To be fair, I think that at least hydro would overtake nuclear if both current "no proliferation risk is acceptable no matter how small" principle on fuel recycling persists and if costs of dismantling reactors are as high as some estimate. Last I checked, hydro and nuclear fission are in a fairly tight race on which one is most economical.
However many of the uses convert electric energy to things like formulation of chemical bonds that require energy for creation. For example plastic manufacturing. Additionally any usage occurs away from immediate vicinity of the turbine in most cases.
As a result it is a factually correct statement to note that wind power plant removes energy from entropic system known as atmosphere.
As I note below, they go beyond that. They even weight R&D costs in a way that ensures that nuclear is over an order of magnitude more costly in terms of those as well, because they count the research that was done long ago, long before the age of computers as very expensive.
It removes energy from the atmosphere and transfers part of it it into electric energy in the wires leading away from the plant. Other part is converted into heat on the plant itself or on transfer lines and released back into atmosphere.
And fuck me, I should have read on before commenting. They then proceed to tack on R&D costs on top of nuclear, just to be safe. The pie chart looks utterly awesome, stating that 66% of all energy related R&D was aimed at nuclear fission, while only 2.4% went to wind.
Damn it doesn't pay to do research before modern efficient methods and things like computer modelling were implemented with this model.
I'm actually reading the report right now and my jaw is literally lying on the floor. They openly admit that they have no clue how much Nuclear actually cost, but they estimate, and I kid you not, that "total investment support for coal, nuclear and hydropower capacity in 2012 is estimated between 3 and 15 billion in 2013 euros. Then they "weight the nuclear" because "average historic support for nuclear generation capacity is higher than that of coal and hydro".
Basically, they have an error margin of half a fucking order of magnitude and then they weight it against nuclear just to be on the safe side.
No wonder they got the conclusions stated, and no wonder that this report isn't released. It's utterly absurd in its current state. I suspect that this is interim because this is what pro-wind lobby came up with, and next there'll be a sanity check to get rid of the biggest points of idiocy to make it look at least remotely feasible.
Not only that, but they actually stack the deck from the other side as well by assigning penalties to "old investments made under non-liberalized investment regime" (i.e. if you had a plant built in the 70s, they add huge costs because they can't accurately evaluate the values of government support). Finally they count the plants that are nearing end of life as a huge cost burden on things like coal because of the sheer number of the plants.
I have filed tax write offs on my personal taxes before in relation to "earning related spending" related to a hobby of mine that actually earns me a reasonable sum on the side. You simply write it into the tax return papers, include the receipt and send it to the tax office.
There is? I've been in quite a few kennels and I find the sound to be quite normal.
Of course, I'm not a complete idiot and a raging psychopath who thinks that intelligence agencies go around openly and brutally killing their noisiest critics instead of discrediting them.
Is that before or after the angry mob tears most of the NSA bosses to bloody pieces on the streets?
Because it will require some hardcore desperation on part of intelligence to do something that stupid and self-incriminating, and suggests complete lack of options.
Snowden didn't have any material for about a year now. He surrendered everything before accepting asylum in Russia, as that was one of their terms for offering him asylum. It's all in hands of journalists now.
Staggered release is done so that problem stays on the news, and people don't forget that his problem persists.
See, when they took in Snowden, they had a list of terms for him. One was that he would not leak anything while he was in their country.
Snowden agreed, and before accepting asylum he sent everything he had to a few responsible outlets, who are now doing the staggered release of information.
To be fair, almost no consumers have any use for double. And commercial entities who do usually don't mind the extra zero at the end of GPU's cost, because to them, that's just expenses to be written off on their taxes.
And there's a whole lot more to life support than oxygen. People need to eat, shit, piss. Air pressure and humidity needs to be just right. Compartment needs to be kept at right temperature. And countless other features.
Space is an extremely hostile environment for species evolved to operate at a bottom of an atmosphere, and maintaining a habitable environment is extremely resource consuming endeavour.
12 mysogynist kids apparently have indeed moved on. The >12.000 adults pissed off at utter lack of ethics and betrayal by people they expected to stand by them and their hobby on the other hand are just getting started.
The said comment is complete and utter bullshit. When he did his Guns of Icarus thing with other people, he always disclosed it in video description. After some desperate gamasutra folks (who notably have massive vested interest in sinking Bain, NerdCubed and a couple of other big youtube gaming commentators, because they have been massively eating into their audience numbers) started whining that disclosure in video description was not enough (according to the laws, yes it is), he added a short message to the beginning of every such video where he states any potential sources of interest he may have, down to having received a review copy.
Notably, gamasutra itself does not do this, and has been central to the whole gamergate scandal which revolves exactly around this kind of acting, only with gamasutra folks not disclosing their conflicts of interest anywhere. Not in descriptions, not in topics, not in articles. Nowhere.
Frankly, Bain goes to ridiculous lengths to disclose any potential conflict of interest he has nowadays, to the point of holding 3-hour talk marathons with developers (including CEO of the company that bought the sponsored content you talk about) and games media journalists partially on this topic and then puts those on his channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
If you really care about the issue, join #gamergate and go after people who actually do this crap.
Of course. That's what local state laws are about. They are meant to be binding for citizenry.
European Directives are not binding to citizens, they are binding to legislators of each state. The idea is that directive creates a certain base set of rules, and local legislative branch interprets those rules in light of local culture and implements them in local, binding law.
Devil is in the details. Which interpretations of relevant parts were incorporated?
Spain for example, was very allowing, whereas my home country, Finland, was not. We happened to have an former model as a culture minister who was massively lobbied by what was essentially her old employers (content creators) and we got an extremely tight interpretation.
Yet bot laws, in spite of being complete opposites on several key points, like allowing private sharing between friends over internet, are fully compatible with EUCD. Because that's what directives typically are - general framework sets. Specifics, often KEY specifics are left to each country's legislators.
Slashdot Mirror
To be fair, I think that at least hydro would overtake nuclear if both current "no proliferation risk is acceptable no matter how small" principle on fuel recycling persists and if costs of dismantling reactors are as high as some estimate. Last I checked, hydro and nuclear fission are in a fairly tight race on which one is most economical.
However many of the uses convert electric energy to things like formulation of chemical bonds that require energy for creation. For example plastic manufacturing. Additionally any usage occurs away from immediate vicinity of the turbine in most cases.
As a result it is a factually correct statement to note that wind power plant removes energy from entropic system known as atmosphere.
As I note below, they go beyond that. They even weight R&D costs in a way that ensures that nuclear is over an order of magnitude more costly in terms of those as well, because they count the research that was done long ago, long before the age of computers as very expensive.
It's utterly batshit insane in its current state.
It removes energy from the atmosphere and transfers part of it it into electric energy in the wires leading away from the plant. Other part is converted into heat on the plant itself or on transfer lines and released back into atmosphere.
And fuck me, I should have read on before commenting. They then proceed to tack on R&D costs on top of nuclear, just to be safe. The pie chart looks utterly awesome, stating that 66% of all energy related R&D was aimed at nuclear fission, while only 2.4% went to wind.
Damn it doesn't pay to do research before modern efficient methods and things like computer modelling were implemented with this model.
I'm actually reading the report right now and my jaw is literally lying on the floor. They openly admit that they have no clue how much Nuclear actually cost, but they estimate, and I kid you not, that "total investment support for coal, nuclear and hydropower capacity in 2012 is estimated between 3 and 15 billion in 2013 euros.
Then they "weight the nuclear" because "average historic support for nuclear generation capacity is higher than that of coal and hydro".
Basically, they have an error margin of half a fucking order of magnitude and then they weight it against nuclear just to be on the safe side.
No wonder they got the conclusions stated, and no wonder that this report isn't released. It's utterly absurd in its current state. I suspect that this is interim because this is what pro-wind lobby came up with, and next there'll be a sanity check to get rid of the biggest points of idiocy to make it look at least remotely feasible.
Not only that, but they actually stack the deck from the other side as well by assigning penalties to "old investments made under non-liberalized investment regime" (i.e. if you had a plant built in the 70s, they add huge costs because they can't accurately evaluate the values of government support). Finally they count the plants that are nearing end of life as a huge cost burden on things like coal because of the sheer number of the plants.
I have filed tax write offs on my personal taxes before in relation to "earning related spending" related to a hobby of mine that actually earns me a reasonable sum on the side. You simply write it into the tax return papers, include the receipt and send it to the tax office.
At least that's how it works here in Finland.
There is? I've been in quite a few kennels and I find the sound to be quite normal.
Of course, I'm not a complete idiot and a raging psychopath who thinks that intelligence agencies go around openly and brutally killing their noisiest critics instead of discrediting them.
So if you can get admin to run a script, you can own a machine.
News at 11.
Seriously, this is slashdot. We know that if you have admin to get to run a script, you can own the machine.
Is that before or after the angry mob tears most of the NSA bosses to bloody pieces on the streets?
Because it will require some hardcore desperation on part of intelligence to do something that stupid and self-incriminating, and suggests complete lack of options.
Snowden didn't have any material for about a year now. He surrendered everything before accepting asylum in Russia, as that was one of their terms for offering him asylum. It's all in hands of journalists now.
Staggered release is done so that problem stays on the news, and people don't forget that his problem persists.
Where did you get this understanding from?
Hilariously, you can blame Russians for this one.
See, when they took in Snowden, they had a list of terms for him. One was that he would not leak anything while he was in their country.
Snowden agreed, and before accepting asylum he sent everything he had to a few responsible outlets, who are now doing the staggered release of information.
To be fair, almost no consumers have any use for double. And commercial entities who do usually don't mind the extra zero at the end of GPU's cost, because to them, that's just expenses to be written off on their taxes.
And there's a whole lot more to life support than oxygen. People need to eat, shit, piss. Air pressure and humidity needs to be just right. Compartment needs to be kept at right temperature. And countless other features.
Space is an extremely hostile environment for species evolved to operate at a bottom of an atmosphere, and maintaining a habitable environment is extremely resource consuming endeavour.
Not only that, but the main advantage of this thing is that it's apparently a space drone.
Carrying life support would remove its main advantage, ability to loiter.
I don't even want to know what you queue up to do to AMD/ATI's CEO.
And in case you're actually interested: here's the current status of the boycott campaign known as #gamergate:
https://gitorious.org/gamergat...
12 mysogynist kids apparently have indeed moved on. The >12.000 adults pissed off at utter lack of ethics and betrayal by people they expected to stand by them and their hobby on the other hand are just getting started.
It hasn't even started yet.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
The said comment is complete and utter bullshit. When he did his Guns of Icarus thing with other people, he always disclosed it in video description. After some desperate gamasutra folks (who notably have massive vested interest in sinking Bain, NerdCubed and a couple of other big youtube gaming commentators, because they have been massively eating into their audience numbers) started whining that disclosure in video description was not enough (according to the laws, yes it is), he added a short message to the beginning of every such video where he states any potential sources of interest he may have, down to having received a review copy.
Notably, gamasutra itself does not do this, and has been central to the whole gamergate scandal which revolves exactly around this kind of acting, only with gamasutra folks not disclosing their conflicts of interest anywhere. Not in descriptions, not in topics, not in articles. Nowhere.
Frankly, Bain goes to ridiculous lengths to disclose any potential conflict of interest he has nowadays, to the point of holding 3-hour talk marathons with developers (including CEO of the company that bought the sponsored content you talk about) and games media journalists partially on this topic and then puts those on his channel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
If you really care about the issue, join #gamergate and go after people who actually do this crap.
However x86 patents will expire much sooner than x64 ones will. Which makes the noose far, FAR more powerful in comparison.
By that logic, Intel will always have a noose around its neck now, because x64 architecture is also known after its inventor and patent holder: amd64.
Intel's 64 bit architecture, IA64 is more commonly remembered by the nick name of its only CPU: Itanic.
And x64 will remain extremely important for foreseeable future.
Of course. That's what local state laws are about. They are meant to be binding for citizenry.
European Directives are not binding to citizens, they are binding to legislators of each state. The idea is that directive creates a certain base set of rules, and local legislative branch interprets those rules in light of local culture and implements them in local, binding law.
Devil is in the details. Which interpretations of relevant parts were incorporated?
Spain for example, was very allowing, whereas my home country, Finland, was not. We happened to have an former model as a culture minister who was massively lobbied by what was essentially her old employers (content creators) and we got an extremely tight interpretation.
Yet bot laws, in spite of being complete opposites on several key points, like allowing private sharing between friends over internet, are fully compatible with EUCD. Because that's what directives typically are - general framework sets. Specifics, often KEY specifics are left to each country's legislators.