That's a little bit like asking "is Linux dead?", simply because it's not a popular desktop OS. Just because the majority of users don't realize they're interacting with something, doesn't mean it's not widely used. In the case of Java, the Android platform is a major client-facing deployment. However, the majority of enterprise and webservices are still Java/Java EE and that application is growing, driven by the move to the cloud and the popularity of microservice architecture in new enterprise installations.
JavaScript obviously is a bit deal too, given the increasing importance of heavy client-side web-apps. But most of those webapps have Java on the back end.
15 Joules a day is about 175 microwatts continuously, enough to power very simple integrated circuits, perhaps a simple LCD watch. Not enough to produce light or sound or to power much of a processor. It would be a challenge to find an application that wouldn't require a large number of them.
You gotta remember that you're dealing with idiots who tremble at even a hint of an idea that radiation is near them. In fact, there's a little device in your car (assuming it's powered by gasoline) where it's name was determined due to the fear of radiation. The "catalytic converter" has that name because of idiots who fear the concept of radiation. The correct proper name for that device is "catalytic reactor". But the word reactor is used in nuclear reactors so "obviously" a "catalytic reactor" is dangerously radioactive and should never ever be placed in a car because it might spread radiation all over the place and don't even think about what would happen in an accident. Because of that fear, engineers call that little device a "catalytic converter" because that doesn't have the dangerous radiation inducing effects that the word "reactor" has.
Remember your audience and compensate for their ignorance and/or stupidity.
It's a chemical reactor, not a nuclear one. Catalytic activity is a chemical phenomenon, not nuclear.
Right on. That bugs the heck out of me. It's bad enough that a news outlet does it, but then for Slashdot to re-post that without correction is irritating. Gigawatts per hour is a meaningless unit unless you're talking about the rate of capacity installation or production, which this article clearly isn't. Where they get this unit from is beyond me, but it shows up very frequently.
It's almost as bad as when reporters compare two batteries of very different voltages and configurations based on their charge (in mAh). Basic electricity and magnetism really should be mandatory for everyone, but people who write about it for a living have absolutely no excuse.
I know it's in the original article, but one gigawatt per year??? Someone doesn't understand energy. That's a rate of growth of capacity, not a capacity.
I'm guessing what was intended was "one gigawatt hour per year" which is a measure of energy produced in one year. Divide by the number of hours in a year and you have the average power output.
I think the intent was "its eponymous management system runs globally on roughly 229,300 solar plants that typically pump out [5.66TWh] of electrical energy [annually]." It makes more sense to average over a long period of time with solar which is presumably what they were doing. A smart editor would have caught that.
Seriously, when I hear conspiracy theory crap like this, even if it's true, you've still got to tell me what the harm is if more people have access to treatment, even though some of them might not need it. It's the same with autism diagnosis: they favor the diagnosis over not giving it because it allow the child access to therapy which can significantly improve outcomes.
If you're going to err, overdiagnosis for these disorders is a reasonable direction to lean, much safer than underdiagnosing them. And especially when there's no definitive test.
Wait, there's a debate about whether or not the climate is warming? That's news to me. There's certainly a debate about exactly how quickly it's rising, which is something the scientists have not expressed certainty about. But the fact that the planet is warming as well as the question of the main cause very well studied, well demonstrated and not heavily debated among scientists.
Science really isn't about confidence. It's about evidence. If holding the line, even when you know you're wrong, is what makes people feel confident, it's no wonder they turn to religion. But I'm personally thankful that at least one discipline isn't afraid to publish results that contradict earlier findings, if that's where the evidence leads.
As someone who understands this process, findings like this lend tremendous credibility to the scientific community, and yes, boost my confidence in the work they're doing and the integrity of the published results. It's what makes science the best method we know of for understanding reality.
Well, one of the best arguments for upgrading from a system that old is computation power per watt. It costs a lot to run a very old power-hungry system to do something that a tiny micro-controller can do today for fractions of a penny on the dollar in power consumption. You're paying an exorbitant rate per CPU cycle with something like a PDP-11.
That doesn't quite equate to it always being worthwhile to replace a dated system. In some applications, it is critical that a well tested software/hardware combo not be messed with. I suspect this is one of those cases, where the difficulties and cost in maintaining such a system are deemed more economical than the alternatives.
Funny...CFLs are responsible for much less mercury emissions than traditional light bulbs if you count the mercury released during generation in even moderately coal rich generating mixes. They're not in any sense worse for the environment. Not that I'm an environmentalist...I've just taken the time to look into the topic.
The latest research I'm familiar with says the Neanderthals probably never went extinct at all, but rather inter-bread into larger human populations and essentially merged with humans. The large eyes thing might have played a role, but I don't see how since the premise that they became extinct due to a weakness (or at all) isn't broadly accepted anymore.
I wouldn't trust anyone to know what they look at when they read code. Not because I think they're lying, but because other research shows that people often have no idea how they perform complex tasks. So I'd be very skeptical if even your most candid account of how you code or how you read code showed much correlation to how what you actually do when you perform these tasks.
This is one of the things that makes teaching so difficult. If it were just a matter of explaining what you do, it would be simple, but for many tasks you don't actually know. You have to learn all over again when it comes time to teach it.
I don't know how other universal health care systems are run, but in Canada you have a fair amount of choice when it comes to who provides your care. The government isn't directly making any medical decisions or directly providing patient care. In other words, it's single payer, but not single provider. The government essentially acts as a single insurance company, where choices about what care is given are left up to the attending physician and are subject to available resources as in any system.
It's not a perfect system, but it's also not what most people think it is.
Canada takes just as long as the US. There is no difference.
While you anecdote is cute and all, but this shit as actually been studied.
That's a pretty silly thing to say. Canada's system is universal and ends up costing the tax payer less. AND the wait times are similar. Overall, I'm pretty happy with our system and how it stacks up to the patchwork of semi-functional and generally inefficient systems that Americans have to navigate.
The concept that people would be willing to get sick simply because someone else is paying for the healthcare is idiotic. Aside from the fact that not being sick is incentive enough, most people in your country have private insurance so the cost isn't going to be covered by the government anyway. Should they end up in an emergency room, your argument is still faulty since emergency care has been covered by the government for years and has nothing to do with Obama's health care bill. (Except that having more people ensured will probably keep people out of the emergency rooms.)
It's also incorrect that food poisoning doesn't kill you. Many people recover from it, but it can be deadly.
I understand your fear, but it looks like the market forces in favor of Samsung are orders of magnitude stronger than the legal threat from Apple, for starters. This verdict is not an existential threat to competition. In fact Samsung's next products are unlikely to be in violation of Apple's patents in the first place.
Regardless of what Apple wants (every company wants to get rid of competition) they have to work within the law and the law isn't likely to make Apple a monopoly any time soon.
You're living in the exact blind loyalty dream world that every monopoly hopes people will live in.
Blind loyalty to who? I just don't think that there's likely to be a monopoly in phones. There's strong competition and has been for years now and the market is too saturated for one company to make a major share grab at this point. You'd literally have to kill or almost kill one or two of the current platforms for that to happen. Perhaps it's true that Apple wants to kill Android but legally, I don't think it has a leg to stand on.
Slashdot Mirror
That's a little bit like asking "is Linux dead?", simply because it's not a popular desktop OS. Just because the majority of users don't realize they're interacting with something, doesn't mean it's not widely used. In the case of Java, the Android platform is a major client-facing deployment. However, the majority of enterprise and webservices are still Java/Java EE and that application is growing, driven by the move to the cloud and the popularity of microservice architecture in new enterprise installations.
JavaScript obviously is a bit deal too, given the increasing importance of heavy client-side web-apps. But most of those webapps have Java on the back end.
15 Joules a day is about 175 microwatts continuously, enough to power very simple integrated circuits, perhaps a simple LCD watch. Not enough to produce light or sound or to power much of a processor. It would be a challenge to find an application that wouldn't require a large number of them.
You gotta remember that you're dealing with idiots who tremble at even a hint of an idea that radiation is near them. In fact, there's a little device in your car (assuming it's powered by gasoline) where it's name was determined due to the fear of radiation. The "catalytic converter" has that name because of idiots who fear the concept of radiation. The correct proper name for that device is "catalytic reactor". But the word reactor is used in nuclear reactors so "obviously" a "catalytic reactor" is dangerously radioactive and should never ever be placed in a car because it might spread radiation all over the place and don't even think about what would happen in an accident. Because of that fear, engineers call that little device a "catalytic converter" because that doesn't have the dangerous radiation inducing effects that the word "reactor" has.
Remember your audience and compensate for their ignorance and/or stupidity.
It's a chemical reactor, not a nuclear one. Catalytic activity is a chemical phenomenon, not nuclear.
Mod the hell out of this. This person gets it!
"the primary desktop environment for GNU/Linux operating systems"
Well, well, aren't we full of ourselves...
Right on. That bugs the heck out of me. It's bad enough that a news outlet does it, but then for Slashdot to re-post that without correction is irritating. Gigawatts per hour is a meaningless unit unless you're talking about the rate of capacity installation or production, which this article clearly isn't. Where they get this unit from is beyond me, but it shows up very frequently.
It's almost as bad as when reporters compare two batteries of very different voltages and configurations based on their charge (in mAh). Basic electricity and magnetism really should be mandatory for everyone, but people who write about it for a living have absolutely no excuse.
I know it's in the original article, but one gigawatt per year??? Someone doesn't understand energy. That's a rate of growth of capacity, not a capacity. I'm guessing what was intended was "one gigawatt hour per year" which is a measure of energy produced in one year. Divide by the number of hours in a year and you have the average power output.
I think the intent was "its eponymous management system runs globally on roughly 229,300 solar plants that typically pump out [5.66TWh] of electrical energy [annually]." It makes more sense to average over a long period of time with solar which is presumably what they were doing. A smart editor would have caught that.
Seriously, when I hear conspiracy theory crap like this, even if it's true, you've still got to tell me what the harm is if more people have access to treatment, even though some of them might not need it. It's the same with autism diagnosis: they favor the diagnosis over not giving it because it allow the child access to therapy which can significantly improve outcomes. If you're going to err, overdiagnosis for these disorders is a reasonable direction to lean, much safer than underdiagnosing them. And especially when there's no definitive test.
Wait, there's a debate about whether or not the climate is warming? That's news to me. There's certainly a debate about exactly how quickly it's rising, which is something the scientists have not expressed certainty about. But the fact that the planet is warming as well as the question of the main cause very well studied, well demonstrated and not heavily debated among scientists.
Science really isn't about confidence. It's about evidence. If holding the line, even when you know you're wrong, is what makes people feel confident, it's no wonder they turn to religion. But I'm personally thankful that at least one discipline isn't afraid to publish results that contradict earlier findings, if that's where the evidence leads.
As someone who understands this process, findings like this lend tremendous credibility to the scientific community, and yes, boost my confidence in the work they're doing and the integrity of the published results. It's what makes science the best method we know of for understanding reality.
Well, one of the best arguments for upgrading from a system that old is computation power per watt. It costs a lot to run a very old power-hungry system to do something that a tiny micro-controller can do today for fractions of a penny on the dollar in power consumption. You're paying an exorbitant rate per CPU cycle with something like a PDP-11.
That doesn't quite equate to it always being worthwhile to replace a dated system. In some applications, it is critical that a well tested software/hardware combo not be messed with. I suspect this is one of those cases, where the difficulties and cost in maintaining such a system are deemed more economical than the alternatives.
I'm not fond of this in the least. I wonder how long before major ISPs finally jump to v6.
Kills 500 Americans per year, you say? I think we could all do with fewer Americans. Any way we could beef up that figure?
Strangely enough I can't recall any mention of the 3.46.
That's likely because there wasn't one. It went from 3.1 to 3.5 to 3.51.
Funny...CFLs are responsible for much less mercury emissions than traditional light bulbs if you count the mercury released during generation in even moderately coal rich generating mixes. They're not in any sense worse for the environment. Not that I'm an environmentalist...I've just taken the time to look into the topic.
The latest research I'm familiar with says the Neanderthals probably never went extinct at all, but rather inter-bread into larger human populations and essentially merged with humans. The large eyes thing might have played a role, but I don't see how since the premise that they became extinct due to a weakness (or at all) isn't broadly accepted anymore.
I wouldn't trust anyone to know what they look at when they read code. Not because I think they're lying, but because other research shows that people often have no idea how they perform complex tasks. So I'd be very skeptical if even your most candid account of how you code or how you read code showed much correlation to how what you actually do when you perform these tasks.
This is one of the things that makes teaching so difficult. If it were just a matter of explaining what you do, it would be simple, but for many tasks you don't actually know. You have to learn all over again when it comes time to teach it.
I don't know how other universal health care systems are run, but in Canada you have a fair amount of choice when it comes to who provides your care. The government isn't directly making any medical decisions or directly providing patient care. In other words, it's single payer, but not single provider. The government essentially acts as a single insurance company, where choices about what care is given are left up to the attending physician and are subject to available resources as in any system.
It's not a perfect system, but it's also not what most people think it is.
Canada takes just as long as the US. There is no difference. While you anecdote is cute and all, but this shit as actually been studied.
That's a pretty silly thing to say. Canada's system is universal and ends up costing the tax payer less. AND the wait times are similar. Overall, I'm pretty happy with our system and how it stacks up to the patchwork of semi-functional and generally inefficient systems that Americans have to navigate.
Pretty much, yeah.
The concept that people would be willing to get sick simply because someone else is paying for the healthcare is idiotic. Aside from the fact that not being sick is incentive enough, most people in your country have private insurance so the cost isn't going to be covered by the government anyway. Should they end up in an emergency room, your argument is still faulty since emergency care has been covered by the government for years and has nothing to do with Obama's health care bill. (Except that having more people ensured will probably keep people out of the emergency rooms.)
It's also incorrect that food poisoning doesn't kill you. Many people recover from it, but it can be deadly.
Something tells me that Windows 7 is here to stay, at least for the next decade or so. I can't see a lot of people switching any time soon.
Exactly!
I understand your fear, but it looks like the market forces in favor of Samsung are orders of magnitude stronger than the legal threat from Apple, for starters. This verdict is not an existential threat to competition. In fact Samsung's next products are unlikely to be in violation of Apple's patents in the first place.
Regardless of what Apple wants (every company wants to get rid of competition) they have to work within the law and the law isn't likely to make Apple a monopoly any time soon.
It's just not something you need to worry about.
You're living in the exact blind loyalty dream world that every monopoly hopes people will live in.
Blind loyalty to who? I just don't think that there's likely to be a monopoly in phones. There's strong competition and has been for years now and the market is too saturated for one company to make a major share grab at this point. You'd literally have to kill or almost kill one or two of the current platforms for that to happen. Perhaps it's true that Apple wants to kill Android but legally, I don't think it has a leg to stand on.