For a typical cross-country flight in a commercial airplane, you are likely to receive 2 to 5 millirem (mrem) of radiation, less than half the radiation dose you receive from a chest x-ray.
So you may be right about that. However, the observation posted by commodore64_love above about the concentration of the scanner dose in the skin does alter the picture a little.
And then I RTFL and answered my own question. Of course it was struck down after the fact, no patent clerk is going to look up Donald Duck before granting what is otherwise a creative patent.
That's exactly what the paper researched, if I read it correctly. They compared the total lifecycle impact of gas and electric cars, and concluded that the lifetime impact of an electric car using conventional electricity would be similar to the lifetime impact of a gasoline car getting 60 mpg.
Or did I miss something, and they only look at the batteries (as consumables) and not account for the drive train (in either gas or electric)? It's still a worthwhile comparison, because excepting the batteries, an electric drive train should last as long and with far less maintenance than a gasoline drive train.
My gut reaction, of course, is that you can say what you like about manufacturing, but don't underestimate the carbon produced by a car over its 10-20 years burning thousands of gallons of gasoline in a less-than-perfect engine.
You forgot the number of people who would have a dashed difficult time eating dinner without a knife, and might starve as a result. "Hold on a second honey, just let me tear this steak up with my bear hands. Isn't it great knowing that we won't be attacked at knife-point by law-abiding citizens anymore?"
Haha, yeah. If you convince them to behave rationally, they might not buy a car at all. But the SUV as a house thing comes in real handy when they get evicted for not paying the mortgage in favor of the three car payments.
Yes, they are actuallybetter than any gasoline car out there, and on par with modern hybrids, even assuming you don't use much renewable energy to charge it.
Taking into account the standard electricity generation mix in Europe the researchers concluded that to be more environmentally friendly than an EV a gasoline car would need to have a fuel efficiency of more than 59 miles per U.S. gallon.
Hook it up to solar panels exclusively, and you've got yourself a lean, green, driving machine.
There's no point, man. It's cheaper to put in the extra development to improve efficiency than it is to make a suboptimal drop-in design with overcapacity to make up for it. I can't possibly see what the point of insisting on a drop-in design is from a consumer's standpoint.
That's right. We're consumers! We vote with our wallets! And since all smartphones are terribly unsecure and overpriced, I'm voting for the dumbphone! End of problem.
All that matters is that it's open to third party hardware and third party developers in general. The exact nature of that openness is irrelevant as far as the consumer is concerned. All that matters is that there is competition among hardware and software vendors to drive down the price of systems and increase compatibility, and people will buy it in ever-increasing numbers. This obviously will never happen with Apple's OS since there is no hardware compatibility or competition.
The Romans started using concrete before 200 B.C., but Wikipedia says the Egyptian pyramids were built with concrete long before that. So that makes its invention 2200-4600 years ago.
IMO "several hundred" was correct.
From your link: "being more than two but fewer than many". Considering civilization has only been around for ~60 centuries, "several" is arguably less than twenty. Try "many hundreds" next time you go for your pedantic medal. Thanks for playing.
But they also have to pay to deliver them. I would probably be cheaper to mail them to the maybe 20% of users who request them than to go around throwing them at everybody's houses in your own trucks.
Back in the stone age, phones worked when the power went out. Now that we're in the enlightened age, we have far more downstream switching hardware on limited-time UPSs which when they run out, entire network segments go down.
Bizarre circumstances do arise, however. Last summer, the power went out for much of my county for a couple of days. My neighbors on RCN land lines had no phone service, but when I hooked some solar panels up to my FIOS modem, I discovered that the upstream FIOS routers were still functioning. It may have turned off the Internet, but phone traffic was getting through. So maybe with even more advanced technology we can return to stone-age functionality.
I think the point is that in the Internet Age information is not something that can be sold, period. Services and physical media can be provided for a fee, but information itself is no longer--and maybe never was--a product to be bought or sold. People who want to contribute to support an artist will do so however they can, but they will be discouraged if the only avenue is through an extortionist publisher. People who don't want to contribute will obtain the information however they want, and no business model will change that. The two activities can no longer be exclusively linked.
My gold standard at this point is, for all its woes, National Public Radio. Their sole purpose is to create content to be distributed freely. They are funded directly by the subset of their audience willing and able to contribute, but bear no grudge to those unwilling or unable, and simply work within the budget society is willing to provide. They take in revenue from selling physical media, yes, but uncompensated donations make up a much larger chunk. The audience is the employer whom they must please, not the product whom they must sell to advertisers. In my mind, this is what content producers should be.
My kingdom for a mod point, this is probably the most obvious stupidity of the TSA. Why the fuck would a pilot need a bomb? He has one already! The only reason it could possibly be a problem is if he was in cahoots to take down a *different* plane--hand off the bomb itself to the suicide freak after the checkpoint, and he could do a couple of them before getting caught. But even so, it's a lot of work to become a certified pilot--a lot more than showing up and asking "how to fly a big plane, no worry how to land". I think it would be easy to argue that the pilots should be trusted MORE than the TSA agents themselves.
I expect if you use more data than that, a mainstream carrier would make sense. T-mobile offers unlimited data for $40/mo prepaid, with $0.45/min prepaid voice, or $50/mo unlimited voice+text, 1.2GB data. In most cases you can activate your unlocked phone on a carrier that sells locked phones. I use Pageplus because I only use 60 minutes per month and no data so anything other than pay-as-you-go is pointless. But no matter what your situation, there is almost no reason to lock yourself into a contract anymore--the prepaid rates are usually better than the contract rates, and you can see for yourself what you save by buying your own phone.
Platform independent malware is simply not reasonable. Different strains can be written for different systems
Exactly. Just like how dogs don't get lyme disease and birds don't get swine flu, or something like that. Writing a virus that could mutate to port itself to a different system, however, would be truly amazing.
Slashdot Mirror
Good point. I guess that's why we don't hear people complaining that 16 people will die every year from chest-xray-induced cancer.
IANATL: I Am Not A Tax Lawyer.
The terrorists are plotting an earthquake! Everybody panic!
For a typical cross-country flight in a commercial airplane, you are likely to receive 2 to 5 millirem (mrem) of radiation, less than half the radiation dose you receive from a chest x-ray.
So you may be right about that. However, the observation posted by commodore64_love above about the concentration of the scanner dose in the skin does alter the picture a little.
Foam rubber shark fins. Definitely foam rubber shark fins. But only ones with lasers in them.
And then I RTFL and answered my own question. Of course it was struck down after the fact, no patent clerk is going to look up Donald Duck before granting what is otherwise a creative patent.
You mean back when prior art was actually a considered before granting/denying a patent? Or did that come up in a law suit like everything else?
I'm so sorry, you're right. You'll just have to bare with me on this one.
That's exactly what the paper researched, if I read it correctly. They compared the total lifecycle impact of gas and electric cars, and concluded that the lifetime impact of an electric car using conventional electricity would be similar to the lifetime impact of a gasoline car getting 60 mpg.
Or did I miss something, and they only look at the batteries (as consumables) and not account for the drive train (in either gas or electric)? It's still a worthwhile comparison, because excepting the batteries, an electric drive train should last as long and with far less maintenance than a gasoline drive train.
My gut reaction, of course, is that you can say what you like about manufacturing, but don't underestimate the carbon produced by a car over its 10-20 years burning thousands of gallons of gasoline in a less-than-perfect engine.
You forgot the number of people who would have a dashed difficult time eating dinner without a knife, and might starve as a result. "Hold on a second honey, just let me tear this steak up with my bear hands. Isn't it great knowing that we won't be attacked at knife-point by law-abiding citizens anymore?"
Haha, yeah. If you convince them to behave rationally, they might not buy a car at all. But the SUV as a house thing comes in real handy when they get evicted for not paying the mortgage in favor of the three car payments.
Yes, they are actually better than any gasoline car out there, and on par with modern hybrids, even assuming you don't use much renewable energy to charge it.
Taking into account the standard electricity generation mix in Europe the researchers concluded that to be more environmentally friendly than an EV a gasoline car would need to have a fuel efficiency of more than 59 miles per U.S. gallon.
Hook it up to solar panels exclusively, and you've got yourself a lean, green, driving machine.
There's no point, man. It's cheaper to put in the extra development to improve efficiency than it is to make a suboptimal drop-in design with overcapacity to make up for it. I can't possibly see what the point of insisting on a drop-in design is from a consumer's standpoint.
That's right. We're consumers! We vote with our wallets! And since all smartphones are terribly unsecure and overpriced, I'm voting for the dumbphone! End of problem.
All that matters is that it's open to third party hardware and third party developers in general. The exact nature of that openness is irrelevant as far as the consumer is concerned. All that matters is that there is competition among hardware and software vendors to drive down the price of systems and increase compatibility, and people will buy it in ever-increasing numbers. This obviously will never happen with Apple's OS since there is no hardware compatibility or competition.
Of course I failed at my own game. 4000 years is better described as "several thousand" than "many hundred" in any case. Gotung was right.
The Romans invented concrete.
That's only 1600-2200 or so years ago.
The Romans started using concrete before 200 B.C., but Wikipedia says the Egyptian pyramids were built with concrete long before that. So that makes its invention 2200-4600 years ago.
IMO "several hundred" was correct.
From your link: "being more than two but fewer than many". Considering civilization has only been around for ~60 centuries, "several" is arguably less than twenty. Try "many hundreds" next time you go for your pedantic medal. Thanks for playing.
But they also have to pay to deliver them. I would probably be cheaper to mail them to the maybe 20% of users who request them than to go around throwing them at everybody's houses in your own trucks.
Back in the stone age, phones worked when the power went out. Now that we're in the enlightened age, we have far more downstream switching hardware on limited-time UPSs which when they run out, entire network segments go down.
Bizarre circumstances do arise, however. Last summer, the power went out for much of my county for a couple of days. My neighbors on RCN land lines had no phone service, but when I hooked some solar panels up to my FIOS modem, I discovered that the upstream FIOS routers were still functioning. It may have turned off the Internet, but phone traffic was getting through. So maybe with even more advanced technology we can return to stone-age functionality.
I think the point is that in the Internet Age information is not something that can be sold, period. Services and physical media can be provided for a fee, but information itself is no longer--and maybe never was--a product to be bought or sold. People who want to contribute to support an artist will do so however they can, but they will be discouraged if the only avenue is through an extortionist publisher. People who don't want to contribute will obtain the information however they want, and no business model will change that. The two activities can no longer be exclusively linked.
My gold standard at this point is, for all its woes, National Public Radio. Their sole purpose is to create content to be distributed freely. They are funded directly by the subset of their audience willing and able to contribute, but bear no grudge to those unwilling or unable, and simply work within the budget society is willing to provide. They take in revenue from selling physical media, yes, but uncompensated donations make up a much larger chunk. The audience is the employer whom they must please, not the product whom they must sell to advertisers. In my mind, this is what content producers should be.
My kingdom for a mod point, this is probably the most obvious stupidity of the TSA. Why the fuck would a pilot need a bomb? He has one already! The only reason it could possibly be a problem is if he was in cahoots to take down a *different* plane--hand off the bomb itself to the suicide freak after the checkpoint, and he could do a couple of them before getting caught. But even so, it's a lot of work to become a certified pilot--a lot more than showing up and asking "how to fly a big plane, no worry how to land". I think it would be easy to argue that the pilots should be trusted MORE than the TSA agents themselves.
I expect if you use more data than that, a mainstream carrier would make sense. T-mobile offers unlimited data for $40/mo prepaid, with $0.45/min prepaid voice, or $50/mo unlimited voice+text, 1.2GB data. In most cases you can activate your unlocked phone on a carrier that sells locked phones. I use Pageplus because I only use 60 minutes per month and no data so anything other than pay-as-you-go is pointless. But no matter what your situation, there is almost no reason to lock yourself into a contract anymore--the prepaid rates are usually better than the contract rates, and you can see for yourself what you save by buying your own phone.
Platform independent malware is simply not reasonable. Different strains can be written for different systems
Exactly. Just like how dogs don't get lyme disease and birds don't get swine flu, or something like that. Writing a virus that could mutate to port itself to a different system, however, would be truly amazing.
Plus, they really like seafood. This city could follow the fish.
Until they run out of fish. Then they would have nowhere to go.
It's from an Apple ad: http://images.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac/apple-getamac-security_480x376.mov