That is the point. If it "looks" like it's done by a licensed engineer, but it's not done by a licensed engineer, then the data may be incorrect but could be accepted as true.
I'd like to read the state's rules about it, but I doubt they stretch this far. If they aren't limited to people claiming to be PEs when they aren't PEs, or aren't limited to work legally required to be done by PEs being done by non-PEs, then the rules are unconstitutional. Anyone can provide information to the government in any form. It's up to the PEs in the government to vet it for application to a public-safety project.
You do need to be a PE to design something that is going to be used to construct public works.
But that's not what he did here. What he did was lobby the government on a decisionmaking matter. Anyone can do that, using any information at all, at any time. If his design is accepted it would have to be redesigned by a PE.
What his government officials are doing to him by "investigating" him is a clear violation of his rights. No matter how they try to spin it after the fact.
No, the thing here is that a paper map won't map the route automatically for you, and likely won't include information that would cause you to believe the shortcut through the pig wallow is there.
If you can't see it on the map, you can't make the mistake of planning your route through it.
But a GPS map database prides itself on knowing every wagon-rut. And route software prides itself on delivering the minimal-time or -distance route.
Try out the "walking" option in Google Maps some time. But if you're going to use it, bring crampons and a kayak, and learn to hide from irate gun-toting landowners.
How does that help in the city? Or when driving a moving van on mountain roads? In fact, how does that help when humping a pack in canyon country?
People with GPS aren't getting lost. They're getting led into situations they can't drive back out of. The issue is two-fold. First, they trust the GPS. But if you don't trust the GPS a map won't help you any better, except that it will never give you any valid shortcuts along with the invalid ones. Second, they don't stop trusting the GPS soon enough. As soon as you think "is this really the right way?" is the time to turn back and take the longer route on the bigger roads. By the time you're saying "yep, I knew this wasn't the right way" you're probably realizing you're out of gas or up to your differential in mud.
Newsweek is making money from you online. You're just not the one paying them directly. But if you were you might find its content to be a little deeper, and a little better geared towards the information you are interested in. And if you valued that sort of thing, you'd pay it.
The pay model has advantages for the reader, and that's the advantage for the publisher.
And now that he's got the template, he can create dozens of other online magazines using the same model. If he didn't get that sort of flexibility for his $40 million, then he's a total idiot (and while I think he's a criminal tool, I don't think he's dumb).
Everyone in the rocket business thinks of the alternatives all the time.
And then looks at the laws of physics, and the laws of economics, and goes for the solution that gets the job done with minimal waste and effort.
This isn't to say there's no waste or extraneous effort, but the main theme of the project isn't based on a fantastic boondoggle.
And if there's more than one way to skin a cat, it will get tried eventually as someone realizes they do have the resources to attempt it.
But while it may work for a niche, eventually you come back to the science of rocketry and the equations of motion and you decide that your rocket is going to look and act like a lot of others before it.
"Since Astrology is partly based upon study of movement of sun, earth, planets and other celestial bodies, it is a study of science at least to some extent."
Wow. That's a total failure to understand what science is.
Science isn't the things it studies. Science is the process of determining truth objectively. Apparently, India's courts have no interest at all in doing science, just in redefining it to be nonsense.
136 tonnes (metric, likely) of snow times 333.55 joules/kg to melt it is 45.3 GJ/hr
a gallon of gasoline gives about 125k BTU per gallon, which at 1054 j/BTU is 132 MJ/gal.
45.4 GJ/hr / 132 MJ/gal = 344 gallons per hour of gasoline.
How big is 136 tonnes?
Well, if one lane of a road is 10 feet wide, and the snow is 1/10th the density of water (which is typical for new snow on the ground), a foot of snow is 0.28 m^3 per linear foot and that weighs about 28 kg. 136 tonnes would then cover 136000/28 = 4850 linear feet of road.
So, each hour, this thing could clear about 4/10ths of a mile of two-lane, and would burn over $1,000 worth of gas doing it.
And this was more economical than a snowblower exactly how?
Concrete is actually a pretty good insulator. It's the Heat of Fusion that's screwing you over. Imagine dumping your entire tank of liquid propane across the sidewalk and lighting it on fire. It'd burn for a couple of minutes and make the ice slick, but certainly not melt it all.
Salt is really the quickest means of disposing of frozen water. And it's pretty energy-efficient. It just doesn't do the environment much good.
Once viewers of the NewsCorp padzine find that they are "getting more" about a story by going to the web, they may realize that it doesn't require a dollar to read free information, and laden with advertisements.
This is true of any magazine, but the point of a magazine is to have original content and more depth than your average newspaper, tv, or radio outlet can afford to develop.
What ends up happening is that you hear about the magazine story on the tv or radio news, and get a once-over about the events from the newspaper, but when the magazine shows up in your mailbox you read the background and analysis and finally understand what's happening. Just clicking the "all 15,896 news articles" link on news.google.com will get you a lot more words, but not more information.
Without paid-for content to pay for real reporting, Internet news will be informationbites, not reporting.
The Venn diagram of (people who buy Apple hardware) and (people who buy Rupert Murdoch content) does not have a very large overlap, but does have a big bubble for (people who would avoid buying Apple hardware if it came with Rupert Murdoch content).
People are still buying magazines off the newsracks. Hell, I still do it. Why? Because the content is generally richer than what I can get on the average blog-like internet infotainment site. Editorial effort will do that for you.
So Miller has it exactly backwards. The Internet doesn't want more of what HE is selling, which is web-2.0 gibbering from unvetted writers who've had no discussions of the subject or goal with anyone else before writing the story. It wants professional-quality content, and may be willing to pay enough for it to keep a web-magazine format website going.
And the Internet does give the magazine's publisher massive efficiencies he'd never get from a printed medium. There's no unit cost to speak of; and production is cheaper. Once a page is written and layed out, it's done. Software can do the compositing as the writer enters the text and pictures and links and videos. Whole departments, and tons of man-hours and delay-hours, wiped out of the cost structure.
That leaves some overhead for technical operations, the occasional redesign of the format, and the continuing costs of the productive personnel: the editors and writers and photographers and video teams. Now that it's here, it will be much cheaper to keep it alive than if it were a paper thing.
And he's got Fox News to drive people to it. And you know their viewers will bite.
How about "within a nominal range on at least one attribute necessary for habitability of life of the sort we theorize we are".
Sometimes you have to wonder if before the Internet there was a broadsheet version of/. sold on streetcorners by dirty-faced, loud-voiced kids in plus-fours, suspenders, and snap-brim caps.
But no, couldn't be. It would have been tabloid...
Slashdot Mirror
That is the point. If it "looks" like it's done by a licensed engineer, but it's not done by a licensed engineer, then the data may be incorrect but could be accepted as true.
I'd like to read the state's rules about it, but I doubt they stretch this far. If they aren't limited to people claiming to be PEs when they aren't PEs, or aren't limited to work legally required to be done by PEs being done by non-PEs, then the rules are unconstitutional. Anyone can provide information to the government in any form. It's up to the PEs in the government to vet it for application to a public-safety project.
You do need to be a PE to design something that is going to be used to construct public works.
But that's not what he did here. What he did was lobby the government on a decisionmaking matter. Anyone can do that, using any information at all, at any time. If his design is accepted it would have to be redesigned by a PE.
What his government officials are doing to him by "investigating" him is a clear violation of his rights. No matter how they try to spin it after the fact.
An inaccurate map ought to be a warranty fix.
But only if it was in the script.
No, the thing here is that a paper map won't map the route automatically for you, and likely won't include information that would cause you to believe the shortcut through the pig wallow is there.
If you can't see it on the map, you can't make the mistake of planning your route through it.
But a GPS map database prides itself on knowing every wagon-rut. And route software prides itself on delivering the minimal-time or -distance route.
Try out the "walking" option in Google Maps some time. But if you're going to use it, bring crampons and a kayak, and learn to hide from irate gun-toting landowners.
Had they a map from 100 years ago, it would have been useless.
Depends on the locale. In a lot of places, the roads are on thousand-year-old goat tracks.
Sure. Sounds great. But how many people even need to make the Kessel run in 12 parsecs?
How does that help in the city? Or when driving a moving van on mountain roads? In fact, how does that help when humping a pack in canyon country?
People with GPS aren't getting lost. They're getting led into situations they can't drive back out of. The issue is two-fold. First, they trust the GPS. But if you don't trust the GPS a map won't help you any better, except that it will never give you any valid shortcuts along with the invalid ones. Second, they don't stop trusting the GPS soon enough. As soon as you think "is this really the right way?" is the time to turn back and take the longer route on the bigger roads. By the time you're saying "yep, I knew this wasn't the right way" you're probably realizing you're out of gas or up to your differential in mud.
Newsweek is making money from you online. You're just not the one paying them directly. But if you were you might find its content to be a little deeper, and a little better geared towards the information you are interested in. And if you valued that sort of thing, you'd pay it.
The pay model has advantages for the reader, and that's the advantage for the publisher.
And now that he's got the template, he can create dozens of other online magazines using the same model. If he didn't get that sort of flexibility for his $40 million, then he's a total idiot (and while I think he's a criminal tool, I don't think he's dumb).
Everyone in the rocket business thinks of the alternatives all the time.
And then looks at the laws of physics, and the laws of economics, and goes for the solution that gets the job done with minimal waste and effort.
This isn't to say there's no waste or extraneous effort, but the main theme of the project isn't based on a fantastic boondoggle.
And if there's more than one way to skin a cat, it will get tried eventually as someone realizes they do have the resources to attempt it.
But while it may work for a niche, eventually you come back to the science of rocketry and the equations of motion and you decide that your rocket is going to look and act like a lot of others before it.
Conservatism.
"The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience."
- Oliver Wendell Holmes (Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court)
in other words, if you think this can't happen in the U.S., a surprise awaits you
"Since Astrology is partly based upon study of movement of sun, earth, planets and other celestial bodies, it is a study of science at least to some extent."
Wow. That's a total failure to understand what science is.
Science isn't the things it studies. Science is the process of determining truth objectively. Apparently, India's courts have no interest at all in doing science, just in redefining it to be nonsense.
136 tonnes (metric, likely) of snow times 333.55 joules/kg to melt it is 45.3 GJ/hr
a gallon of gasoline gives about 125k BTU per gallon, which at 1054 j/BTU is 132 MJ/gal.
45.4 GJ/hr / 132 MJ/gal = 344 gallons per hour of gasoline.
How big is 136 tonnes?
Well, if one lane of a road is 10 feet wide, and the snow is 1/10th the density of water (which is typical for new snow on the ground), a foot of snow is 0.28 m^3 per linear foot and that weighs about 28 kg. 136 tonnes would then cover 136000/28 = 4850 linear feet of road.
So, each hour, this thing could clear about 4/10ths of a mile of two-lane, and would burn over $1,000 worth of gas doing it.
And this was more economical than a snowblower exactly how?
100k BTU/Hour = 105400000 Joule/hour
105400000 Joule/hour / 333550 Joule/kg = 316 kg/hour
316 kg/hour * 1.04 liter/kg = 0.33 m^3/hour
assume a uniform thickness of 0.25 cm for the ice and a width of 3 m for the sidewalk; that's 0.0075 m^3 of ice per meter of length.
0.33 m^3/hour / 0.0075 m^3/m = 43.8 m/hour.
That heater would take an hour to clear a tenth of an inch of ice from in front of one building.
New snow has a density typically about 10% that of water, so a tenth of an inch of ice would be about one inch of snow.
After a two-foot snowstorm, your 100k-BTU heater would take an hour to clear a half-meter wide path from your front steps to the street.
Concrete is actually a pretty good insulator. It's the Heat of Fusion that's screwing you over. Imagine dumping your entire tank of liquid propane across the sidewalk and lighting it on fire. It'd burn for a couple of minutes and make the ice slick, but certainly not melt it all.
Salt is really the quickest means of disposing of frozen water. And it's pretty energy-efficient. It just doesn't do the environment much good.
Once viewers of the NewsCorp padzine find that they are "getting more" about a story by going to the web, they may realize that it doesn't require a dollar to read free information, and laden with advertisements.
This is true of any magazine, but the point of a magazine is to have original content and more depth than your average newspaper, tv, or radio outlet can afford to develop.
What ends up happening is that you hear about the magazine story on the tv or radio news, and get a once-over about the events from the newspaper, but when the magazine shows up in your mailbox you read the background and analysis and finally understand what's happening. Just clicking the "all 15,896 news articles" link on news.google.com will get you a lot more words, but not more information.
Without paid-for content to pay for real reporting, Internet news will be informationbites, not reporting.
That's really its only fundamental flaw.
The Venn diagram of (people who buy Apple hardware) and (people who buy Rupert Murdoch content) does not have a very large overlap, but does have a big bubble for (people who would avoid buying Apple hardware if it came with Rupert Murdoch content).
People are still buying magazines off the newsracks. Hell, I still do it. Why? Because the content is generally richer than what I can get on the average blog-like internet infotainment site. Editorial effort will do that for you.
So Miller has it exactly backwards. The Internet doesn't want more of what HE is selling, which is web-2.0 gibbering from unvetted writers who've had no discussions of the subject or goal with anyone else before writing the story. It wants professional-quality content, and may be willing to pay enough for it to keep a web-magazine format website going.
And the Internet does give the magazine's publisher massive efficiencies he'd never get from a printed medium. There's no unit cost to speak of; and production is cheaper. Once a page is written and layed out, it's done. Software can do the compositing as the writer enters the text and pictures and links and videos. Whole departments, and tons of man-hours and delay-hours, wiped out of the cost structure.
That leaves some overhead for technical operations, the occasional redesign of the format, and the continuing costs of the productive personnel: the editors and writers and photographers and video teams. Now that it's here, it will be much cheaper to keep it alive than if it were a paper thing.
And he's got Fox News to drive people to it. And you know their viewers will bite.
Mmm-hmm. And when these elements are bound up in minerals they can't contribute to processes that lead to or support life.
So my statement stands.
by the time we could visit such planets, we will have learned we can't live on Earth...
And apparently our universe is 500 times infinity.
How about "within a nominal range on at least one attribute necessary for habitability of life of the sort we theorize we are".
Sometimes you have to wonder if before the Internet there was a broadsheet version of /. sold on streetcorners by dirty-faced, loud-voiced kids in plus-fours, suspenders, and snap-brim caps.
But no, couldn't be. It would have been tabloid...
Pretty much every Nobel Peace Prize ever given was for "not being George W. Bush".
Ousting the Bush administration and its partisans was a contribution towards peace.