Really? My combined refrigerator-freezer unit (Siemens iQ500 series) has a maximum power rating of 90W
You're going to have to provide a citation for that, because that's ridiculously tiny. I tried looking it up on Siemens' website but all they quote is yearly power consumption:
This one quotes 274kWh/yr, which works out to 31W if the thing were running continuously, which isn't how refrigerators work. Besides, that's a tiny unit and nothing at all like the stuff we have in the US. However, according to this site, power consumption for refrigerators (the US kind) has fallen dramatically since the turn of the millennium, and back in the 70s/80s they used to use 4-5 times as much power, so it's possible that it's no longer necessary to supply them with a large circuit. However, they probably continue to give them a separate circuit in the kitchen so that your fridge doesn't get turned off if you blow a breaker because of your blender or toaster (which is also more likely if the fridge is running and sharing that same circuit, as toasters for instance use a ridiculous amount of power).
I did manage to find this site which quotes 150-400W, which is a rather wide range, and doesn't cite and sources or any specific model at all.
Someone in this discussion says even a little dorm refrigerator will peg a 1500W inverter on start-up, even though the running power consumption is 84W (not much less than your figure for your much-larger unit, though the dorm fridge is likely not terribly efficient unlike a top-of-the-line Euro unit). So you need to consider that too: how much power does the fridge use when the compressor starts? It's likely very high, even though it probably lasts less than a second.
So yeah, it's quite likely that a 15A 1800W dedicated circuit is still necessary for a fridge just to handle the start-up current.
Also: it's not a coincidence that 'Freon' refrigerants tend to be 'banned' shortly after DuPont's patent runs out on the old refrigerant.
WTF? Citation needed. Freon has been around for many, many decades, and was only banned about 20 years ago. Patents don't last anywhere near that long.
No, it's not like the silly police analogy, because MS is not a government agency. You chose MS to be your OS provider, so it's your own dumb fault if you don't like the way they're managing your computer. They have every right to refuse to run whatever 3rd-party software they want with their OS. If you don't like it, then don't use their OS.
Most voltage converters are not meant for large loads, including hair dryers, and will tell you so quite clearly. Refrigerators are very high-power loads and in a US house normally have their own, separate 20A (120V) circuit, which is 2400W maximum.
No, but if I take my fridge and move to new home in town, there should be no expectation that I can't still use it if it's perfectly functional. The home builder certainly wouldn't design the home to force me to change it.
The home builder absolutely could do that, if he wanted to. What are you going to do about it? It's simple: if you don't like it, don't buy the house.
Incidentally, there actually are some (fancy) houses like this: they have Subzero refrigerators built-in, and you can't just stick a standard fridge in there easily. There's also plenty of old houses which can't use your larger modern dual-door fridge, because they were designed for older fridges which are significantly smaller than today's typical 25 cu. ft. double-door fridges (both narrower and shorter); you'd have to redo the cabinetry to get a large modern fridge in there.
Why should anyone discard functional things just because of Microsoft's say so?
Because their new OS doesn't support your old shit, and because you are implicitly consenting to allow Microsoft to manage your computer by installing their new OS, and part of that management includes deleting old shit that they don't feel like supporting any more.
If you think that old shit is so great, then go write your own OS to run it on.
Basically, it's like you demanding that your oven manufacturer continue to provide spare parts for your 20-year-old oven. They might do so if they feel it makes business sense, but they're under absolutely no obligation to do so.
10 actively finds and kills anything that is not Microsoft-related once the update/upgrade starts.
I fail to see the problem here. That other stuff isn't Microsoft's, so why should they preserve it? It could cause problems with the upgrade process.
That's why the process takes so long, Microsoft is scanning and wiping shit from your system without your permission or knowledge.
You gave them permission when you authorized the upgrade to Win10.
This is what happens when you do a poor job of selecting a vendor. If you don't like the way a vendor treats you as a customer, then it's your job to find a better vendor.
It is NOT Micro$haft's computer, they should NEVER be disabling any user installed software at all!
Wrong. It's their OS, and they can design it to do whatever the hell they want, including disabling any software users install. By installing their OS on your computer, you are giving them permission to operate your computer in the way that *they* deem best (hence the term "operating system").
If you don't like the way their OS works, then you should find another vendor instead of bellyaching about it.
Micro$haft seems to have forgotten that the ONLY function of an Operating System is to run the software that the user installs. PERIOD!
Wrong, you seem to not understand what an OS is at a fundamental level. An OS has many tasks, including running software, keeping those different programs from interfering with each other, and providing many services to application programs, including network (incl. WiFi) connectivity and other access to hardware, and finally providing security.
I'm sorry, but that argument is crap. Your situation is not like Gnome's. You're making something for your own use, and then you're trying to be helpful by allowing others to use and fork it, which is great. Unfortunately, there's some ungrateful jerks out there who are whining about it.
The difference between you and Gnome, however, is that you aren't pushing your product to be used as a standard anywhere. You're only allowing outsiders to use it, but you're making no big effort to push its adoption.
Gnome isn't like this. They actively push its adoption, and promote its use across the Linux ecosystem. They really want Gnome to be the standard Linux desktop (and it is, in a de-facto sense considering how many distros have adopted it as their standard, and what portion of the desktop Linux userbase that covers). That means they have a responsibility to respond to user requests and give the users what they want, which they don't do.
As soon as you decide to aggressively push your software as a standard outside your company, then you'll deserve the torrent of demands that brings. If you don't want to respond to users, then don't push for people to use your product. You seem to not be doing that, so it makes sense for you to delete your forums and only respond to bug reports, but this just isn't the case with Gnome.
Also, you need to remember that with the Gnome devs, they're *paid* to do that work, so it's in their financial self-interest to promote themselves. You're not paid for your software, you use your software internally to generate revenue.
We keep voting for these people in the hopes one day someone will live up to expectations, and finding out they are lying human beings like nearly every person on the planet.
B...b...b...b...but Trump's not a politician, he's a businessman!!!
I agree. And let's compare it to another TV show with a long arc: Game of Thrones. GoT isn't doing this at all (AFAICT, it's not over yet). By all indications, even though the author's books have been passed up because he's so slow, there is definitely an overall plan for the story, and the writers are sticking to that, instead of just making shit up as they go along.
No, it's not. It's just that the market has gotten so huge that it seems like they're drowned out by the big/Chinese-crap sellers. But they're really not that hard to find, though it depends on what exactly you're buying. Look for some expensive item and sort the results by price and you're probably looking at used sellers. Look for some out-of-date item (no longer sold new) and you're probably looking at used sellers. Look for some cheap commodity item and it's probably not.
Also, there's a lot of sellers on there selling new stuff, but the sellers are still relatively small; they use Ebay as their marketplace instead of (or maybe in addition to) Amazon. For instance, I needed a part for my washing machine; on Ebay, I was able to look it up by part number and there's a bunch of appliance-repair businesses selling that stuff. Of course, these aren't individuals, but they're probably small, local businesses somewhere with only a handful of employees.
Ah, I see what you mean now. Wow, that phrase is so ingrained I didn't even make the connection to "turning", or rotary motion; I was focused only on the "on/off" part of the phrase. I guess I thought of it like a lot of other English words, which can have totally different meanings in different contexts. I guess "switch on" would make more sense for an electrical device.
Ok, here's a better idea: people with up to a certain BMI (25?) are allowed to wear stretchy spandex outfits. People over that threshold are only allowed to wear baggy sweatclothes. This way, both groups have clothes that only really need to come in a handful of sizes and pretty much fit everyone, and don't need any kind of special cuts.
Want to ship boxes around the country adding weight and landfill mass while burning fuel for NO DISCERNIBLE REASON?
Well the alternative is everyone driving their SUV to the mall (10-60 minutes away perhaps) just so they can try on clothes in person. Replacing that with delivery drivers from Fedex/UPS ferrying boxes back and forth, and improving efficiency by combining shipments onto one truck for one neighborhood/route (so that 100 customers get their clothes delivered by 1 truck, rather than 100 people driving their personal vehicles to the mall), seems like it's actually better for the planet. The main downside is the cardboard boxes which they don't seem to reuse that much, but cardboard is highly recyclable and actually is recycled heavily by big companies. I don't know what you mean by "adding weight and landfill mass". Amazon is pretty bad about adding any packing materials to their boxes actually (they just toss the goods in there and tape it up usually), and I don't see how this adds to the landfill any more than people driving themselves to the mall.
Seriously, if you think about it, online shopping is likely far more ecological than shopping at a local B&M store. The main downsides are 1) the inability to see something up-close and touch it and try it on (without sending it back), 2) having to wait to get it unless you pay for expensive shipping, and 3) the lack of the social aspect of shopping, and getting a little exercise from walking around which shopping in a mall forces you to do.
but I finally abandoned the whole thing somewhere in the middle of Season 3
You missed out on some of the very best episodes. Skip the rest of season 3 and go watch season 4. Especially watch the two mirror-universe episodes; they were fantastic. Even the opening sequence alone is worth the watch.
One of these is not like the others. How does "turn on" have anything to do with oil lamps? Anything that's electrical can be "turned on": your TV, your computer, a light, etc. What other term would you use, besides maybe the somewhat-stilted sounding "activate"?
Um, I remember that episode's ending fairly well I think, plus your own link describes it quite well. They were left to keep on hating because they were the only two of their kind left, and they refused to resolve their differences, so there was really nothing Kirk could do about it. They both voluntarily beamed down to the wrecked planet despite Kirk's offer for them to live with the Federation. There was no invocation of the Prime Directive, just merely respecting these peoples' decisions. PD doesn't really apply anyway because they had already developed spaceflight (one had been pursuing the other across the galaxy for 50,000 years).
Oh please, Roddenberry would absolutely recognize how things today have gone in relation to his vision. It's very simple: we're in one of those mirror universes where everything's gone to shit. Captain Kirk's universe isn't the universe we're in.
(We're not in the evil-Kirk universe with the ISS Enterprise either, because that requires spaceflight. We're in some other parallel universe where humans just go extinct in the 21st or 22nd century.)
BSG pretty much put a bullet in the idea of Star Trek as the best ship-based SciFi franchise.
You have got to be kidding. While I heartily agree that the BSG miniseries and first 2 seasons were fantastic, it quickly went down the drain, starting with the occupation of New Caprica, and especially later with the "Final 5" and the ridiculous series ending. That all really kinda ruined BSG for me, especially as far as being "the best ship-based Sci-Fi franchise". Unfortunately, unlike the Matrix movies where I'm somehow able to block the latter two installments out of my mind for the most part, I haven't been able to do that with BSG.
Honestly, BSG should be a testament as to why this "story arc" idea needs to be throw in the trash. It just doesn't work, because of the realities of network TV. (Obviously, I'll exclude HBO shows like GoT from this because they really do order them all in one season, and Netflix shows are even better because they produce them a whole season at a time and release the entire season at once.) The problem with this story arc stuff is that the writers can't come up with an actual plot arc that spans the entire run of the series because they have no idea how long the show will last before the network pulls the plug on it, so they just make shit up as they go along. It became obvious BSG was doing this sometime in season 2, and we saw the same thing with LOST.
ST:TNG really had a better format: self-contained episodes you can watch any time without needing to know all the details of what happened in previous episodes. Then, if the network cancels it, you're not just left hanging, like in "Terra Nova" or "Firefly".
Slashdot Mirror
Really? My combined refrigerator-freezer unit (Siemens iQ500 series) has a maximum power rating of 90W
You're going to have to provide a citation for that, because that's ridiculously tiny. I tried looking it up on Siemens' website but all they quote is yearly power consumption:
http://www.siemens-home.bsh-gr...
This one quotes 274kWh/yr, which works out to 31W if the thing were running continuously, which isn't how refrigerators work. Besides, that's a tiny unit and nothing at all like the stuff we have in the US. However, according to this site, power consumption for refrigerators (the US kind) has fallen dramatically since the turn of the millennium, and back in the 70s/80s they used to use 4-5 times as much power, so it's possible that it's no longer necessary to supply them with a large circuit. However, they probably continue to give them a separate circuit in the kitchen so that your fridge doesn't get turned off if you blow a breaker because of your blender or toaster (which is also more likely if the fridge is running and sharing that same circuit, as toasters for instance use a ridiculous amount of power).
I did manage to find this site which quotes 150-400W, which is a rather wide range, and doesn't cite and sources or any specific model at all.
Someone in this discussion says even a little dorm refrigerator will peg a 1500W inverter on start-up, even though the running power consumption is 84W (not much less than your figure for your much-larger unit, though the dorm fridge is likely not terribly efficient unlike a top-of-the-line Euro unit). So you need to consider that too: how much power does the fridge use when the compressor starts? It's likely very high, even though it probably lasts less than a second.
So yeah, it's quite likely that a 15A 1800W dedicated circuit is still necessary for a fridge just to handle the start-up current.
I would have issue with MS uninstalling any 3rd party software I installed on my machine.
Yeah? And what would you do about it? File a complaint?
I have never understood the appeal of the elongated bowls.
You must be a female. Women typically don't understand the appeal of elongated bowls.
Also: it's not a coincidence that 'Freon' refrigerants tend to be 'banned' shortly after DuPont's patent runs out on the old refrigerant.
WTF? Citation needed. Freon has been around for many, many decades, and was only banned about 20 years ago. Patents don't last anywhere near that long.
No, it's not like the silly police analogy, because MS is not a government agency. You chose MS to be your OS provider, so it's your own dumb fault if you don't like the way they're managing your computer. They have every right to refuse to run whatever 3rd-party software they want with their OS. If you don't like it, then don't use their OS.
Most voltage converters are not meant for large loads, including hair dryers, and will tell you so quite clearly. Refrigerators are very high-power loads and in a US house normally have their own, separate 20A (120V) circuit, which is 2400W maximum.
No, but if I take my fridge and move to new home in town, there should be no expectation that I can't still use it if it's perfectly functional. The home builder certainly wouldn't design the home to force me to change it.
The home builder absolutely could do that, if he wanted to. What are you going to do about it? It's simple: if you don't like it, don't buy the house.
Incidentally, there actually are some (fancy) houses like this: they have Subzero refrigerators built-in, and you can't just stick a standard fridge in there easily. There's also plenty of old houses which can't use your larger modern dual-door fridge, because they were designed for older fridges which are significantly smaller than today's typical 25 cu. ft. double-door fridges (both narrower and shorter); you'd have to redo the cabinetry to get a large modern fridge in there.
Why should anyone discard functional things just because of Microsoft's say so?
Because their new OS doesn't support your old shit, and because you are implicitly consenting to allow Microsoft to manage your computer by installing their new OS, and part of that management includes deleting old shit that they don't feel like supporting any more.
If you think that old shit is so great, then go write your own OS to run it on.
Basically, it's like you demanding that your oven manufacturer continue to provide spare parts for your 20-year-old oven. They might do so if they feel it makes business sense, but they're under absolutely no obligation to do so.
10 actively finds and kills anything that is not Microsoft-related once the update/upgrade starts.
I fail to see the problem here. That other stuff isn't Microsoft's, so why should they preserve it? It could cause problems with the upgrade process.
That's why the process takes so long, Microsoft is scanning and wiping shit from your system without your permission or knowledge.
You gave them permission when you authorized the upgrade to Win10.
This is what happens when you do a poor job of selecting a vendor. If you don't like the way a vendor treats you as a customer, then it's your job to find a better vendor.
It is NOT Micro$haft's computer, they should NEVER be disabling any user installed software at all!
Wrong. It's their OS, and they can design it to do whatever the hell they want, including disabling any software users install. By installing their OS on your computer, you are giving them permission to operate your computer in the way that *they* deem best (hence the term "operating system").
If you don't like the way their OS works, then you should find another vendor instead of bellyaching about it.
Micro$haft seems to have forgotten that the ONLY function of an Operating System is to run the software that the user installs. PERIOD!
Wrong, you seem to not understand what an OS is at a fundamental level. An OS has many tasks, including running software, keeping those different programs from interfering with each other, and providing many services to application programs, including network (incl. WiFi) connectivity and other access to hardware, and finally providing security.
I'm sorry, but that argument is crap. Your situation is not like Gnome's. You're making something for your own use, and then you're trying to be helpful by allowing others to use and fork it, which is great. Unfortunately, there's some ungrateful jerks out there who are whining about it.
The difference between you and Gnome, however, is that you aren't pushing your product to be used as a standard anywhere. You're only allowing outsiders to use it, but you're making no big effort to push its adoption.
Gnome isn't like this. They actively push its adoption, and promote its use across the Linux ecosystem. They really want Gnome to be the standard Linux desktop (and it is, in a de-facto sense considering how many distros have adopted it as their standard, and what portion of the desktop Linux userbase that covers). That means they have a responsibility to respond to user requests and give the users what they want, which they don't do.
As soon as you decide to aggressively push your software as a standard outside your company, then you'll deserve the torrent of demands that brings. If you don't want to respond to users, then don't push for people to use your product. You seem to not be doing that, so it makes sense for you to delete your forums and only respond to bug reports, but this just isn't the case with Gnome.
Also, you need to remember that with the Gnome devs, they're *paid* to do that work, so it's in their financial self-interest to promote themselves. You're not paid for your software, you use your software internally to generate revenue.
Not sucking in ditch diggers, barely competent windows admins, and rapists (see what I did there ?)
Your words "barely competent" are superfluous and redundant here.
We keep voting for these people in the hopes one day someone will live up to expectations, and finding out they are lying human beings like nearly every person on the planet.
B...b...b...b...but Trump's not a politician, he's a businessman!!!
I agree. And let's compare it to another TV show with a long arc: Game of Thrones. GoT isn't doing this at all (AFAICT, it's not over yet). By all indications, even though the author's books have been passed up because he's so slow, there is definitely an overall plan for the story, and the writers are sticking to that, instead of just making shit up as they go along.
No, it's not. It's just that the market has gotten so huge that it seems like they're drowned out by the big/Chinese-crap sellers. But they're really not that hard to find, though it depends on what exactly you're buying. Look for some expensive item and sort the results by price and you're probably looking at used sellers. Look for some out-of-date item (no longer sold new) and you're probably looking at used sellers. Look for some cheap commodity item and it's probably not.
Also, there's a lot of sellers on there selling new stuff, but the sellers are still relatively small; they use Ebay as their marketplace instead of (or maybe in addition to) Amazon. For instance, I needed a part for my washing machine; on Ebay, I was able to look it up by part number and there's a bunch of appliance-repair businesses selling that stuff. Of course, these aren't individuals, but they're probably small, local businesses somewhere with only a handful of employees.
Ah, I see what you mean now. Wow, that phrase is so ingrained I didn't even make the connection to "turning", or rotary motion; I was focused only on the "on/off" part of the phrase. I guess I thought of it like a lot of other English words, which can have totally different meanings in different contexts. I guess "switch on" would make more sense for an electrical device.
Ok, here's a better idea: people with up to a certain BMI (25?) are allowed to wear stretchy spandex outfits. People over that threshold are only allowed to wear baggy sweatclothes. This way, both groups have clothes that only really need to come in a handful of sizes and pretty much fit everyone, and don't need any kind of special cuts.
Want to ship boxes around the country adding weight and landfill mass while burning fuel for NO DISCERNIBLE REASON?
Well the alternative is everyone driving their SUV to the mall (10-60 minutes away perhaps) just so they can try on clothes in person. Replacing that with delivery drivers from Fedex/UPS ferrying boxes back and forth, and improving efficiency by combining shipments onto one truck for one neighborhood/route (so that 100 customers get their clothes delivered by 1 truck, rather than 100 people driving their personal vehicles to the mall), seems like it's actually better for the planet. The main downside is the cardboard boxes which they don't seem to reuse that much, but cardboard is highly recyclable and actually is recycled heavily by big companies. I don't know what you mean by "adding weight and landfill mass". Amazon is pretty bad about adding any packing materials to their boxes actually (they just toss the goods in there and tape it up usually), and I don't see how this adds to the landfill any more than people driving themselves to the mall.
Seriously, if you think about it, online shopping is likely far more ecological than shopping at a local B&M store. The main downsides are 1) the inability to see something up-close and touch it and try it on (without sending it back), 2) having to wait to get it unless you pay for expensive shipping, and 3) the lack of the social aspect of shopping, and getting a little exercise from walking around which shopping in a mall forces you to do.
It'd be a whole lot easier if everyone just wore stretchy spandex outfits like in 70s sci-fi movies.
You need to get a wife/girlfriend who has her own money and buys her own clothes.
but I finally abandoned the whole thing somewhere in the middle of Season 3
You missed out on some of the very best episodes. Skip the rest of season 3 and go watch season 4. Especially watch the two mirror-universe episodes; they were fantastic. Even the opening sequence alone is worth the watch.
One of these is not like the others. How does "turn on" have anything to do with oil lamps? Anything that's electrical can be "turned on": your TV, your computer, a light, etc. What other term would you use, besides maybe the somewhat-stilted sounding "activate"?
Um, I remember that episode's ending fairly well I think, plus your own link describes it quite well. They were left to keep on hating because they were the only two of their kind left, and they refused to resolve their differences, so there was really nothing Kirk could do about it. They both voluntarily beamed down to the wrecked planet despite Kirk's offer for them to live with the Federation. There was no invocation of the Prime Directive, just merely respecting these peoples' decisions. PD doesn't really apply anyway because they had already developed spaceflight (one had been pursuing the other across the galaxy for 50,000 years).
Oh please, Roddenberry would absolutely recognize how things today have gone in relation to his vision. It's very simple: we're in one of those mirror universes where everything's gone to shit. Captain Kirk's universe isn't the universe we're in.
(We're not in the evil-Kirk universe with the ISS Enterprise either, because that requires spaceflight. We're in some other parallel universe where humans just go extinct in the 21st or 22nd century.)
BSG pretty much put a bullet in the idea of Star Trek as the best ship-based SciFi franchise.
You have got to be kidding. While I heartily agree that the BSG miniseries and first 2 seasons were fantastic, it quickly went down the drain, starting with the occupation of New Caprica, and especially later with the "Final 5" and the ridiculous series ending. That all really kinda ruined BSG for me, especially as far as being "the best ship-based Sci-Fi franchise". Unfortunately, unlike the Matrix movies where I'm somehow able to block the latter two installments out of my mind for the most part, I haven't been able to do that with BSG.
Honestly, BSG should be a testament as to why this "story arc" idea needs to be throw in the trash. It just doesn't work, because of the realities of network TV. (Obviously, I'll exclude HBO shows like GoT from this because they really do order them all in one season, and Netflix shows are even better because they produce them a whole season at a time and release the entire season at once.) The problem with this story arc stuff is that the writers can't come up with an actual plot arc that spans the entire run of the series because they have no idea how long the show will last before the network pulls the plug on it, so they just make shit up as they go along. It became obvious BSG was doing this sometime in season 2, and we saw the same thing with LOST.
ST:TNG really had a better format: self-contained episodes you can watch any time without needing to know all the details of what happened in previous episodes. Then, if the network cancels it, you're not just left hanging, like in "Terra Nova" or "Firefly".