Come on. Free, source code, runs on any/cheap hardware. That isn't Apple at all.
It could on the other hand be good for Linux. Load up GNUstep add a bit of code to the Linux kernel to run OSX binaries and it's conceivable that you could have OSX apps running natively on Linux under a very OSX like interface. Hang on, why would I need a Mac then?
It was on "Tomorrow's World" which tells our British listeners how long ago I'm talking. The demonstration was of *huge* print jobs though, A2, A1 and A0 sort of size.
I take it that they tooks lots of Ashkenazi Jews out of their natural cultural environment at birth, handed them over to random sections of society at large and then compared the intelligence of the resulting adults with the rest of society in order to rule out cultural effects? Hmm? They didn't?
Instead what they say in the study basically and with a lot of hand waving is we couldn't think of anything which might be causing this culturally and wouldn't know how to measure it anyway so it must be biological.
I don't know which is the best in the ix86 market at the moment, possibly Via, possibly Intel, used to be Transmeta.
It's one of the things many geeks tend not to consider when they're dreaming up their ideal ultra powerful, ultra cheap beowulf cluster. The fact that you need a megaWatts worth of power and a megaWatts worth of cooling to go along with those $400 1U high density servers running the latest 4GHz AMD CPUs. Suddenly those cheap servers don't look so cheap.
Haven't tried it myself. There is an old woman a couple of roads away who shoots magpies with an air rifle, apparently they're a pest. She says they taste OK as well.
The first case, email. The second case usenet or other group forums. Email is too high priority for this kind of communication, or at least it should be, you end up sorting and filtering like mad to regain some control of the junk that is thrown at you.
Hmm? I'd spread rumours about if I was looking for a better deal.
I don't see how the economics could possibly work
on
NPR Talks Skyhooks
·
· Score: 1
So, you've got this single cable with one, two? elevators which take several hours each to get things into space and then another several hours to get back down and it's supposed to be cheaper than firing them up with rockets?
How does that work? Economically I mean.
As opposed to lots of companies competing to build cheaper rocket or similar technology, launching in parallel.
They should probably be gasifying their coal (The US should probably be gasifying it's coal). It'd allow them to implement CCGT power stations, which can be built fairly quickly, and which run with an efficiency of around 60% as opposed to 40% for more conventional coal. Plus there would be saleable byproducts (depending on specific technology) like sulphur, sulphuric acid, concrete additives.
But can't afford it yet, so... *Everyone*, show this technology to your CEOs and CIOs. Use some visuallisation bullshit to get them to buy some of them.
Then when the price comes down to a reasonable level we'll all be able to get one.
"That would be great except the batteries you talk about are exorbitantly expensive to manufacture on the type of scale and size needed for an automobile the size of a Honda Civic."
Are they now? How much is "exorbitantly" exactly? Because 10 years ago the laptop I'm typing on would have been "exorbitantly" expensive and is now only a couple of hundred quid.
The question is how fast do you *want* it charged? The rate limiting step is no longer the battery. Want it charged faster? Uprate your infrastructure.
Battery technology has been around for years which would allow cars to travel hundreds of thousands of miles before having to be replaced, disposed of or recycled.
In fact, Toshiba have a li-ion which charges in minutes and has negligible degradation even after thousands of charges. At around 300 miles per charge and thousands of charges we have vehicles which will travel half a million miles, a million miles before the batteries are an issue. The *batteries* are no longer the problem.
"hydrogen storage technology is far from ideal, but with a bit of engineering..."
Engineering isn't magic fairy dust, you can't just sprinkle some engineering on something and make it better. Hydrogen gas doesn't remotely have the energy density required. Liquid hydrogen has to be cooled to near absolute zero. Metal hydrides are *heavy* and stripping hydrogen off of fossil fuels or similar using a reformer drops the overall efficiency of the cell to little better than current internal combustion engines.
What are you, marketing department for one of the big oil companies? Hybrids aren't perfect but you're talking out of your *arse*.
The batteries used in hybrids last as long as the vehicle, 150,000 - 200,000 miles at least and are guaranteed for at least 8 years. The batteries are NiMH, not lead acid or Nicad.
You can push people away from the worst excesses that way and of course the poorest are the hardest hit by tax increases and often can't afford the capital expense of the more environmentally friendly solution. It also doesn't help pull people towards the greenest solutions either, you need tax reductions and exemptions for that.
Slashdot Mirror
And we are the spinners and weavers.
"Can you prove that it's purely a cultural effect?"
No, but I'm not making that claim, the only claim I'm making is that this paper is poor science and poor science is worse than no science at all.
It could on the other hand be good for Linux. Load up GNUstep add a bit of code to the Linux kernel to run OSX binaries and it's conceivable that you could have OSX apps running natively on Linux under a very OSX like interface. Hang on, why would I need a Mac then?
It was on "Tomorrow's World" which tells our British listeners how long ago I'm talking. The demonstration was of *huge* print jobs though, A2, A1 and A0 sort of size.
I take it that they tooks lots of Ashkenazi Jews out of their natural cultural environment at birth, handed them over to random sections of society at large and then compared the intelligence of the resulting adults with the rest of society in order to rule out cultural effects? Hmm? They didn't?
Instead what they say in the study basically and with a lot of hand waving is we couldn't think of anything which might be causing this culturally and wouldn't know how to measure it anyway so it must be biological.
It works out at around twenty six thousand dollars for every man woman and child. You're all going to have to pay, one way or another.
It's been called communist, but it's really just a totalitarian dictatorship.
Seems like the sensible solution to me.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/19980029.htm
Which requires companies to take precautions against the loss of personal data.
I don't know which is the best in the ix86 market at the moment, possibly Via, possibly Intel, used to be Transmeta.
It's one of the things many geeks tend not to consider when they're dreaming up their ideal ultra powerful, ultra cheap beowulf cluster. The fact that you need a megaWatts worth of power and a megaWatts worth of cooling to go along with those $400 1U high density servers running the latest 4GHz AMD CPUs. Suddenly those cheap servers don't look so cheap.
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/crows/crowfaq.htm#ta
http://www.crowbusters.com/recipes.htm
Haven't tried it myself. There is an old woman a couple of roads away who shoots magpies with an air rifle, apparently they're a pest. She says they taste OK as well.
The first case, email. The second case usenet or other group forums. Email is too high priority for this kind of communication, or at least it should be, you end up sorting and filtering like mad to regain some control of the junk that is thrown at you.
And cackling "3 megahertz, mwahahahaaaaaa". He pressed the submit button.
Hmm? I'd spread rumours about if I was looking for a better deal.
So, you've got this single cable with one, two? elevators which take several hours each to get things into space and then another several hours to get back down and it's supposed to be cheaper than firing them up with rockets?
How does that work? Economically I mean.
As opposed to lots of companies competing to build cheaper rocket or similar technology, launching in parallel.
There's a company called Artificial Development who are trying to simulate a 20 billion neuron brain. They call it CCortex.
http://www.ad.com/
They've been at it for several years so looks like IBM are a bit behind.
"However this is not due to poor infrastructure"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4529269.stm
They should probably be gasifying their coal (The US should probably be gasifying it's coal). It'd allow them to implement CCGT power stations, which can be built fairly quickly, and which run with an efficiency of around 60% as opposed to 40% for more conventional coal. Plus there would be saleable byproducts (depending on specific technology) like sulphur, sulphuric acid, concrete additives.
Put the video processing in the device itself and develop a 3d language (opengl?) to allow the main computer to describe what's to be displayed.
Plus you only have to send what is to be displayed, empty space doesn't need to be sent or held in memory.
Scotland is (just) warmer than the arctic. Which is better for agriculture?
But can't afford it yet, so... *Everyone*, show this technology to your CEOs and CIOs. Use some visuallisation bullshit to get them to buy some of them.
Then when the price comes down to a reasonable level we'll all be able to get one.
"That would be great except the batteries you talk about are exorbitantly expensive to manufacture on the type of scale and size needed for an automobile the size of a Honda Civic."
Are they now? How much is "exorbitantly" exactly? Because 10 years ago the laptop I'm typing on would have been "exorbitantly" expensive and is now only a couple of hundred quid.
The question is how fast do you *want* it charged? The rate limiting step is no longer the battery. Want it charged faster? Uprate your infrastructure.
Battery technology has been around for years which would allow cars to travel hundreds of thousands of miles before having to be replaced, disposed of or recycled.
In fact, Toshiba have a li-ion which charges in minutes and has negligible degradation even after thousands of charges. At around 300 miles per charge and thousands of charges we have vehicles which will travel half a million miles, a million miles before the batteries are an issue. The *batteries* are no longer the problem.
"hydrogen storage technology is far from ideal, but with a bit of engineering..."
Engineering isn't magic fairy dust, you can't just sprinkle some engineering on something and make it better. Hydrogen gas doesn't remotely have the energy density required. Liquid hydrogen has to be cooled to near absolute zero. Metal hydrides are *heavy* and stripping hydrogen off of fossil fuels or similar using a reformer drops the overall efficiency of the cell to little better than current internal combustion engines.
Fuel cells, are a red herring.
What are you, marketing department for one of the big oil companies? Hybrids aren't perfect but you're talking out of your *arse*.
_ release.html?id=20040623
The batteries used in hybrids last as long as the vehicle, 150,000 - 200,000 miles at least and are guaranteed for at least 8 years. The batteries are NiMH, not lead acid or Nicad.
e.g.
http://pressroom.toyota.com/photo_library/display
You can push people away from the worst excesses that way and of course the poorest are the hardest hit by tax increases and often can't afford the capital expense of the more environmentally friendly solution. It also doesn't help pull people towards the greenest solutions either, you need tax reductions and exemptions for that.