How can we out innovate when large corporations are selling technology to foreign countries? Think GE selling jet engine designs to China so they can get some short term profit.
Let me start by saying that I am naturally skeptical of this sort of deal. However let me offer the logic that may be behind this decision...
Basically GE has competition and believes that if they decline the offer then a competitor may accept it. In this scenario they lose in both the short term and the long term. To prevent the tech transfer GE and its competitors must essentially establish a cartel and coordinate their actions. The problem is that cartels almost always fail, some member almost always cheats. The "cheating" may not even be greed based, one member may be losing in the market and about to fail so it sells off its tech (or itself) to avoid going out of business. The cartel not only has to coordinate to prevent tech transfer but it would also have to coordinate to keep all members at some minimal level of health. So it is highly likely that someone is going to transfer the tech. GE's logic may be that since someone will most likely do it, they might as well be that someone.
Essentially they may believe that the long term is already lost and that the short term is the only potential win.
Personally I agree with the philosophy that decision makers should be thinking long term except when short term survival is in question. However what does one do when the long term options seem to all be bad? Emotionally I want to say that GE is being dumb or greedy but I can't honestly say that this is the case, a lot more info is needed.
And if that cylinder had been sitting against the wall of a car or truck (or nearly so) and not been free to accelerate over fifty or so feet? A fun video for sure but its not quite the circumstances we are discussing.
A 40 pound projectile moving at 500mph is not "just air", if it gets lose in a confined area, the question ain't if it'll go trough the window, but if it'll go trough the *wall
Note that we are discussing suba tanks being driven around in cars for many decades. They are not free to accelerate and get up to speed. Especially so since the burst disc failure prevents the neck/regulator failure you describe.
You do -not- want to be close to a 3000psi pressurised tank that ruptures.
Again, the point of the burst disc is that the disc ruptures, not the cylinder. Gas is vented over a longer duration of time than if there had been a catastrophic failure.
That compressed gas, stored at pressure as high as 5,000 pounds per square inch, represents energy waiting to be released.
Not sure I'd want to be an a 1.0 version consumer vehicle with that much pressure without some serious discussion about the safety precautions to prevent or mitigate "unexpected pressure drops". Can someone who's got more experience with the fluid mechanics add to this?
Scuba divers drive around with aluminum cylinders containing air at 3,000 PSI. Safety "burst" discs are built into the regulator of the cylinders so that if over pressurization occurs they rupture. The results are frightening and embarrassing but its only air and not shrapnel since the cylinder remains intact. I expect there are similar technologies in the pressure vessels in these cars.
except at night when most of those plants *produce* CO2 to respire just like everything else.
While growing its still a net CO2 sequestration. Sort of on topic but also interesting:
"A new NASA computer modeling effort has found that additional growth of plants and trees in a world with doubled atmospheric carbon dioxide levels would create a new negative feedback – a cooling effect – in the Earth's climate system that could work to reduce future global warming." http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/cooling-plant-growth.html
Only plants which tie the CO2 up in wood or which get burried and turned into oil take more out of the atmostphere than they put back.
I believe plants have some direct uses beyond wood and there is also the potential for things like plastic precursors (eliminating another need for petroleum).
"Now, in a first step toward achieving industrial-scale green production, scientists from the U.S. Department of Energys (DOE) Brookhaven National Laboratory and collaborators at Dow AgroSciences report engineering a plant that produces industrially relevant levels of compounds that could potentially be used to make plastics." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101108140638.htm
So just "plants" isn't good enough.
it has to be the right plants.
In general I think it is plants that are in a growth phase, not necessarily particular species.
What new infrastructure? Hydrogen would need an entirely new infrastructure...
The bacteria produce hydrocarbons (gasoline, diesel, jet fuel), not hydrogen. That is why there is literally no new infrastructure, no new engines.
The general consensus is that electric vehicles will not add more than a few percentage points to grid load, and in fact might make it easier to control the grid by acting as temporary storage.
That seems contradictory with respect to electrics not needing new infrastructure. How are all those EV's plugged in during the day when peak load occurs and they act as a power source?
Even if it is only an additional 3% that has a huge effect on the many areas that are already seeing periodic brownouts.
Sounds great, but doesn't really address the problem of internal combustion engines having only 30% efficiency. Why jump through all those hoops if we could gather electricity with photovoltaic panels and then use much more efficient electrical engines? Does anyone here know how much energy that'd generate per acre versus the bacteria? I mean as long as we're looking for long-term solutions, why not focus on better plans? We're only short of light, infinitely rechargeable batteries or power lines along the roads by now.
You are sort of answering your own question. The "hoops" for bacteria generated fuel are smaller and fewer than the "hoops" for creating an entirely new infrastructure. In addition to the improvements in battery technology and massive new power generation and transmission requirements that you allude to there is also the environmental effects of the mining and transportation of the resources (ex lithium) necessary for all those new batteries and the recycling and waste handling of all the batteries that will be periodically replaced. In contrast the bacteria produced fuels use the existing tech and infrastructure and replace a dirty source with a possibly clean source.
The bacteria produced fuel seems to be a *clean* fuel unlike fuel distilled from petroleum. The CO2 from petroleum is CO2 sequestered by ancient forests and is being reintroduced to the atmosphere, increasing the C02 content of the atmosphere. The company describes their process as "artificial photosynthesis". If so then the CO2 from bacteria produced fuel is coming from the atmosphere. When burned its returning the CO2 it removed so there is no overall increase. Much as rain does not add to the ocean since the water was evaporated from the ocean in the first place.
Now we just need a bacterial fuel additive to eliminate CO2 emissions:)
There is already a biological solution for removing CO2 from the atmosphere. They are called plants.
Reducing emissions and alternate sources of energy are fine but they are only *part* of a potential solution. More plants is another *part*. If we ignore the plants side of the solution we are going to require more draconian measures on the other side and this will just increase resistance and impede progress.
My anecdotal evidence trumps your empirical evidence any day!
They are not necessarily reaching their goal of better searches, they are simply meeting their design specification. Their metrics are a model, a guess, at what better search results *may* be. If the metrics are off, then their results will probably also be off.
Isn't RFI from a lightning strike a momentary issue as opposed to a handheld device which is an ongoing issue? A hypothetical error in navigational data for a second seems far less of an issue than a hypothetical error in navigational data for an hour.
... I don't see how flight avionics, which also have to be hardened against increased cosmic radiation and RFI from operating closer to the ionosphere, are so sensitive to relatively low power transmitters...
I'm not sure the lower power transmitter argument is a viable one. Certainly navigation towers are using much higher power transmitters but isn't there also a distance squared component? Once distance is factored in how does that tower many miles away compared to the onboard device?
... I don't see how flight avionics, which also have to be hardened against increased cosmic radiation and RFI from operating closer to the ionosphere, are so sensitive to relatively low power transmitters...
Perhaps it has to do with all the experimentation and decades of experience and data dealing with external EMF/RFI? Internal sources of EMF/RFI may be more of an unknown, only a "relatively" recent issue?
... however it's entirely possible that Google has a copyright assignment agreement with the ASF. If this is the case, they may simply be putting an ASF copyright header at the top of Android source files, with the assumption that people at the ASF will pick up any that are actually useful and incorporate them into their codebases. This would mean that the ASF actually does own the subset of this code that Google has the right to assign...
An AC posted a header. If accurate it seems to license not assign ownership:
"Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more contributor license agreements."
More accurately he is just repackaging *traditional* republican arguments (which may or may not resemble some contemporary republicans).
Did you mean lowercase "republican", as in a form of government, or did you mean pre-neocon "Republican", as in the political party before Bill Kristol/Karl Rove?
Sort of the later, however I don't see a strict line of demarcation. Contrary to popular opinion, republicans can be a diverse group. Karl Rove is no more the typical republican than Nancy Pelosi is the typical democrat. I'm thinking more of the people on the "street" rather than the people on TV.
"Woosh"? Maybe, but are you referring to shared groups? If so then it seems people know how they are characterized. I'm suggesting something where your "facebook friend" does not know how they have been categorized.
... Keep it accessable & live, and migrate it each time you upgrade your system. Sure, I've got a few 5.25" floppies around, but how to read them? Keep it spinning & live.
I don't think you have to keep the old hardware spinning for more than a generation or two. I have a DVD with my backups (src and doc, not OS or apps which I could just reinstall). The current DVD includes older CD based backups. The CD backups include older QIC-80 tape based backups. The QIC-80 tapes include older diskette based backups. Next year I expect it will all be on a blue ray.
Be careful with fire safes. They are generally designed and rated for paper, not electronic media, and will get too hot for electronics to survive. Be sure the safe you get is rated for electronic media. Also such electronic media rated safes I've seen are really designed for disaster not security, a claw hammer can probably open them. If you are just storing your family photos this is probably a plus.
(1) Have facebook support user defined expiration dates.
(2) Have facebook allow a user to subcategorize friends, subcategories would just be a configuration item not a publicly displayed state. Perhaps family, friends and coworkers. You can then tag photos to be only shown to particular subcategories.
"Snyder mentioned a concept called "open-source economic development." He said the state is going to look at every region and see which area is the best at a certain practice and ask if the community is willing to share it with the rest of the state."
More accurately he is just repackaging *traditional* republican arguments (which may or may not resemble some contemporary republicans). Basically the idea is that rather than have some central authority decide upon a solution let lower level authorities address the issue so that we essentially have multiple experiments running in parallel to see what approaches work best. Some republicans and libertarians will further argue that such local approaches also leverage the fact that one problem may have multiple causes and one cause may dominate in one area while a different cause dominates a different area, leading to larger scale one-size-fits-all approaches often favored by central authorities being less efficient.
Let conservatives call this one thing and let liberals call this something else, whatever its called maybe we'll get more effective government if the idea is actually put into practice.
Slashdot Mirror
How can we out innovate when large corporations are selling technology to foreign countries? Think GE selling jet engine designs to China so they can get some short term profit.
Let me start by saying that I am naturally skeptical of this sort of deal. However let me offer the logic that may be behind this decision ...
Basically GE has competition and believes that if they decline the offer then a competitor may accept it. In this scenario they lose in both the short term and the long term. To prevent the tech transfer GE and its competitors must essentially establish a cartel and coordinate their actions. The problem is that cartels almost always fail, some member almost always cheats. The "cheating" may not even be greed based, one member may be losing in the market and about to fail so it sells off its tech (or itself) to avoid going out of business. The cartel not only has to coordinate to prevent tech transfer but it would also have to coordinate to keep all members at some minimal level of health. So it is highly likely that someone is going to transfer the tech. GE's logic may be that since someone will most likely do it, they might as well be that someone.
Essentially they may believe that the long term is already lost and that the short term is the only potential win.
Personally I agree with the philosophy that decision makers should be thinking long term except when short term survival is in question. However what does one do when the long term options seem to all be bad? Emotionally I want to say that GE is being dumb or greedy but I can't honestly say that this is the case, a lot more info is needed.
And if that cylinder had been sitting against the wall of a car or truck (or nearly so) and not been free to accelerate over fifty or so feet? A fun video for sure but its not quite the circumstances we are discussing.
A 40 pound projectile moving at 500mph is not "just air", if it gets lose in a confined area, the question ain't if it'll go trough the window, but if it'll go trough the *wall
Note that we are discussing suba tanks being driven around in cars for many decades. They are not free to accelerate and get up to speed. Especially so since the burst disc failure prevents the neck/regulator failure you describe.
You do -not- want to be close to a 3000psi pressurised tank that ruptures.
Again, the point of the burst disc is that the disc ruptures, not the cylinder. Gas is vented over a longer duration of time than if there had been a catastrophic failure.
FTFA:
That compressed gas, stored at pressure as high as 5,000 pounds per square inch, represents energy waiting to be released.
Not sure I'd want to be an a 1.0 version consumer vehicle with that much pressure without some serious discussion about the safety precautions to prevent or mitigate "unexpected pressure drops". Can someone who's got more experience with the fluid mechanics add to this?
Scuba divers drive around with aluminum cylinders containing air at 3,000 PSI. Safety "burst" discs are built into the regulator of the cylinders so that if over pressurization occurs they rupture. The results are frightening and embarrassing but its only air and not shrapnel since the cylinder remains intact. I expect there are similar technologies in the pressure vessels in these cars.
except at night when most of those plants *produce* CO2 to respire just like everything else.
While growing its still a net CO2 sequestration. Sort of on topic but also interesting:
"A new NASA computer modeling effort has found that additional growth of plants and trees in a world with doubled atmospheric carbon dioxide levels would create a new negative feedback – a cooling effect – in the Earth's climate system that could work to reduce future global warming."
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/cooling-plant-growth.html
Only plants which tie the CO2 up in wood or which get burried and turned into oil take more out of the atmostphere than they put back.
I believe plants have some direct uses beyond wood and there is also the potential for things like plastic precursors (eliminating another need for petroleum).
"Now, in a first step toward achieving industrial-scale green production, scientists from the U.S. Department of Energys (DOE) Brookhaven National Laboratory and collaborators at Dow AgroSciences report engineering a plant that produces industrially relevant levels of compounds that could potentially be used to make plastics."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101108140638.htm
So just "plants" isn't good enough. it has to be the right plants.
In general I think it is plants that are in a growth phase, not necessarily particular species.
What new infrastructure? Hydrogen would need an entirely new infrastructure ...
The bacteria produce hydrocarbons (gasoline, diesel, jet fuel), not hydrogen. That is why there is literally no new infrastructure, no new engines.
The general consensus is that electric vehicles will not add more than a few percentage points to grid load, and in fact might make it easier to control the grid by acting as temporary storage.
That seems contradictory with respect to electrics not needing new infrastructure. How are all those EV's plugged in during the day when peak load occurs and they act as a power source?
Even if it is only an additional 3% that has a huge effect on the many areas that are already seeing periodic brownouts.
Huzzah! Perpetual Motion At Last!
Actually its not perpetual motion since the sun is constantly introducing energy and power the process.
Sounds great, but doesn't really address the problem of internal combustion engines having only 30% efficiency. Why jump through all those hoops if we could gather electricity with photovoltaic panels and then use much more efficient electrical engines? Does anyone here know how much energy that'd generate per acre versus the bacteria? I mean as long as we're looking for long-term solutions, why not focus on better plans? We're only short of light, infinitely rechargeable batteries or power lines along the roads by now.
You are sort of answering your own question. The "hoops" for bacteria generated fuel are smaller and fewer than the "hoops" for creating an entirely new infrastructure. In addition to the improvements in battery technology and massive new power generation and transmission requirements that you allude to there is also the environmental effects of the mining and transportation of the resources (ex lithium) necessary for all those new batteries and the recycling and waste handling of all the batteries that will be periodically replaced. In contrast the bacteria produced fuels use the existing tech and infrastructure and replace a dirty source with a possibly clean source.
The bacteria produced fuel seems to be a *clean* fuel unlike fuel distilled from petroleum. The CO2 from petroleum is CO2 sequestered by ancient forests and is being reintroduced to the atmosphere, increasing the C02 content of the atmosphere. The company describes their process as "artificial photosynthesis". If so then the CO2 from bacteria produced fuel is coming from the atmosphere. When burned its returning the CO2 it removed so there is no overall increase. Much as rain does not add to the ocean since the water was evaporated from the ocean in the first place.
Now we just need a bacterial fuel additive to eliminate CO2 emissions :)
There is already a biological solution for removing CO2 from the atmosphere. They are called plants.
Reducing emissions and alternate sources of energy are fine but they are only *part* of a potential solution. More plants is another *part*. If we ignore the plants side of the solution we are going to require more draconian measures on the other side and this will just increase resistance and impede progress.
My anecdotal evidence trumps your empirical evidence any day!
They are not necessarily reaching their goal of better searches, they are simply meeting their design specification. Their metrics are a model, a guess, at what better search results *may* be. If the metrics are off, then their results will probably also be off.
Isn't RFI from a lightning strike a momentary issue as opposed to a handheld device which is an ongoing issue? A hypothetical error in navigational data for a second seems far less of an issue than a hypothetical error in navigational data for an hour.
... It seems hard to believe that every third car in 1985 had voided their warranty when they installed a CB radio ...
FWIW I would guess that to be closer to 1975 than 1985. My recollection is that the fad had ended well before 1985.
... I don't see how flight avionics, which also have to be hardened against increased cosmic radiation and RFI from operating closer to the ionosphere, are so sensitive to relatively low power transmitters ...
I'm not sure the lower power transmitter argument is a viable one. Certainly navigation towers are using much higher power transmitters but isn't there also a distance squared component? Once distance is factored in how does that tower many miles away compared to the onboard device?
... I don't see how flight avionics, which also have to be hardened against increased cosmic radiation and RFI from operating closer to the ionosphere, are so sensitive to relatively low power transmitters ...
Perhaps it has to do with all the experimentation and decades of experience and data dealing with external EMF/RFI? Internal sources of EMF/RFI may be more of an unknown, only a "relatively" recent issue?
... however it's entirely possible that Google has a copyright assignment agreement with the ASF. If this is the case, they may simply be putting an ASF copyright header at the top of Android source files, with the assumption that people at the ASF will pick up any that are actually useful and incorporate them into their codebases. This would mean that the ASF actually does own the subset of this code that Google has the right to assign ...
An AC posted a header. If accurate it seems to license not assign ownership:
"Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more contributor license agreements."
Just print out the ones and zeros on paper, and store it in a fire safe. Or for advanced data compression, print it in hex.
My faith in OCR is not that great so I'll pass on that option. :-)
More accurately he is just repackaging *traditional* republican arguments (which may or may not resemble some contemporary republicans).
Did you mean lowercase "republican", as in a form of government, or did you mean pre-neocon "Republican", as in the political party before Bill Kristol/Karl Rove?
Sort of the later, however I don't see a strict line of demarcation. Contrary to popular opinion, republicans can be a diverse group. Karl Rove is no more the typical republican than Nancy Pelosi is the typical democrat. I'm thinking more of the people on the "street" rather than the people on TV.
Thank you. Lists sound like what I was looking for. I'll go through the fb ui and settings again.
"Woosh"? Maybe, but are you referring to shared groups? If so then it seems people know how they are characterized. I'm suggesting something where your "facebook friend" does not know how they have been categorized.
... Keep it accessable & live, and migrate it each time you upgrade your system. Sure, I've got a few 5.25" floppies around, but how to read them? Keep it spinning & live.
I don't think you have to keep the old hardware spinning for more than a generation or two. I have a DVD with my backups (src and doc, not OS or apps which I could just reinstall). The current DVD includes older CD based backups. The CD backups include older QIC-80 tape based backups. The QIC-80 tapes include older diskette based backups. Next year I expect it will all be on a blue ray.
Be careful with fire safes. They are generally designed and rated for paper, not electronic media, and will get too hot for electronics to survive. Be sure the safe you get is rated for electronic media. Also such electronic media rated safes I've seen are really designed for disaster not security, a claw hammer can probably open them. If you are just storing your family photos this is probably a plus.
(1) Have facebook support user defined expiration dates.
(2) Have facebook allow a user to subcategorize friends, subcategories would just be a configuration item not a publicly displayed state. Perhaps family, friends and coworkers. You can then tag photos to be only shown to particular subcategories.
and did that 'constitutional' model help ANY of the bullshit we have experienced in the last decade ?
Perhaps the problem was that the constitutional model was not being followed.
He is just dropping buzzwords:
"Snyder mentioned a concept called "open-source economic development." He said the state is going to look at every region and see which area is the best at a certain practice and ask if the community is willing to share it with the rest of the state."
More accurately he is just repackaging *traditional* republican arguments (which may or may not resemble some contemporary republicans). Basically the idea is that rather than have some central authority decide upon a solution let lower level authorities address the issue so that we essentially have multiple experiments running in parallel to see what approaches work best. Some republicans and libertarians will further argue that such local approaches also leverage the fact that one problem may have multiple causes and one cause may dominate in one area while a different cause dominates a different area, leading to larger scale one-size-fits-all approaches often favored by central authorities being less efficient.
Let conservatives call this one thing and let liberals call this something else, whatever its called maybe we'll get more effective government if the idea is actually put into practice.