once for a tooth extraction and once for a broken finger.
Yeah. I mean 1 in 3 people suffering that kind of pain yearly? What the fuck? By the way why would you take an opiate for a tooth extraction? I've had 6 teeth pulled in my time. I was prescribed an opiate for one of them, but that was done under a general and tore a hole into my sinus wall as well.
Let me stop you right there. "Fair" doesn't come into it. "Ethics" is the only thing that matters here and subjecting to a bunch of humans to: "Lets see what this does" doesn't pass muster. Also "irritant" is a strange way of describing something that can have lasting effects on lung function. And something that in studies have shown to have adverse impact on other living things such as massively stunting growth of plants.
Oh thank god. For a moment I thought the entire population was popping 2 pills a day rather than the entire population popping a pill every 5 days. I'm glad you cleared that up.
Oddly enough the design criteria is "efficient combustion" not "high NOx".
Yep because engineers target one thing and don't know how combustion works. People have known the relationship between thermal combustion and NOx since the 40s. By raising efficiency they were directly and knowingly raising NOx. By not putting a constraint on NOx they effectively were designing cars with this in mind.
Fucking amazing that. Who would've thought you'd be stupid enough to contradict yourself.
You're talking in present tense.... were you doing this in 1982?
No but my dad was.
Think for a moment about the tools that would have been available at the time.
I don't need to think about it at all. Most of the tools I'm using have dates around that time stamped on the side. Even the book which I used for developing exposure tables and techniques is from the 60s. The only "modern" thing I use for my hobby is perishables like film and developer powder.
The only real barrier is that I got most of this from the trash-heap whereas people would need to have invested in their hobby back in the 80s. But people did. Heck every male in a generation above mine in my family at one point or another turned part of their house into a darkroom.
And just how many years had you been doing it before you were able to make a picture that actually couldn't be easily distinguished as altered?
Define easily altered? Remember the quality of photos people were putting out back then? There was no 50mpxl pixel peeping or analytical techniques. My first ever attempt at exposure blending looked damn good and the result came out on an 8x5 to say nothing of the far smaller photo sizes that were common at the time.
And just what kind of practice would you have needed
Worked first go. It's not that hard. The darkroom was incredibly forgiving. Remember it's a place people often turn to in order to fix their in camera screw-ups. The process also isn't quick. You watch developing happen in real time and each step takes minutes at a time. It's not hard to get right first go. Unlike Photoshop where you click the button and instantly get a blend and then reach for the Ctrl-Z
Poor example but still a good conclusion. Sitting at home and watching TV is still far better for the environment than sitting in the car and watching traffic, even when the latter activity takes up a fraction of the time.
Also you're implying that everything is fixed on the other end. It's not. We just closed down an office and merged it with another due to a rise in working from home. This reduces travel, well reduces the amount of energy spent lighting (why the hell are there so many fluros over my head?), and as another tenant picks up that office space it quite likely prevented yet another building being built.
Combine that with the archaic heating systems a lot of people have that heat their homes while they aren't even there and the savings do make some sense.
Oh thank God. The humans were only subjected to NOx to see if it causes cancer and not tailpipe emissions. Here I was worried they may be breathing in something dangerous.
Of course they did. High NOx emissions are a well know effect of pushing a diesel engine to combust more efficiently which is precisely what VW have been pushing for many years.
Is it at all relevant? So far I have seen little uproar over the incident which as done little more than light up bases that no one was putting any effort into hiding in the first place.
I am just having a hard time with the concept that the first notification they have of a need to supplement the power grid comes in the form of a frequency sag. There have to be SCADA networks, and the network operator must know when they are over capacity.
This part of localised controls in a self regulating system. The system stability is dependent on having enough local control with enough speed to react to change. It only becomes unstable if you lack speed or capacity to regulate. Until these batteries existed speed wasn't an issue since detection of an event on the other side of the country was still orders of magnitude faster than anyone's ability to react to the event.
Think of it in terms of a bucket leaking water, and you and your friend are both pouring water in at a controllable rate to keep the bucket exactly half full. Now if your friend tells you he's about to stop pouring you can pour faster and keep that bucket exactly half full, but if you can't see or hear him and he suddenly stops, you're likely still in a very good place to correct yourself to keep that bucket half full without emptying it overflowing it. And ultimately the only thing that matters in this network is for it to not empty or overflow. Being exactly spot on perfect is not a requirement.
Now that said the whole concept of smart grids is that we are starting to get in a situation that is more intermittent and demanding of faster reaction times. Maybe some large scale SCADA systems will be implemented in the future, but right now unless you foul something up we are well within our means of controlling the system with lots of localised controls.
We were also able to refine oil in the 30s. Sure nowadays we do it a bit more reliability with more onspec products as a result, but the idea of many small control local controls working on a single system and keeping it stable is as old as control theory itself.
If you want your world run by corporations you are a dangerous person.
Oh yeah sorry. I forgot the world is run on open source Windows on open source hardware with everything in the open at all times.
If you think that vendors solving vendor problems isn't perfectly normal in our world then you're delusional. But if not, now that the bug is in the open maybe you can send me updated microcode? Maybe the government can? Right? I mean you seem to think that that is the norm and everyone has access to vendor code and systems right?
In practice, I'd expect that it was just not viable back then to do convincingly without at least *SOME* commercial-scale opportunity for profit.
Profit? You know some people do this as a hobby right? I still do this as a hobby. I made a lovely little "photoshopped" picture of a diver emerging from a puddle with nothing more than some creativity, a $50 enlarger saved from a trip to the dumpster and a little fun in the "darkroom" (actually the kitchen with the main lightbulb replaced with a red one).
In practice it is trivial to do. In practice many people enjoy doing it just for shits and giggles.
14c/kWh is only expensive if you live in the fairy land coal coal coal USA subsidising your own poor health. Where some people happily pay 20c/kWh instead of the alternative 8c/kWh + x days off your life due to lung disease/kWh.
I'm rather surprised at your response. Normally when some arrogant kraut dilettante fucks up some part of Linux for no perceivable reason it's like you got all your birthdays at once.
That's only because you approach the subject religiously while I approach it practically. Also you're right, when someone fucks up some part of Linux I get upset. Fortunately that doesn't happen too often.
Oh yes I fully agree. It's a great system and a great idea, but it's no silver bullet for stability and may not be the cheapest way of stabling a grid depending on that grid's requirements. All of this needs to be taken into account.
Slashdot Mirror
once for a tooth extraction and once for a broken finger.
Yeah. I mean 1 in 3 people suffering that kind of pain yearly? What the fuck?
By the way why would you take an opiate for a tooth extraction? I've had 6 teeth pulled in my time. I was prescribed an opiate for one of them, but that was done under a general and tore a hole into my sinus wall as well.
ONE hydrocodone every 5 days is a serious problem?/quote
For one person no. For an entire population it shows a horrific substance dependency problem.
To be fair...
Let me stop you right there. "Fair" doesn't come into it. "Ethics" is the only thing that matters here and subjecting to a bunch of humans to: "Lets see what this does" doesn't pass muster. Also "irritant" is a strange way of describing something that can have lasting effects on lung function. And something that in studies have shown to have adverse impact on other living things such as massively stunting growth of plants.
The summary is all about when, but what we desperately want to know is How? Do I use my eyes?
Oh thank god. For a moment I thought the entire population was popping 2 pills a day rather than the entire population popping a pill every 5 days. I'm glad you cleared that up.
1 in 3 adults are getting prescriptions from the numbers I am finding.
Let me just say: WHAT THE FUCK!
You own non-Apple devices. You're doing it wrong.
Oddly enough the design criteria is "efficient combustion" not "high NOx".
Yep because engineers target one thing and don't know how combustion works. People have known the relationship between thermal combustion and NOx since the 40s. By raising efficiency they were directly and knowingly raising NOx. By not putting a constraint on NOx they effectively were designing cars with this in mind.
Fucking amazing that. Who would've thought you'd be stupid enough to contradict yourself.
You're a special kind of idiot.
You're talking in present tense.... were you doing this in 1982?
No but my dad was.
Think for a moment about the tools that would have been available at the time.
I don't need to think about it at all. Most of the tools I'm using have dates around that time stamped on the side. Even the book which I used for developing exposure tables and techniques is from the 60s. The only "modern" thing I use for my hobby is perishables like film and developer powder.
The only real barrier is that I got most of this from the trash-heap whereas people would need to have invested in their hobby back in the 80s. But people did. Heck every male in a generation above mine in my family at one point or another turned part of their house into a darkroom.
And just how many years had you been doing it before you were able to make a picture that actually couldn't be easily distinguished as altered?
Define easily altered? Remember the quality of photos people were putting out back then? There was no 50mpxl pixel peeping or analytical techniques. My first ever attempt at exposure blending looked damn good and the result came out on an 8x5 to say nothing of the far smaller photo sizes that were common at the time.
And just what kind of practice would you have needed
Worked first go. It's not that hard. The darkroom was incredibly forgiving. Remember it's a place people often turn to in order to fix their in camera screw-ups. The process also isn't quick. You watch developing happen in real time and each step takes minutes at a time. It's not hard to get right first go. Unlike Photoshop where you click the button and instantly get a blend and then reach for the Ctrl-Z
Poor example but still a good conclusion. Sitting at home and watching TV is still far better for the environment than sitting in the car and watching traffic, even when the latter activity takes up a fraction of the time.
Also you're implying that everything is fixed on the other end. It's not. We just closed down an office and merged it with another due to a rise in working from home. This reduces travel, well reduces the amount of energy spent lighting (why the hell are there so many fluros over my head?), and as another tenant picks up that office space it quite likely prevented yet another building being built.
Combine that with the archaic heating systems a lot of people have that heat their homes while they aren't even there and the savings do make some sense.
Fortunately they skipped all of that ethical nonesense and proceeded directly to human testing
It was an industry group, not one manufacturer specifically. VW just admitted to being part of the group.
Oh thank God. The humans were only subjected to NOx to see if it causes cancer and not tailpipe emissions. Here I was worried they may be breathing in something dangerous.
No, VW did not design their cars to emit NOx.
Of course they did. High NOx emissions are a well know effect of pushing a diesel engine to combust more efficiently which is precisely what VW have been pushing for many years.
Would it have been better to test it on humans in some third-world shithole?
No that's racist. Instead they tested on humans in New Mexico. Interesting that the CNET article left out this minor detail.
Is it at all relevant? So far I have seen little uproar over the incident which as done little more than light up bases that no one was putting any effort into hiding in the first place.
I am just having a hard time with the concept that the first notification they have of a need to supplement the power grid comes in the form of a frequency sag. There have to be SCADA networks, and the network operator must know when they are over capacity.
This part of localised controls in a self regulating system. The system stability is dependent on having enough local control with enough speed to react to change. It only becomes unstable if you lack speed or capacity to regulate. Until these batteries existed speed wasn't an issue since detection of an event on the other side of the country was still orders of magnitude faster than anyone's ability to react to the event.
Think of it in terms of a bucket leaking water, and you and your friend are both pouring water in at a controllable rate to keep the bucket exactly half full. Now if your friend tells you he's about to stop pouring you can pour faster and keep that bucket exactly half full, but if you can't see or hear him and he suddenly stops, you're likely still in a very good place to correct yourself to keep that bucket half full without emptying it overflowing it. And ultimately the only thing that matters in this network is for it to not empty or overflow. Being exactly spot on perfect is not a requirement.
Now that said the whole concept of smart grids is that we are starting to get in a situation that is more intermittent and demanding of faster reaction times. Maybe some large scale SCADA systems will be implemented in the future, but right now unless you foul something up we are well within our means of controlling the system with lots of localised controls.
We were also able to refine oil in the 30s. Sure nowadays we do it a bit more reliability with more onspec products as a result, but the idea of many small control local controls working on a single system and keeping it stable is as old as control theory itself.
You mean the Sun that created the SPARC which Oracle has come out and said is also vulnerable to not only Spectre but also Meltdown?
If you want your world run by corporations you are a dangerous person.
Oh yeah sorry. I forgot the world is run on open source Windows on open source hardware with everything in the open at all times.
If you think that vendors solving vendor problems isn't perfectly normal in our world then you're delusional. But if not, now that the bug is in the open maybe you can send me updated microcode? Maybe the government can? Right? I mean you seem to think that that is the norm and everyone has access to vendor code and systems right?
I think you've been using BSD too long.
In practice, I'd expect that it was just not viable back then to do convincingly without at least *SOME* commercial-scale opportunity for profit.
Profit? You know some people do this as a hobby right? I still do this as a hobby. I made a lovely little "photoshopped" picture of a diver emerging from a puddle with nothing more than some creativity, a $50 enlarger saved from a trip to the dumpster and a little fun in the "darkroom" (actually the kitchen with the main lightbulb replaced with a red one).
In practice it is trivial to do. In practice many people enjoy doing it just for shits and giggles.
14c/kWh is only expensive if you live in the fairy land coal coal coal USA subsidising your own poor health. Where some people happily pay 20c/kWh instead of the alternative 8c/kWh + x days off your life due to lung disease /kWh.
I'm rather surprised at your response. Normally when some arrogant kraut dilettante fucks up some part of Linux for no perceivable reason it's like you got all your birthdays at once.
That's only because you approach the subject religiously while I approach it practically. Also you're right, when someone fucks up some part of Linux I get upset. Fortunately that doesn't happen too often.
systemctl start give-you-the-fucking-finger
That was a lot harder to do in 1982
Ever wonder why all the tools in photoshop are named after physical activities you'd do in a darkroom? Like cut, paste, dodge, burn, mask, etc?
What is being proposed was trivial in the 1928 let alone 1982.
You want to keep a secret you don't let people talk.
You're assuming that this is a secret, rather than large obvious forward outposts that were blown up figuratively by internet armchair doomsayers.
Oh yes I fully agree. It's a great system and a great idea, but it's no silver bullet for stability and may not be the cheapest way of stabling a grid depending on that grid's requirements. All of this needs to be taken into account.