Not even close to what I said because I don't believe climate change is "settled science". Actually, to me, it's a boondoggle that is a lot like a boat. It's a hole in the water that you dump your money into. We are barking up the wrong tree, in the wrong forest, in the wrong country, on the wrong planet.
Oh yeah, that sweet sweet grant money. Everyone knows scientists who support global warming are all riding around on their private yachts paid for with the grant money they lied in their research to get, whereas the poor defenseless honest scientists who are sceptical of global warming are all broke and starving because no one will pay them a dime.
No, they are not running around on their yachts. They are fighting for a living share of a dwindling supply of cash. They are coming out of the woodwork trying to protect their livelihoods and paychecks for fear they might have to get an industry job where there is accountability for results, not just being able to get grant money. They are fighting to stay relevant, so they can keep their PHD students in subjects do develop and defend, right or wrong.
You see, this is academia we are discussing, not business. If this was a business venture, we would have had our answer years ago and wouldn't need another round of National Science Foundation funding to investigate this, or come up with another model that disagrees with the 20 we already have which are not good enough. We certainly wouldn't need a "frame work" to more fairly dole out the funds.
What we really have is survival of the fittest, capitalistic, style. A bunch of these folks will be taking up new avenues of research, getting other jobs, or just retiring without their Nobel Peace Prize. The question is who will make the cut and what will they do when they get desperate.
Not because I would object though.. But because it gets pretty hot here from time to time.
So, if you move it north, why not? Heck, the south pole is pretty cold most of the year..
I have a better idea, how about we just put server farms out at sea, then just use seawater from a few hundred feet down for cooling. That works great, even in the tropics.
It's only cold in space when you are in the shade. Direct sunlight is pretty hot stuff, but if you use reflective surfaces it limits the absorbed energy.
The problem with space though, is it is a vacuum and usually weightless. No convective cooling, only radiative cooling. Which is why they put a huge ammonia based cooling system on the ISS that drives external hot plates they keep in the shade when they can. So apparently, cooling stuff in space isn't all that easy or cost effective.
The reason why natural gas is dirt cheap and putting baseload plants out of business is largely because the gas cannot be stored, if it is not used where it is generated it is wasted. My guess is more pipeline infrastructure and gas liquification plants will come online over the next 10 years or so to stabilize the market.
I don't know where you live, but storing natural gas is routinely done here, even without converting it to liquid. It is also routinely piped long distances, including to my home, for use. It is not just wasted at the point of production.
So I'm not sure what you are talking about. If you are talking about shipping it to foreign markets, then LNG is required, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about domestic production and use.
Surely they can detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that you are wanted (i.e. match the description of someone they wish to question, arrest warrant etc) and you cannot prove who you are, even if you are a passenger in a car? How else could they arrest anybody? All anybody would have to do is just refuse to produce identification (or not carrying any as you suggest) and not knowing for sure the police would have to let you go.
In the USA the law sounds similar. Driving a car obligates you to produce a driver's license, proof of insurance, registration and safety inspection for the car (in most states). You will be issued a ticket if you don't have the necessary documentation, but said ticket is usually dismissed if you produce the necessary documents prior to trial. You can also be stopped for questioning on the street, but you are not obliged to produce any "papers" to prove your ID, though you could be charged with obstruction if you lie to an officer about who you are. Officers can detain you for a reasonable length of time (however that's defined) and even search you (with cause) without putting you under arrest.
So in the case being discussed here, where Assange is spirited away from the embassy in a car, the police could stop said car, identify Assange by sight and detain him.
There are a number of nuclear plants which are not being kept in operation due to the advent of cheap, clean, natural gas. Fracking has increased the production of old wells and opened up new areas to energy production. So much that wholesale electricity prices have been falling (along with retail prices). This has hammered the nuclear industry (along with solar and wind power) who are facing rising costs (due to inflation, as well as plant age), not to mention other fuel sources such as coal are suffering too. This low natural gas price is not expected to rise for at least the next decade.
So, electric power has NOT been an industry to rack in billions of ill-gotten profits. They make profits, but many are facing the cold hard fact that their current set of generation capacity fueled by nuclear or coal is not going to be financially viable in short order. They are currently on a natural gas fired plant building binge, while shuttering their existing plants. I don't see this trend changing anytime soon.
Assange is not a recognized diplomat and is subject to arrest. I'm sure the host country would be within their rights to arrest him if they saw him. He is really only protected when he is not on British soil (i.e. within the embassy).
Police have the right, diplomats or no, to stop and ID anybody on the public street. This includes the stopping of any vehicles out on the road. They may even detain diplomats, until their status can be fully validated. So, if they suspected Assange was intending to leave, saw the van leave, they could stop the van and detain him.
This is based on my understanding of USA law which I'm sure is similar to British law. Surely Police in the UK have the right to stop and require people to identify themselves, especially when in a car.
Automation is here. Being paranoid about one particular application of it won't help anyone.
Yea, what you say is true, but it really doesn't make good news to talk about things that way. At least until somebody actually does it, then we get weeks of wall to wall "breaking news" and "Alert" coverage and the hosts of MSNBC will pontificate about how we should have known this was going to happen and stopped it.
Dang it folks, I left the farm to be an electrical engineer and it keeps following me! I ran away from the farm for a reason, and bailing twine was wrapped all around it.
Now we are going to be making capacitors from bailing twine? NOOOOOO!! I won't do this again!
I have to retire before they start sending me out to pickup packages of dried grass and haul them to the barn again.
you don't really hate Microsoft as much as the next Linux Zealot./Linux sorta-Zealot
I never said I "hate" Microsoft. I said I don't like them. I have been actively advocating Linux professionally for nearly 15 years now, so I consider myself a Zealot because I would NEVER suggest to a customer that they use windows except, perhaps, on the desktop. But you have to admit that Windows is here, it's what folks understand how to use and you have to do what the customer asks, even if you think something else is better. So Zealot I am, but I'm tolerant of those who don't see things as clearly as I do.
Besides, life's too short to hate any thing except real evil and M$ is not the corporate embodiment of evil some seem to think it is.
. I can play around with the tools and creating apps as much as I want without spending a dime. It's only when I want to put an app on actual device that I need to spend the money.
You already had the OSx running Apple device then?
For me, I don't have an Apple computer to develop on, so I'd be out buying hardware/software first. The $99 only gives you the privilege of trying to get an app into the store and give it away. You are right, it's not much. But if you want to sell your app, Apple takes a pretty big bite from the proceeds to process the credit cards and such and sending the rest on to you.
Never complained about the apps myself, only what it costs to get one into the store, market it and sell it. Well, I did complain once that making me buy an Apple computer to actually develop apps wasn't appreciated either, but it's been a few years since I looked at that so somebody might have changed it.
Any FOSS app development environments out there that don't require OSx to run?
Yet on my droid, I have used all three of these App sources. How you can say Google's store didn't benefit from Amazon's competing? Problem is, we will never know if it helped or not.
I don't think going 3D is going to fix the power density problem. You still have to get the heat generated out of the die and keep the device within the operational temperature range it Stacking things 3D only makes this job harder, along with the how do you interconnect stuff on multiple layers?
Could we develop technologies to make 3D happen? Sure, we actually are already doing this, albeit in very specific cases. But there are multiple technical issues with trying to dope areas in 3D. You can do it, it's just really hard to then build a gate on top of an already doped region.
We can move a lot of processing off to servers now that we have a fast, cheap and ubiquitous network. That will allow our devices to be smaller and use the resources of a larger server somewhere else.
You have a point, sort of. We are already doing this. However, apart from the display and CPU resources (in that order) the third largest power consumer in a cell phone is running the radios. When you start transferring data at high rates, it takes a lot of power. Given the normal distances between the phone and the cell tower, we are just about at the physical limits on this too. It just takes X amount of RF to get your signal over the link and there is not much you can do w/o violating the laws of physics..
WiFi, Bluetooth, Near Field chips suffer from the same minimum power limits dictated by physics.
Apple is never going to voluntarily let people out of the walled garden.
There is that. Yes, I know, Apple will not give up control until the marketplace can pry control of the App Store out of their cold dead hands. Which is my point. Apple having 100% control is the problem, squashing innovation and competition in how App Store's work. If there was a competitor in the App Store market, you can bet there would be a lot of new ideas out there that fixed the issues discussed, and issues we don't even know about yet.
Oh yea they do, (actually IT does). Apple's app store suffers from one really obvious flaw, it's 100% controlled by Apple and not subject to any kind of competition. They religiously guard this control.
A little bit of competition would spurn on innovation in the App market and how they are loaded and sold, which was the point I was trying to make.
If you read my comment.... I'm saying that we are very close to hitting the physical limits. In the past, the limits where set by the manufacturing process, but now we are becoming limited by the material, the size of the of silicon atoms.
There is basically only one way to reduce the current/power consumption of a device, make it smaller. A smaller logic gate takes less energy to switch states. We are rapidly approaching the size limits of the actual logic gates and are now doing gates measured in hundreds of atoms wide. You are not going to get that much smaller than a few hundred atoms wide. Which means the primary means of reducing power consumption is reaching it's physical limits. Producing gates that small also requires some seriously exacting lithography and doping processes, and we are just coming up the yield curve on some of these, so there is improvement still to come, but we are *almost* there now.
There are still possible power reducing technologies which remain to be fully developed, but they are theoretically not going to get us all that much more, or we'd have already been pushing them harder. So basic silicon technology is going to hit the physical limits of the material pretty soon.
1. Remove Apple from having it's name on the App Store (or just allow anybody to set up their own store)
2. Removing Apple's 100% control of what apps are listed (Or just allow anybody to set up their own store)
Having an APP rating system might be nice, one where users rate the app for content similar to video games as well as a user overall satisfaction score. However, just doing the first two things would fix it.
But we all know Apple won't forgo the revenue stream and will NEVER give up editorial control because now it requires rooting your phone and voiding the warranty to set up any app store besides Apple's.
So I guess, it's really just one thing... Allow anybody to set up their own store and not require user to root their device to load apps from it.
Actually, the answer is no and that is obvious. Eventually we are going to run into limits driven by the size of atoms (and are in fact already there).
Once you get a logic gate under a few atoms wide, there is no more room to make things smaller. No more room to make them work on less power. We will have reached the physical limits, at least in the realm of our current lithographic doping processes. We are just about there.
This is not to say there won't be continued advances. They are going to get more and more stuff onto each die for quite some time and manufacturing costs will continue to decline as yields go up. It's just that we are about at the limits of lowering the power consumption of the CPU and chipsets.
Slashdot Mirror
Not even close to what I said because I don't believe climate change is "settled science". Actually, to me, it's a boondoggle that is a lot like a boat. It's a hole in the water that you dump your money into. We are barking up the wrong tree, in the wrong forest, in the wrong country, on the wrong planet.
Oh yeah, that sweet sweet grant money. Everyone knows scientists who support global warming are all riding around on their private yachts paid for with the grant money they lied in their research to get, whereas the poor defenseless honest scientists who are sceptical of global warming are all broke and starving because no one will pay them a dime.
No, they are not running around on their yachts. They are fighting for a living share of a dwindling supply of cash. They are coming out of the woodwork trying to protect their livelihoods and paychecks for fear they might have to get an industry job where there is accountability for results, not just being able to get grant money. They are fighting to stay relevant, so they can keep their PHD students in subjects do develop and defend, right or wrong.
You see, this is academia we are discussing, not business. If this was a business venture, we would have had our answer years ago and wouldn't need another round of National Science Foundation funding to investigate this, or come up with another model that disagrees with the 20 we already have which are not good enough. We certainly wouldn't need a "frame work" to more fairly dole out the funds.
What we really have is survival of the fittest, capitalistic, style. A bunch of these folks will be taking up new avenues of research, getting other jobs, or just retiring without their Nobel Peace Prize. The question is who will make the cut and what will they do when they get desperate.
Not because I would object though.. But because it gets pretty hot here from time to time.
So, if you move it north, why not? Heck, the south pole is pretty cold most of the year..
I have a better idea, how about we just put server farms out at sea, then just use seawater from a few hundred feet down for cooling. That works great, even in the tropics.
It's only cold in space when you are in the shade. Direct sunlight is pretty hot stuff, but if you use reflective surfaces it limits the absorbed energy.
The problem with space though, is it is a vacuum and usually weightless. No convective cooling, only radiative cooling. Which is why they put a huge ammonia based cooling system on the ISS that drives external hot plates they keep in the shade when they can. So apparently, cooling stuff in space isn't all that easy or cost effective.
The reason why natural gas is dirt cheap and putting baseload plants out of business is largely because the gas cannot be stored, if it is not used where it is generated it is wasted. My guess is more pipeline infrastructure and gas liquification plants will come online over the next 10 years or so to stabilize the market.
I don't know where you live, but storing natural gas is routinely done here, even without converting it to liquid. It is also routinely piped long distances, including to my home, for use. It is not just wasted at the point of production.
So I'm not sure what you are talking about. If you are talking about shipping it to foreign markets, then LNG is required, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about domestic production and use.
Surely they can detain you if they have reasonable suspicion that you are wanted (i.e. match the description of someone they wish to question, arrest warrant etc) and you cannot prove who you are, even if you are a passenger in a car? How else could they arrest anybody? All anybody would have to do is just refuse to produce identification (or not carrying any as you suggest) and not knowing for sure the police would have to let you go.
In the USA the law sounds similar. Driving a car obligates you to produce a driver's license, proof of insurance, registration and safety inspection for the car (in most states). You will be issued a ticket if you don't have the necessary documentation, but said ticket is usually dismissed if you produce the necessary documents prior to trial. You can also be stopped for questioning on the street, but you are not obliged to produce any "papers" to prove your ID, though you could be charged with obstruction if you lie to an officer about who you are. Officers can detain you for a reasonable length of time (however that's defined) and even search you (with cause) without putting you under arrest.
So in the case being discussed here, where Assange is spirited away from the embassy in a car, the police could stop said car, identify Assange by sight and detain him.
Citation please?
There are a number of nuclear plants which are not being kept in operation due to the advent of cheap, clean, natural gas. Fracking has increased the production of old wells and opened up new areas to energy production. So much that wholesale electricity prices have been falling (along with retail prices). This has hammered the nuclear industry (along with solar and wind power) who are facing rising costs (due to inflation, as well as plant age), not to mention other fuel sources such as coal are suffering too. This low natural gas price is not expected to rise for at least the next decade.
So, electric power has NOT been an industry to rack in billions of ill-gotten profits. They make profits, but many are facing the cold hard fact that their current set of generation capacity fueled by nuclear or coal is not going to be financially viable in short order. They are currently on a natural gas fired plant building binge, while shuttering their existing plants. I don't see this trend changing anytime soon.
Assange is not a recognized diplomat and is subject to arrest. I'm sure the host country would be within their rights to arrest him if they saw him. He is really only protected when he is not on British soil (i.e. within the embassy).
Police have the right, diplomats or no, to stop and ID anybody on the public street. This includes the stopping of any vehicles out on the road. They may even detain diplomats, until their status can be fully validated. So, if they suspected Assange was intending to leave, saw the van leave, they could stop the van and detain him.
This is based on my understanding of USA law which I'm sure is similar to British law. Surely Police in the UK have the right to stop and require people to identify themselves, especially when in a car.
Automation is here. Being paranoid about one particular application of it won't help anyone.
Yea, what you say is true, but it really doesn't make good news to talk about things that way. At least until somebody actually does it, then we get weeks of wall to wall "breaking news" and "Alert" coverage and the hosts of MSNBC will pontificate about how we should have known this was going to happen and stopped it.
BSOD starts to take on a whole new meaning..
As does, crash dump, interrupt trigger, dirty block and System Panic...
You remember that "We can recover audio from a video of a potato chip bag" article right? 4.4 Trillion FPS might be overkill for that though.
What are we going to see that we couldn't before?
Audio vibrations in a potato chip bag perhaps? Just saying...
Dang it folks, I left the farm to be an electrical engineer and it keeps following me! I ran away from the farm for a reason, and bailing twine was wrapped all around it.
Now we are going to be making capacitors from bailing twine? NOOOOOO!! I won't do this again!
I have to retire before they start sending me out to pickup packages of dried grass and haul them to the barn again.
you don't really hate Microsoft as much as the next Linux Zealot. /Linux sorta-Zealot
I never said I "hate" Microsoft. I said I don't like them. I have been actively advocating Linux professionally for nearly 15 years now, so I consider myself a Zealot because I would NEVER suggest to a customer that they use windows except, perhaps, on the desktop. But you have to admit that Windows is here, it's what folks understand how to use and you have to do what the customer asks, even if you think something else is better. So Zealot I am, but I'm tolerant of those who don't see things as clearly as I do.
Besides, life's too short to hate any thing except real evil and M$ is not the corporate embodiment of evil some seem to think it is.
. I can play around with the tools and creating apps as much as I want without spending a dime. It's only when I want to put an app on actual device that I need to spend the money.
You already had the OSx running Apple device then?
For me, I don't have an Apple computer to develop on, so I'd be out buying hardware/software first. The $99 only gives you the privilege of trying to get an app into the store and give it away. You are right, it's not much. But if you want to sell your app, Apple takes a pretty big bite from the proceeds to process the credit cards and such and sending the rest on to you.
Never complained about the apps myself, only what it costs to get one into the store, market it and sell it. Well, I did complain once that making me buy an Apple computer to actually develop apps wasn't appreciated either, but it's been a few years since I looked at that so somebody might have changed it.
Any FOSS app development environments out there that don't require OSx to run?
Yet on my droid, I have used all three of these App sources. How you can say Google's store didn't benefit from Amazon's competing? Problem is, we will never know if it helped or not.
I don't think going 3D is going to fix the power density problem. You still have to get the heat generated out of the die and keep the device within the operational temperature range it Stacking things 3D only makes this job harder, along with the how do you interconnect stuff on multiple layers?
Could we develop technologies to make 3D happen? Sure, we actually are already doing this, albeit in very specific cases. But there are multiple technical issues with trying to dope areas in 3D. You can do it, it's just really hard to then build a gate on top of an already doped region.
We can move a lot of processing off to servers now that we have a fast, cheap and ubiquitous network. That will allow our devices to be smaller and use the resources of a larger server somewhere else.
You have a point, sort of. We are already doing this. However, apart from the display and CPU resources (in that order) the third largest power consumer in a cell phone is running the radios. When you start transferring data at high rates, it takes a lot of power. Given the normal distances between the phone and the cell tower, we are just about at the physical limits on this too. It just takes X amount of RF to get your signal over the link and there is not much you can do w/o violating the laws of physics..
WiFi, Bluetooth, Near Field chips suffer from the same minimum power limits dictated by physics.
So even this approach has it"s issues.
You forgot (3), de-ice Hell.
Apple is never going to voluntarily let people out of the walled garden.
There is that. Yes, I know, Apple will not give up control until the marketplace can pry control of the App Store out of their cold dead hands. Which is my point. Apple having 100% control is the problem, squashing innovation and competition in how App Store's work. If there was a competitor in the App Store market, you can bet there would be a lot of new ideas out there that fixed the issues discussed, and issues we don't even know about yet.
Oh yea they do, (actually IT does). Apple's app store suffers from one really obvious flaw, it's 100% controlled by Apple and not subject to any kind of competition. They religiously guard this control.
A little bit of competition would spurn on innovation in the App market and how they are loaded and sold, which was the point I was trying to make.
How can Apple retain total, maniacal control by giving up some control?
What do you want to do? Sell devices or make money on apps?
For Apple Both I know... It's a profit thing.
If you read my comment.... I'm saying that we are very close to hitting the physical limits. In the past, the limits where set by the manufacturing process, but now we are becoming limited by the material, the size of the of silicon atoms.
There is basically only one way to reduce the current/power consumption of a device, make it smaller. A smaller logic gate takes less energy to switch states. We are rapidly approaching the size limits of the actual logic gates and are now doing gates measured in hundreds of atoms wide. You are not going to get that much smaller than a few hundred atoms wide. Which means the primary means of reducing power consumption is reaching it's physical limits. Producing gates that small also requires some seriously exacting lithography and doping processes, and we are just coming up the yield curve on some of these, so there is improvement still to come, but we are *almost* there now.
There are still possible power reducing technologies which remain to be fully developed, but they are theoretically not going to get us all that much more, or we'd have already been pushing them harder. So basic silicon technology is going to hit the physical limits of the material pretty soon.
1. Remove Apple from having it's name on the App Store (or just allow anybody to set up their own store)
2. Removing Apple's 100% control of what apps are listed (Or just allow anybody to set up their own store)
Having an APP rating system might be nice, one where users rate the app for content similar to video games as well as a user overall satisfaction score. However, just doing the first two things would fix it.
But we all know Apple won't forgo the revenue stream and will NEVER give up editorial control because now it requires rooting your phone and voiding the warranty to set up any app store besides Apple's.
So I guess, it's really just one thing... Allow anybody to set up their own store and not require user to root their device to load apps from it.
Actually, the answer is no and that is obvious. Eventually we are going to run into limits driven by the size of atoms (and are in fact already there).
Once you get a logic gate under a few atoms wide, there is no more room to make things smaller. No more room to make them work on less power. We will have reached the physical limits, at least in the realm of our current lithographic doping processes. We are just about there.
This is not to say there won't be continued advances. They are going to get more and more stuff onto each die for quite some time and manufacturing costs will continue to decline as yields go up. It's just that we are about at the limits of lowering the power consumption of the CPU and chipsets.