To further that point, consider this: if it took 3 hours to make up for the 1 or 2 seconds it takes to start the bulb, this would mean that the bulb requires several thousand watts of power to start - which would blow any household circuit breaker, or at least dim all of the other lights in the house. I'm sure you've seen lights dim when a high-powered motor kicks in (washing machine, fridge, etc) but starting a florescent light does no such thing.
That's an awesome point. Thank you very much. I appreciate information that we can use right here and now, so that we won't have to look up some kind of scientific journal or something. Your reply shows that even though the answers can be right in front of faces some times, we can still fail to see it, unless somebody [ie. you] points it out.
Thank you, both you and the anonymous reader! I was really getting concerned about whether or not the manufacturers were just too scared to make things complex for Joe Sixpack. That's awesome news.
The other issue with LED is that it's hard to make them to run on regular household voltages like standard incandesents and CFL, so you need a transformer, whichs tends to negate the benifit you get. Upshot is they don't make that good of a drop in replacement in household situations, except for Halogen downlights where you have the transformer already.
Hi.
Would you elaborate a bit more?
Don't the CFL electronic balasts also use transformers?
How is it an upshot that they don't make good household replacements?
Regarding the hybrids, wouldn't the transformers still pose a problem?
Yeah, I totally agree with you. Sell the virtues of natural lighting. When I saw my skin colour under incandescent lighting for the first time after a long time, I did a double take. I expected the lighting to look more natural, but my skin looked sickly green.
LEDs are coming down. I noticed that they are being sold as night lights. I think that that is what will bring prices down and sell them to the public. I could imagine a day where bulbs are sold as a feature of a house. In other words, you will never have to replace them for the life of the house.
Those are very reasonable demands. I saw on the packaging of some bulbs that those bulbs light up right away. We bought some and they do light up right away. I'm sure that you will notice them getting brighter after a minute, the difference is very negligible for stairway use.
And that being said, it sounds as if you are the type of person who turns his lights off every time he doesn't use them. If this is true, then you probably won't save much environment by using them in the stairs.
Do you or anybody know whether or not there is a minimum amount of time before we start saving money? In the 80s, we used to need to leave them on for 3 hours before we started saving money. Have things changed?
Guesses are fine, but I want the facts, please. I use these lights already. I just want to save as much electricity as possible.
I don't know if I've been verbally abused, but I've bee sworn at and micromanaged at the same time. I've been accused at being deceptive to the management team, slacking off, and playing games with the management.
1 time, I was just pouring water down a drain, and the project foreman started swearing at me from across the site. Apparently, I wasn't pouring fast enough for him. Another time, I wasn't going to what he thought was the best drain possible. Another time, I got sworn at because I didn't take my lunch break. Apparently, I was a bad worker for not watching the clock.
I could go on and on, and yet I only worked for them for 4.3 months.
Maybe they can make it more complex by instructing the user to click on them in a certain order. For example, "Click on the black bunny, then the white bunny, then the black kitten.".
Maybe another idea is to have a question asking which item doesn't belong, and explaining why. Things like that can be subjective, unfortunately.
Another idea would be to show a picture of many people, and ask how many of them have brown/black hair. In the picture would be all coloured people with brown/black hair, and black people with different coloured hair. The problem with my suggestion, is that number of people could only be so many [ie: between 1 - 10], so it would only take so long for bots to guess all possibilities, but then again, every little bit helps.
Regarding television, I find it quite ironic that it is probably talk shows like Oprah that have caused the most damage to society, because the show doesn't model good talk.
Regarding the police and driving badly, sometimes it is the police. Once a car stopped on train tracks that were being used, and when my friend pointed it out to the driver, the fellow just flashed his badge and drove off.
You're right about chewing people out. Unfortunately, it's tough to get it going because we need that critical mass to push it past that tipping point. Also, it can get worse, because if we don't use people skills, then we can make a new enemy out of that person.
If we're to protect the environment, let's focus on free-market solutions wherever possible.
Exactly.
If we have to tax consumers to subsidize better technologies, then how efficient are those "better" technologies? The Tragedy Of The Commons is an excellent lesson here. The environment in the Commons was only able to sustain so much. Yet, when the fences were in place, everybody had enough. I bet if every man had his own power generator, and his own allotment of fuel, then I'd bet that you'd never hear a single peep about global warming.
Actually, why don't you just give the companies money and not use their products? This way, they'd still experiment on the rats and rat-dogs, but you wouldn't have to suffer the agony of bad products?
Perhaps the way to encourage adoption of water meters would be to sell them to people as an optional service, for those who don't consume a lot of water and want to save money?
Here's some good news for you. I live in Surrey, BC, and they gave away meters for free. The waiting list is so long, that I think that they got around to my parents house 1 month late. When they finally came, we began to wonder if they were intending to fix the hole in the driveway. They did.
I'm not implying that they are slow. I'm just saying that I totally agree with you. There is a high demand from most people to use a meter.
The sad news is that water is so cheap, despite dry seasons and water restrictions, that there still is no incentive to shut off the taps.
The meter only solves problems if the cost of water is perceived to be extremely high. If it were $10/gallon or litre, then you wouldn't see people running taps wastefully. The problem is that people need water, and it isn't really a luxury. I think that meters should be mandatory for everybody, and that the price should be exponential. So, it would be free for the first few litres, to drink and to flush, but it would just go up after that. The next few would be $1/gallon, and then the next few would $10/gallon, etc.
When I say "few", "$1", and "$10", I'm just throwing out rough numbers for illustration. The curve would have to be much more generous than that.
The reason that I say all of this is that it isn't uncommon to see water being wasted in my city, even though most of us are on the meter. All new buildings are much more environmentally friendly, and are metered, yet you see sprinklers running during the rain, and water pouring out on the streets during dry seasons. It's very sad.
That test on the linked page is very interesting. I wonder how well it would work. I think that it is great for certain forums where people must read important instructions and disclaimers. Due to the nature of the test, I'm sure that the testers could shuffle certain questions around with the answer options being in the same place, because the answer options are relevant for the questions of that type. I hope that that makes sense.
Actually, from what I heard of a particular device, a terminal of 40 characters wide, 2 lines high, and with fixed width characters is the most accurate description. In fact, bring that down to 8 characters wide, and you have to scroll left and right across a 40 character line, each time you read. This doesn't include menus. Your friend's might be different.
Am I allowed to leave for work an hour later, have lunch an hour later, and leave work an hour later? I realize that some companies are very flexible, but not all. I was just a general labourer for a construction company, and because I did not watch the clock, the foreman took time out of his busy schedule to swear at me speak down at me. The reason for that is because he has bad people skills, and can't deal with stress, and because they want to keep us synchronized.
I know what you're saying, but just getting up and hour later or earlier won't change the tv schedules or work schedules. Life is weird that way.
Actually, I think you'd find it takes less electricity to constantly keep topping up the water cylinder's temperature rather than letting it cool and heating it up from cold again.
Can you give some math formulas or evidence of this? I have difficulty believing it. I've had some discussions about this regarding keeping things warm on the stove. I'm sure that that is different, but I'd genuinely like to know exactly what the right choice is for every situation.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks a million.
Thank you, both you and the anonymous reader! I was really getting concerned about whether or not the manufacturers were just too scared to make things complex for Joe Sixpack. That's awesome news.
Why didn't you just clse your windows?
Would you elaborate a bit more?
Don't the CFL electronic balasts also use transformers?
How is it an upshot that they don't make good household replacements?
Regarding the hybrids, wouldn't the transformers still pose a problem?
Yeah, I totally agree with you. Sell the virtues of natural lighting. When I saw my skin colour under incandescent lighting for the first time after a long time, I did a double take. I expected the lighting to look more natural, but my skin looked sickly green.
LEDs are coming down. I noticed that they are being sold as night lights. I think that that is what will bring prices down and sell them to the public. I could imagine a day where bulbs are sold as a feature of a house. In other words, you will never have to replace them for the life of the house.
Do you know how long we have to leave them on in order to save money?
Also, a bad solder? That's amazing. I'll check out my old bulbs that don't work.
Those are very reasonable demands. I saw on the packaging of some bulbs that those bulbs light up right away. We bought some and they do light up right away. I'm sure that you will notice them getting brighter after a minute, the difference is very negligible for stairway use.
And that being said, it sounds as if you are the type of person who turns his lights off every time he doesn't use them. If this is true, then you probably won't save much environment by using them in the stairs.
Do you or anybody know whether or not there is a minimum amount of time before we start saving money? In the 80s, we used to need to leave them on for 3 hours before we started saving money. Have things changed?
Guesses are fine, but I want the facts, please. I use these lights already. I just want to save as much electricity as possible.
I don't know if I've been verbally abused, but I've bee sworn at and micromanaged at the same time. I've been accused at being deceptive to the management team, slacking off, and playing games with the management.
1 time, I was just pouring water down a drain, and the project foreman started swearing at me from across the site. Apparently, I wasn't pouring fast enough for him. Another time, I wasn't going to what he thought was the best drain possible. Another time, I got sworn at because I didn't take my lunch break. Apparently, I was a bad worker for not watching the clock.
I could go on and on, and yet I only worked for them for 4.3 months.
Maybe they can make it more complex by instructing the user to click on them in a certain order. For example, "Click on the black bunny, then the white bunny, then the black kitten.".
Maybe another idea is to have a question asking which item doesn't belong, and explaining why. Things like that can be subjective, unfortunately.
Another idea would be to show a picture of many people, and ask how many of them have brown/black hair. In the picture would be all coloured people with brown/black hair, and black people with different coloured hair. The problem with my suggestion, is that number of people could only be so many [ie: between 1 - 10], so it would only take so long for bots to guess all possibilities, but then again, every little bit helps.
Well, yeah. The previous misconception was that it was hung on the ceiling over his bed.
Regarding television, I find it quite ironic that it is probably talk shows like Oprah that have caused the most damage to society, because the show doesn't model good talk.
Regarding the police and driving badly, sometimes it is the police. Once a car stopped on train tracks that were being used, and when my friend pointed it out to the driver, the fellow just flashed his badge and drove off.
You're right about chewing people out. Unfortunately, it's tough to get it going because we need that critical mass to push it past that tipping point. Also, it can get worse, because if we don't use people skills, then we can make a new enemy out of that person.
It's tough.
I like your idea a lot. If we could find a way to send these false cheques, and credit card numbers, then we'd be all set.
If we have to tax consumers to subsidize better technologies, then how efficient are those "better" technologies? The Tragedy Of The Commons is an excellent lesson here. The environment in the Commons was only able to sustain so much. Yet, when the fences were in place, everybody had enough. I bet if every man had his own power generator, and his own allotment of fuel, then I'd bet that you'd never hear a single peep about global warming.
Actually, why don't you just give the companies money and not use their products? This way, they'd still experiment on the rats and rat-dogs, but you wouldn't have to suffer the agony of bad products?
I'm not implying that they are slow. I'm just saying that I totally agree with you. There is a high demand from most people to use a meter.
The sad news is that water is so cheap, despite dry seasons and water restrictions, that there still is no incentive to shut off the taps.
The meter only solves problems if the cost of water is perceived to be extremely high. If it were $10/gallon or litre, then you wouldn't see people running taps wastefully. The problem is that people need water, and it isn't really a luxury. I think that meters should be mandatory for everybody, and that the price should be exponential. So, it would be free for the first few litres, to drink and to flush, but it would just go up after that. The next few would be $1/gallon, and then the next few would $10/gallon, etc.
When I say "few", "$1", and "$10", I'm just throwing out rough numbers for illustration. The curve would have to be much more generous than that.
The reason that I say all of this is that it isn't uncommon to see water being wasted in my city, even though most of us are on the meter. All new buildings are much more environmentally friendly, and are metered, yet you see sprinklers running during the rain, and water pouring out on the streets during dry seasons. It's very sad.
That test on the linked page is very interesting. I wonder how well it would work. I think that it is great for certain forums where people must read important instructions and disclaimers. Due to the nature of the test, I'm sure that the testers could shuffle certain questions around with the answer options being in the same place, because the answer options are relevant for the questions of that type. I hope that that makes sense.
Thanks for sharing.
Actually, from what I heard of a particular device, a terminal of 40 characters wide, 2 lines high, and with fixed width characters is the most accurate description. In fact, bring that down to 8 characters wide, and you have to scroll left and right across a 40 character line, each time you read. This doesn't include menus. Your friend's might be different.
Am I allowed to leave for work an hour later, have lunch an hour later, and leave work an hour later? I realize that some companies are very flexible, but not all. I was just a general labourer for a construction company, and because I did not watch the clock, the foreman took time out of his busy schedule to swear at me speak down at me. The reason for that is because he has bad people skills, and can't deal with stress, and because they want to keep us synchronized.
I know what you're saying, but just getting up and hour later or earlier won't change the tv schedules or work schedules. Life is weird that way.
That was hillarious! I loved the part about the aviation fuel. Thanks! :^)