Again, you are wrong. The case quoted was when workers suffered severe burns in factory explosions. In most cases of weaponized WP, you are not going to get 35%+ burns. You're going to get small, localized burns as WP is used in small quickly burning pieces as these burn more efficiently. As a result, you have a pretty good survival rate from initial burns.
Finally, the argument is also irrelevant. Just because nuclear weapon kills most of its victims conventionally (shockwave, shrapnel, burns) doesn't mean it still has a radioactive potential. Same goes for chemical weapons.
Also, I corrected myself long before your post, it's the same allotrope but different chemical. Read the other reply.
Correction: the book speaks about phosphorous which is mixed with other chemicals (which among other things elevate flash point). It's the same allotrope.
White phosphorus is the most active allotropic form and is extremely toxic when inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through burned areas (Eldad and Simon 1991). It is fat soluble, glows in yellow-green light, and ignites spontaneously upon drying and exposure to air. Storage of white phosphorus in water prevents it from burning spontaneously (Eldad and Simon 1991). White phosphorus can cause thermal injury and hygroscopic damage by absorbing water from surrounding tissues. It reacts with oxygen and water to form strong acids (H3PO2, H3PO3) and combines with metals like copper to form dark-colored inactive salts (Eldad and Simon 1991). White phosphorus particles can burn on the surface of the skin or penetrate deep into the tissues when carried on shrapnel particles. Local destruction of tissues continues as long as white phosphorus is exposed to oxygen. White phosphorus smoke with a garlic odor is characteristic of white phosphorus burns (Eldad and Simon 1991). High mortality rates seen following white phosphorus burns can be due to its absorption from the burned surface, which may result in multi-organ failure (mainly liver and kidneys), hyperphosphatemia, hypocalcemia, and electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities (ST depression, QT elongation, microvoltage of QRS and bradycardia) (Bowen et al. 1971; Eldad and Simon 1991).
Parent is only partially correct. WP is indeed an incendiary weapon in the first stage of its impact on the living victim. It however becomes a chemical weapon in the second stage, as WP that burns through skin into tissue will likely be absorbed by normal human metabolism, causing severe damage to kidneys, liver and heart.
Essentially even if the victim survives the being burned, he/she will likely need treatment for severe chemical poisoning (phosphorous poisoning) or risk heart/kidney/liver/multiple organ failure.
Blowing into cartridges was how you broke them (condensation followed by corrosion). Proper cleaning is done with a match wrapped in some wool. Do that every once in a while instead of "blowing" and your NES/SNES will work for a very long time, barring motherboard corrosion or similar issues that you can't really help.
You have fingers inside your eyeballs in real life? Because one of the most important aspects of immersion is that you perceive insides of the screen as the actual world around you, rather then a screen in real world.
Fingers on the screen make such level of immersion almost impossible, unless you specifically train yourself to ignore them. Which will require significant levels of conditioning considering that they often take between 1/5 and 1/3 of the available space (less on tablets and more on phones).
Not impossible, but anyone claiming to feel this will be a very tiny minority. On the other hand, you often do not observe your body at all in real life (other then your end of the nose, which is used to calibrate optical depth and irrelevant in this argument). You control your body without ever looking at it, and many things in modern world operate remotely, without ever needing any visible hands on the objects, or having hands in a very specific position (i.e. wheel of the car). Having fingers on top of the image is in no way comparable to being "just like in real life" in vast majority of scenarios. This is why wheels in racing games typically have virtual hands, guns in FPS games are held by virtual hands and so on. That is how you would view your hands in real life.
I read this as a the fact that the last PC developer that had a policy of "release product when it's ready" has thrown in the towel and now releases when publisher wants it to be released just like everyone else.
Internal combustion engine needs to be cooled WAAAY below 135C for its oil to remain viscous (which is the requirement to get slightly above 100% efficiency). You're going to have some actual energy-consuming heat pumps to get it anywhere near required temperatures. Realistically you'll need much greater temperatures.
Most likely, yes. Homeless are people used to fairly rugged environment, and lugging a few kilos of Li-ion on their backs isn't going to be much of a problem.
Full disclosure: I have zero contact of any kind with any part of nuclear industry. I have a close relative that holds an advanced degree on nuclear engineering and had some practical experience building and testing breeder reactors designed to produce special durable materials for space satellites which is what drove me to study this stuff in my free time. He does not work with nuclear power plants, and never has. Most information I use is based on publicly available information, often peer reviewed studies and I use the aforementioned close relative to ask about things I'm not sure of.
As far as I know I have no one in my close circle of family and friends who are in any relationship with nuclear power generating industry or any kind. I do have at least one close family member who's fanatically against nuclear power, and is quite noticeably half-illogical half-hysterical about it.
Indeed. Low level radiation is known to increase life expectancy in rats. It has no known effect on human life expectancy, mainly because it wasn't properly tested. That said, a great example is Mexico City, where background radiation is much greater then there ever was in Tokyo during "elevated radiation periods" when Fukushima was actively emitting radioactive clouds.
Did I mention there is absolutely no statistical spike of radiation-related increase of deaths or shorter life span in Mexico City when compared to other, less radioactive locations?
Now can we stop being stupid and claim things we don't know jack shit about?
Actually, this is one of the rare cases where business is the force for "good", while public opinion is the force for "evil".
If public didn't hear associate "radiation" with "oh god, a HORRIBLE DEATH GLOWING GREEN!", reactor subsystems would have been upgraded to more modern ones quite a while ago. But they can't be upgraded, because "upgrades to nuclear power plants peripherals" will be spun as "upgrading nuclear power plants" which will be heard as "we are building more nuclear power, HORRIBLE DEATH GLOWING GREEN!".
So we end up having tech from 60s (when entire industry was born in 50s!) instead of modern reactors and modern peripherals that would have taken the punishment of that tsunami. Hell, we can't even research new tech because of public opinion, and are forced to use old tech. Fukushima was a great demonstration of how well plants were actually made - many forget that plants were built to withstand 7 magnitudes and reasonable tsunamis, and got hit by 9 magnitudes and biggest tsunami in a century and then some. And even so, the plant didn't cause a single death, even with tsunami wiping out essentially all infrastructure of the region and killing 30.000 people.
We really should make a name for "stupid, loud and opinionated people" as a concept. "Sheepism" maybe?
Pay for game time is not free. You cannot play for free because you have to buy game time. Only pay to win is "free to play, pay to win". A far closer to "free" model is buy to play, where you buy the box and play forever. Aka the classic sales model.
The other truly free to play model is advertisement supported one.
Not really functional. Looking at the chart, this works in fairly high temperatures (the curve that exceeds 100% is at 135C) and exceptionally low power input and light output.
Basically they are stating that at extremely low voltage and very high ambient temperature, LED can convert a small portion of heat around itself into luminescence. While interesting, practical applications are going to be minimal due to temperature, power and output luminescence values.
I think there is something that many people need to understand: the new w8 start menu is not designed as an improvement to desktop. It's designed as a measure to push microsoft's tablet and phone offerings leveraging their desktop market share. Note how it was published after MS was taken off "probation" for its similar leveraging efforts to push IE market share up, which resulted in anti-trust violation case and eventual settlement.
As a result, desktop users are getting the shaft. The idea in itself is brilliant in terms of getting catastrophic lack of sales of WP7 and lack of interest in W8 tablets to go up. But it comes at direct expense of desktop usability, which will come crashing down in comparison to XP/7.
I suspect that you and I have a very different idea on what "playable" is. To me, 10fps with occasional spikes into sub-1 fps is NOT playable and that's what I've seen HD3000 get. On two different machines.
But that's just the thing. It's NOT sufficient to run most games in low settings. Try starcraft 2 for example. It's very optimized for low end, just like all blizzard offerings, and it's still spectacularly unplayable on intel offerings.
Slashdot Mirror
Again, you are wrong. The case quoted was when workers suffered severe burns in factory explosions. In most cases of weaponized WP, you are not going to get 35%+ burns. You're going to get small, localized burns as WP is used in small quickly burning pieces as these burn more efficiently. As a result, you have a pretty good survival rate from initial burns.
Finally, the argument is also irrelevant. Just because nuclear weapon kills most of its victims conventionally (shockwave, shrapnel, burns) doesn't mean it still has a radioactive potential. Same goes for chemical weapons.
Also, I corrected myself long before your post, it's the same allotrope but different chemical. Read the other reply.
Correction: the book speaks about phosphorous which is mixed with other chemicals (which among other things elevate flash point). It's the same allotrope.
This talks about phosphorous in pesticides, which is a different allotrope of phosphorous known as yellow phosphorous.
Here is a quote about white phosphorous from http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp103-c2.pdf
White phosphorus is the most active allotropic form and is extremely toxic when inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through burned areas (Eldad and Simon 1991). It is fat soluble, glows in yellow-green light, and ignites spontaneously upon drying and exposure to air. Storage of white phosphorus in water prevents it from burning spontaneously (Eldad and Simon 1991). White phosphorus can cause thermal injury and hygroscopic damage by absorbing water from surrounding tissues. It reacts with oxygen and water to form strong acids (H3PO2, H3PO3) and combines with metals like copper to form dark-colored inactive salts (Eldad and Simon 1991).
White phosphorus particles can burn on the surface of the skin or penetrate deep into the tissues when carried on shrapnel particles. Local destruction of tissues continues as long as white phosphorus is exposed to oxygen. White phosphorus smoke with a garlic odor is characteristic of white phosphorus burns (Eldad and Simon 1991). High mortality rates seen following white phosphorus burns can be due to its absorption from the burned surface, which may result in multi-organ failure (mainly liver and kidneys), hyperphosphatemia, hypocalcemia, and electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities (ST depression, QT elongation, microvoltage of QRS and bradycardia) (Bowen et al. 1971; Eldad and Simon 1991).
Parent is only partially correct. WP is indeed an incendiary weapon in the first stage of its impact on the living victim. It however becomes a chemical weapon in the second stage, as WP that burns through skin into tissue will likely be absorbed by normal human metabolism, causing severe damage to kidneys, liver and heart.
Essentially even if the victim survives the being burned, he/she will likely need treatment for severe chemical poisoning (phosphorous poisoning) or risk heart/kidney/liver/multiple organ failure.
Because US government goes around shooting journalists and kids from attack helicopters on near-daily basis and then cover it all up.
What?
Yarr matey. I'm in your gamez, killing your DRMz!
Blowing into cartridges was how you broke them (condensation followed by corrosion). Proper cleaning is done with a match wrapped in some wool. Do that every once in a while instead of "blowing" and your NES/SNES will work for a very long time, barring motherboard corrosion or similar issues that you can't really help.
You have fingers inside your eyeballs in real life? Because one of the most important aspects of immersion is that you perceive insides of the screen as the actual world around you, rather then a screen in real world.
Fingers on the screen make such level of immersion almost impossible, unless you specifically train yourself to ignore them. Which will require significant levels of conditioning considering that they often take between 1/5 and 1/3 of the available space (less on tablets and more on phones).
Not impossible, but anyone claiming to feel this will be a very tiny minority. On the other hand, you often do not observe your body at all in real life (other then your end of the nose, which is used to calibrate optical depth and irrelevant in this argument). You control your body without ever looking at it, and many things in modern world operate remotely, without ever needing any visible hands on the objects, or having hands in a very specific position (i.e. wheel of the car). Having fingers on top of the image is in no way comparable to being "just like in real life" in vast majority of scenarios. This is why wheels in racing games typically have virtual hands, guns in FPS games are held by virtual hands and so on. That is how you would view your hands in real life.
I wonder if you do realise that you answered your own question there and not in the way you meant to answer it?
So, you find fingers on top of the game world more... immersive?
I read this as a the fact that the last PC developer that had a policy of "release product when it's ready" has thrown in the towel and now releases when publisher wants it to be released just like everyone else.
They would be removing results "to comply with new legislation". Literally. Rather hard to claim that this is anti-competitive.
Internal combustion engine needs to be cooled WAAAY below 135C for its oil to remain viscous (which is the requirement to get slightly above 100% efficiency). You're going to have some actual energy-consuming heat pumps to get it anywhere near required temperatures. Realistically you'll need much greater temperatures.
Most likely, taxation. If you paid the person, it would be a job, meaning taxes.
Most likely, yes. Homeless are people used to fairly rugged environment, and lugging a few kilos of Li-ion on their backs isn't going to be much of a problem.
Afaik Chinese are mostly copying Russian tech in this regard, just like they do with weapons.
Full disclosure: I have zero contact of any kind with any part of nuclear industry. I have a close relative that holds an advanced degree on nuclear engineering and had some practical experience building and testing breeder reactors designed to produce special durable materials for space satellites which is what drove me to study this stuff in my free time. He does not work with nuclear power plants, and never has. Most information I use is based on publicly available information, often peer reviewed studies and I use the aforementioned close relative to ask about things I'm not sure of.
As far as I know I have no one in my close circle of family and friends who are in any relationship with nuclear power generating industry or any kind. I do have at least one close family member who's fanatically against nuclear power, and is quite noticeably half-illogical half-hysterical about it.
Indeed. Low level radiation is known to increase life expectancy in rats. It has no known effect on human life expectancy, mainly because it wasn't properly tested. That said, a great example is Mexico City, where background radiation is much greater then there ever was in Tokyo during "elevated radiation periods" when Fukushima was actively emitting radioactive clouds.
Did I mention there is absolutely no statistical spike of radiation-related increase of deaths or shorter life span in Mexico City when compared to other, less radioactive locations?
Now can we stop being stupid and claim things we don't know jack shit about?
Actually, this is one of the rare cases where business is the force for "good", while public opinion is the force for "evil".
If public didn't hear associate "radiation" with "oh god, a HORRIBLE DEATH GLOWING GREEN!", reactor subsystems would have been upgraded to more modern ones quite a while ago. But they can't be upgraded, because "upgrades to nuclear power plants peripherals" will be spun as "upgrading nuclear power plants" which will be heard as "we are building more nuclear power, HORRIBLE DEATH GLOWING GREEN!".
So we end up having tech from 60s (when entire industry was born in 50s!) instead of modern reactors and modern peripherals that would have taken the punishment of that tsunami. Hell, we can't even research new tech because of public opinion, and are forced to use old tech. Fukushima was a great demonstration of how well plants were actually made - many forget that plants were built to withstand 7 magnitudes and reasonable tsunamis, and got hit by 9 magnitudes and biggest tsunami in a century and then some. And even so, the plant didn't cause a single death, even with tsunami wiping out essentially all infrastructure of the region and killing 30.000 people.
We really should make a name for "stupid, loud and opinionated people" as a concept. "Sheepism" maybe?
Pay for game time is not free. You cannot play for free because you have to buy game time. Only pay to win is "free to play, pay to win".
A far closer to "free" model is buy to play, where you buy the box and play forever. Aka the classic sales model.
The other truly free to play model is advertisement supported one.
Not really functional. Looking at the chart, this works in fairly high temperatures (the curve that exceeds 100% is at 135C) and exceptionally low power input and light output.
Basically they are stating that at extremely low voltage and very high ambient temperature, LED can convert a small portion of heat around itself into luminescence. While interesting, practical applications are going to be minimal due to temperature, power and output luminescence values.
I think there is something that many people need to understand: the new w8 start menu is not designed as an improvement to desktop. It's designed as a measure to push microsoft's tablet and phone offerings leveraging their desktop market share. Note how it was published after MS was taken off "probation" for its similar leveraging efforts to push IE market share up, which resulted in anti-trust violation case and eventual settlement.
As a result, desktop users are getting the shaft. The idea in itself is brilliant in terms of getting catastrophic lack of sales of WP7 and lack of interest in W8 tablets to go up. But it comes at direct expense of desktop usability, which will come crashing down in comparison to XP/7.
I suspect that you and I have a very different idea on what "playable" is. To me, 10fps with occasional spikes into sub-1 fps is NOT playable and that's what I've seen HD3000 get. On two different machines.
Vast majority of these games (or more specifically gamers) have nothing to do with indie niche. They're playing zynga games.
But that's just the thing. It's NOT sufficient to run most games in low settings. Try starcraft 2 for example. It's very optimized for low end, just like all blizzard offerings, and it's still spectacularly unplayable on intel offerings.