1) Yes, quite, this is a measure of what people THINK makes them act in certain ways, with no double blind, no control, no measurement, in fact no science. Yawn.
2) I dont have a relative like that... I am pretty sure... (looks in mirror).. oh....
>And then there's the whole cold, calculated, methodical attempted genocide employed by the Nazis. Somehow it's different when they treat it like a clerical task.
As opposed to the warm fuzzies of the Cultural Revolution, the Great Leap Forward, the Red Terror? the Great Purse?.... All of them were officially decided planned moves with the specific intention of genociding a specific subset of their population. Each of them killed many times the largest estimates of Nazi Jewish deaths. None of them were involving a war (directly) (and not that that is any excuse).
If you want cold and calculated, nothing comes even CLOSE to the Russians, Lavrentiy Beria is a good place to start for reference.
No, no it doesnt (well, the actual fact is some of it does, most of it does not). BURNING wood puts most of it back.
In case you dont realise, dirt actually holds quite a bit of carbon. Dirt is mostly rotted plants. This is also why grasslands absorb (and hold!) quite a lot of carbon, grass grows fast and dies often.
Dont just make up bullshit, This is nin NO way just a reduction in price, or equivalent to a coupon.
It is a clear transaction - The University waives the fee, the Postgrad works for them. THAT sir, is in effect a financial transaction, and it should correctly be taxed.
Not to mention the fact that it is used by Universities these days to treat Postgrads as slave labour by setting the fees to whatever they want.
Next time how about actually thinking, instead of just spouting bs?
Of course that will get ignored, didnt you know Wikileaks is just another arm of the KGB? I thought *everyone* knew that! It is your duty as a citizen to know that! I think you had better report yourself immediately for re-education.
Was the whole Kaspersky thing not completely transparent enough to make it clear that they are being punished for not playing 'the game'?
NO (x) removes methane from the atmosphere, and you result in more nitrates in the soil. So there is a response, and its quite a good one.
You will however want to ignore the fact that atmospheric methane levels have at times be MUCH higher than today (which is why there is so much trapped methane), but we dont want to talk about that, because, you know, thats denier talk.
Mostly because even the best widely supported audio codec for bluetooth sound bad? AptX (HD) is about as good as you will get, and it is somewhat... average.
Certainly good enough for cheap(ly made, sometimes expensive priced) earbuds, 'fashion' headphones, etc. However, still a far FAR distance from the quality available with high quality headphones.
And if you want good lipsync with video, you better either accept lower quality, or be able to adjust the video delay, because the advanced codec add a lot of latency (166ms for AptX, less in low latency mode, but quality is reduced).
So sure, YOU may not care about the quality, and prefer your bluetooth - good on you. Some other people still prefer quality - and this in no LP/CD comparison, there is a VERY measurable degradation with all bluetooth codecs.
If you can find a mine that produces any of these in pure elemental form, then I suggest you lay claim and get rich damn quick.
Until that time, I suggest that what comes out of mines are minerals, and from those we extract purer forms, which can approach elemental purity at times, depending on requirements. This article is about the mines, so you are simply being a pedant, sorry.
' It''s just a matter of paying for the extraction. It won't make batteries hard to find, just expensive.' You think that is a useful comment? Hell, Seawater contains all of those elements! we could just extract from that!. Good mineral sources have order*S* of magnitude more economic value than 'an element is common' implies, as I am sure you are aware.
The town of cobalt however is an odd inclusion - I suggest Bloombergs researcher needs up to strung up for that one.
Exactly! And they will never be able to land rockets on their tail! NASA have proven reusable space flight costs (hundreds of..) billions!!
I am however interested that the aviation industry are worried enough to pay for FUD already...
btw, you need to tune your FUD. The tunnel would recompress, not be explosive, and have little to no effect (except on efficiency of service). Things inside the tunnel could decompress, although calling what they would do from a small hole like a rifle bullet 'explosive' is overstatement in the least. Of course the pressure difference between what they would experience and what an airliner at altitude experiences is pretty damn small.
I suggest you are better addressing the boondoggle angle, or more to the point kicking the damn TSA out of your airports, since they are the ones destroying your particular industry.
Just wondering, is boeing or airbus paying your invoices, or are the airlines picking up the tab?
Unfortunately batteries are only about 80-90% efficient (lifetime average), electricity transmission is around 90% (allowing for max/min usage transitions), and the generation of the electricity is about 60% efficient. and no, an electric drivetrain has only a small advantage over an IC drivetrain unless you have wheel motors-which no one does - probably in the region of 10% better. Now, static generation Is more efficient that an IC motor, by around 20%.
So, if you are talking about hydrocarbon power for both, electric has 2 additional losses (batteries, transmission) which acount for around 20% loss, but IC is about 30% lower from the motor and drivetrain.
So we are talking about 10% or so difference. HOWEVER, if the power is from nuclear (and no, solar/wind are not going to produce enough for a nation scale car fleet any time soon) then electric is HUGELY better for CO2 - but not if it is coal/gas electricity..
HOWEVER++ they are talking diesels. DIESEL ENGINES ARE ACTUALLY GREENHOUSE NEGATIVE! WTF you say? Well they produce NO (which is what everyone complains about). That reacts with atmospheric methane and removes it! methane is thousands of times worse as a greenhouse gas than CO2. The net effect of your average diesel car is a LOWERING of the atmospheric greenhouse gas effect!
So, what we need to battle greenhouse effect are more nuclear power stations, and more diesels! Sorry, facts are so inconvenient, aint they..
The approximately half of the US voters who voted for Trump are directly at fault! The approximately half who voted for Clinton, after all, were supporting war again Russia, much more sane!
Or just perhaps in 2006 the rapidly decreasing cost of panels was not predictable? Perhaps (actually..) they were talking about actual output not the now commonly used peak figure that assumes a bright sun is directly overhead 24/7? Just maybe they were not allowing for the large government subsidy injections that have made large solar project profitable regardless of their output or power prices?
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-02-13/business/1993044090_1_neural-networks-chips-michael-glier NI-1000, back in 1993, for missles (or more to the point to cash in of defense spending of course)
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/embedded/products/quark/mcu/se-soc/overview.html A little more recently we have Quark-SE, with 'pattern matching hardware'
https://www.hpcwire.com/2017/08/28/intel-debuts-myriad-x-vision-processing-unit-neural-net-inferencing/ And of course rather more recent, the Myriad range - I thought those were your new NN chips Intel?
The pattern is of course Intel buys up one-idea-wonders, warms them over the a while, then releases them as 'the big thing!', but since there is little actual product development, market cooperation, or even perhaps one would think any actual business plan, they flash-and-fail.
Intel is great at manufacturing x86 chips, and pretty good at holding a captured market, but non-x86 innovation? not such a good track record.
what would happen then is everyone would refuse to license patents, and you would get a bunch of big cooperates basically saying 'Go on little inventor, we know you cannot afford to actually bring your great new invention to market, even though it is profitable, so we will simple infringe it, make billions, and then claim you had no actual losses'
They spend all their money on short term feel-good things, and therefore have no savings to be able to own property outside small inner city apartments, therefore they dont need a car to travel day to day.
Goods just magically turn up at their local bespoke coffee shop, organic market, and packages ordered from amazon appear at their door by magic.
They have no friends outside Facebook (and the coffee shop/political activist group), especially none far enough away to perhaps have different opinions, social circumstances, etc - that would be SO uncomfortable.
However they do sometimes get a nagging suspicion that perhaps other people are DIFFERENT, perhaps other people actually do MORE - the sooner that can be stamped out, the sooner they can not worry about that.
Dont forget where this legislation is coming from.
Car manufacturers love this idea. Phase 1 is to move all new cars to electric - its actually quite a bit cheaper to make (engines/drive trains are horrible complex) Phase 2 is then, of course, to ramp up 'pollution taxes' on the existing fleet of non-electrics, to 'transition' everyone to electric.
ie: a huge force to push people to purchase new vehicles.
It will be interested to see where they will build the obsolescence in to the new cars, so we need to buy a new one every 5-10 years. I am guessing it will mostly be in the battery packs initially, with a lot of work going in to making sure they cannot be economically swapped, and their lifespan is not too much to get in the way of profit. Longer term I would expect new regulations to 'remove unsafe older electric vehicles' from the road for a bunch of made up reasons.
The funz will really start when they extend the APIs to allow for recurring charges, one of the common billing scams - it wont be long I am sure.
'WE JUST NEED TO VERIFY YOUR CCARD WITH A $0.01 CHARGE TO VALIDATE YOU' (tinyprint hidden, we will also start charging you $39.95 per month for an email telling you our monthly lucky numbers, and it is basically impossible to cancel).
So yes, the ONLY valid answer to this if 'NO F'in WAY'
Do you know your claims are false, or do you not care?
The fact is that similar numbers of people die from both. Prostate cancer is diagnosed far more often, and men suffer from a larger number of life-impacting operations to remove their prostate than for breast cancer. There are 8 TIMES as many drugs developed for breast cancer than prostate cancer. Undiagnosed mortality rates from both are quite similar, although higher for prostate cancer. Screening for breast cancer received around 10 TIMES the funding of prostate cancer. Research funding for breast cancer is 2 to 4 times that of prostate cancer.
Equality, got to love it. Men die earlier than Women on average, and Womens health gets much much more funding. Welcome to real sexism, the type that isnt talked about because its not seen as 'an issue'
We will see the usual troublemakers rush back in to try and stir up more protests now. The same ones who have been missing throughout this actual process, because creating public strife and being the center of attention is what the seek, rather than any actual improvement to peoples lives.
What they really dont like is the presence of anyone who does not agree with them.
So they have gone and made their own little club, out the in the back shed, where they can make sure anyone who does not agree with them will be kicked out (the equivalent of the 'no girls!' club sign). They will make their big plans there, all competing to out do the others in how 'revolutionary' they are.they will virtue signal until they are red in the face and their 'community' will slowly shrink as anyone who isnt revolutionary ENOUGH this week gets excluded.
Meanwhile the rest of the world will get on with actual life, something they will be less and less in touch with.
Sad? yes. Pathetic? yes.
But hey, its no different 'because its on the internet', the only odd thing here is that someone thinks its newsworthy. Its not.
Ah... you seem to be miss-informed about IBM these days.
Once upon a time that would have been true, these days IBM specialises in not even delivering a solution in the first place, and still somehow keeping a bit pile of the money involved. Then they let things cool off for a year or so, and have another dig at the gravy trough.
The usual formula seems to be that a project that could be done for $x by getting local companies to quite it is instead quietly contracted through a process only involving several of the 'big names' for $x*100, and then IBM is given the contract for 5 to 10 times that figure, and bollocks it up so badly it never ever works.
I think we call it progress and open government?
IBMs primary skill is a small group of nice suits who talk a very good talk and present a very good presentation, and then walk away never to be seen near that project every again.
Oh, and the fact that still, no one ever gets fires for buying IBM.
I just want to know when being Hungarian-American made you a Russian? I mean, this is basically the Soros method in a nutshell, it practically a fingerprint.
But no, it must be 'Russians' because after all, Facebook says so, and they are completely independent as we well know! After all, they are practically a religion now..
Slashdot Mirror
1) Yes, quite, this is a measure of what people THINK makes them act in certain ways, with no double blind, no control, no measurement, in fact no science. Yawn.
2) I dont have a relative like that... I am pretty sure... (looks in mirror).. oh....
3) Profit?
>And then there's the whole cold, calculated, methodical attempted genocide employed by the Nazis. Somehow it's different when they treat it like a clerical task.
As opposed to the warm fuzzies of the Cultural Revolution, the Great Leap Forward, the Red Terror? the Great Purse?....
All of them were officially decided planned moves with the specific intention of genociding a specific subset of their population.
Each of them killed many times the largest estimates of Nazi Jewish deaths.
None of them were involving a war (directly) (and not that that is any excuse).
If you want cold and calculated, nothing comes even CLOSE to the Russians, Lavrentiy Beria is a good place to start for reference.
No, no it doesnt (well, the actual fact is some of it does, most of it does not).
BURNING wood puts most of it back.
In case you dont realise, dirt actually holds quite a bit of carbon. Dirt is mostly rotted plants.
This is also why grasslands absorb (and hold!) quite a lot of carbon, grass grows fast and dies often.
Funny, that.
Dont just make up bullshit, This is nin NO way just a reduction in price, or equivalent to a coupon.
It is a clear transaction - The University waives the fee, the Postgrad works for them.
THAT sir, is in effect a financial transaction, and it should correctly be taxed.
Not to mention the fact that it is used by Universities these days to treat Postgrads as slave labour by setting the fees to whatever they want.
Next time how about actually thinking, instead of just spouting bs?
Of course that will get ignored, didnt you know Wikileaks is just another arm of the KGB?
I thought *everyone* knew that! It is your duty as a citizen to know that!
I think you had better report yourself immediately for re-education.
Was the whole Kaspersky thing not completely transparent enough to make it clear that they are being punished for not playing 'the game'?
Not to mention the other new one - go on, give it a try ;)
NO (x) removes methane from the atmosphere, and you result in more nitrates in the soil.
So there is a response, and its quite a good one.
You will however want to ignore the fact that atmospheric methane levels have at times be MUCH higher than today (which is why there is so much trapped methane), but we dont want to talk about that, because, you know, thats denier talk.
Mostly because even the best widely supported audio codec for bluetooth sound bad?
AptX (HD) is about as good as you will get, and it is somewhat... average.
Certainly good enough for cheap(ly made, sometimes expensive priced) earbuds, 'fashion' headphones, etc.
However, still a far FAR distance from the quality available with high quality headphones.
And if you want good lipsync with video, you better either accept lower quality, or be able to adjust the video delay,
because the advanced codec add a lot of latency (166ms for AptX, less in low latency mode, but quality is reduced).
So sure, YOU may not care about the quality, and prefer your bluetooth - good on you.
Some other people still prefer quality - and this in no LP/CD comparison, there is a VERY measurable degradation with all bluetooth codecs.
If you can find a mine that produces any of these in pure elemental form, then I suggest you lay claim and get rich damn quick.
Until that time, I suggest that what comes out of mines are minerals, and from those we extract purer forms, which can approach elemental purity at times, depending on requirements. This article is about the mines, so you are simply being a pedant, sorry.
' It''s just a matter of paying for the extraction. It won't make batteries hard to find, just expensive.'
You think that is a useful comment? Hell, Seawater contains all of those elements! we could just extract from that!.
Good mineral sources have order*S* of magnitude more economic value than 'an element is common' implies, as I am sure you are aware.
The town of cobalt however is an odd inclusion - I suggest Bloombergs researcher needs up to strung up for that one.
Exactly! And they will never be able to land rockets on their tail! NASA have proven reusable space flight costs (hundreds of..) billions!!
I am however interested that the aviation industry are worried enough to pay for FUD already...
btw, you need to tune your FUD. The tunnel would recompress, not be explosive, and have little to no effect (except on efficiency of service).
Things inside the tunnel could decompress, although calling what they would do from a small hole like a rifle bullet 'explosive' is overstatement in the least.
Of course the pressure difference between what they would experience and what an airliner at altitude experiences is pretty damn small.
I suggest you are better addressing the boondoggle angle, or more to the point kicking the damn TSA out of your airports, since they are the ones destroying your particular industry.
Just wondering, is boeing or airbus paying your invoices, or are the airlines picking up the tab?
Unfortunately batteries are only about 80-90% efficient (lifetime average), electricity transmission is around 90% (allowing for max/min usage transitions), and the generation of the electricity is about 60% efficient.
and no, an electric drivetrain has only a small advantage over an IC drivetrain unless you have wheel motors-which no one does - probably in the region of 10% better.
Now, static generation Is more efficient that an IC motor, by around 20%.
So, if you are talking about hydrocarbon power for both, electric has 2 additional losses (batteries, transmission) which acount for around 20% loss, but IC is about 30% lower from the motor and drivetrain.
So we are talking about 10% or so difference.
HOWEVER, if the power is from nuclear (and no, solar/wind are not going to produce enough for a nation scale car fleet any time soon) then electric is HUGELY better for CO2 - but not if it is coal/gas electricity..
HOWEVER++ they are talking diesels. DIESEL ENGINES ARE ACTUALLY GREENHOUSE NEGATIVE!
WTF you say? Well they produce NO (which is what everyone complains about). That reacts with atmospheric methane and removes it! methane is thousands of times worse as a greenhouse gas than CO2. The net effect of your average diesel car is a LOWERING of the atmospheric greenhouse gas effect!
So, what we need to battle greenhouse effect are more nuclear power stations, and more diesels!
Sorry, facts are so inconvenient, aint they..
I find it highly unlikely that they can even tell what traffic I have on my VPN.....
Exactly!
The approximately half of the US voters who voted for Trump are directly at fault!
The approximately half who voted for Clinton, after all, were supporting war again Russia, much more sane!
Or, just possibly, not.
Or just perhaps in 2006 the rapidly decreasing cost of panels was not predictable?
Perhaps (actually..) they were talking about actual output not the now commonly used peak figure that assumes a bright sun is directly overhead 24/7?
Just maybe they were not allowing for the large government subsidy injections that have made large solar project profitable regardless of their output or power prices?
No, must be a conspiracy.
Next please.
AI chip that is, rather than n00b ;)
http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1993-02-13/business/1993044090_1_neural-networks-chips-michael-glier
NI-1000, back in 1993, for missles (or more to the point to cash in of defense spending of course)
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/embedded/products/quark/mcu/se-soc/overview.html
A little more recently we have Quark-SE, with 'pattern matching hardware'
https://www.hpcwire.com/2017/08/28/intel-debuts-myriad-x-vision-processing-unit-neural-net-inferencing/
And of course rather more recent, the Myriad range - I thought those were your new NN chips Intel?
The pattern is of course Intel buys up one-idea-wonders, warms them over the a while, then releases them as 'the big thing!', but since there is little actual product development, market cooperation, or even perhaps one would think any actual business plan, they flash-and-fail.
Intel is great at manufacturing x86 chips, and pretty good at holding a captured market, but non-x86 innovation? not such a good track record.
That simply does not work.
what would happen then is everyone would refuse to license patents, and you would get a bunch of big cooperates basically saying 'Go on little inventor, we know you cannot afford to actually bring your great new invention to market, even though it is profitable, so we will simple infringe it, make billions, and then claim you had no actual losses'
Is that the world you are hoping for?
Of course not.
They spend all their money on short term feel-good things, and therefore have no savings to be able to own property outside small inner city apartments, therefore they dont need a car to travel day to day.
Goods just magically turn up at their local bespoke coffee shop, organic market, and packages ordered from amazon appear at their door by magic.
They have no friends outside Facebook (and the coffee shop/political activist group), especially none far enough away to perhaps have different opinions, social circumstances, etc - that would be SO uncomfortable.
However they do sometimes get a nagging suspicion that perhaps other people are DIFFERENT, perhaps other people actually do MORE - the sooner that can be stamped out, the sooner they can not worry about that.
Dont forget where this legislation is coming from.
Car manufacturers love this idea.
Phase 1 is to move all new cars to electric - its actually quite a bit cheaper to make (engines/drive trains are horrible complex)
Phase 2 is then, of course, to ramp up 'pollution taxes' on the existing fleet of non-electrics, to 'transition' everyone to electric.
ie: a huge force to push people to purchase new vehicles.
It will be interested to see where they will build the obsolescence in to the new cars, so we need to buy a new one every 5-10 years.
I am guessing it will mostly be in the battery packs initially, with a lot of work going in to making sure they cannot be economically swapped,
and their lifespan is not too much to get in the way of profit.
Longer term I would expect new regulations to 'remove unsafe older electric vehicles' from the road for a bunch of made up reasons.
Just follow the money. Sad but true.
Do you even need to ask that question?
The funz will really start when they extend the APIs to allow for recurring charges, one of the common billing scams - it wont be long I am sure.
'WE JUST NEED TO VERIFY YOUR CCARD WITH A $0.01 CHARGE TO VALIDATE YOU' (tinyprint hidden, we will also start charging you $39.95 per month for an email telling you our monthly lucky numbers, and it is basically impossible to cancel).
So yes, the ONLY valid answer to this if 'NO F'in WAY'
Exactly.
Journalists love to ignore the simple fact that correlation is not causation.
Because it makes for great headlines, but also has caused many many problems.
Do you know your claims are false, or do you not care?
The fact is that similar numbers of people die from both.
Prostate cancer is diagnosed far more often, and men suffer from a larger number of life-impacting operations to remove their prostate than for breast cancer.
There are 8 TIMES as many drugs developed for breast cancer than prostate cancer.
Undiagnosed mortality rates from both are quite similar, although higher for prostate cancer.
Screening for breast cancer received around 10 TIMES the funding of prostate cancer.
Research funding for breast cancer is 2 to 4 times that of prostate cancer.
Equality, got to love it. Men die earlier than Women on average, and Womens health gets much much more funding.
Welcome to real sexism, the type that isnt talked about because its not seen as 'an issue'
But at large cost as is often the case.
We will see the usual troublemakers rush back in to try and stir up more protests now.
The same ones who have been missing throughout this actual process, because creating public strife and being the center of attention is what the seek, rather than any actual improvement to peoples lives.
What they really dont like is the presence of anyone who does not agree with them.
So they have gone and made their own little club, out the in the back shed, where they can make sure anyone who does not agree with them will be kicked out (the equivalent of the 'no girls!' club sign). They will make their big plans there, all competing to out do the others in how 'revolutionary' they are.they will virtue signal until they are red in the face and their 'community' will slowly shrink as anyone who isnt revolutionary ENOUGH this week gets excluded.
Meanwhile the rest of the world will get on with actual life, something they will be less and less in touch with.
Sad? yes.
Pathetic? yes.
But hey, its no different 'because its on the internet', the only odd thing here is that someone thinks its newsworthy. Its not.
Ah... you seem to be miss-informed about IBM these days.
Once upon a time that would have been true, these days IBM specialises in not even delivering a solution in the first place, and still somehow keeping a bit pile of the money involved.
Then they let things cool off for a year or so, and have another dig at the gravy trough.
The usual formula seems to be that a project that could be done for $x by getting local companies to quite it is instead quietly contracted through a process only involving several of the 'big names' for $x*100, and then IBM is given the contract for 5 to 10 times that figure, and bollocks it up so badly it never ever works.
I think we call it progress and open government?
IBMs primary skill is a small group of nice suits who talk a very good talk and present a very good presentation, and then walk away never to be seen near that project every again.
Oh, and the fact that still, no one ever gets fires for buying IBM.
I just want to know when being Hungarian-American made you a Russian?
I mean, this is basically the Soros method in a nutshell, it practically a fingerprint.
But no, it must be 'Russians' because after all, Facebook says so, and they are completely independent as we well know!
After all, they are practically a religion now..