Experts have been working on the idea for almost a decade, Discover notes; it could be commercially viable within 10 years, the Navy says. Right now, however, researchers are showing off the technique using a model plane.
Sorry but you missed the point. The issues is that hot chips are causing local expansion on the board which causes warping and is breaking the solder connections. By putting the board in an oven you get even heating which does not warp the board and allows the older to re-flow. Disconnecting heat sinks would just make matters worse.
I guess youforgot to read the last sentence of the article;
"We would have liked to have seen it become a museum, but it just wasn't in the cards," Navy spokesman Chris Johnson told Fox. "But unfortunately, it is a difficult proposition to raise funds. The group that was going to collect donations had a $35 million budget plan but was only able to raise $100,000."
The $35M was the budget to convert it into a museum.
It is much more complex than that. Pumping is nit sufficient as one would have to clean every pipe and tank. There are also toxic substances that can not be pumped out such as PCBs, and asbestos. It costs money to do that. The Oriskany, a smaller carrier at 30,800 tons/888 ft vs 56,000-ton/1,050ft, was sunk for a budget of $2.8M in 2006. Taking into account the larger size and inflation I bet $4.0M would not be an unreasonable figure. Now try to justify the Navy spending $4.0M to sink a ship instead of recycling the metal on board.
Which will not work. I have Aspergers and know right from wrong. I too am fed up with idiots who have fun screwing up other people's fun. Go pick on another group.
As far as I can find the IOC has only recognized the World DanceSport Federation as the international body governing competitive ballroom dancing. There has been a lot of push to get ballroom dancing in the Olympics but as far as I can find it has never happened. If you can find any references to anyone actually winning a medal in ballroom dancing I would like to see it.
That is an argument for not allowing hotels to slap reviewers. It is a different issue. BTW, the Blackpool issue has been resolved by the "fine" being reimbursed and the policy cancelled.
This is another example of how Uber has advantages over taxis. Most, if not all, taxi fares are highly regulated. A taxi company can not "adjust", read hike, fares in response to demand. If they could do it fares would be much higher on the weekends than on the week days.
This is yet another statistical study that itself has flaws. 1.What was the selection process for the studies. The phrase "All 14 of the most highly cited papers in the study" implies that there were papers not in the study. Possible selection bias? 2. They do not go into why the 14 papers were cited so much and if any further research or refinement of the papers were done before they were accepted by other journals. Surface analysis of numbers can be manipulated to say anything. 3. They also say that it might be better to not have a review and just publish everything. This just means that everyone who reads the papers has to do the review. That is not practical. There are many papers that should not be published due to shoddy practices or malfeasance. Instead of trowing out the whole system how about looking at why the 14 papers were rejected and modifying the system accordingly. 4. The article does not give access to the study so we can review it. It is behind a paywall.
Two Words; Seat belts. You will still be a passenger in a small vehicle which could be involved in an accident. Personal restrains will still be required.
No. I fully believe that the cars HAVE reached that point.
It does not matter what you believe we factually have not reached that point yet. Google themselves have admitted that their vehicle does not work well in rain, snow or fog. There is also the issue that every road would have to be scanned and manually gone over for current technology cars to drive on them. I have yet to see a valid test of a vehicle driving into a random, unaugmented parking lot and parking.
There is no evidence in the ruling that the police used the identity of a real person to "friend" the suspect. It is legal for a create an insatgram account for a fictitious person.
According to a Ken Burns documentary. an amendment was used because the Temperance Movement thought a constitutional amendment would never be repealed. Amending the Constitution is difficult and the only way to repeal an Amendment is to make another Amendment. No Amendment had ever been repealed and it was thought that no Amendment ever would be. Federal laws, on the other hand, can be repealed by any sitting Congress. The Temperance Movement thought they had certainty with an Amendment. It was never tested as to whether a federal law would be shot down by the SCOTUS. Using a constitutional amendment was a choice not a requirement.
As evidence of this in 1914 the Federal government passed the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act which nationally regulated and taxed the production, importation, and distribution of opiates and coca products. That law was upheld by SCOTUS in United States v. Doremus, 249 u.s. 86. Regulating alcohol is quite similar to regulating narcotics but the Temperance Movement wanted the certainty, or at least what they thought was certainty, of a constitutional amendment.
Sorry but the evidence does not match the idea that Congress is now viewing the Constitution differently than they did in 1920.
The difference is that storing a tank's worth of gas does not require $12,000 in equipment.. How many batteries do you think will be used in a day? Even 100 batteries would mean $1.2M in batteries. The more batteries you have to keep "lying around" the higher the costs.
Say it takes 3 minutes to swap a battery and 30 minutes to recharge a battery. To service a continuous stream of vehicles at each battery swap station one would need to have 30/3=10 batteries charging per station. A Tesla Model S battery stores 85 kWh. To charge that in half an hour take at least 170KW. Now multiply that by the number of batteries charging would be 1.7MW draw on the grid. If you decrease the swap time the draw increases. Multiply that by the number of swap stations and the draw is even larger.
Swap stations don't work very well if you can not charge batteries at the rate they are swapped.
Because of these issues, researchers at NASA KSC have been studying a very intuitive method of 3D printing on the surfaces of other planets. Their method is very similar to that of large industrial selective laser sintering 3D printers, which lay down layers of material that are then sintered (melted and hardened) by heat lasers.
Slashdot Mirror
I guess you didn't read the reference you posted;
Experts have been working on the idea for almost a decade, Discover notes; it could be commercially viable within 10 years, the Navy says. Right now, however, researchers are showing off the technique using a model plane.
That technology is not available yet.
Use a heat gun to warp the board, melt the solder and pop the chips right off. An oven gives even heat which will not warp the board.
Sorry but you missed the point. The issues is that hot chips are causing local expansion on the board which causes warping and is breaking the solder connections. By putting the board in an oven you get even heating which does not warp the board and allows the older to re-flow. Disconnecting heat sinks would just make matters worse.
Or Canadian
I guess youforgot to read the last sentence of the article;
"We would have liked to have seen it become a museum, but it just wasn't in the cards," Navy spokesman Chris Johnson told Fox. "But unfortunately, it is a difficult proposition to raise funds. The group that was going to collect donations had a $35 million budget plan but was only able to raise $100,000."
The $35M was the budget to convert it into a museum.
It is much more complex than that. Pumping is nit sufficient as one would have to clean every pipe and tank. There are also toxic substances that can not be pumped out such as PCBs, and asbestos. It costs money to do that. The Oriskany, a smaller carrier at 30,800 tons/888 ft vs 56,000-ton/1,050ft, was sunk for a budget of $2.8M in 2006. Taking into account the larger size and inflation I bet $4.0M would not be an unreasonable figure. Now try to justify the Navy spending $4.0M to sink a ship instead of recycling the metal on board.
And if they can't take money there's no point in the system working at all.
And if people leave your system because they can not play then it is not good either. Nice rant against making money.
the "boo-hoo I have aspergers" defence.
Which will not work. I have Aspergers and know right from wrong. I too am fed up with idiots who have fun screwing up other people's fun. Go pick on another group.
we have sports like ballroom dance
As far as I can find the IOC has only recognized the World DanceSport Federation as the international body governing competitive ballroom dancing. There has been a lot of push to get ballroom dancing in the Olympics but as far as I can find it has never happened. If you can find any references to anyone actually winning a medal in ballroom dancing I would like to see it.
That is an argument for not allowing hotels to slap reviewers. It is a different issue.
BTW, the Blackpool issue has been resolved by the "fine" being reimbursed and the policy cancelled.
This is another example of how Uber has advantages over taxis. Most, if not all, taxi fares are highly regulated. A taxi company can not "adjust", read hike, fares in response to demand. If they could do it fares would be much higher on the weekends than on the week days.
This is yet another statistical study that itself has flaws.
1.What was the selection process for the studies. The phrase "All 14 of the most highly cited papers in the study" implies that there were papers not in the study. Possible selection bias?
2. They do not go into why the 14 papers were cited so much and if any further research or refinement of the papers were done before they were accepted by other journals. Surface analysis of numbers can be manipulated to say anything.
3. They also say that it might be better to not have a review and just publish everything. This just means that everyone who reads the papers has to do the review. That is not practical. There are many papers that should not be published due to shoddy practices or malfeasance. Instead of trowing out the whole system how about looking at why the 14 papers were rejected and modifying the system accordingly.
4. The article does not give access to the study so we can review it. It is behind a paywall.
Two Words; Seat belts. You will still be a passenger in a small vehicle which could be involved in an accident. Personal restrains will still be required.
the routing accounts for all those weird situations.
Except if the construction was on a street without another exit. There will be situations where routing will not work.
No. I fully believe that the cars HAVE reached that point.
It does not matter what you believe we factually have not reached that point yet. Google themselves have admitted that their vehicle does not work well in rain, snow or fog. There is also the issue that every road would have to be scanned and manually gone over for current technology cars to drive on them. I have yet to see a valid test of a vehicle driving into a random, unaugmented parking lot and parking.
That is a myth.
There is no evidence in the ruling that the police used the identity of a real person to "friend" the suspect. It is legal for a create an insatgram account for a fictitious person.
Please quote where in the US Constitution it says that. If that was true no undercover operation would ever work.
outside of specific, warrant backed undercover operations.
Under cover operations are not searches or seizures so warrants do not apply.
Lying and entrapment are very different things.
According to a Ken Burns documentary. an amendment was used because the Temperance Movement thought a constitutional amendment would never be repealed. Amending the Constitution is difficult and the only way to repeal an Amendment is to make another Amendment. No Amendment had ever been repealed and it was thought that no Amendment ever would be. Federal laws, on the other hand, can be repealed by any sitting Congress. The Temperance Movement thought they had certainty with an Amendment. It was never tested as to whether a federal law would be shot down by the SCOTUS. Using a constitutional amendment was a choice not a requirement.
As evidence of this in 1914 the Federal government passed the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act which nationally regulated and taxed the production, importation, and distribution of opiates and coca products. That law was upheld by SCOTUS in United States v. Doremus, 249 u.s. 86. Regulating alcohol is quite similar to regulating narcotics but the Temperance Movement wanted the certainty, or at least what they thought was certainty, of a constitutional amendment.
Sorry but the evidence does not match the idea that Congress is now viewing the Constitution differently than they did in 1920.
The difference is that storing a tank's worth of gas does not require $12,000 in equipment.. How many batteries do you think will be used in a day? Even 100 batteries would mean $1.2M in batteries. The more batteries you have to keep "lying around" the higher the costs.
Say it takes 3 minutes to swap a battery and 30 minutes to recharge a battery. To service a continuous stream of vehicles at each battery swap station one would need to have 30/3=10 batteries charging per station. A Tesla Model S battery stores 85 kWh. To charge that in half an hour take at least 170KW. Now multiply that by the number of batteries charging would be 1.7MW draw on the grid. If you decrease the swap time the draw increases. Multiply that by the number of swap stations and the draw is even larger.
Swap stations don't work very well if you can not charge batteries at the rate they are swapped.
Communists can also be terrorists. They are not mutually exclusive.
Because of these issues, researchers at NASA KSC have been studying a very intuitive method of 3D printing on the surfaces of other planets. Their method is very similar to that of large industrial selective laser sintering 3D printers, which lay down layers of material that are then sintered (melted and hardened) by heat lasers.
They are not talking about using liquids at all