Not an employee, but I've done work with/for the labs on a few occasions, and know people who've managed some pretty big contracts. They go out there with intentions of changing things and making progress, but those attitudes are not rewarded, but rather result in political backlash. They come back disenchanted.
There are ingrained issues at the labs. A new management company can't come in a get rid of existing dysfunctional subcontractors. Their employees often have bad attitudes and live in an entitlement culture. The DOE needs to let new companies displace the existing ones completely and just hire the existing people that want to get jobs done.
With that said, their are sections of the labs that do great work and have talented people. Those are usually in the smaller, more focused programs.
That is true as well. But Cell companies have to manage capacity in order to deliver. Its fundamentally different in how the need to go about it just because of the nature of the product.
^But you are not paying a flat fee for unlimited power. You are paying by the KWH. So the analogy would be paying the ISP by the MB, not flat fee usage.
But there have been instances where user consumption has been limited due to power supply constraints. Brownouts are an example. Load control devices another.
"The technology is good. It's matured a lot in the last few years in terms of thermal storage........... The difficulties turn out to be mostly political:
So, thermal storage is the only technical problem, and is now considered "matured". What are people smoking?
I don't believe the population can't be trusted. I believe the population makes poor choices when not informed, they should spend more time educating themselves in the voting opportunities they have rather than less, and more time deciding for themselves rather than reacting to the media sway, and both would just get worse with continuous voting.
Of course in the exceptional case, some could be misplaced. But there have been many many recounts without those problems. Certainly it is not a systemic vulnerability.
Nobody can coerce your vote while in a private booth. Paper ballots are kept and can be re-counted, which is not uncommon in tight races. Actually some vote counting machines do give you a chance to make sure your paper ballot is read correctly.
Don't fret. We can have it all. Doomsaying over global threats as well as over our crumbling infrastructure. And global warming ta boot! Not sure I should head to work with all the dangers lurking.
Lets see it go faster than a crawl. There is no way to push of and get back on the platform. No significant movement. No steering. This just proves that given enough power anything can get off the ground. It is far from doing anything useful let alone fun.
A fundamental tenet of democracy is that voting is secret, and that the counting process is transparent. E-voting provides none of these. I'm aware that there are cryptographic protocols that would allow this in theory, but this does not resolve the issue of the voters being coerced by their spouses, families, communities or big brother to vote a certain way. Only casting your vote anonymously inside the voting booth prevents this. Further, having a verifiable paper trail and manual counting makes fraud MUCH more difficult. In E-voting, you only have to alter a single number to sway the election in your favor. In traditional voting, throwing a whole election becomes much harder.
Even if we assume that we go the E-voting path, how can we trust the software running on the system? Who wrote it? Me? Then I know who the next president will be! We can cook up all kinds of hashes etc, but how can you verify that a system that claims to run a particular version of the code is, in fact, running this version? Particularly on a remote connection? Even if all this were, in some fictional universe, in place, this system is highly complex: In code, in technology, in infrastructure. I may be able to grasp this, but my mother (a smart woman, but not tech savvy) won't have a clue. This is fundamentally undemocratic.
I wonder why this isn't obvious, but some seem to think that there is an algorithm or a neat trick that will make everything wonderful, and not stop to think about why things are the way they are.
Aside from the many problems with identity and security and creating a huge cyber security target, the last thing we need is mob mentality reactionary voting and continuous campaign propaganda on every little thing that needs voted upon.
So you are assuming that this one family was singled out for no reason at all. The indirect evidence, that many families are allowed to travel but this one wasn't, is and indicator that there was something different about this family or a member of it. Assuming there was no reason at all is your own personal world view fallacy.
Islamist activities, you mean like praying and celebrating holidays just like their Christian counterparts? Or is this a parody of dumbness who are too stupid to know that the word "Islam" is not synonymous with the word "terrorist?"
Since many Muslims that pray and celebrate holidays are allowed to fly to the US every single day, maybe its not a big stretch to conclude there is another reason this particular group was flagged.
I don't accept those excuses for reporters to not be accurate, do the work, or be critical. There are good reporters out there. Yes, the system encourages thin reporting effort, so that is a good point, but it doesn't force a reporter to act like he/she knows more than they do. Nerds or knowledgeable scientific persons should be able to find the information they need, so the bigger problem is ignorant reporters preaching to the less knowledgeable masses, and its not limited to science.
That just looks like more of the same to me. You get all kinds of reports, animals acting funny, strange feelings, but there is still no recorded observation. If this were a clearly linked phenomena, it would most likely have been scientifically observed already.
Another question being put forth as some sort of possibility.... sorry, no evidence to support this at all and it doesn't even pass the common sense test.
Science is in the open, but I pin most of the reporting woes on reporters that really don't understand what they are reporting on. They read a little and think they understand enough to report, but the devil is always in the details. They don't do the research, they can't educate the reader so they try to 'wow' the reader with cool claims. In addition, there is no skepticism when it comes to claims of breakthroughs. And almost never do they take a look at the credentials of those performing the science.
Anybody can be a science reporter. Anybody can call them-self a scientist as well.
At least a battery made with sulfur can be extinguished with something other than a Class D fire extinguisher, unlike lithium.
Lithium fires are the sort of bad news where best practice might be "throw the burning laptop through the window, and then work on putting out the secondary fires."
I was under the impression that it was the construction of lithium ion batteries, not the lithium itself, that is the real problem. Very narrow layers with delicate foils that can easily be shorted if there is physical damage or a manufacturing defect. Once a short starts, the heat causes more distortion and shorting. I assume a similar construction approach would be used for sulfur based batteries.
Absolutely no it is not illegal for police to talk to children without parents being there. It is however not wise to do so because often what is disclosed cannot be used against them without loads of supportive evidence.
Also, an investigation was performed. The kid actually did say it was a bomb at one time. He claims he was joking but admitted to the making claim . This is a bomb threat at minimum. If you went anywhere and told someone you had a bomb, you can expect similar treatment. Go ahead and try it. Walk into a library or bank and tell someone you have a bomb and see what happens.
More often than not, when these things occur and all the facts are known, the actions taken are much more understandable. However, in this case, folks will run with judgement based headline hype. Sounds like something that could have been taken care of quietly and according to the rules which likely require a school administrator to inform police of any mention of a bomb in any manner, and the police are then required to follow up. There is no information that says either the school or the police acted outside of rules and requirements.
Although those important facts are not reported, the kid's ethnicity is. Think about that.
You are exactly right. The liberal media is actually Trump's greatest asset. They play to all his intentionally over the top statements. What the liberal media has intently done over the years is mute, twist, and otherwise minimize any moderate conservative message, and yet here they are running around after Trump's every word like begging dogs.
I don't agree, but they are certainly entitled to their opinion, and if they want to block a FOURTH solar farm from being built around their two horse town, I really don't think we have any room to bitch.
How many solar farms does YOUR town have? less than 3 per 800 people, I imagine.
But big solar has already passed this off as fear from simple ignorant people. And many folks right here on/. were happy to eat that clickbait without any real thought. So, lets stick with the big solar's story, after all, when it comes to solar, any means is justified, including belittling people, misleading articles, and keeping the facts to a minimum .
Slashdot Mirror
Then I hope folks start realizing that being able to hack something is no longer news.
Not an employee, but I've done work with/for the labs on a few occasions, and know people who've managed some pretty big contracts. They go out there with intentions of changing things and making progress, but those attitudes are not rewarded, but rather result in political backlash. They come back disenchanted.
There are ingrained issues at the labs. A new management company can't come in a get rid of existing dysfunctional subcontractors. Their employees often have bad attitudes and live in an entitlement culture. The DOE needs to let new companies displace the existing ones completely and just hire the existing people that want to get jobs done.
With that said, their are sections of the labs that do great work and have talented people. Those are usually in the smaller, more focused programs.
That is true as well. But Cell companies have to manage capacity in order to deliver. Its fundamentally different in how the need to go about it just because of the nature of the product.
^But you are not paying a flat fee for unlimited power. You are paying by the KWH. So the analogy would be paying the ISP by the MB, not flat fee usage.
But there have been instances where user consumption has been limited due to power supply constraints. Brownouts are an example. Load control devices another.
"The technology is good. It's matured a lot in the last few years in terms of thermal storage........... The difficulties turn out to be mostly political:
So, thermal storage is the only technical problem, and is now considered "matured". What are people smoking?
I don't believe the population can't be trusted. I believe the population makes poor choices when not informed, they should spend more time educating themselves in the voting opportunities they have rather than less, and more time deciding for themselves rather than reacting to the media sway, and both would just get worse with continuous voting.
The population voting has to be better than a few power hungry politicians voting.
Interesting....who voted for the power hungry politician and why? Seems like your point sneaks up behind itself and stabs......
Of course in the exceptional case, some could be misplaced. But there have been many many recounts without those problems. Certainly it is not a systemic vulnerability.
Nobody can coerce your vote while in a private booth. Paper ballots are kept and can be re-counted, which is not uncommon in tight races. Actually some vote counting machines do give you a chance to make sure your paper ballot is read correctly.
Don't fret. We can have it all. Doomsaying over global threats as well as over our crumbling infrastructure. And global warming ta boot! Not sure I should head to work with all the dangers lurking.
Lets see it go faster than a crawl. There is no way to push of and get back on the platform. No significant movement. No steering. This just proves that given enough power anything can get off the ground. It is far from doing anything useful let alone fun.
In other words, the perfect kickstarter product!
A fundamental tenet of democracy is that voting is secret, and that the counting process is transparent. E-voting provides none of these. I'm aware that there are cryptographic protocols that would allow this in theory, but this does not resolve the issue of the voters being coerced by their spouses, families, communities or big brother to vote a certain way. Only casting your vote anonymously inside the voting booth prevents this. Further, having a verifiable paper trail and manual counting makes fraud MUCH more difficult. In E-voting, you only have to alter a single number to sway the election in your favor. In traditional voting, throwing a whole election becomes much harder.
Even if we assume that we go the E-voting path, how can we trust the software running on the system? Who wrote it? Me? Then I know who the next president will be! We can cook up all kinds of hashes etc, but how can you verify that a system that claims to run a particular version of the code is, in fact, running this version? Particularly on a remote connection? Even if all this were, in some fictional universe, in place, this system is highly complex: In code, in technology, in infrastructure. I may be able to grasp this, but my mother (a smart woman, but not tech savvy) won't have a clue. This is fundamentally undemocratic.
See this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I wonder why this isn't obvious, but some seem to think that there is an algorithm or a neat trick that will make everything wonderful, and not stop to think about why things are the way they are.
Aside from the many problems with identity and security and creating a huge cyber security target, the last thing we need is mob mentality reactionary voting and continuous campaign propaganda on every little thing that needs voted upon.
So you are assuming that this one family was singled out for no reason at all. The indirect evidence, that many families are allowed to travel but this one wasn't, is and indicator that there was something different about this family or a member of it. Assuming there was no reason at all is your own personal world view fallacy.
Islamist activities, you mean like praying and celebrating holidays just like their Christian counterparts? Or is this a parody of dumbness who are too stupid to know that the word "Islam" is not synonymous with the word "terrorist?"
Since many Muslims that pray and celebrate holidays are allowed to fly to the US every single day, maybe its not a big stretch to conclude there is another reason this particular group was flagged.
I don't accept those excuses for reporters to not be accurate, do the work, or be critical. There are good reporters out there. Yes, the system encourages thin reporting effort, so that is a good point, but it doesn't force a reporter to act like he/she knows more than they do. Nerds or knowledgeable scientific persons should be able to find the information they need, so the bigger problem is ignorant reporters preaching to the less knowledgeable masses, and its not limited to science.
That just looks like more of the same to me. You get all kinds of reports, animals acting funny, strange feelings, but there is still no recorded observation. If this were a clearly linked phenomena, it would most likely have been scientifically observed already.
Another question being put forth as some sort of possibility.... sorry, no evidence to support this at all and it doesn't even pass the common sense test.
Science is in the open, but I pin most of the reporting woes on reporters that really don't understand what they are reporting on. They read a little and think they understand enough to report, but the devil is always in the details. They don't do the research, they can't educate the reader so they try to 'wow' the reader with cool claims. In addition, there is no skepticism when it comes to claims of breakthroughs. And almost never do they take a look at the credentials of those performing the science. Anybody can be a science reporter. Anybody can call them-self a scientist as well.
At least a battery made with sulfur can be extinguished with something other than a Class D fire extinguisher, unlike lithium.
Lithium fires are the sort of bad news where best practice might be "throw the burning laptop through the window, and then work on putting out the secondary fires."
I was under the impression that it was the construction of lithium ion batteries, not the lithium itself, that is the real problem. Very narrow layers with delicate foils that can easily be shorted if there is physical damage or a manufacturing defect. Once a short starts, the heat causes more distortion and shorting. I assume a similar construction approach would be used for sulfur based batteries.
"household and grid storage"
For those applications cost per kWh is a far more important factor than density/weight.
Also charge/discharge rate and recharge cycle lifespan, the latter of which plays into the cost per kWh you mentioned.
Absolutely no it is not illegal for police to talk to children without parents being there. It is however not wise to do so because often what is disclosed cannot be used against them without loads of supportive evidence.
Also, an investigation was performed. The kid actually did say it was a bomb at one time. He claims he was joking but admitted to the making claim . This is a bomb threat at minimum. If you went anywhere and told someone you had a bomb, you can expect similar treatment. Go ahead and try it. Walk into a library or bank and tell someone you have a bomb and see what happens.
More often than not, when these things occur and all the facts are known, the actions taken are much more understandable. However, in this case, folks will run with judgement based headline hype. Sounds like something that could have been taken care of quietly and according to the rules which likely require a school administrator to inform police of any mention of a bomb in any manner, and the police are then required to follow up. There is no information that says either the school or the police acted outside of rules and requirements.
Although those important facts are not reported, the kid's ethnicity is. Think about that.
You are exactly right. The liberal media is actually Trump's greatest asset. They play to all his intentionally over the top statements. What the liberal media has intently done over the years is mute, twist, and otherwise minimize any moderate conservative message, and yet here they are running around after Trump's every word like begging dogs.
I don't agree, but they are certainly entitled to their opinion, and if they want to block a FOURTH solar farm from being built around their two horse town, I really don't think we have any room to bitch.
How many solar farms does YOUR town have? less than 3 per 800 people, I imagine.
But big solar has already passed this off as fear from simple ignorant people. And many folks right here on /. were happy to eat that clickbait without any real thought. So, lets stick with the big solar's story, after all, when it comes to solar, any means is justified, including belittling people, misleading articles, and keeping the facts to a minimum .