Don't need the whole TSA to screen for guns or bombs. The airlines were doing mostly OK before, except for the locked re-inforced cockpit doors. I don't know when air marshals stopped being used; in any case, their selection and training could likely use improvement; I'm not sure they're needful anyway.
Detectors ought to be at terminal entrances, not each airlines' booth. Check your guns at the door, pick 'em up on the way out.
The way I read it is the Bigelow is trying to get serious discussion going, leading to practical serious discussion. From previous statements he obviously intends to try to get to the Moon when he can, so's to do whatever it is he wants to try doing. China is going to go. Japan and India and likely Brazil as well, as and when they can.
Most entities will initially go for visits - a little flag waving and some science. Barring major gotchas, those visits and science and eventually economic extraction (whatever can be done or gotten that increases advantage for doing something else), and finally, permanent human habitation in support of whatever it is that makes sense for having people living there. All of this will come about in fairly short order, so long as it remains roughly feasible and reasonable to do.
The issue is not really all that far off; avoiding useful discussion that leads to some sort of practical framework is simply doing an ostrich number and is grossly irresponsible.
Right now the only practical way of enforcing any off-planet treaties is to prevent launch or to injure craft in near-Earth environs. Those are easy enough to apply to some commercial entity. What will you do for, or to, a nation-state?
It's not always directly about dollars. It's about advantage - often, but not necessarily, measured in dollars.
So we can try to level the playing field a bit, in a way agreeable to enough people for a while until the question has to be re-visited for some next thing, which will likely involve moving asteroids around, building large colonies, or having sufficient infrastructure "out there" so's to constitute a potential threat in some real way.
Ah, yes, the Grand Old Republic. Nice, eh? I think you furnished a pretty good precis (if that's the right word.) And thanks, I'd clean forgotten the Mass. Guv thing.
Okey, fine. What I found disturbing was the apparent (from everything I was able to find to date) lack of information largely owing to censorship about MERS - vector, incubation time, infection rates, spread, all that little stuff. SARS I find interesting due its mutations and, from what i gather, shifting sources and transmission. If that interest by you is anti-scientific or alarmist, so be it.
I do apologize for going astray with the matter of followup; your recounting seeing the SARS documentary got me thinking on it, was all. Better intellects than mine will better focus and filter. I submit the matter of "whatever happened to" still obtains.
Yes, one may see stars from lots of places. I can walk out in the parking lot next to my building and see some stars on a clear night; I maybe saw several hundreds just last week. One does not, however, see the night sky in its immensity. That was what I said and meant. Examples, clear nights all: a hillside above a village of a hundred-odd, thirty miles from nearest city; five miles out from a farm center, twenty miles from nearest city; middle of Lake Michigan aboard a sailboat; a farmyard with its light turned off, fifteen miles from nearest city. In all the landed cases there were intervening hills. It's dark. Your eyes night adapt. There is no appreciable skyglow above a few degrees of the horizon. Hold out your hand, take it away. Now count all the bits of light where your hand blocked the sky. Can you count high enough fast enough before dawn to finish?
True that, but by the same token we at least know that some people are doing interesting, nifty, and potentially useful stuff, along with just good science and engineering - asking and trying to answer questions and advancing knowledge in the process.
Why you're not modded informative is beyond me. The possibilities of MERS are frightening, given what I've read on it the past six months. The Saudi secrecy is unforgiveable. There are too many unknowns and too little data.
Funny thing: we're inundated every waking moment by stuff; when we go looking, say for news, it's worse. If we can contrive for ourselves filters that at least seem reasonable, balanced, unbiased enough to have a chance to keep our prejudices challenged, our intellects stimulated, our lives perhaps edified, we will always filter out some things that, did we know of them we'd regret having filtered, and always also not filter many things that at minimum distract and steal our time - and at worst abuse us by manipulating, or trying to influence, perception and thought.
After all that's done, if there's a story or three we think of import, there all too often seems to be no follow-up, or way of finding such, even if we can remember - or trouble to make a note of them and set up a tickler file on a calendar.
On top of that, I note that many of the searches I do on a goodly variety of things seem to return less useful results these days compared to even a few years ago. Between "improvement to our search algorithms", SEO, and crafted ad results, it's getting right annoying. My search-fu was never that great to begin with.
Sorry, but one more thing. I wonder just how much our increasing electronic involvement - the devices, the wondrous Internet, etc. is distancing us and distorting our perceptions and judgements of the natural world we live in. I mean, when was the last time you spent a few hours looking at the stars? If that's even possible, given the horrid light pollution where so many of us live. I haven't been able to take a good look at the night sky in more than twenty years, and I submit that one of the problems with city folks is they can't see the stars and thus have no sense of awe or source for humility.
All envelopes have been photographed by the USPS for some time now - and that data is available via existing legal means and conditions. Whether there is wider collection I don't know.
A search brings this up as one of the early results:
and according to the article the data is kept for up to a month "but they are available for law enforcement, if requested." The program started after the ricin attacks in 2001. Also according to the article, each sorting machine keeps its own stuff - their is no central store.
"2,776 known incidents of 'unauthorized collection...."
FTF us; it was clever of them to omit that qualifier. Many would slide right past it, or say "See, they know what's going on, even the wrong stuff." and be comforted by the seemingly small number of incidents and thus in their own minds negating the very importance of what they'd just read.
(Long ago and far away I was involved in writing scripts and such for the telemarketing of vacation home sites. It's right amazing what can be done with careful word choice and phrasing, and use of the Voice (apologies to Herbert and the concept.))
Well, that, and, cynical about their fellow men as they were, they couldn't conceive that the citizenry would be so lax in their duties as to let things get so far out of whack. The "common man", as stupid (that's asleep, in old speak; oblivious in the new), parochial, and lazy outside their own very narrow immediate situation, still had some balls back then. Even, on rare occasions, some sense of duty towards the commonweal. Nowadays? Pfui.
As pointed out below, treason doesn't cover it. But things such as mis- and mal-feasance likely do, along with abuse of office, acting under color of authority, misappropriation of funds, etc. Set an ethical prosecutor loose and keep him, and the rest, accountable to that committee drawn from the public, as is done for jury duty. I expect we might want to avoid the guillotine or noose, though. Certainly the punishments should be strict enough pour encourager les autres; and, rather than country-club prisons, put 'em to work cleaning up roadsides and such - get some useful work out of the bastards.
Yeah, the world being as it is, we need some good intel on capabilities and intents, as always, human nature and nasty folks being what what they are, but even human nature can be worked on, and we have (or ought) police detectives for the bad actors (and on that note, abolish stings and entrapments.) What we don't need is 1984 on steroids.
Oh, yeah, and just to respond to the real topic - seems to me the Brit Conservatives have their heads where the Sun doesn't - any speech they've given is already public domain and they have absolutely no right to try to remove same.
I note that we've lost a whole bunch of info that was out in the open but got yanked or walled after 9/11 - and some of it started way before then. In my opinion of course, most all of this behaviour is down to a whiny bunch of craven power-crazed individuals possessed of egos far exceeding their intellect. What the Tories are doing is more of the same, and rather typical. Aaargh.
I'm a big fan of being able to get information. Since you already allow that, I have no complaints. If idiots in the form of a human or a human who specifies what a particular spider does is being a prick, then fuck 'em - it ain't their data, and it's already there for the looking on a per-case basis. So, point, set, match to you.
So long as I get to look at what time to set sail so's I can clear the sand bar at harbor's mouth, I'm good (and hoping that last storm hasn't shifted it... but that's what we have fathometers for - and a dinghy and kedge anchor just in case.)
"This is no different than if someone put up HTML versions of the Harry Potter books on a site and placed ads on every page."
Quite different, I say. Reading the book is reading the book, albeit sans the physical package in my hand (unless I print it out.) Reading a song's lyrics is _not_ hearing the music.
On the other stuff, I would like very much to see some real, supportable numbers, starting with how much each operator of a lyric site is netting after hosting and breaking out attendant costs, for instance. People can 'argue' from established viewpoints until the cows come home, but there can be little useful discussion without a sufficient body of fact to let everyone see what is happening as distinct from what they suppose or claim is going on.
Is there infringement going on? Perhaps, although one might argue from greater good. Let's not for one minute forget that copyright (and patents) were established to secure for a short time potential advantage to author - the intent was always rapid entry into public domain. The former was for incentive and reward for creators, the latter for common good and rapid flourishing of "the arts" - which in the original use of the term covered inventions as well.
Copyright was never by any stretch of the imagination considered to be a perpetual money machine for people who have done nothing to foster creativity. Further, before it gets to any middleman or rentier, any costs involved in production or distribution are a matter between them and the artist; if that involves a cut of, say, CD sales for a period of time, it's still a private matter between them - it's not a contract with the public.
Lastly, legal is not necessarily right. It is to be hoped that right would coincide with public good.
Meanwhile, until I see vouchsafed numbers I'm going with lyric sites as being helpful. What I would like to see is direct discussion between artist and site operator, not for takedown, but for equitable sharing, up to the end of a shorter copyright period. (Heck, given some of the garbled lyrics that show up, I'd like to see accurate ones also. One might think that a songwriter would want them to be correct.)
It's morality, a quaint concept these days. Just because it's _possible_ to listen in, for instance, doesn't mean it's right to do so. That little bit seems to get lost in most of these 'discussions'.
For that matter, all those pointing out how ordinary emails are sent plain-text, so what? Consider the header to be the envelope, just like of a letter via snail mail; works for me. Somebody has to physically do something to read an email by opening the file, just as someone has to open the envelope for a regular letter.
Part also is the slippery slope thing - if I agree that Google can have an algorithm seek keywords in my emails in exchange for using their Gmail service, what comes next? Is it a straight trade, or the camel's nose? (yeah, mixed metaphors and all, sue me [grin])
From the summary, "as consumer confidence plummets, technology companies' economic futures are threatened.'" Gosh and golly gee, I don't see a whole lot of consumer confidence plummeting, do you? Nor do I think that somehow Google's, for example, fortunes are particularly threatened - or have I missed something?
It's been maybe half a year since I was last there, but for years I found Major Geeks to be OK; their reviews and how-tos could be helpful. Tucows used to get good recommendations but for whatever reason I rarely used it.
A site I've used for many years even before the name change, mostly for Windows stuff, is http://www.snapfiles.com/. They've got freeware and shareware, user and editor reviews, all no bullshit stuff. I think it's a highly under-rated place.
Correct. Maybe - we haven't reached Soylent Green yet.
The only free market is outlaw. In my experience many of those who yelp and clamor for free market are speaking from unexamined or disguised agenda, ignorance, and wishful thinking. Some, of course, could simply be rapacious bastards from the "I got mine so fuck you." school of existence. There has never been a shortage there, in the human behaviour market - a case where it seems to me that supply greatly outstrips demand.
Of course, one could take what those who pervert Darwin to hide their agenda to see that, for instance, the poor could be limited to chalk in 'milk' while the rich could have real dairy trucked to them. (from historical instance, go look it up if interested)
Sure, but when you're living halfway to the boonies, a bit of backup can trump ROI. At the moment, no, fuel cells aren't cost-efficient 'cuz there aren't a lot of them - they cost more for what they deliver than buying an off-the-shelf gasoline generator of household size. Strip that inequality away, and I think they're an interesting, and attractive, alternative. Being able to get heat and electricity with the same fuel, in this case propane, seems useful to me. Gas like anything else has its drawbacks, but being able to run an entire house plus transport on one fuel - propane or methane, for instance, is intriguing to me, especially as methane in particular can be variously sourced.
(Lost the link a few years back, haven't found it yet via casual search, but came across a fellow with some engineering chops who'd developed an entire loop based on methane that was off-the-shelf, cost and energy efficient for heat, power, and transport; major losses are the standards - some waste heat and ordinary maintenance. IIRC it was fairly scalable as well, from household to community.)
Anyway, in real world, right now it makes sense to me to go with the most practical and affordable whatever for a given case - whatever that works out to be. But I try to keep my eyes open. I admit, I've long had a soft spot for fuel cells - well done, they offer direct conversion and high efficiency, which appeals to my tyro engineering side.
Not sure small and local can overcome the present situation, but one can hope. The back of the envelope thing re monopoly ownership is intriguing as well.
By weird association, reminds me of going to a dentist mid-'70s or so and reading an article on old man Honda (Soichiro Honda). Two things stood out. He'd go around to dealerships dressed in old khaki slacks, loafers, and a ratty sweatshirt to see how he got treated. Second, he decided that the owner of a company should not make more than 100 times the pay of the lowest employee. (As for the dentist, I hoped he was a better investor than tooth doctor.)
God, that's one beautiful little piece of writing. Thank you.
From the posted summary "...if few pixels in each frame of a high-definition video are improperly decoded, viewers probably won't notice" - Now there's a slippery slope if ever I saw one.
Or just as easily, invite a crusading congressman for a tour and while there show him what they have on him; he comes out being quite supportive of agency's programs. We had one example just a few months back, for those following the news.
"It's too bad the disk doesn't drag some air along with it as it spins."
I do believe that there's a thin layer of air bound to, or dragged along with, the platters' surface - a few molecules thick, anyway. Some of this relates to both high-speed airfoil design and Tesla turbines, where they're dealing with somewhat coarser effects. A quick search pulled up a couple of pdfs on hard-disk platter stuff as well.
"boundary layer high speed disk platters" was my search
Years ago I lived in an area where propane was commonly used for both heating and hot water. Having a fuel cell in the chain to output electricity would be golden.
Btw, I keep seeing people saying that electrolysis for hydrogen sucks; why not use windmills to spin generators for the juice and maybe the compressors?
Slashdot Mirror
Don't need the whole TSA to screen for guns or bombs. The airlines were doing mostly OK before, except for the locked re-inforced cockpit doors. I don't know when air marshals stopped being used; in any case, their selection and training could likely use improvement; I'm not sure they're needful anyway.
Detectors ought to be at terminal entrances, not each airlines' booth. Check your guns at the door, pick 'em up on the way out.
The way I read it is the Bigelow is trying to get serious discussion going, leading to practical serious discussion. From previous statements he obviously intends to try to get to the Moon when he can, so's to do whatever it is he wants to try doing. China is going to go. Japan and India and likely Brazil as well, as and when they can.
Most entities will initially go for visits - a little flag waving and some science. Barring major gotchas, those visits and science and eventually economic extraction (whatever can be done or gotten that increases advantage for doing something else), and finally, permanent human habitation in support of whatever it is that makes sense for having people living there. All of this will come about in fairly short order, so long as it remains roughly feasible and reasonable to do.
The issue is not really all that far off; avoiding useful discussion that leads to some sort of practical framework is simply doing an ostrich number and is grossly irresponsible.
Right now the only practical way of enforcing any off-planet treaties is to prevent launch or to injure craft in near-Earth environs. Those are easy enough to apply to some commercial entity. What will you do for, or to, a nation-state?
It's not always directly about dollars. It's about advantage - often, but not necessarily, measured in dollars.
So we can try to level the playing field a bit, in a way agreeable to enough people for a while until the question has to be re-visited for some next thing, which will likely involve moving asteroids around, building large colonies, or having sufficient infrastructure "out there" so's to constitute a potential threat in some real way.
Ah, yes, the Grand Old Republic. Nice, eh? I think you furnished a pretty good precis (if that's the right word.) And thanks, I'd clean forgotten the Mass. Guv thing.
Okey, fine. What I found disturbing was the apparent (from everything I was able to find to date) lack of information largely owing to censorship about MERS - vector, incubation time, infection rates, spread, all that little stuff. SARS I find interesting due its mutations and, from what i gather, shifting sources and transmission. If that interest by you is anti-scientific or alarmist, so be it.
I do apologize for going astray with the matter of followup; your recounting seeing the SARS documentary got me thinking on it, was all. Better intellects than mine will better focus and filter. I submit the matter of "whatever happened to" still obtains.
Yes, one may see stars from lots of places. I can walk out in the parking lot next to my building and see some stars on a clear night; I maybe saw several hundreds just last week. One does not, however, see the night sky in its immensity. That was what I said and meant. Examples, clear nights all: a hillside above a village of a hundred-odd, thirty miles from nearest city; five miles out from a farm center, twenty miles from nearest city; middle of Lake Michigan aboard a sailboat; a farmyard with its light turned off, fifteen miles from nearest city. In all the landed cases there were intervening hills. It's dark. Your eyes night adapt. There is no appreciable skyglow above a few degrees of the horizon. Hold out your hand, take it away. Now count all the bits of light where your hand blocked the sky. Can you count high enough fast enough before dawn to finish?
True that, but by the same token we at least know that some people are doing interesting, nifty, and potentially useful stuff, along with just good science and engineering - asking and trying to answer questions and advancing knowledge in the process.
Why you're not modded informative is beyond me. The possibilities of MERS are frightening, given what I've read on it the past six months. The Saudi secrecy is unforgiveable. There are too many unknowns and too little data.
Funny thing: we're inundated every waking moment by stuff; when we go looking, say for news, it's worse. If we can contrive for ourselves filters that at least seem reasonable, balanced, unbiased enough to have a chance to keep our prejudices challenged, our intellects stimulated, our lives perhaps edified, we will always filter out some things that, did we know of them we'd regret having filtered, and always also not filter many things that at minimum distract and steal our time - and at worst abuse us by manipulating, or trying to influence, perception and thought.
After all that's done, if there's a story or three we think of import, there all too often seems to be no follow-up, or way of finding such, even if we can remember - or trouble to make a note of them and set up a tickler file on a calendar.
On top of that, I note that many of the searches I do on a goodly variety of things seem to return less useful results these days compared to even a few years ago. Between "improvement to our search algorithms", SEO, and crafted ad results, it's getting right annoying. My search-fu was never that great to begin with.
Sorry, but one more thing. I wonder just how much our increasing electronic involvement - the devices, the wondrous Internet, etc. is distancing us and distorting our perceptions and judgements of the natural world we live in. I mean, when was the last time you spent a few hours looking at the stars? If that's even possible, given the horrid light pollution where so many of us live. I haven't been able to take a good look at the night sky in more than twenty years, and I submit that one of the problems with city folks is they can't see the stars and thus have no sense of awe or source for humility.
Quibble: it's "inch _by_ inch" as in
"Inch by inch, step by step....Niagara Falls!" - The Three Stooges.
All envelopes have been photographed by the USPS for some time now - and that data is available via existing legal means and conditions. Whether there is wider collection I don't know.
A search brings this up as one of the early results:
http://news.yahoo.com/ap-interview-usps-takes-photos-mail-072949079.html
and according to the article the data is kept for up to a month "but they are available for law enforcement, if requested." The program started after the ricin attacks in 2001. Also according to the article, each sorting machine keeps its own stuff - their is no central store.
"2,776 known incidents of 'unauthorized collection...."
FTF us; it was clever of them to omit that qualifier. Many would slide right past it, or say "See, they know what's going on, even the wrong stuff." and be comforted by the seemingly small number of incidents and thus in their own minds negating the very importance of what they'd just read.
(Long ago and far away I was involved in writing scripts and such for the telemarketing of vacation home sites. It's right amazing what can be done with careful word choice and phrasing, and use of the Voice (apologies to Herbert and the concept.))
Well, that, and, cynical about their fellow men as they were, they couldn't conceive that the citizenry would be so lax in their duties as to let things get so far out of whack. The "common man", as stupid (that's asleep, in old speak; oblivious in the new), parochial, and lazy outside their own very narrow immediate situation, still had some balls back then. Even, on rare occasions, some sense of duty towards the commonweal. Nowadays? Pfui.
As pointed out below, treason doesn't cover it. But things such as mis- and mal-feasance likely do, along with abuse of office, acting under color of authority, misappropriation of funds, etc. Set an ethical prosecutor loose and keep him, and the rest, accountable to that committee drawn from the public, as is done for jury duty. I expect we might want to avoid the guillotine or noose, though. Certainly the punishments should be strict enough pour encourager les autres; and, rather than country-club prisons, put 'em to work cleaning up roadsides and such - get some useful work out of the bastards.
Yeah, the world being as it is, we need some good intel on capabilities and intents, as always, human nature and nasty folks being what what they are, but even human nature can be worked on, and we have (or ought) police detectives for the bad actors (and on that note, abolish stings and entrapments.) What we don't need is 1984 on steroids.
Oh, yeah, and just to respond to the real topic - seems to me the Brit Conservatives have their heads where the Sun doesn't - any speech they've given is already public domain and they have absolutely no right to try to remove same.
I note that we've lost a whole bunch of info that was out in the open but got yanked or walled after 9/11 - and some of it started way before then. In my opinion of course, most all of this behaviour is down to a whiny bunch of craven power-crazed individuals possessed of egos far exceeding their intellect. What the Tories are doing is more of the same, and rather typical. Aaargh.
I'm a big fan of being able to get information. Since you already allow that, I have no complaints. If idiots in the form of a human or a human who specifies what a particular spider does is being a prick, then fuck 'em - it ain't their data, and it's already there for the looking on a per-case basis. So, point, set, match to you.
So long as I get to look at what time to set sail so's I can clear the sand bar at harbor's mouth, I'm good (and hoping that last storm hasn't shifted it... but that's what we have fathometers for - and a dinghy and kedge anchor just in case.)
"This is no different than if someone put up HTML versions of the Harry Potter books on a site and placed ads on every page."
Quite different, I say. Reading the book is reading the book, albeit sans the physical package in my hand (unless I print it out.) Reading a song's lyrics is _not_ hearing the music.
On the other stuff, I would like very much to see some real, supportable numbers, starting with how much each operator of a lyric site is netting after hosting and breaking out attendant costs, for instance. People can 'argue' from established viewpoints until the cows come home, but there can be little useful discussion without a sufficient body of fact to let everyone see what is happening as distinct from what they suppose or claim is going on.
Is there infringement going on? Perhaps, although one might argue from greater good. Let's not for one minute forget that copyright (and patents) were established to secure for a short time potential advantage to author - the intent was always rapid entry into public domain. The former was for incentive and reward for creators, the latter for common good and rapid flourishing of "the arts" - which in the original use of the term covered inventions as well.
Copyright was never by any stretch of the imagination considered to be a perpetual money machine for people who have done nothing to foster creativity. Further, before it gets to any middleman or rentier, any costs involved in production or distribution are a matter between them and the artist; if that involves a cut of, say, CD sales for a period of time, it's still a private matter between them - it's not a contract with the public.
Lastly, legal is not necessarily right. It is to be hoped that right would coincide with public good.
Meanwhile, until I see vouchsafed numbers I'm going with lyric sites as being helpful. What I would like to see is direct discussion between artist and site operator, not for takedown, but for equitable sharing, up to the end of a shorter copyright period. (Heck, given some of the garbled lyrics that show up, I'd like to see accurate ones also. One might think that a songwriter would want them to be correct.)
Agreed.
It's morality, a quaint concept these days. Just because it's _possible_ to listen in, for instance, doesn't mean it's right to do so. That little bit seems to get lost in most of these 'discussions'.
For that matter, all those pointing out how ordinary emails are sent plain-text, so what? Consider the header to be the envelope, just like of a letter via snail mail; works for me. Somebody has to physically do something to read an email by opening the file, just as someone has to open the envelope for a regular letter.
Part also is the slippery slope thing - if I agree that Google can have an algorithm seek keywords in my emails in exchange for using their Gmail service, what comes next? Is it a straight trade, or the camel's nose? (yeah, mixed metaphors and all, sue me [grin])
From the summary, "as consumer confidence plummets, technology companies' economic futures are threatened.'" Gosh and golly gee, I don't see a whole lot of consumer confidence plummeting, do you? Nor do I think that somehow Google's, for example, fortunes are particularly threatened - or have I missed something?
It's been maybe half a year since I was last there, but for years I found Major Geeks to be OK; their reviews and how-tos could be helpful. Tucows used to get good recommendations but for whatever reason I rarely used it.
A site I've used for many years even before the name change, mostly for Windows stuff, is http://www.snapfiles.com/. They've got freeware and shareware, user and editor reviews, all no bullshit stuff. I think it's a highly under-rated place.
Correct. Maybe - we haven't reached Soylent Green yet.
The only free market is outlaw. In my experience many of those who yelp and clamor for free market are speaking from unexamined or disguised agenda, ignorance, and wishful thinking. Some, of course, could simply be rapacious bastards from the "I got mine so fuck you." school of existence. There has never been a shortage there, in the human behaviour market - a case where it seems to me that supply greatly outstrips demand.
Of course, one could take what those who pervert Darwin to hide their agenda to see that, for instance, the poor could be limited to chalk in 'milk' while the rich could have real dairy trucked to them. (from historical instance, go look it up if interested)
Sure, but when you're living halfway to the boonies, a bit of backup can trump ROI. At the moment, no, fuel cells aren't cost-efficient 'cuz there aren't a lot of them - they cost more for what they deliver than buying an off-the-shelf gasoline generator of household size. Strip that inequality away, and I think they're an interesting, and attractive, alternative. Being able to get heat and electricity with the same fuel, in this case propane, seems useful to me. Gas like anything else has its drawbacks, but being able to run an entire house plus transport on one fuel - propane or methane, for instance, is intriguing to me, especially as methane in particular can be variously sourced.
(Lost the link a few years back, haven't found it yet via casual search, but came across a fellow with some engineering chops who'd developed an entire loop based on methane that was off-the-shelf, cost and energy efficient for heat, power, and transport; major losses are the standards - some waste heat and ordinary maintenance. IIRC it was fairly scalable as well, from household to community.)
Anyway, in real world, right now it makes sense to me to go with the most practical and affordable whatever for a given case - whatever that works out to be. But I try to keep my eyes open. I admit, I've long had a soft spot for fuel cells - well done, they offer direct conversion and high efficiency, which appeals to my tyro engineering side.
Yaderhey. Curiosity compels, if'n you don't mind me asking, what's yours?
(I take note of the page quote for today as being apropos: Prediction is very difficult, especially of the future. - Niels Bohr)
Not sure small and local can overcome the present situation, but one can hope. The back of the envelope thing re monopoly ownership is intriguing as well.
By weird association, reminds me of going to a dentist mid-'70s or so and reading an article on old man Honda (Soichiro Honda). Two things stood out. He'd go around to dealerships dressed in old khaki slacks, loafers, and a ratty sweatshirt to see how he got treated. Second, he decided that the owner of a company should not make more than 100 times the pay of the lowest employee. (As for the dentist, I hoped he was a better investor than tooth doctor.)
"Of course, the easy response is to pull up.."
Yes. If, of course, by the time you've decided the 'green screen' isn't going to fix itself, you still know where up is.
God, that's one beautiful little piece of writing. Thank you.
From the posted summary "...if few pixels in each frame of a high-definition video are improperly decoded, viewers probably won't notice" - Now there's a slippery slope if ever I saw one.
Or just as easily, invite a crusading congressman for a tour and while there show him what they have on him; he comes out being quite supportive of agency's programs. We had one example just a few months back, for those following the news.
"the tyros in the NSA"
N.B. I don't think tyro means what you think it means, i.e., tyro is a beginner.
As for the rest? Who knows? You could well be right.
"It's too bad the disk doesn't drag some air along with it as it spins."
I do believe that there's a thin layer of air bound to, or dragged along with, the platters' surface - a few molecules thick, anyway. Some of this relates to both high-speed airfoil design and Tesla turbines, where they're dealing with somewhat coarser effects. A quick search pulled up a couple of pdfs on hard-disk platter stuff as well.
"boundary layer high speed disk platters" was my search
Years ago I lived in an area where propane was commonly used for both heating and hot water. Having a fuel cell in the chain to output electricity would be golden.
Btw, I keep seeing people saying that electrolysis for hydrogen sucks; why not use windmills to spin generators for the juice and maybe the compressors?