Yes. And that if you click on any URL, or in any other way tell an app you want a network/internet/filesystem object with a URL, that the app will get the data, by relying on whatever standard processing you have assigned (or the OS assigns by default).
Yes, this should all seem familiar from Firefox or your other browser - it was basically introduced with Netscape. But it should be an OS feature. So that any app can access it in a truly standard fashion. That's why it was started in FreeDesktop.org. But even if you don't have a Desktop, your OS should still do this. Your browser should just give a UI to the OS feature that actually does it.
Well, that's not a studio, but a toolkit. And when I downloaded it and tried to make it on my Ubuntu 8.04 PC, the make failed all over COpenGLDriver.cpp .
It's going to take longer to get built correctly, and then to write a C++ app, than I really should spend just learning a basic studio's GUI.
Other than eliminating conflicting directory structures, the most important standard for Linux distros to completely unify would be a single API to data protocols and MIME types. Like the one FreeDesktop.org has managed to sync (in principle) between GNOME and KDE Desktops, but for all distros (including servers).
A registry of which app to hand off a URL to given its protocol part, to retrieve the data. A registry of which app to hand off the data to once it's retrieved. Different data handler lists for displaying, editing or executing (the usual Linux RWX modes) the content, depending on the use case triggering the registry access. The registries could include prioritized lists of different apps, depending on user selection or settable default preference. And of course any single app could be registered to either registry, in any mode it will function properly.
Then the OS is performing its main task of connecting processes to the hardware and to each other. In a very simple and clear architecture. That every single app can use, without having to anticipate how the other apps will agree with it.
If LSB4 can pull that off, using the existing attempts as a starting point, it won't just make a unified Linux target for developers across distros. It will make LSB4 itself more quickly and completely adopted, because its benefits will be so compelling.
The Federal government has jurisdiction over murders and robberies where the perpetrators cross state lines, or substantially affect interstate commerce in the crime's commission.
The Constitution is indeed a document that describes how the US government is constituted, including prohibitions on private actions. I cite the 13th Amendment prohibiting private ownership of slaves. The people create a government with the Constitution to protect our rights. The government and that protection is a real thing in a material world, so those protections can be more or less complete and effective. But the failure of the government to protect private people from other private people is no shortcoming of the Constitution, just its application by real people.
No, my argument is that the government can and does prohibit private ownership of slaves. The fact that the government could own slaves or involuntary servants as punishment for a crime does not at all contradict that argument. Such possible government ownership does not at all conflict with the Constitutional prohibition on private slave ownership. No one but the government can punish for a crime. And even if they could (in a contrived argument invoking private prison corporations), those people are not slaves. They're prisoners.
You are, in fact, getting your argument backwards. Or, more accurately, inverted.
Abridgement, infringement, suspension: all those violations are demonstrations that our rights, which still persist as rights, are not absolute, and require protection. Limits on our rights are not solely matters of "shouting fire in a crowded audience". Rights are not absolute, but just abusing them doesn't remove them from being our rights.
No, my rights and yours are universal. The government is involved because we create a government to protect our rights.
This "Conservative" ideology that "our rights apply only to protection from the government" is just wrong. The Constitution specifies, among other protected rights, that we cannot be slaves - prohibiting not just the government from owning slaves. The Constitution of course instructs the government to protect us from robbery, murder and all kinds of other deprivations of our rights.
Our rights are inalienable. Not just inalienable by the government, but by anyone. We create governments to protect us from that alienation, even while the governments we create are themselves not empowered, and often explicitly prohibited to be sure there's no confusion, to deprive us of those rights. But are created with the power to protect our rights.
This Shapeways 3D printing service requires models in Collada (or X3D) format. Other than running Windows SketchUp under Wine, which is so buggy that it crashes when you try to save a file, what's a really good, basic Linux 3D studio, suitable for learning in about 10-15 minutes how to sketch out accurate scale models of houses and basic landscape, that imports and exports Collada format?
Then I can 3D print the models, and I can export them to Google Earth. I could even download and import my neighborhood, tweak it, and 3D print it for my trainset.
3.4.1 Present state of the art [...] What is the cost of such electrolysers? Large commercial electrolysers cost between 500-1000 DM/kWel but smaller plants are considerably more expensive. The smallest 1 kWel electrolysers can cost up to 10,000 DM with the price only falling to the 500 DM/kWel figure in the MW range.Operating efficiencies lie in the 50-60% range for the smaller electrolysers and around 65-70% for the larger plants.
So "personal" electrolyzers are in the 50-60% range, and industrial ones (nearly all of them, that currently produce significant quantities) in the 65-70%, at the most.
BTW, your concerns in your other post don't seem supported by facts. You're suggesting that the inefficiency ratings of electrolysis include the energy consumed by manufacturing, deploying and (perhaps) recycling/disposing electrolysis cells, its "lifecycle energy efficiency". But the stats I just cited say operating efficiencies, which excludes those extra energy costs. Those costs are indeed significant, and do count, but aren't what we're comparing. And this new solution seems to offer vastly better lifecycle costs.
But the main electrolysis energy inefficiency, as in most energy processing systems, is heat generation. This new process seems to do without that to a very great extent.
The Reuters article claims the new catalyst drops the conversion inefficiency by about 90% compared to platinum. Since platinum efficiency is about 50-70%, that means that the new efficiency is about 95-97.5%.
This is an incredible advance, if it's true. Even though it increases the efficiency of only the oxygen generation, leaving hydrogen still generated by a platinum catalyst at the old efficiency. Even if the efficiency has jumped only from 50-70% to about 70-85%, that's still a big jump. And it shows that there's a lot of reachable gains left to get, and not necessarily in the distant future.
I wonder if we'll someday be able to look at the quantum state of the molecules, atoms and subatomic particles making up even pure water, to learn about its history. The way that we look at the chemical composition now, with more familiar instruments.
It's a low priority. We've got a lot more higher priority missions that cost a lot less.
If they spent the past decade's Star Wars budget over a century instead, it would still have cost us more than it would cost us to recruit, train and use a thousand assassins to penetrate Pakistan and destroy the Qaeda community there that is our #1 threat.
Star Wars is not measured by success in developing anything. It is entirely rigged to just spend money on defense contractors.
If we're going to invest money to develop Star Wars tech because it would be good to eventually do it, we can invest 10x as much in the NASA civilian development of space first, as a platform for whatever military is necessary and affordable after our other military and NASA missions are complete.
But there's still not going to be any application for the Star Wars strategy that just incites our enemies to either multiply their warhead count, or to improve other WMD delivery like smuggling part by part inside oil tankers or other cargo ships. No application other than defense contractor welfare, anyway.
Exactly correct. Hundreds of years from now, Star Wars missile defense might be militarily useful. Right now it's only good for very expensive fireworks.
No, the lasers shooting things down are the essence of Star Wars. Even if you can find lots of pages saying it worked, all it takes is a few saying it doesn't work to show that it's a boondoggle.
Which is also the essence of the Star Wars boondoggle itself. Unless the missile shield is 100.000% effective, the percentage of missiles that will get through will encourage more missile production by the enemy. Which is exactly why Star Wars had any benefit at all when it was originally pursued: it incited the Soviets to make more weapons, to expand the "error rate" into a significant threat of many penetrating missiles. Since the Soviets already had tens of thousands of missiles, the shield started out as penetrable. Even a single missile hitting a US city, or anywhere in the US or Europe, would be an unacceptable catastrophe. But that would be the risk, a risk even greater because Star Wars would encourage such brinksmanship. But Star Wars "worked" by bankrupting the Soviets in the arms race it escalated. Now it's just bankrupting the US.
Of course, that's what you Republicans do best: bankrupt the US by cranking up our national security risks past the maximum.
You Republicans have also kicked the hornets nest and inflamed this Terror War beyond all manageability, too. I know that boom was largely an unexpected windfall for Halliburton and Northrup, a distraction from the Star Wars plan. But we can't even afford your boondoggle Terror War. Stacking Star Wars atop it is like running your SUV on "vacuum power" after you've burned all the fumes in your gas tank. I know you Republicans are working that angle as hard and fast as you can still con the 23% of Americans who can't spell their own name. But the rest of us paying attention know that it's a total failure.
Which is why I'm getting +mods. You've turned yourself out as a standard issue Republican warmonger. You're not going to get a lightsaber with this Star Wars plan, you know. All you're going to get is another $TRILLION boondoggle that endangers us even more. I know you love that, too. But the rest of us are on to you and your tricks.
Keep your Dark Side to yourself. You had your Cheney. Now the rest of us have to pick up the pieces, without more science fiction foreign/defense policy.
Frankly, its none of your business what is being said in the classified literature about the results of laser testing.
You start off accusing me (falsely) of a straw man, then end off lecturing me in some straw man about my business with classified laser testing literature.
What a bunch of "malarkey".
The Star Wars tests for 25 years have consistently failed to shoot down anything except the most carefully controlled test targets. The tests are usually faked, propaganda to keep spending those $BILLIONS on a defense system that is instead provocative, and worse than useless. That wasted money spent on crony defense contractors is all that Start Wars is ever good for.
But you ridiculous Republicans keep demanding it. You've been wrong about everything else, especially with such huge price tags, so why shouldn't you insist on more Star Wars boondoggles?
Frankly, you should stop talking like your made-up pronouncements on national "defense" and what business Americans have in debunking it are worth listening to.
The neocons made their bones in the "spotted owl" wars of the 1980s, where the owl was like a "canary in a coalmine" to protect forest ecosystems in the Northwest. The Reagan/Bush team clearcut them anyway.
That search was a preemtive search to see whether a candidate would be connected with past Republican escapades. From "spotted owl" to "Iran/Contra". Really a thorough background search.
what they are already very good at -- shooting things out of the sky with a laser.
No, the Pentagon still sucks at shooting things out of the sky with a laser. They are excellent at spending $BILLIONS on trying, over and again, for decades.
Maybe they're laser-proofing everything because they're so bad at lasering stuff that they're afraid they'll laser our own stuff. At the very least, it's innovation in spending $BILLIONS on lasers.
They're not "exactly as bad". Democrats didn't give us the Iraq War, or the mortgage/credit debacle, or torture. Some few Democrats in the minority had some hand, but you've got to be crazy to think that Democrats are as bad as what we've had under Republicans. Democrats' problems have all been sustainable. Another few years of Republican rule, and we'd be a smoking hole in the ground. The Democratic changing of the guard at least offers the chance that we'll return to mere inefficiency, instead of catastrophe at every quarter.
BTW, calling Bush a "so-called Republican" just blew your cover. You are Republican. You voted for Bush twice, and for Republican congressmembers and governors and other representatives who knows how many times. Now that your boys have ruined everything they've touched, suddenly "they're not really Republicans". Oh, and you're probably not either, now that the damage is done - you're a "Libertarian", right?
Social Security is one of the most successful programmes, public or private, ever undertaken. It's extremely popular. You Republicans courted disaster when you blurted out your plans to privateer it into yet another stock scam. But you're still clinging to it. Libertarians love old people starving in the dark. Real Americans don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. And that if you click on any URL, or in any other way tell an app you want a network/internet/filesystem object with a URL, that the app will get the data, by relying on whatever standard processing you have assigned (or the OS assigns by default).
Yes, this should all seem familiar from Firefox or your other browser - it was basically introduced with Netscape. But it should be an OS feature. So that any app can access it in a truly standard fashion. That's why it was started in FreeDesktop.org. But even if you don't have a Desktop, your OS should still do this. Your browser should just give a UI to the OS feature that actually does it.
Well, that's not a studio, but a toolkit. And when I downloaded it and tried to make it on my Ubuntu 8.04 PC, the make failed all over COpenGLDriver.cpp .
It's going to take longer to get built correctly, and then to write a C++ app, than I really should spend just learning a basic studio's GUI.
Other than eliminating conflicting directory structures, the most important standard for Linux distros to completely unify would be a single API to data protocols and MIME types. Like the one FreeDesktop.org has managed to sync (in principle) between GNOME and KDE Desktops, but for all distros (including servers).
A registry of which app to hand off a URL to given its protocol part, to retrieve the data. A registry of which app to hand off the data to once it's retrieved. Different data handler lists for displaying, editing or executing (the usual Linux RWX modes) the content, depending on the use case triggering the registry access. The registries could include prioritized lists of different apps, depending on user selection or settable default preference. And of course any single app could be registered to either registry, in any mode it will function properly.
Then the OS is performing its main task of connecting processes to the hardware and to each other. In a very simple and clear architecture. That every single app can use, without having to anticipate how the other apps will agree with it.
If LSB4 can pull that off, using the existing attempts as a starting point, it won't just make a unified Linux target for developers across distros. It will make LSB4 itself more quickly and completely adopted, because its benefits will be so compelling.
The Federal government has jurisdiction over murders and robberies where the perpetrators cross state lines, or substantially affect interstate commerce in the crime's commission.
The Constitution is indeed a document that describes how the US government is constituted, including prohibitions on private actions. I cite the 13th Amendment prohibiting private ownership of slaves. The people create a government with the Constitution to protect our rights. The government and that protection is a real thing in a material world, so those protections can be more or less complete and effective. But the failure of the government to protect private people from other private people is no shortcoming of the Constitution, just its application by real people.
No, my argument is that the government can and does prohibit private ownership of slaves. The fact that the government could own slaves or involuntary servants as punishment for a crime does not at all contradict that argument. Such possible government ownership does not at all conflict with the Constitutional prohibition on private slave ownership. No one but the government can punish for a crime. And even if they could (in a contrived argument invoking private prison corporations), those people are not slaves. They're prisoners.
You are, in fact, getting your argument backwards. Or, more accurately, inverted.
Abridgement, infringement, suspension: all those violations are demonstrations that our rights, which still persist as rights, are not absolute, and require protection. Limits on our rights are not solely matters of "shouting fire in a crowded audience". Rights are not absolute, but just abusing them doesn't remove them from being our rights.
Slaves have no rights, are not citizens.
Not all prisoners are slaves. Basic logic. Saying it doesn't make it so, it just makes it plain wrong.
No, my rights and yours are universal. The government is involved because we create a government to protect our rights.
This "Conservative" ideology that "our rights apply only to protection from the government" is just wrong. The Constitution specifies, among other protected rights, that we cannot be slaves - prohibiting not just the government from owning slaves. The Constitution of course instructs the government to protect us from robbery, murder and all kinds of other deprivations of our rights.
Our rights are inalienable. Not just inalienable by the government, but by anyone. We create governments to protect us from that alienation, even while the governments we create are themselves not empowered, and often explicitly prohibited to be sure there's no confusion, to deprive us of those rights. But are created with the power to protect our rights.
This Shapeways 3D printing service requires models in Collada (or X3D) format. Other than running Windows SketchUp under Wine, which is so buggy that it crashes when you try to save a file, what's a really good, basic Linux 3D studio, suitable for learning in about 10-15 minutes how to sketch out accurate scale models of houses and basic landscape, that imports and exports Collada format?
Then I can 3D print the models, and I can export them to Google Earth. I could even download and import my neighborhood, tweak it, and 3D print it for my trainset.
In WoW, maybe you don't have a right to speak freely, if Blizzard says no.
In the Real World, we have that right. We'll see which world these courts are playing their games in.
_Hydrogen in the Energy Sector_: "3. Production of Hydrogen":
Further research confirms the 50-70% stat, though there is some indication that most industrial H2 production by electrolysis is at best 50% energy efficient, and perhaps more often around 25%.
So "personal" electrolyzers are in the 50-60% range, and industrial ones (nearly all of them, that currently produce significant quantities) in the 65-70%, at the most.
BTW, your concerns in your other post don't seem supported by facts. You're suggesting that the inefficiency ratings of electrolysis include the energy consumed by manufacturing, deploying and (perhaps) recycling/disposing electrolysis cells, its "lifecycle energy efficiency". But the stats I just cited say operating efficiencies, which excludes those extra energy costs. Those costs are indeed significant, and do count, but aren't what we're comparing. And this new solution seems to offer vastly better lifecycle costs.
But the main electrolysis energy inefficiency, as in most energy processing systems, is heat generation. This new process seems to do without that to a very great extent.
The Reuters article claims the new catalyst drops the conversion inefficiency by about 90% compared to platinum. Since platinum efficiency is about 50-70%, that means that the new efficiency is about 95-97.5%.
This is an incredible advance, if it's true. Even though it increases the efficiency of only the oxygen generation, leaving hydrogen still generated by a platinum catalyst at the old efficiency. Even if the efficiency has jumped only from 50-70% to about 70-85%, that's still a big jump. And it shows that there's a lot of reachable gains left to get, and not necessarily in the distant future.
I wonder if we'll someday be able to look at the quantum state of the molecules, atoms and subatomic particles making up even pure water, to learn about its history. The way that we look at the chemical composition now, with more familiar instruments.
It's a low priority. We've got a lot more higher priority missions that cost a lot less.
If they spent the past decade's Star Wars budget over a century instead, it would still have cost us more than it would cost us to recruit, train and use a thousand assassins to penetrate Pakistan and destroy the Qaeda community there that is our #1 threat.
Star Wars is not measured by success in developing anything. It is entirely rigged to just spend money on defense contractors.
If we're going to invest money to develop Star Wars tech because it would be good to eventually do it, we can invest 10x as much in the NASA civilian development of space first, as a platform for whatever military is necessary and affordable after our other military and NASA missions are complete.
But there's still not going to be any application for the Star Wars strategy that just incites our enemies to either multiply their warhead count, or to improve other WMD delivery like smuggling part by part inside oil tankers or other cargo ships. No application other than defense contractor welfare, anyway.
"in the corporate criminal world there can be no expectation of safety."
There, Google, I fixed that for you.
That wasn't my tax money.
And when it was, that was wrong.
Besides, $BILLIONS for fiber that generates $TRILLIONS when it mostly works isn't $TRILLIONS that generates total destruction when it mostly works.
Exactly correct. Hundreds of years from now, Star Wars missile defense might be militarily useful. Right now it's only good for very expensive fireworks.
No, the lasers shooting things down are the essence of Star Wars. Even if you can find lots of pages saying it worked, all it takes is a few saying it doesn't work to show that it's a boondoggle.
Which is also the essence of the Star Wars boondoggle itself. Unless the missile shield is 100.000% effective, the percentage of missiles that will get through will encourage more missile production by the enemy. Which is exactly why Star Wars had any benefit at all when it was originally pursued: it incited the Soviets to make more weapons, to expand the "error rate" into a significant threat of many penetrating missiles. Since the Soviets already had tens of thousands of missiles, the shield started out as penetrable. Even a single missile hitting a US city, or anywhere in the US or Europe, would be an unacceptable catastrophe. But that would be the risk, a risk even greater because Star Wars would encourage such brinksmanship. But Star Wars "worked" by bankrupting the Soviets in the arms race it escalated. Now it's just bankrupting the US.
Of course, that's what you Republicans do best: bankrupt the US by cranking up our national security risks past the maximum.
You Republicans have also kicked the hornets nest and inflamed this Terror War beyond all manageability, too. I know that boom was largely an unexpected windfall for Halliburton and Northrup, a distraction from the Star Wars plan. But we can't even afford your boondoggle Terror War. Stacking Star Wars atop it is like running your SUV on "vacuum power" after you've burned all the fumes in your gas tank. I know you Republicans are working that angle as hard and fast as you can still con the 23% of Americans who can't spell their own name. But the rest of us paying attention know that it's a total failure.
Which is why I'm getting +mods. You've turned yourself out as a standard issue Republican warmonger. You're not going to get a lightsaber with this Star Wars plan, you know. All you're going to get is another $TRILLION boondoggle that endangers us even more. I know you love that, too. But the rest of us are on to you and your tricks.
Keep your Dark Side to yourself. You had your Cheney. Now the rest of us have to pick up the pieces, without more science fiction foreign/defense policy.
"star wars" "missile defense" (failed OR failure)
Secret tests have succeeded? Well, I have a secret plan to end the war. Just like Nixon did in Vietnam in 1968.
You Republicans don't even have new lies.
You start off accusing me (falsely) of a straw man, then end off lecturing me in some straw man about my business with classified laser testing literature.
What a bunch of "malarkey".
The Star Wars tests for 25 years have consistently failed to shoot down anything except the most carefully controlled test targets. The tests are usually faked, propaganda to keep spending those $BILLIONS on a defense system that is instead provocative, and worse than useless. That wasted money spent on crony defense contractors is all that Start Wars is ever good for.
But you ridiculous Republicans keep demanding it. You've been wrong about everything else, especially with such huge price tags, so why shouldn't you insist on more Star Wars boondoggles?
Frankly, you should stop talking like your made-up pronouncements on national "defense" and what business Americans have in debunking it are worth listening to.
The neocons made their bones in the "spotted owl" wars of the 1980s, where the owl was like a "canary in a coalmine" to protect forest ecosystems in the Northwest. The Reagan/Bush team clearcut them anyway.
That search was a preemtive search to see whether a candidate would be connected with past Republican escapades. From "spotted owl" to "Iran/Contra". Really a thorough background search.
Hey, wanna bet this new MS "Web OS" promises us a "database filesystem"?
Wanna bet it never arrives?
Can I install the x86 VM on my PS3 under Ubuntu, and run Wine to get Windows apps running?
No, the Pentagon still sucks at shooting things out of the sky with a laser. They are excellent at spending $BILLIONS on trying, over and again, for decades.
Maybe they're laser-proofing everything because they're so bad at lasering stuff that they're afraid they'll laser our own stuff. At the very least, it's innovation in spending $BILLIONS on lasers.
They're not "exactly as bad". Democrats didn't give us the Iraq War, or the mortgage/credit debacle, or torture. Some few Democrats in the minority had some hand, but you've got to be crazy to think that Democrats are as bad as what we've had under Republicans. Democrats' problems have all been sustainable. Another few years of Republican rule, and we'd be a smoking hole in the ground. The Democratic changing of the guard at least offers the chance that we'll return to mere inefficiency, instead of catastrophe at every quarter.
BTW, calling Bush a "so-called Republican" just blew your cover. You are Republican. You voted for Bush twice, and for Republican congressmembers and governors and other representatives who knows how many times. Now that your boys have ruined everything they've touched, suddenly "they're not really Republicans". Oh, and you're probably not either, now that the damage is done - you're a "Libertarian", right?
Social Security is one of the most successful programmes, public or private, ever undertaken. It's extremely popular. You Republicans courted disaster when you blurted out your plans to privateer it into yet another stock scam. But you're still clinging to it. Libertarians love old people starving in the dark. Real Americans don't.