really bummed out by this situation
I'm more bummed by his inability to understand how customer support is supposed to work.
Anyone who's ever dealt with the wrong-colored blinking lights on a modem knows that just one level above the first guy get on the phones isn't enough. Escalate the issue one tier higher up the chain of command, point to the purchase history, and ask them to get a real tech working there (not someone handling tech-support flowcharts) to verify, and I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem.
But instead the whiny brat gives Newegg (which offers one of the better customer support experiences out there IMO) probably much more losses in bad press for what looks like a shit effort to communicate on his own end.
I will begin by positing the following: That it's pretty obvious that the less removed the advertisee is from the product, the more impulse-driven the advertising becomes.
This is clearly illustrated in the following: -TV commercials (most removed) that try to get you to remember a name for the next time you need to say, buy life insurance. -Internet ads (on a PC, getting warmer) that want you to click and enter some CC info while distracting you from what you were doing. -Targeted internet ads (such as from a store that already has your info suggesting other products) where you can basically "one-click" your way to poverty. -Finally product labels (in a store, knowing you already are there, in that aisle, for the purpose of buying a product) which try to out-shine the next guy with colors and swooping patterns.
And there's clearly a well-established economics set up for the last two, considering the click-through payments that online retailers will give to advertising partners, as well as grocery stores putting their own generic brand in some of the most visible spots next to well-known brands.
Now we take a look at mobile devices and what do we see? As far as immediacy goes, they rest somewhere between generic internet ads and the more targeted ads. But why is there such a price parity?
Think about filling out a full billing or credit card address form, one letter at a time, with hilarious auto-correct. Think about punching your full credit card info into any mobile app.
And finally, keep in mind that certain products (iTunes) which do offer features (all payment info stored centrally) to exploit such impulsiveness tend to do fairly well revenue wise.
If you think about the two bolded concepts of immediacy and impulsiveness, it's pretty easy to see that the issue of the mobile space is not so much that it's an "old-boy's" network with a failure to adapt, but that a lack (even if perceived) of any trustworthy impulsive payment method is what moves its effectiveness as an advertising channel from that of click-to-buy to something more comparable to a TV jingle.
To write a summary about the failure of mobile ads based on an analysis epitomized by a fucking TV show on the other hand, makes it seem that the whole ITWorld crew in many ways still resembles the Mad Men-era old boy's network, and simply may not be equipped to cope.;)
This is the consequence of idiots labelling anything scientific that they don't understand as "science", but also a benefit in a way:
Before anyone else tries to write us off as Satan-loving heretics, think about this: In "science" people with sometimes completely different interpretations and understandings of the underlying "science" (in this case physics) involved will test each other's hypotheses and, out of respect of the pursuit of knowledge (in most cases) publish their honest findings either confirming or denying their conclusions (inconclusive stuff being relatively un-publishable).
When is a Jew or Buddhist (even though it's a philosophy more than religion) ever invited to comment on the ideological principles of the Catholic religion in an official and respected forum? Sounds pretty ridiculous right? But that's exactly what happens in science every day.
Why the stark difference? Because religion is something many of us are taught starting from when we are young, and more importantly is taught as the only one that is right with no testable means to prove or disprove it. I can imagine a public that's much more... responsive to science in a way, if it were taught to them in a more religious fashion. Indoctrinated, in a sense. But at the same time, that would be the exact undoing of the fundamental objectivity and pursuit of truth that basic science is founded upon, and all that inspires real scientists.
Your comment is funny considering Intel is bending over backwards to provide other laptop makers the parts to build cheap Macbook air clones (Otherwise known as Ultrabooks)
Yeah that must be it! Because Apple's been using Intel sourced components the longest out of every other PC maker in history first off, and also Ultrabook category laptops like the Thinkpad X-series didn't exist before Apple made the Air!
Try to at least wipe a little bit of the fanboy off next time?
Slashdot Mirror
If the speed of sound would be a potential factor in determining who wins, it counts as a tie.
I have a feeling we'd see a lot of deaf people at least tying for first in the Olympics then.
Remove just the word videogames, and imagine how much ridiculous NRA'esque rhetoric we could expect to see (even here on /.) about how "they" (big brother, gov't, democrats, Obama etc.) are literally trying to brainwash us and take away our rights!
Soon even the word "sexist" will be sexist.
Or vagina!
The first CAES plant, a 290 megawatt facility, was built in Huntorf, Germany in 1978.
The Bethel Energy Center is slated to be a 317 megawatt facility which is about one-quarter of the size of a gas-powered plant near Richland Chambers in Freestone County, according to Farley.
So a few decades later, we are going to be the cutting edge in building something with effectively the same operational capacity as the original? Keep in mind these things are just giant batteries that use air pressure, and I'm assuming the same electric motors that pump air in will extract energy when the air comes back out, with a ~80-90% efficiency either way.
We spending a third of a billion dollars to push air around like they did in the 70's.
Shipping kills the deal. Red, T/D.
There will be an immediate and nearly catastrophic increase in the amount of bad science, pseudo-science and technobabble-based science fiction in popular media.
It could be years before the world recovers from this.
Bazinga!
Malignancy due to radiation is not deterministic. To treat it as "worst case scenario" is very irresponsible. Also, electron dose drops off in a non-analytical fashion dependent on the spectrum of the incident beam.
According to Wiki it beta decays into an electron which can be blocked with "5 mm of perspex". I'm not sure how human tissue compares with the blocking power of perspex. The other particle is an electron anti-neutrino (!) which passes harmlessly through almost everything. No gamma radiation is produced. No neutrons are produced.
If I had to be irradiated with something, Phosphorus 32 doesn't sound that bad.
Ionizing radiation can both cause and cure cancer via DNA damage. If this patch can destroy cancerous DNA, it also has a nonzero chance of creating more cancerous cells in healthy cells. So no, you can't make-believe that it's curing cancer while the rest of your skin is immune to its effects.
Additionally, most polymers can roughly be approximated as tissue-equivalent as far as penetration depth goes (only density matters to first order), which means that these electrons will penetrate up to 5mm (half a centimeter, mind you) of skin. That's well beyond the ~1mm of dead epidermal skin, and can reach the dermal stem cells.
Moral is if you're ever drunk at a party and see 32P laying around, remember that Wikipedia doesn't empower you to be immune to cancer.
Radiation differentially kills rapidly dividing cells more than non-dividing cells. Hence it is a poison that affects cancer cells more than normal cells.
Never said radiation wasn't a specialized poison.
I'm not trying to comment on the biochemistry of the form of damage that radiation is good at creating, nor am I commenting on the biology of why these free radicals preferentially kills cancer cells (rapid proliferation sure, but more importantly you should mention lack of repair mechanisms, or else you'd be guaranteed more cancer in the healthy cells after radiation therapy, just with a time-delay based on the difference in proliferation rates).
I trying to say that radiation is a form of poison, and has a mixture of qualities about it that are separately are neither magical, nor unique among poisons.
Yet TFA makes it seem like you rub "radiation" on a patch and it can make cancer "disappear".
It's stupid shit like this that makes people keep thinking radiation is some form of magic.
I might as well call radiation therapy devices like tomotherapy "giant cancer-fighting plastic donuts", or refer to brachytherapy seeds as "Curative metal rice grains".
Radiation is a highly effective type of poison. Just like certain poisons, radiation sometimes causes cancer, and like other poisons, sometimes it cures cancer.
To put an article like "patch cures cancer" on a "news for nerds" website and have the punchline be that it's just topical brachytherapy is pathetic.
Use someone *else's* face as your unlock.
Like Teddy Roosevelt.
And then put that picture as your login screen, so it'll log you in if you point at a mirror.
It'll still be a problem if Zombie Teddy Roosevelt steals your phone, but how likely is that...
So you now have a cell-phone that's only useful near mirrors.
It's a step in the right direction, but I'm not sure if it's out of any charity towards their customer base....
Honestly though, no corporation will ever act strictly out of charity (the strict definition being having nothing to gain), even towards their customer base.
The benefit that we see is hilariously enough, actually a twisted form of competition induced by capitalism that actually behaves in the way ideological competition should: to benefit the consumer.
Helped a bit, sure, but given blacks historically vote about 90% Democrat, it's not as big a factor as you're trying to make. Can't we just say "Anybody can be racist" and get on with our lives?
Whatever you say you peace-making redskin.
Compelling argument, but how does that refute the smartassery contained within the article's last sentence?
Wait, so which of those does installing Linux fall under? Improper use, physical damage, or missing accessories?
Seriously though, some guy who confused the crap out of some guy trained to handle rice-cooker and wristwatch returns and his logical next step is to bitch and moan about it everywhere.
it's up to the store to provide good customer service. If they don't the customer is absolutely entitled to bitch and moan.
To answer your question, read where I bring up flashing modem flashing lights as an example. Having moved 4 times in undergrad alone and taking my DSL service with me, I can't count the number of times I've had a person from India read through a flow-chart of resetting the modem, only to escalate my call to (eventually) a local tier-3 engineer that could literally identify and fix the problem (on their end) remotely.
It's pretty clear that installing something that boots up looking nothing like what every other laptop returned to them has looked like is going to be outside the operating parameters of what an entry level customer support person will handle. I will agree that it's disappointing for the "manager" (i.e. first guy to not read from a flow-chart) to not understand the real issue, but to have it result in a pathetic attempt for an article conclucing "SO WHICH ONE IS IT, HARDWARE OR MISSING ACCESSORY? HAHA GOTCHA NEWEGG!" is pretty pathetic.
Sure it's up to a company to provide good customer service, but it's also up to any human living in society to understand the operational limits of what are and aren't economically possible.
If you had a sports car, but the muffler rusted off and you violated noise limits, what's more likely? That a policeman gives you a fix-it ticket on your way to the muffler shop because they figure it's intentional? Or that same policeman, going against every bit of their training and experience, understands your unique situation, and waves you on by?
Or how about if your job was the customer service guy? You handle every form of return on Newegg, from rice cookers, to watches, to this laptop. You see something COMPLETELY out of the ordinary that could only be due to user intervention, along with some other claimed hardware issue involving some bisexual o's. Do you risk your own job performance by letting something this crazy through, or send a generic rejection letter?
And finally, there's enough of the feeling entitled to bitch and moan in this fucking society. And my point is that without shit for due diligence based on realistic expectations, no he's not entitled to feel special.
If you get your ceasefire broken once, that makes you a victim of betrayal, but the third time it happens you're just being gullible.
Why does that logic sound so familiar?
Ah yes, ages 4-7:
The child has an intuitive grasp of logical concepts in some areas. However, there is still a tendency to focus attention on one aspect of an object while ignoring others. Concepts formed are crude and irreversible.
Perceptions dominate judgment. In moral-ethical realm, the child is not able to show principles underlying best behavior.
Once again, display of maturity and an attempt to build an actual society.
He must be a pretty crappy gamer if, in all that time, there are still other civilizations in his way with which to have constant nuclear warfare. If he'd actually eliminated the other civilizations, he could easily rebuild everything.
Also, how on earth did he have so much global warming? That can really only be the effect of poor decisions or poorly waged nuclear war.
Considering how his biggest gripes are when other countries violate ceasefires, as well as his reluctance in switching away from democracy, it looks like he was trying create an actual society that co-inhabits the world with other societies, rather than just play king of the resource mountain.
Looks like the due-diligence for this special circumstance (a customer service trained to handle basic situations making the wrong judgement call) consisted of:
I spoke with a support agent, as well as a manager who couldn't comprehend the difference between an obvious hardware failure that could be found running the BIOS provided diagnostics, and the Linux installation.
The logical next step? Well Norm here manages to get it on some moronic newsblog article, that is comprised of: one screenshot of a generic rejection letter, a sentence of what comprised the followup, as well as a snippet of their expansive return policy, ending in a retarded red-herring speculation.
For a customer that supposedly
used Newegg for years and spent tens of thousands on tech gear with them, so I'm really bummed out by this situation
I'm more bummed by his inability to understand how customer support is supposed to work.
Anyone who's ever dealt with the wrong-colored blinking lights on a modem knows that just one level above the first guy get on the phones isn't enough. Escalate the issue one tier higher up the chain of command, point to the purchase history, and ask them to get a real tech working there (not someone handling tech-support flowcharts) to verify, and I'm sure it wouldn't be a problem.
But instead the whiny brat gives Newegg (which offers one of the better customer support experiences out there IMO) probably much more losses in bad press for what looks like a shit effort to communicate on his own end.
Well I frequently hear various political commentators stating that he was the "first black president".
Good point, we should be looking at Obama's gay vote instead ;)
My thoughts exactly.
96% of the black vote, constituting 13% of the electorate. I'd say he's being helped more by blind racial ignorance than hurt.
I will begin by positing the following: That it's pretty obvious that the less removed the advertisee is from the product, the more impulse-driven the advertising becomes.
This is clearly illustrated in the following:
-TV commercials (most removed) that try to get you to remember a name for the next time you need to say, buy life insurance.
-Internet ads (on a PC, getting warmer) that want you to click and enter some CC info while distracting you from what you were doing.
-Targeted internet ads (such as from a store that already has your info suggesting other products) where you can basically "one-click" your way to poverty.
-Finally product labels (in a store, knowing you already are there, in that aisle, for the purpose of buying a product) which try to out-shine the next guy with colors and swooping patterns.
And there's clearly a well-established economics set up for the last two, considering the click-through payments that online retailers will give to advertising partners, as well as grocery stores putting their own generic brand in some of the most visible spots next to well-known brands.
Now we take a look at mobile devices and what do we see?
As far as immediacy goes, they rest somewhere between generic internet ads and the more targeted ads. But why is there such a price parity?
Think about filling out a full billing or credit card address form, one letter at a time, with hilarious auto-correct.
Think about punching your full credit card info into any mobile app.
And finally, keep in mind that certain products (iTunes) which do offer features (all payment info stored centrally) to exploit such impulsiveness tend to do fairly well revenue wise.
If you think about the two bolded concepts of immediacy and impulsiveness, it's pretty easy to see that the issue of the mobile space is not so much that it's an "old-boy's" network with a failure to adapt, but that a lack (even if perceived) of any trustworthy impulsive payment method is what moves its effectiveness as an advertising channel from that of click-to-buy to something more comparable to a TV jingle.
To write a summary about the failure of mobile ads based on an analysis epitomized by a fucking TV show on the other hand, makes it seem that the whole ITWorld crew in many ways still resembles the Mad Men-era old boy's network, and simply may not be equipped to cope. ;)
This is the consequence of idiots labelling anything scientific that they don't understand as "science", but also a benefit in a way:
Before anyone else tries to write us off as Satan-loving heretics, think about this:
In "science" people with sometimes completely different interpretations and understandings of the underlying "science" (in this case physics) involved will test each other's hypotheses and, out of respect of the pursuit of knowledge (in most cases) publish their honest findings either confirming or denying their conclusions (inconclusive stuff being relatively un-publishable).
When is a Jew or Buddhist (even though it's a philosophy more than religion) ever invited to comment on the ideological principles of the Catholic religion in an official and respected forum?
Sounds pretty ridiculous right? But that's exactly what happens in science every day.
Why the stark difference? Because religion is something many of us are taught starting from when we are young, and more importantly is taught as the only one that is right with no testable means to prove or disprove it. ... responsive to science in a way, if it were taught to them in a more religious fashion. Indoctrinated, in a sense. But at the same time, that would be the exact undoing of the fundamental objectivity and pursuit of truth that basic science is founded upon, and all that inspires real scientists.
I can imagine a public that's much more
Your comment is funny considering Intel is bending over backwards to provide other laptop makers the parts to build cheap Macbook air clones (Otherwise known as Ultrabooks)
Yeah that must be it!
Because Apple's been using Intel sourced components the longest out of every other PC maker in history first off, and also Ultrabook category laptops like the Thinkpad X-series didn't exist before Apple made the Air!
Try to at least wipe a little bit of the fanboy off next time?
If you don't know what to do, throw lots of shit against a wall and see what sticks.
Actually, that sounds more accurate when used to describe TFA.
Wish I had mod points man.