I like what Dennis Miller said about global warming. "I am supposed believe the temperature readings from a hundred years ago? Hell we were still crapping outdoors."
Dennis Miller says a lot of dumb things all the time, "people", but that has to be the dumbest Dennis Miller quote ever. Although I may be wrong since I missed his brief career on Monday night football.
I think before we panic we should all stop to realize that this is part of a continuous process of change where red spots are continuously created and destroyed on Jupiter all the time! Oh well I suppose a spot will disappear next week ho hum no news here.
Considering that it would be storing the energy equivalent of 30 tons of TNT, if you were to notice the lid starting to bulge on that cap, it would be wise to run like hell.
Actually I remember doing some physics problem where I had to calculate the energy density of a simple high voltage paper/oil capacitor charged to near its breakdown voltage. I got an energy density for the cap that was 3% that of gasoline. Chemical fuels are just amazing.
You could run your datacenter off a huge current in a superconducting ring kept near its superconducting transition temperature. As the magnetic field slowly collapses, a circular electric field forms around it. You stick a coil in that field and connect it to your datacenter. Cold magnetic rings can be delivered by (refrigerated nonmagnetic) truck. This scheme is only limited by the current in the ring when it comes off the truck.
You could use a spinning disk. I'm guessing a steel disk spinning almost fast enough to structurally fail and fly apart might have an energy density similar to that of a fully-charged cap. Maybe it's possible to create an ultra-spinnable disk using carbon nanotubes. Then you could spin the disk much faster, and keep your datacenter running longer. I'm too lazy to figure out how fast you can spin a disk like that. But the edge can't go faster than c, or weird relativistic things start happening to the disk. Carbon nanotubes can only get you so far. They could spin the disks up in China, and send them here. But they would have to be careful. If every person in China spun up such a disk at the same time, it might affect the position of the North Star or change the length of the day.
You could just run your datacenter off the 30 tons of TNT.
I don't understand this whole issue with AC and DC. Both require massive investments in overhead wiring, which despoils the beauty of our suburbia, causes copper shortages, introduces losses from line transmission, requires odd things to be done to trees, and gives birds a comfortable place to sit directly above your car.
Why not just deliver the electricity off a truck like everything else in life? This country has gotten so "addicted" to current electricity that we've forgotten that static electricity even exists. A single charged capacitor can supply enough power to run a modern datacenter; the only limitation is capacitance. Say your datacenter runs on 10 kilowatts (that's just a guess) so you need 240 kWh of power a day, or 864,000,000 Joules of energy. Can a capacitor deliver that amount of power?
Sure it can, if it has enough capacitance. Energy storage is 0.5*C*V^2. Say the cap is 1 Farad, and we choose a reasonable charge voltage of 500 kV. How much energy is that? 125,000,000,000 Joules! WOW! That will keep you all set for 144.675926 days of continuous uptime! Every couple months, the electricity truck arrives and delivers your charged cap, and you give your spent cap back to the electricity man to be recharged at some high-sulfur coal plant in another state. (That means recycling which will help get the "greens" on board.)
Of course then, you have the nitpickers. "But what about the gasoline for the truck? Isn't that a wasteful means of electricity transmission?" Just use the energy in the caps to run the truck! It's like hydrogen! Hydrogen has already been shown to be politically viable.
Before anyone gets on my case about it, I firmly state that I don't believe in intelligent design... it is, however, compatible with evolution...
There isn't a single scientific theory in the world that intelligent design is incompatible with. Nor is it possible to come up with one (even an obviously wrong one) that is incompatible with intelligent design or that would refute it in any way. That's why intelligent design is crap.
You don't understand the notion of representation by an attorney. A DA is not expected to be an unthinking automaton like Inspector Javert- he represents the state and among his duties is consideration of the interests of the state when charging people, for which he has to be given discretion. Consider this recent story from Utah where a part-time judge (and part-time truck driver) was thrown off the bench for having three wives:
Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff praised the court's decision, saying someone breaking the law should not be in a judicial role. Shurtleff had declined to prosecute Steed. He said his office intends to stick to its policy of only prosecuting bigamy cases that involve other crimes such as domestic violence or sex with minors. "If you charge one where do you stop? You start prosecuting 10,000 people and have 20,000 kids go into the (child welfare) system?" Shurtleff said.
If district attorneys behaved as you think they should, mindlessly prosecuting every violation of statute with no discretion allowable, it would not serve the state's interests at all. Not only would it have to build more prisons than it can afford, it would quickly run out of district attorneys- in fact it would run out of courts! Real criminals would be roaming the streets while prisons would fill with technical violators. As its legal representative the DA has a duty to take all of the state's interests into account. Prosecuting violations of statute is one of them- but not the only one.
To be fair, I'd have to say that this is also a symptom of the problems science fiction writers seem to have when choosing dates for their stories. They always lowball the date way too much- 1984, 2001/2010, 2019 (Blade Runner- "attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion"?- LOL). When the year eventually rolls around, people chuckle at how unrealistic your story is. I've even heard that argument applied to 1984- that since the year came and went, it should somehow cast doubt on the entire premise of the whole novel. George Herbert correctly chose five-digit years that will let his novels age well. And of course they couldn't even be A.D. years, they had to be in a different numbering system based on the rule of some future emperor, and he specified no way to convert to A.D.- that's just how good of a date-picker he was.
A story like 1984 doesn't even need to have a year specified. Not specifying the year makes a science fiction story more disorienting- which is what you might want in this case. Although "1984" is a better title than the other one Orwell was considering- "The Last Man On Earth". That would have been just awful. He should have called it "Total Information Awareness".
This is why I have no plans to buy an iPod, ever. Or any more CDs for that matter. I have to assume I'm going to get ripped off. If you have CDs, the RIAA argues, transferring them to an iPod should be illegal. You should have to buy the music all over again:
The [submitted arguments in favor of granting exemptions to the DMCA] provide no arguments or legal authority that making back up copies of CDs is a noninfringing use. In addition, the submissions provide no evidence that access controls are currently preventing them from making back up copies of CDs or that they are likely to do so in the future. Myriad online downloading services are available and offer varying types of digital rights management alternatives. For example, the Apple FairPlay technology allows users to make a limited number of copies for personal use. Presumably, consumers concerned with the ability to make back up copies would choose to purchase music from a service that allowed such copying. Even if CDs do become damaged, replacements are readily available at affordable prices. Similar to the motion picture industry, the recording industry has faced, in online piracy, a direct attack on its ability to enjoy its copyrights.
You can't burn your disk so you have a backup, or a copy for the car- you have to buy two disks. Since you can always buy more CDs (unless you don't have the money to fork over, or they aren't printing it anymore), the RIAA argues that you shouldn't be allowed to back up your CDs. If you buy music for an iPod, you can never back it up off the iPod- and if anything should happen to your iPod, well that's just too bad for you. Why do so many people buy iPods? It just seems like a waste of money.
Not one of my programmer friends are out of a job(people I've been friends with for 10 years). We all make $90k+.. (of course, we're in Cali..)
I'm sorry to hear that. I don't know how people manage to survive here with only a five figure income. I wish the best of luck to you and both your friends!
RTFA you ignorant twit. There are more jobs, not less. There are more IT jobs now than during the dotcom era. Pay is going up, not down. Your little timeline is inane and ignorant. Stop acting like you have a clue, because you don't.
You may have RTFA, but you did not read the report from which the article cherry-picks its information. Although most categories of software jobs grew, two sub-specialties did not: database administrators and computer programmers (warning: PDF). From May 2003 to May 2004, the number of computer programming positions in the U.S. dropped by 4.5% and the number of DBA positions dropped by 3.9%. As for pay "going up, not down", the Federal Reserve does not agree with you.
Your CATO link basically argues that price decreases are evidence of resource abundance, when they can just as easily be explained by improvements in extraction technology. But this made me laugh:
Two weeks before Julian died, I was driving through central Iowa and was surprised and delighted to find gasoline selling for 89 cents a gallon. I hadn't seen gas prices that low since before the OPEC embargo in the early 1970s. I instantly thought of Julian. It was one of those little real-world events that confirm that he was right all along.
Why is it that if you are against Darwin you are against science?
Well, of course in principle it doesn't automatically mean that.
However, evolution is one of the most well-established theories that science has to offer. It is supported by evidence extremely well and is validated by hundreds of new observations every day. And if you publicly come out against it and in favor of some alternative theory for which the only evidence is a religious text, chances are pretty damn good that you are incapable of holding a logical thought in your head to begin with.
Now maybe that's an unfair assessment to make about you, but to make a more accurate one requires too much time and energy to expend on every evolution-basher out there. Life is too short, and there are too many of them (especially in the United States of America) to interview every single one as to his feelings about science in general. And it's a simple fact that people who publicly oppose evolution tend to be quite vocal in not only bashing scientists as a group, but bashing science in general as an inferior source of knowledge as compared to religion- an apples to oranges comparison if there ever was one.
If I were some omniscient being with all the time and resources in the world to examine the innermost thoughts of every creationist and intelligent designer, perhaps I'd be able to develop a more accurate opinion. As a human being with limited years on this earth, please forgive me if I take a short cut and make what is a pretty accurate generalization to save time. If you are against Darwin, you are probably against science. You may think you're pro-science, but usually what that means is that you're pro-technology and view your toys as validation of the superiority of your culture and by extension the correctness of its religious views. Individuals opposed to Darwinism on the merits of the theory itself (and who may offer alternative theories equally unpalatable from religious viewpoints) are actually quite rare.
I was going to say the same thing. I remembered reading Google's description of their file system as soon as I read the guy's question. It would be perfect for him.
Ha ha ha America China have T Rex father 160 million year old dinosaur in Xinjiang province American hillbilly have intelligent design So commence cry as you not keep up What no dinosaur? Too bad so sad Already you behind We sell you dinosaur make you good deal hillbilly!
Slashdot Mirror
I like what Dennis Miller said about global warming. "I am supposed believe the temperature readings from a hundred years ago? Hell we were still crapping outdoors."
Dennis Miller says a lot of dumb things all the time, "people", but that has to be the dumbest Dennis Miller quote ever. Although I may be wrong since I missed his brief career on Monday night football.
I think before we panic we should all stop to realize that this is part of a continuous process of change where red spots are continuously created and destroyed on Jupiter all the time!
Oh well I suppose a spot will disappear next week ho hum no news here.
Are you out of your ever loving mind? Most capacitors are measured in MICROfarads. 1 farad is absolutely huge.
Dude, shhh!
Radio Shack's been selling a 0.1 F cap for years. Although it's only rated for low voltage and charge/discharge takes forever.
Considering that it would be storing the energy equivalent of 30 tons of TNT, if you were to notice the lid starting to bulge on that cap, it would be wise to run like hell.
Actually I remember doing some physics problem where I had to calculate the energy density of a simple high voltage paper/oil capacitor charged to near its breakdown voltage. I got an energy density for the cap that was 3% that of gasoline. Chemical fuels are just amazing.
You could run your datacenter off a huge current in a superconducting ring kept near its superconducting transition temperature. As the magnetic field slowly collapses, a circular electric field forms around it. You stick a coil in that field and connect it to your datacenter. Cold magnetic rings can be delivered by (refrigerated nonmagnetic) truck. This scheme is only limited by the current in the ring when it comes off the truck.
You could use a spinning disk. I'm guessing a steel disk spinning almost fast enough to structurally fail and fly apart might have an energy density similar to that of a fully-charged cap. Maybe it's possible to create an ultra-spinnable disk using carbon nanotubes. Then you could spin the disk much faster, and keep your datacenter running longer. I'm too lazy to figure out how fast you can spin a disk like that. But the edge can't go faster than c, or weird relativistic things start happening to the disk. Carbon nanotubes can only get you so far. They could spin the disks up in China, and send them here. But they would have to be careful. If every person in China spun up such a disk at the same time, it might affect the position of the North Star or change the length of the day.
You could just run your datacenter off the 30 tons of TNT.
I don't understand this whole issue with AC and DC. Both require massive investments in overhead wiring, which despoils the beauty of our suburbia, causes copper shortages, introduces losses from line transmission, requires odd things to be done to trees, and gives birds a comfortable place to sit directly above your car.
Why not just deliver the electricity off a truck like everything else in life? This country has gotten so "addicted" to current electricity that we've forgotten that static electricity even exists. A single charged capacitor can supply enough power to run a modern datacenter; the only limitation is capacitance. Say your datacenter runs on 10 kilowatts (that's just a guess) so you need 240 kWh of power a day, or 864,000,000 Joules of energy. Can a capacitor deliver that amount of power?
Sure it can, if it has enough capacitance. Energy storage is 0.5*C*V^2. Say the cap is 1 Farad, and we choose a reasonable charge voltage of 500 kV. How much energy is that? 125,000,000,000 Joules! WOW! That will keep you all set for 144.675926 days of continuous uptime! Every couple months, the electricity truck arrives and delivers your charged cap, and you give your spent cap back to the electricity man to be recharged at some high-sulfur coal plant in another state. (That means recycling which will help get the "greens" on board.)
Of course then, you have the nitpickers. "But what about the gasoline for the truck? Isn't that a wasteful means of electricity transmission?" Just use the energy in the caps to run the truck! It's like hydrogen! Hydrogen has already been shown to be politically viable.
Before anyone gets on my case about it, I firmly state that I don't believe in intelligent design... it is, however, compatible with evolution...
There isn't a single scientific theory in the world that intelligent design is incompatible with. Nor is it possible to come up with one (even an obviously wrong one) that is incompatible with intelligent design or that would refute it in any way. That's why intelligent design is crap.
Diebold recently won approval from California Secretary of State Bruce McPherson to start selling the machines again in California. As long as they make them "secure".
SWT : buy
Swing: hold
AWT : sell
Whoops, I meant Frank Herbert. I must have been thinking "George" from Orwell, I guess.
No need to be so rude.
To be fair, I'd have to say that this is also a symptom of the problems science fiction writers seem to have when choosing dates for their stories. They always lowball the date way too much- 1984, 2001/2010, 2019 (Blade Runner- "attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion"?- LOL). When the year eventually rolls around, people chuckle at how unrealistic your story is. I've even heard that argument applied to 1984- that since the year came and went, it should somehow cast doubt on the entire premise of the whole novel. George Herbert correctly chose five-digit years that will let his novels age well. And of course they couldn't even be A.D. years, they had to be in a different numbering system based on the rule of some future emperor, and he specified no way to convert to A.D.- that's just how good of a date-picker he was.
A story like 1984 doesn't even need to have a year specified. Not specifying the year makes a science fiction story more disorienting- which is what you might want in this case. Although "1984" is a better title than the other one Orwell was considering- "The Last Man On Earth". That would have been just awful. He should have called it "Total Information Awareness".
Not one of my programmer friends are out of a job(people I've been friends with for 10 years). We all make $90k+.. (of course, we're in Cali..)
I'm sorry to hear that. I don't know how people manage to survive here with only a five figure income. I wish the best of luck to you and both your friends!
RTFA you ignorant twit. There are more jobs, not less. There are more IT jobs now than during the dotcom era. Pay is going up, not down. Your little timeline is inane and ignorant. Stop acting like you have a clue, because you don't.
You may have RTFA, but you did not read the report from which the article cherry-picks its information. Although most categories of software jobs grew, two sub-specialties did not: database administrators and computer programmers (warning: PDF). From May 2003 to May 2004, the number of computer programming positions in the U.S. dropped by 4.5% and the number of DBA positions dropped by 3.9%. As for pay "going up, not down", the Federal Reserve does not agree with you.
Thanks for posting that! What a pity the Feynman videos are in Realplayer format.
Forget P2P; just stop watching insipid protected content. It's not worth protecting, and it's not worth stealing either.
When you steal, you enable them; they can point to you and convince your government that all technology must be fucked up for the sake of the nation.
* People facing financial ruin who would just declare bankruptcy if they lived in some other country
How about the idiots who, for example, think Bush is comparable to Hitler?
When was it decided that it's just too offensive to compare any contemporary politician to Hitler? It's considered a below-the-belt insult.
This just floors me. You'd think we'd want to compare everyone to Hitler all the time. We can't afford to have that happen again.
We're determined to learn nothing, it seems.
Why is it that if you are against Darwin you are against science?
Well, of course in principle it doesn't automatically mean that.
However, evolution is one of the most well-established theories that science has to offer. It is supported by evidence extremely well and is validated by hundreds of new observations every day. And if you publicly come out against it and in favor of some alternative theory for which the only evidence is a religious text, chances are pretty damn good that you are incapable of holding a logical thought in your head to begin with.
Now maybe that's an unfair assessment to make about you, but to make a more accurate one requires too much time and energy to expend on every evolution-basher out there. Life is too short, and there are too many of them (especially in the United States of America) to interview every single one as to his feelings about science in general. And it's a simple fact that people who publicly oppose evolution tend to be quite vocal in not only bashing scientists as a group, but bashing science in general as an inferior source of knowledge as compared to religion- an apples to oranges comparison if there ever was one.
If I were some omniscient being with all the time and resources in the world to examine the innermost thoughts of every creationist and intelligent designer, perhaps I'd be able to develop a more accurate opinion. As a human being with limited years on this earth, please forgive me if I take a short cut and make what is a pretty accurate generalization to save time. If you are against Darwin, you are probably against science. You may think you're pro-science, but usually what that means is that you're pro-technology and view your toys as validation of the superiority of your culture and by extension the correctness of its religious views. Individuals opposed to Darwinism on the merits of the theory itself (and who may offer alternative theories equally unpalatable from religious viewpoints) are actually quite rare.
Do you know what this means? The "Hot Coffee Scene" is good for you!
I was going to say the same thing. I remembered reading Google's description of their file system as soon as I read the guy's question. It would be perfect for him.
Oh stfu chink! At least Google and Yahoo don't sensor our search results!
Hillbilly do Google search
"high pay American job"
Google censor all result
Better luck with search
"American job at Wendy"
Ha ha ha!
Ha ha ha America
China have
T Rex father
160 million year old dinosaur
in Xinjiang province
American hillbilly have
intelligent design
So commence cry
as you not keep up
What no dinosaur?
Too bad so sad
Already you behind
We sell you dinosaur
make you good deal hillbilly!
To read yourself of ALL spyware: format c:
How do you know you're executing the real format executable and not a fake that simulates a formatted system just to fool you?