No. With the GPL, you don't have to agree to it unless you distribute the GPL'd software. If you don't distribute the GPL'd software to anyone (or code that includes GPL'd code), you don't have to agree to the GPL. Otherwise, you would violate copyright law. Accepting the GPL grants you exceptions from copyright law so you can redistribute the software, but you don't violate copyright law in your own fair use.
Another good idea. I'm not aware of any opensource 3D model generators, but I think you might be able to find one/write one. You could have spinning turntable on which was placed (although this would be a hassle for people) or have some kind of spinning ring with the kinect on it.
This guy is on the way to solving the three main problems of personal robotics:
1. Indoor localization (figure out where you are inside)
2. Indoor navigation
3. Table top manipulation
There are already open source software packages for all of these items, but they require very expensive laser scanners (starting at 5K a pop). Most of these lasers only scan one row at a time, which means that for situations where you want 3D, you have to tilt the scanner up and down. This is a hassle and leads to slow scan times, which reduces the responsiveness of the robot.
For indoor localization, what you really want is just a line of points at a fixed height (you could extract one row of Kinect depth pixels) that you can feed to particle filers to figure out position in a mapped space. You might also be able to use opensource SLAM software, wheel encoders, and a Kinect to make 2D and 3D maps of indoor environments.
For indoor navigation, you can use 2D navigation planners to figure out plans through maps, and then use indoor localization to follow the plans. The Kinect can serve as an obstacle detector in addition to the providing data to the localizer. For example, if a person or animal jumps in front of the robot, the Kinect will sense it, and allow the robot to stop instantly and plan a new route. With a tilting laser, the reaction time would be slower, because laser might be in an orientation where it does not see the obstacle.
For table top manipulation, the Kinect can provide a point cloud of the objects on the table. CV software can remove the background (table, wall, etc.) and then detect the objects on the table. Once this is done, motion planners can plan a route for an arm or other manipulator to pick up objects on the table.
Once we have all three of these systems, it should not be all that hard to link them together and start actually doing useful things with robots in our homes. Even just the first two would make it possible useful cleaning and sentry robots.
A normal sized car has about 4 m^2 of area, so it results in about 24 kWh per day in sunny CA at 100%. More likely it would be 2.4 kWh with all the loses or about 100 watts average.
It's only part of the solar panel. I'm over-simplifying, but solar panels are a sandwich of three layers: the transparent conductor (currently indium doped tin oxide), the semiconductor layer (silicon), and the back collector (metal). This discovery will replace that pesky transparent conductor layer.
Yep. One air car company has already been busted for fraud. Others have been dancing around for years, but no products yet. The linked article was from 2007, and said it would be in production by now.
If you do the math, you'll find that having %100 efficient air motors (not likely) leads to around 2.6 MJ per L of compressed air at 10,000 PSI. A Tesla roadster has a 55 kWh battery, meaning you would need a 76 liter, or 20 gallon air tank. That's a carbon fibre tank. Good luck finding that for sale, anywhere. The Tesla would probably consume less energy per mile than the MDI car linked. Why? Because the Tesla is sleeker (look at it) and has a smaller frontal area. Thus it would have less drag, and be more efficient.
Yep. Subjects for them to test:
-Different regimes on NiMH, NiCd, Li-ion, LiPoly, LiFePO4 and lead-acid.
-Pulse charging
-Those "battery desulfators"
-Charge up some alkalines to show it's possible
No. You have no clue what entropy is. Entropy is a state function of the molecules. As the battery is charged and discharged, it changes. Look at your molar entropy tables.
Second, it is known not to impact some batteries. Edison cells are still producing %100 of their rated capacity after almost 100 years of operation. Iron plates = no shape change.
"This just in - scientists use vacuum tunnel and state of the art electronics to detect that gravity accelerates two different masses - at the same rate!!" [NB - sarcasm]
It would be news if they found, down to say 10^-15, that both masses are accelerated the same.
Don't laugh. I've been thinking about setting up a website where groups of people passionate about an issue can hire lobbyists to change it for them. Any issue. You can go on line and hire lobbyists to make abortion a crime deserving the death penalty, while I can go on and hire a lobbyist to make abortion free to all. The issue I have is that the internet does not represent everyone. Perhaps, after the Internet site is big, we'll expand to mail and print. I'll call it the "citizen's bribery organization".
Actually it is partly a distribution problem. Specifically, the fact we are even distributing most resources at all.
Local makes no sense at all. It's cheaper and better for things to be built in big industrial factories where massive quantities of products flow down simple assembly lines. Transportation is insanely cheap, especially freight transportation. Instead of having communities (which is a disaster), we can have capitalists trade products, and if we don't like it, we don't buy it!
Efficiency is not the goal. It is a decoy thrown at us by a group of idealists, and backed by the fossil fuel industries. Yes the fossil fuel industries. They realize that demand will outstrip production. That will force nuclear and solar building. If they promote efficiency, they can hang around for longer. This is what saved the whales. Not efficiency, but prices rises, and a man named JD Rockefeller.
Here's a simple solution. Nuclear power. Synthetic gasoline. A new V8 SUV. Small towns and suburbia. That's easy, if we put aside our ideologies of efficiency and our irrational phobias.
Communities won't save us. They can't even agree on what color to force people to paint their roofs. Now you want them to agree to build a farm?
The dollar forces people to agree. It forces people to do things intelligently. When you don't consider the full picture, a lot looks stupid. But the amount of labor to ship something around the world rather than make it local is less, so it makes sense to ship it around the world.
Two communities might be able to save us. The business community and the scientific community. But more likely, I think it will be a few individuals looking to make a buck.
Solving that distribution problem wouldn't take more resources now, would it? Moving all "that food we can produce" would happen with magic fairy dust, right, not fossil fuels. Distributing all that food would happen with magic neo-awesome materials, not vessels made of iron.
Actually it would. The earth contains a hell of a lot of solar energy. 175 petawatts worth. Just 1 day of solar = all the oil in the world. The earth also contains, in the oceans, enough uranium for 1000 years of current energy use, in the most inefficient case. We could solve all our problems right now if we went nuclear. However, the environmentalists prevented this. All those ships and trucks and V8 cars could be powered by synthetic gas and diesel made from CO2 in those powerplants. So, as a result of the suppression of these advanced technologies, we're going to have to go solar. This will be more expensive, but that's life.
You don't have to believe we are running low on many key components to modern life. In 30 years from now you will live it.
I predict that 30 years from now, we will be living comfortably. I also predict that many people will think the world is on the verge of collapse. Just like it was in 1980, when we'd starve in 2000. But, it did not happen, because the principles of finite resources, while seemingly logical, are wrong. Just like it is logical that heavy things fall faster, but this is in fact false. Humans, and so-called "mythical unicorn tears" will always find a way around it. The best example is the whales. It was not the advocacy of Greenpeace that saved the whales, but the capitalism of Standard Oil. Just in time for the whale species and depletion of whale stocks, the "mythical unicorn tears" of ground oil. Now, the same must happen again. It will not be the advocates, but the capitalists who save the glaciers. Julian Simon is a great author about these issues.
And if China and India come anywhere close to a fully developed economy that allows the majority of its residents to live "modern" lives you'll be lucky to get 15 years of your comfortable life before the serious difficulties begin.
They're going nuclear, and we should be too. The fact that they are using more resources is good, because affluence == less population growth. More nukes, less protests.
What's easier to accept, "This is a load of crap! Pass me the bucket o' wings, I gotta watch this in high-def" or... "Damn it, I'm a part of the problem, too!?"
Depends on what kind of a person you are. If you are a rational person, then you just want to sit down and eat food and watch TV/do what ever. Meanwhile, if you have a system of moral values about consuming less, then you go out an criticize, and attempt to tax people for their personal choices.
We already have that. It's called a lithium-ion battery. But it costs too much. We instead need a 50 mile pack that's dirt cheap. Like lead-acid. And a gasoline generator, so we never run out of range. That is the scheme that makes the most sense. A 50 mile battery pack (really cheap, lead acid, nickel cadmium or nimh) and a generator.
Slashdot Mirror
No. With the GPL, you don't have to agree to it unless you distribute the GPL'd software. If you don't distribute the GPL'd software to anyone (or code that includes GPL'd code), you don't have to agree to the GPL. Otherwise, you would violate copyright law. Accepting the GPL grants you exceptions from copyright law so you can redistribute the software, but you don't violate copyright law in your own fair use.
Another good idea. I'm not aware of any opensource 3D model generators, but I think you might be able to find one/write one. You could have spinning turntable on which was placed (although this would be a hassle for people) or have some kind of spinning ring with the kinect on it.
See that depth image on the left in the vid? That's worth it's weight in unobtainium oxide to roboticists.
This guy is on the way to solving the three main problems of personal robotics:
1. Indoor localization (figure out where you are inside)
2. Indoor navigation
3. Table top manipulation
There are already open source software packages for all of these items, but they require very expensive laser scanners (starting at 5K a pop). Most of these lasers only scan one row at a time, which means that for situations where you want 3D, you have to tilt the scanner up and down. This is a hassle and leads to slow scan times, which reduces the responsiveness of the robot.
For indoor localization, what you really want is just a line of points at a fixed height (you could extract one row of Kinect depth pixels) that you can feed to particle filers to figure out position in a mapped space. You might also be able to use opensource SLAM software, wheel encoders, and a Kinect to make 2D and 3D maps of indoor environments.
For indoor navigation, you can use 2D navigation planners to figure out plans through maps, and then use indoor localization to follow the plans. The Kinect can serve as an obstacle detector in addition to the providing data to the localizer. For example, if a person or animal jumps in front of the robot, the Kinect will sense it, and allow the robot to stop instantly and plan a new route. With a tilting laser, the reaction time would be slower, because laser might be in an orientation where it does not see the obstacle.
For table top manipulation, the Kinect can provide a point cloud of the objects on the table. CV software can remove the background (table, wall, etc.) and then detect the objects on the table. Once this is done, motion planners can plan a route for an arm or other manipulator to pick up objects on the table.
Once we have all three of these systems, it should not be all that hard to link them together and start actually doing useful things with robots in our homes. Even just the first two would make it possible useful cleaning and sentry robots.
A normal sized car has about 4 m^2 of area, so it results in about 24 kWh per day in sunny CA at 100%. More likely it would be 2.4 kWh with all the loses or about 100 watts average.
It's only part of the solar panel. I'm over-simplifying, but solar panels are a sandwich of three layers: the transparent conductor (currently indium doped tin oxide), the semiconductor layer (silicon), and the back collector (metal). This discovery will replace that pesky transparent conductor layer.
According to this German article [tagesschau.de] the car was driving 130km/h, which is more like 80 mph. Which makes this even more impressive.
Even more so, because drag is approximately speed squared. From simple math 375 * (80/65)^2, this car could go about 570 miles on a charge.
Yamaha makes everything from motorcycles to violins
Instead of ACME, we have JCME.
Yep. One air car company has already been busted for fraud. Others have been dancing around for years, but no products yet. The linked article was from 2007, and said it would be in production by now.
If you do the math, you'll find that having %100 efficient air motors (not likely) leads to around 2.6 MJ per L of compressed air at 10,000 PSI. A Tesla roadster has a 55 kWh battery, meaning you would need a 76 liter, or 20 gallon air tank. That's a carbon fibre tank. Good luck finding that for sale, anywhere. The Tesla would probably consume less energy per mile than the MDI car linked. Why? Because the Tesla is sleeker (look at it) and has a smaller frontal area. Thus it would have less drag, and be more efficient.
Yep. Subjects for them to test:
-Different regimes on NiMH, NiCd, Li-ion, LiPoly, LiFePO4 and lead-acid.
-Pulse charging
-Those "battery desulfators"
-Charge up some alkalines to show it's possible
You have no chance to photograph, make your time.
And then there's NiFe, which does not give a damn.
It gets attributed to Entropy.
No. You have no clue what entropy is. Entropy is a state function of the molecules. As the battery is charged and discharged, it changes. Look at your molar entropy tables.
Second, it is known not to impact some batteries. Edison cells are still producing %100 of their rated capacity after almost 100 years of operation. Iron plates = no shape change.
"This just in - scientists use vacuum tunnel and state of the art electronics to detect that gravity accelerates two different masses - at the same rate!!" [NB - sarcasm]
It would be news if they found, down to say 10^-15, that both masses are accelerated the same.
And to be greater than 10 times lower in energy density than lead acid batteries.
Don't laugh. I've been thinking about setting up a website where groups of people passionate about an issue can hire lobbyists to change it for them. Any issue. You can go on line and hire lobbyists to make abortion a crime deserving the death penalty, while I can go on and hire a lobbyist to make abortion free to all. The issue I have is that the internet does not represent everyone. Perhaps, after the Internet site is big, we'll expand to mail and print. I'll call it the "citizen's bribery organization".
About using a light, doomsday, and any date circa 2012 : one should mention Peak Whale Oil
(even if instead of a sudden apocalyptic vision we have a decades long agony of energy shortage)
Actually it is partly a distribution problem. Specifically, the fact we are even distributing most resources at all.
Local makes no sense at all. It's cheaper and better for things to be built in big industrial factories where massive quantities of products flow down simple assembly lines. Transportation is insanely cheap, especially freight transportation. Instead of having communities (which is a disaster), we can have capitalists trade products, and if we don't like it, we don't buy it!
Efficiency is not the goal. It is a decoy thrown at us by a group of idealists, and backed by the fossil fuel industries. Yes the fossil fuel industries. They realize that demand will outstrip production. That will force nuclear and solar building. If they promote efficiency, they can hang around for longer. This is what saved the whales. Not efficiency, but prices rises, and a man named JD Rockefeller.
Here's a simple solution. Nuclear power. Synthetic gasoline. A new V8 SUV. Small towns and suburbia. That's easy, if we put aside our ideologies of efficiency and our irrational phobias.
Communities won't save us. They can't even agree on what color to force people to paint their roofs. Now you want them to agree to build a farm?
The dollar forces people to agree. It forces people to do things intelligently. When you don't consider the full picture, a lot looks stupid. But the amount of labor to ship something around the world rather than make it local is less, so it makes sense to ship it around the world.
Two communities might be able to save us. The business community and the scientific community. But more likely, I think it will be a few individuals looking to make a buck.
Solving that distribution problem wouldn't take more resources now, would it? Moving all "that food we can produce" would happen with magic fairy dust, right, not fossil fuels. Distributing all that food would happen with magic neo-awesome materials, not vessels made of iron.
Actually it would. The earth contains a hell of a lot of solar energy. 175 petawatts worth. Just 1 day of solar = all the oil in the world. The earth also contains, in the oceans, enough uranium for 1000 years of current energy use, in the most inefficient case. We could solve all our problems right now if we went nuclear. However, the environmentalists prevented this. All those ships and trucks and V8 cars could be powered by synthetic gas and diesel made from CO2 in those powerplants. So, as a result of the suppression of these advanced technologies, we're going to have to go solar. This will be more expensive, but that's life.
You don't have to believe we are running low on many key components to modern life. In 30 years from now you will live it.
I predict that 30 years from now, we will be living comfortably. I also predict that many people will think the world is on the verge of collapse. Just like it was in 1980, when we'd starve in 2000. But, it did not happen, because the principles of finite resources, while seemingly logical, are wrong. Just like it is logical that heavy things fall faster, but this is in fact false. Humans, and so-called "mythical unicorn tears" will always find a way around it. The best example is the whales. It was not the advocacy of Greenpeace that saved the whales, but the capitalism of Standard Oil. Just in time for the whale species and depletion of whale stocks, the "mythical unicorn tears" of ground oil. Now, the same must happen again. It will not be the advocates, but the capitalists who save the glaciers. Julian Simon is a great author about these issues.
And if China and India come anywhere close to a fully developed economy that allows the majority of its residents to live "modern" lives you'll be lucky to get 15 years of your comfortable life before the serious difficulties begin.
They're going nuclear, and we should be too. The fact that they are using more resources is good, because affluence == less population growth. More nukes, less protests.
What's easier to accept, "This is a load of crap! Pass me the bucket o' wings, I gotta watch this in high-def" or... "Damn it, I'm a part of the problem, too!?"
Depends on what kind of a person you are. If you are a rational person, then you just want to sit down and eat food and watch TV/do what ever. Meanwhile, if you have a system of moral values about consuming less, then you go out an criticize, and attempt to tax people for their personal choices.
I want my EV95 panasonic NiMH.
We already have that. It's called a lithium-ion battery. But it costs too much. We instead need a 50 mile pack that's dirt cheap. Like lead-acid. And a gasoline generator, so we never run out of range. That is the scheme that makes the most sense. A 50 mile battery pack (really cheap, lead acid, nickel cadmium or nimh) and a generator.
Sorry about this. Math mistake made here.
Newer, better data from here.
Commuter rail: 124 deaths/11049 million miles = 1.12 deaths per 100 million passenger miles
This is for a direct comparison. I'll look for other types.
I am not a troll. I misheard the tone of your pose and apologise for the comment.
How in the hell is this related to war profiteering? This just sounds like another excuse to hate the USA.
Oh yeah, what is Black Gold Alchemy's renewable energy product?
I.E., a vanpool, which is IMO the best form of public transport.