One of our customers is an European local power plant and power grid operator. And he begs to differ.
1. You don't build a 110 kV power line within the time frame of a weather forecast. For instance south east Bavaria in Germany has consumers of a demand and a grid designed for 100 MW, but the locally installed decentral power generation is capable of 400 MW. What's missing for instance is power lines. 2. It's not the power lines alone, what is missing too is storage capacity, and that means: pumped-storage hydropower plants. There is no other technology right now of comparable capacity.
No, the mandated two year warranty has to be given by the seller of a product, not the manufacturer.
It's the italian Apple Store that is liable, and this is an italian company. That the italian Apple Store is owned by Apple Inc., doesn't change anything.
The abstract is at least as misleading as Apple's warranty terms, it seems. The mandated two year warranty has nothing to do with a manufacturer's warranty. The two year mandated warranty
a) covers only faults that where present at the time of the sale. b) has to be given by the seller of the product, independent from any manufacturer (how the seller gets back to the manufacturer for cover is up to them).
Only if Apple is the seller of the items (e.g. through the Apple Stores), it has to adhere to the rules. And then the terms of business or the advertising for the extended warranty must not be misleading about the coverage the buyer is entitled to anyway.
It's not that easy. To distribute power, that got discontinuely generated at very different spots and where the only constant is the constant change in amount generated and amount consumed, you need a very powerful grid and large buffering capacities (e.g. pumped-storage hydropower plants).
A normal grid as used until now knows mainly one direction: from a central continious power plant to the consumers, and it is pretty well predictable. A distributed grid with lots of little generators and very variable power generation needs to be bidirectional and has a much more complicated management, because you newer know beforehand at which point in the grid how much power gets generated and how it needs to be distributed (or stored) at this exact moment. It might easily overload at some spots down the distribution chain, if the power generators at this place are active while not much power gets consumed locally.
Which is more offensive to you, the lump sum, directly paid, or the submarine like subsidies in tax exemptions, extended write-off possibilities and artificial low rents?
In Germany, it's 20%. If Germany's subsidies are on par with the world, this would mean that oil and coal got about twice the subsidies than renewables got compared with the output.
Evolution builds on variation. Each generation is quite similar to the parent generation, but the individuals differ slightly from each other and from the parents. Thus they are differently adapted to the environment they live in and have thus different chances of survival and having offsprings themselves. Recombination (mostly) and mutation (quite seldom) will provide for new variations in each new generation.
But individuals can also react to environmental pressure, by either influencing and adapting the environment to their needs (like plants, beavers or ants, or humans), or by migration away from the environment into new biotops and trying to gain a foothold there.
If the environment changes gradually, the chances are high that in each generation there are enough individuals well adapted to the slightly changed environment, so the species as such survives, even with individuals whose habitus is gradually moving away from the ancestor's.
If intensive environmental changes happen, species with high variation, short generation cycles and a high number of offsping per individuum have higher chances to adapt fast enough to the changes. If the environment is stable, species with low variation have less to invest into new offspring, because each descendant will be about as well adapted as the respective parent, thus those species have advantages.
No. This ist just making up history for the sake of it. The court records of people being convicted and killed because of paganism are there, and there is no evidence of someone being convicted because of a decorated tree.
In the 19th century, it was en vogue to find local roots for about any tradition one could think of, and especially english and german authors were eager to reinterpret about anything catholic (and thus roman) as being derived from celtic or german origins. Many of those speculations are still reported as "historical facts", even if they were mostly well invented. One of the most famous of those reinterpretations is Halloween/Samhain, completely ignoring the fact, that All Hallows Eve was introduced as a catholic holiday in Rome in 609 by Pope Bonifatius IV, when he consecrated the Pantheon in Rome and dedicated it to "the Virgin Mary and all Martyrs", and by the way demanded the consecration to be celebrated each year - completely ignoring any celtic traditions that any hibernians, picts or scots may celebrate somewhere else on some islands at the border of Christianity.
There is a verse banning cutting down trees and carving idols out of them. Some people with reading problems interpret this as cutting down trees and decorating them.
Christmas trees are, as far as documentation goes, not a pagan survival, they only appeared about 500 years ago in Southwest Germany. At this time, Southwest Germany was christianized for 1000 years already. Nice tradition though.
Actually, it's not illegal in Spain to share copyrighted files. So whatever his intended purpose was, the main use the tools came to were not illegal in Spain.
And there is still the question if banning illicit drugs actually make sense. It's more a thing of tradition, because from a objective point of view banning illicit drugs does not hinder their distribution, but increases the cost the society pays in terms of policing, criminality and wrongful deaths.
Most people in the U.S. don't even know how health care in Europe works.
For once, it's generally not paid for by taxes. In Germany and in Austria, for instance, it works like this: If you are an employee, a predefined percentage of your income goes to the health care insurance, which has to provide a certain, legally defined coverage. Thus those health care insurers are called "gesetzliche Krankenversicherung" (legal health care insurance). The employer has to pay the same amount for you too (so in fact your real income is higher, and your health insurance premium is too, but in the end, it's just a play with numbers). Only if your monthly income is higher than a certain level, or if you are self-employed or running a business, you are not required to take legal health care insurance, you are free to either be not insured at all or have any coverage you see fit. Health care insurers, who provide those coverages are called "private Krankenversicherung" (private health care insurers).
In Germany, there are about 100 insurers providing legal coverage, and you can freely choose between them. They take different percentages of your income (as stated above), ranging between 12% and 16%, right now (it can change over time). You can switch between insurers at will, with three month notice, and for the same premium the health care insurer offers to all its clients.
In Austria, you can't freely choose. For each sector of the economy, there is a specialized health care insurer. Most employees will be covered by the Gebietskrankenkasse (regional health care provider), of which one exists in each federal state. Employees in the public sector for instance will be insured by the BVA (Insurer for Workers of the Public Sector). But the general system is the same.
It's the satisfied feeling of being able and educated enough to elect the right person in the right office, and hold the elected people responsible for what the government does. If you don't expect anything from the government, then you can't expect anything from your goverment.
Remember people: In a democracy, you get the government you deserve.
No, articles without references are just dead wood. They serve no purpose. If I need a Wikipedia article, then I am not familiar with the topic, and that means that I am not able to determine the value of the information I get from the article.
On the other hand, in German, it's not much better. They call the federal states "Länder" (in both Germany and Austria), but at the same time refer to the countries of the World as "Länder" too. They say "in den Staaten" (in the States), and mean the U.S., and they say "in den Staaten Asiens" and mean the countries of Asia.
(And if someone would be linguistically exact, country just means 'beyond the borders', derived from Latin terra contrata = opposite land.)
But differently than any god, I have an idea how I could actually detect matter travelling faster than light and how to prove its existance.
With gods, people claim, they exist, and they actually influence you, and at the same time people refuse any criterion which determines the influence and differentiate it from other wellknown or lesser known influences.
For an atheist, there is always the stance: Reality is, what is the case. You have to make a case out of a god's existance to convince an atheist: list the pro and contra of a god's existance, put forward how the world would be different, if the claimed god either exists or doesn't exist etc.pp.
If the topic is popular enough, then the danger of falling into obscurity is low, indeed. But you don't know which topics will stay popular, and which will fall into obscurity. And why should a lower level of quality be required for articles about popular topics anyway? If there are so many people with a profound knowledge about the topic, then finding enough references to help those not familiar with the topic should be the easier.
Slashdot Mirror
One of our customers is an European local power plant and power grid operator. And he begs to differ.
1. You don't build a 110 kV power line within the time frame of a weather forecast. For instance south east Bavaria in Germany has consumers of a demand and a grid designed for 100 MW, but the locally installed decentral power generation is capable of 400 MW. What's missing for instance is power lines.
2. It's not the power lines alone, what is missing too is storage capacity, and that means: pumped-storage hydropower plants. There is no other technology right now of comparable capacity.
No, the mandated two year warranty has to be given by the seller of a product, not the manufacturer.
It's the italian Apple Store that is liable, and this is an italian company. That the italian Apple Store is owned by Apple Inc., doesn't change anything.
The abstract is at least as misleading as Apple's warranty terms, it seems. The mandated two year warranty has nothing to do with a manufacturer's warranty. The two year mandated warranty
a) covers only faults that where present at the time of the sale.
b) has to be given by the seller of the product, independent from any manufacturer (how the seller gets back to the manufacturer for cover is up to them).
Only if Apple is the seller of the items (e.g. through the Apple Stores), it has to adhere to the rules. And then the terms of business or the advertising for the extended warranty must not be misleading about the coverage the buyer is entitled to anyway.
It's not that easy. To distribute power, that got discontinuely generated at very different spots and where the only constant is the constant change in amount generated and amount consumed, you need a very powerful grid and large buffering capacities (e.g. pumped-storage hydropower plants).
A normal grid as used until now knows mainly one direction: from a central continious power plant to the consumers, and it is pretty well predictable. A distributed grid with lots of little generators and very variable power generation needs to be bidirectional and has a much more complicated management, because you newer know beforehand at which point in the grid how much power gets generated and how it needs to be distributed (or stored) at this exact moment. It might easily overload at some spots down the distribution chain, if the power generators at this place are active while not much power gets consumed locally.
You confused me.
Which is more offensive to you, the lump sum, directly paid, or the submarine like subsidies in tax exemptions, extended write-off possibilities and artificial low rents?
In Germany, it's 20%. If Germany's subsidies are on par with the world, this would mean that oil and coal got about twice the subsidies than renewables got compared with the output.
It is more complicated than that.
Evolution builds on variation. Each generation is quite similar to the parent generation, but the individuals differ slightly from each other and from the parents. Thus they are differently adapted to the environment they live in and have thus different chances of survival and having offsprings themselves. Recombination (mostly) and mutation (quite seldom) will provide for new variations in each new generation.
But individuals can also react to environmental pressure, by either influencing and adapting the environment to their needs (like plants, beavers or ants, or humans), or by migration away from the environment into new biotops and trying to gain a foothold there.
If the environment changes gradually, the chances are high that in each generation there are enough individuals well adapted to the slightly changed environment, so the species as such survives, even with individuals whose habitus is gradually moving away from the ancestor's.
If intensive environmental changes happen, species with high variation, short generation cycles and a high number of offsping per individuum have higher chances to adapt fast enough to the changes. If the environment is stable, species with low variation have less to invest into new offspring, because each descendant will be about as well adapted as the respective parent, thus those species have advantages.
Ingwi means nothing in German. Ingwer would be Ginger though.
And Ötzi (or Oetzi for the umlaut-challenged) is named thus because he was found at the upper end of the Ötztal valley.
In the civilized world, a can of coke has 1/3 l (333 ml).
No. This ist just making up history for the sake of it.
The court records of people being convicted and killed because of paganism are there, and there is no evidence of someone being convicted because of a decorated tree.
In the 19th century, it was en vogue to find local roots for about any tradition one could think of, and especially english and german authors were eager to reinterpret about anything catholic (and thus roman) as being derived from celtic or german origins. Many of those speculations are still reported as "historical facts", even if they were mostly well invented. One of the most famous of those reinterpretations is Halloween/Samhain, completely ignoring the fact, that All Hallows Eve was introduced as a catholic holiday in Rome in 609 by Pope Bonifatius IV, when he consecrated the Pantheon in Rome and dedicated it to "the Virgin Mary and all Martyrs", and by the way demanded the consecration to be celebrated each year - completely ignoring any celtic traditions that any hibernians, picts or scots may celebrate somewhere else on some islands at the border of Christianity.
There is a verse banning cutting down trees and carving idols out of them. Some people with reading problems interpret this as cutting down trees and decorating them.
Christmas trees are, as far as documentation goes, not a pagan survival, they only appeared about 500 years ago in Southwest Germany. At this time, Southwest Germany was christianized for 1000 years already. Nice tradition though.
You never had much experience with people addicted to alcohol or legal psychopharmaca?
Actually, it's not illegal in Spain to share copyrighted files. So whatever his intended purpose was, the main use the tools came to were not illegal in Spain.
And there is still the question if banning illicit drugs actually make sense. It's more a thing of tradition, because from a objective point of view banning illicit drugs does not hinder their distribution, but increases the cost the society pays in terms of policing, criminality and wrongful deaths.
Whoooosh!
This gets completely off-topic, but anyway...
Most people in the U.S. don't even know how health care in Europe works.
For once, it's generally not paid for by taxes. In Germany and in Austria, for instance, it works like this: If you are an employee, a predefined percentage of your income goes to the health care insurance, which has to provide a certain, legally defined coverage. Thus those health care insurers are called "gesetzliche Krankenversicherung" (legal health care insurance). The employer has to pay the same amount for you too (so in fact your real income is higher, and your health insurance premium is too, but in the end, it's just a play with numbers). Only if your monthly income is higher than a certain level, or if you are self-employed or running a business, you are not required to take legal health care insurance, you are free to either be not insured at all or have any coverage you see fit. Health care insurers, who provide those coverages are called "private Krankenversicherung" (private health care insurers).
In Germany, there are about 100 insurers providing legal coverage, and you can freely choose between them. They take different percentages of your income (as stated above), ranging between 12% and 16%, right now (it can change over time). You can switch between insurers at will, with three month notice, and for the same premium the health care insurer offers to all its clients.
In Austria, you can't freely choose. For each sector of the economy, there is a specialized health care insurer. Most employees will be covered by the Gebietskrankenkasse (regional health care provider), of which one exists in each federal state. Employees in the public sector for instance will be insured by the BVA (Insurer for Workers of the Public Sector). But the general system is the same.
Because we know how much methane will be enclosed into ice, given certain conditions, and how long it will stay there.
So all we need is ice going back that long.
You are not borrowing it yet, if you just ask them. So they don't have any right to any data about you yet either.
It's the satisfied feeling of being able and educated enough to elect the right person in the right office, and hold the elected people responsible for what the government does. If you don't expect anything from the government, then you can't expect anything from your goverment.
Remember people: In a democracy, you get the government you deserve.
No, articles without references are just dead wood. They serve no purpose. If I need a Wikipedia article, then I am not familiar with the topic, and that means that I am not able to determine the value of the information I get from the article.
On the other hand, in German, it's not much better. They call the federal states "Länder" (in both Germany and Austria), but at the same time refer to the countries of the World as "Länder" too. They say "in den Staaten" (in the States), and mean the U.S., and they say "in den Staaten Asiens" and mean the countries of Asia.
(And if someone would be linguistically exact, country just means 'beyond the borders', derived from Latin terra contrata = opposite land.)
I guess, you get your groceries online in Neanderthal.
But differently than any god, I have an idea how I could actually detect matter travelling faster than light and how to prove its existance.
With gods, people claim, they exist, and they actually influence you, and at the same time people refuse any criterion which determines the influence and differentiate it from other wellknown or lesser known influences.
For an atheist, there is always the stance: Reality is, what is the case. You have to make a case out of a god's existance to convince an atheist: list the pro and contra of a god's existance, put forward how the world would be different, if the claimed god either exists or doesn't exist etc.pp.
If the topic is popular enough, then the danger of falling into obscurity is low, indeed. But you don't know which topics will stay popular, and which will fall into obscurity. And why should a lower level of quality be required for articles about popular topics anyway? If there are so many people with a profound knowledge about the topic, then finding enough references to help those not familiar with the topic should be the easier.