Once the oil is so far gone that it's too expensive the surest source of hydrogen is water, to which you must add energy.
The difference here is that hydrogen, as a portable energy source, is neutral to the manner in which it is generated. One could generate it with hardcore geothermal techniques, wind, solar, nuclear, tidal, what have you.
Energy must be added to free it. See the second law.
The earth is *not* a closed system. Reflect on this a while before continuing your second-law litany.
C//
Re:No difference for a long while, but...
on
The End of the Oil Age
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
In France, 90% of our electricity comes from nuclear plants and it's reasonnably cheap. I gather that the investments were huge but they're paying off.
(my fellow) Americans are (somewhat) irrationally afraid of nuclear. As a consequence, our safety standards are very, very high. This increases total cost of generating power beyond the cost of other power generating techniques. If Americans were a bit less nuclear-paranoid, we might be able to look rationally at some of the emerging/new techniques at safely and cheaply generating power.
There are laws (anti-SLAPP laws - SLAPP stands for Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) that are designed to let judges throw out libel suits designed to silence critics.
Only in ENLIGHTENED states, alas. At a guess, either they are not suing people in California, or the sued parties don't know how easily that they could give Gator a quick adult circumcision.:)
At this point in time, incorperating (sic) 128mb of memory, especially at 2ghz+, into a processor would be ridiculously expensive.
Well, yes. However, not: On-chip memory does not have the same space requirements as on-chip cache. This is what they called eDRAM (embedded DRAM). There is a rumor that the NV40 will have 16MB on chip eDRAM. So, while 128mb on-chip *now* isn't currently viable, it's really not that far away, either. Expect it to be an on-board L3 with relatively high-latency (when compared to cache), but with phenomenally better bandwidth and latency than access across the bus/system link.
"Multiple cores" is meaningless, with today's microprocessors.
Not really. It has to do with managed atoms of complexity. You create this complex thing, give it well-understood interfaces, and connect it to other identical things. There is more than just pure technology involved. There is an issue of managing complexity. One advantage of the single core/ multi core approach is a sort of conceptual "assembly line," where your cheap product is the least atom, and your more expensive parts are compositions of those atoms.
I believe that it's been ruled somewhere that double ended transactions (such as a solicitation, originating in one state, and ending in another) can be said to have occurred in the destination.
Anyway, jurisdictional disputes are complicated. Your "does not and cannot" assertion is pretty thin.
Then they can drop the claim that's not working for them.
They can *try* to drop the claim, but someone with a shark for an attorney won't allow it. 'Course, no such *claim* has been made yet, just public barratry.
If it were me, I'd file under California's anti-SLAPP provisions, and give this company an ass-reaming, good and proper. California's ANTI-SLAPP provisions are described here:
By contracting for phone service, one is agreeing to have anyone else call them.
I very much dispute this. *I* never made any such agreement.
Unless that desire was expressed directly to the caller, he has ever right to make the phone call.
I very much dispute this as well. My right to the privacy of my own home, if I request it, trumps this other so-called "right" in every conceivable way.
Saying "I'm on the list in Washington and therefore you can't call" is like saying "I'm on a the list in my desk drawer and therefore you can't call."
A false analogy! A list in your desk is not publicized in a known location that can be easily accessed....so a law doing so is necessarily unconstitutional.
Not by any modern interpretation of the courts, so you are entirely out of luck there.
There is no constitution right being abridged by the do not call list. You do not have a right to privately contact someone who has expressed a very explicit desire to not be privately contacted. Free speech does not and has never guaranteed you an audience.
If the invoices were out, it would be a clear case.
Perhaps. But the thing about conducting a citizens arrest is that, unlike an arrest conducted by an officer of the law, there is no margin for error on the behalf of the arrestor. If the arrestor later turns out to be in error, he will be without exception be subject to significant civil penalty. So, one might suggest that one has one's ducks in a row before trying something like this.:)
Anyone all *that* sure of themselves can simply get a cop, walk into SCO's headquarters, and conduct a citizen's arrest on the grounds so mentioned. Better be *really* confident there, though, eh?:)
What you are supposing, in essence is "what if the court made the GPL equivalent to releasing into the public domain"? This seems to me to be preposterously unlikely. The amount of case history ruling against incidental public domain entrance is quite lengthy.
Slashdot Mirror
Once the oil is so far gone that it's too expensive the surest source of hydrogen is water, to which you must add energy.
The difference here is that hydrogen, as a portable energy source, is neutral to the manner in which it is generated. One could generate it with hardcore geothermal techniques, wind, solar, nuclear, tidal, what have you.
C//
Batteries have come a long way too, since...
Hydrogen, in fuel cell cars, *is* the battery, really. Nuclear, or any other viable energy, would be a source of hydrogen.
C//
The Buick Hindenburg XT
This is not a safety issue, but a perception issue. Hydrogen is and always has been far safer than gasoline.
C//
Energy must be added to free it. See the second law.
The earth is *not* a closed system. Reflect on this a while before continuing your second-law litany.
C//
In France, 90% of our electricity comes from nuclear plants and it's reasonnably cheap. I gather that the investments were huge but they're paying off.
(my fellow) Americans are (somewhat) irrationally afraid of nuclear. As a consequence, our safety standards are very, very high. This increases total cost of generating power beyond the cost of other power generating techniques. If Americans were a bit less nuclear-paranoid, we might be able to look rationally at some of the emerging/new techniques at safely and cheaply generating power.
C//
There are laws (anti-SLAPP laws - SLAPP stands for Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation) that are designed to let judges throw out libel suits designed to silence critics.
:)
Only in ENLIGHTENED states, alas. At a guess, either they are not suing people in California, or the sued parties don't know how easily that they could give Gator a quick adult circumcision.
C//
Agree. Worse, there are people who are better vested into x86 land who will do x86 solutions better than they ever will.
C//
booty traded for luxuries and necessities
If I were a lonely horny pirate, I'd probably be trading some luxuries for some booty myself.
C//
At this point in time, incorperating (sic) 128mb of memory, especially at 2ghz+, into a processor would be ridiculously expensive.
Well, yes. However, not: On-chip memory does not have the same space requirements as on-chip cache. This is what they called eDRAM (embedded DRAM). There is a rumor that the NV40 will have 16MB on chip eDRAM. So, while 128mb on-chip *now* isn't currently viable, it's really not that far away, either. Expect it to be an on-board L3 with relatively high-latency (when compared to cache), but with phenomenally better bandwidth and latency than access across the bus/system link.
C//
"Multiple cores" is meaningless, with today's microprocessors.
Not really. It has to do with managed atoms of complexity. You create this complex thing, give it well-understood interfaces, and connect it to other identical things. There is more than just pure technology involved. There is an issue of managing complexity. One advantage of the single core/ multi core approach is a sort of conceptual "assembly line," where your cheap product is the least atom, and your more expensive parts are compositions of those atoms.
C//
Criminal charges?s/he is unlikely to do to a fellow government law-agency related person.
*shrug*
Sue. And *MAKE* the them.
C//
While at trial, federal agents purjured themselves on the stand and got warnings.
This is a FELONY. If it is really a matter of the written record, as it would be if it were conducted in COURT, **PRESS CHARGES**.
C//
They're non-profit so they don't have the DNCL restrictions.
They don't have to comply with the Federal Do Not Call List, however they MUST comply with a personal request not to call you anymore.
Next time they call, PICK UP. Just ask them to put you on their DO NOT CALL LIST.
They will stop.
C//
you literally have to be constantly eating
A complete and total falsehood.
C//
I believe that it's been ruled somewhere that double ended transactions (such as a solicitation, originating in one state, and ending in another) can be said to have occurred in the destination.
Anyway, jurisdictional disputes are complicated. Your "does not and cannot" assertion is pretty thin.
C//
Did you contract for phone service in which anybody with the service may call you?
No, I did not.
C//
Then they can drop the claim that's not working for them.
They can *try* to drop the claim, but someone with a shark for an attorney won't allow it. 'Course, no such *claim* has been made yet, just public barratry.
C//
If it were me, I'd file under California's anti-SLAPP provisions, and give this company an ass-reaming, good and proper. California's ANTI-SLAPP provisions are described here:
http://llr.lls.edu/volumes/v33-issue3/tate.pdf
No one ever, ever refers to such a thing with no moving parts as a motor...
http://www.apogeerockets.com/rocket_motors.asp
Don't act like an authority when you're not.
C//
By contracting for phone service, one is agreeing to have anyone else call them.
...so a law doing so is necessarily unconstitutional.
I very much dispute this. *I* never made any such agreement.
Unless that desire was expressed directly to the caller, he has ever right to make the phone call.
I very much dispute this as well. My right to the privacy of my own home, if I request it, trumps this other so-called "right" in every conceivable way.
Saying "I'm on the list in Washington and therefore you can't call" is like saying "I'm on a the list in my desk drawer and therefore you can't call."
A false analogy! A list in your desk is not publicized in a known location that can be easily accessed.
Not by any modern interpretation of the courts, so you are entirely out of luck there.
C//
There is no constitution right being abridged by the do not call list. You do not have a right to privately contact someone who has expressed a very explicit desire to not be privately contacted. Free speech does not and has never guaranteed you an audience.
C//
Well, bud, how many of his own civilians was he killing, eh? We've put a stop to that now.
C//
If the invoices were out, it would be a clear case.
:)
Perhaps. But the thing about conducting a citizens arrest is that, unlike an arrest conducted by an officer of the law, there is no margin for error on the behalf of the arrestor. If the arrestor later turns out to be in error, he will be without exception be subject to significant civil penalty. So, one might suggest that one has one's ducks in a row before trying something like this.
C//
*Shrug*
:)
Anyone all *that* sure of themselves can simply get a cop, walk into SCO's headquarters, and conduct a citizen's arrest on the grounds so mentioned. Better be *really* confident there, though, eh?
C//
What you are supposing, in essence is "what if the court made the GPL equivalent to releasing into the public domain"? This seems to me to be preposterously unlikely. The amount of case history ruling against incidental public domain entrance is quite lengthy.
C//