Is the process pulling hydrogen out of water or are they providing pure hydrogen? If pulled from water would that mean the only byproduct is oxygen? If so this could be huge. Yes I did RTFA.
If this turns out to be legit (and it's a very big if), then it's a nuclear reaction. The energy available from nuclear reactions dwarfs that of chemical reactions by many orders of magnitude, so chemical nature of the source of hydrogen would be irrelevant.
It can cancel it... for a couple of years. Then of course when the ash and sulfur falls out of the atmosphere, temperatures go right back up. We don't get the biggest volcanic eruption in a century as an annual event.
FFS - does anybody here have reasoning skills beyond a 3rd grade level?
Nice attempt to distract attention from your lack of knowledge on the subject by switching topics. Back to the point: Volcanoes are not significant sources of methane or water vapor either.
Methane released by human activities is a significant problem.
Water vapor has a half life in the atmosphere of a couple of days. It's levels are an *effect*, not a cause.
(Of course I should have taken my own advice, saved futile effort, and ignored your post.)
I am sure that recent volcanic activity alone has affected the global climate far more than human activity.
Well, you're DEAD WRONG. Volcanoes emit about 1% as much CO2 as human activities. Look it up. The main effect of volcanoes is *cooling* caused by ash, which only lasts a couple of years max.
Every time you see someone mention volcanoes as the culprit in a discussion about GW, you can be sure that they don't have a frigging clue what they're talking about, and everything they post can be safely ignored.
Because each of us exists as one location in 4-dimensional spacetime. Our existence is a single thread moving uniformly forward through time, attending to one task at a time. Almost nothing in the real wold is stateless or immutable. Our brains evolved to deal with this reality.
but apart, remember programming isn't something natural of the human, is learned.
When I looked at the first BASIC program listing I encountered almost 40 years ago, I immediately understood what it meant. I didn't have to learn anything to relate to it. It's a list of steps to take, just like we do every day in the physical world.
Most CS students struggle for a long time just to get a grasp on recursion, much less the various high-powered concepts from functional languages.
Anyhow, don't we only get some trivial % of oil from the Middle East, with most of it coming from much closer (hello, Canada)?
That's like saying you don't buy electricity from the power company because of the fact that the electrons that arrive at your house aren't the same ones that left the power station.
Oil is a fungible commodity. If they stopped producing it in the Middle East, then the countries closer to them would start buying up the Canadian and South American oil we now consume, driving up the price we pay by hundreds of dollars per barrel. That's why we prop up Middle East producers.
Thats because you're running unoptimized shitty software on it..
Most of the software ever written is shitty and unoptimized. Where do you get the idea that that's going to change?
You won't need to ask web sites to re-code for mobile/arm devices - if performance is insufficient and they lose hits because performance is too bad, that will be motive enough.
The proliferation of bloated Flash content on the web is strong evidence that your theory is false. (For example: go to any restaurant chain to look at their menu. In theory, you want a couple of kilobytes of information to find the price of a few entrees. In reality, you get to wait half a minute while megabytes of animations download before you see even one hamburger basket.)
Even if your theory were valid, it would only apply to sites that have a large proportion of phone users. That has little correlation with business usage, which is largely in-house intranet stuff. That's generally even more shitty and unoptimized than average, and fixing it would usually cost a good deal more than the numbers I mentioned above.
When ATT went to push button phones, they intentionally put the numbers backwards from 10 key adding machines everyone used back then. Then didn't want the fast typers to outpace their new phone system and punch the numbers in to fast.
I doubt it. *MY* unverified explanation that I remember hearing somewhere is: They put the one in the upper left to make it more similar to the familiar rotary dial, where the numbers increase clockwise starting from upper left.
Anyway, is there a calculator on the market that has a phone-style rotary dial? Now that's something I might buy.
A few dollars a month for a desktop... A few thousand dollars a month for an office full of desktops?
We have an "underpowered" Intel Atom-based mini desktop in the kitchen as a terminal, which is silent and uses negligible power.
While it would be usable for an office worker, it *is* noticeably slower than my standard Athlon computers. Just about every real-world web page or application launch takes several seconds longer than the normal PCs. Over the course of a month, all these little delays would almost certainly add up to more lost productivity than the additional power cost, especially if the normal PCs had an effective sleep mode that actually gets used when the computer is idle.
(For example, if the average user does 100 things per day that take an extra 3 seconds each, that's 5 minutes per day, or more than an hour lost time over a typical month. Even with low-wage employees, with overhead that lost time could cost the employer well over $20/month, enough to buy power for a couple of standard PCs going full tilt 24/7.)
Of course, you could try to convince every website operator in the world to recode their sites to not be full of bloated Javascript (starting with the site you're reading this on), but good luck with that.
Why does it need bubbles? Can't an X86 keep its other ALUs busy simultaneously doing other instructions nearby that sequence using standard register renaming and opcode reordering techniques?
At any rate, from what I've read it's the branch prediction that really bottlenecks performance with today's deep pipelines. The advanced runtime branch prediction in the latest CPUs (which can see and react to the actual data at hand) just plain outperforms static compile-time branch analysis.
When I saw this article and the direction the computer industry is headed, I thought: "RMS must be spinning in his grave." (...And he's not even dead.)
It's like the people that were going off about how iPad's don't need USB functionality, insinuating that there is no point to having USB on the tablet. Uh, what? Who could possibly see more connectivity or functionality as a bad thing?
Connectivity is good, but not with a churlish port like USB, which is so often used by the hoi polloi.
We need to have the patience to wait while Apple develops a proprietary "iPort", which will provide exclusive connectivity to approved devices that meet the elite standards of the iPad and its users.
PC World is published by IDG. Ziff Davis published PCMag.
Confusingly, ZDNet isn't run by Ziff Davis either. (It's run by CNet, which is now owned by CBS).
I still appreciate Ziff Davis for one thing: In the days before the WWW or even Minesweeper, when things got boring at work, a good way to kill time was to grab a copy of PCWeek from the break room. I could spend a good part of a morning reading it cover to cover.
(Of course, times have changed, and now everyone can kill time by posting their very own pontifications for the world to see.)
My favorite example of computing (in)efficiency is the USAF's SAGE bomber tracking computers introduced in the 1950s. These vacuum tube machines had CPU horsepower probably in the same ballpark as an 80286, but could draw more than 2 megawatts of power each. They didn't decommission the last one until the 1980s.
Ok, ok... as soon as I hit the submit button, I saw my mistake and thought "Cue the 'you forgot the ++ comments' in 3, 2, 1".
And It's true: There's a bug in the program. It wouldn't work as intended. On this site, I can't go back and edit it. The flaw is cast in stone. All I can do now is express my regret for making the mistake and carry on with my life as best I can.
Yes, and the fact that the US has the worth diet for the typical person and the highest obesity rates has NOTHING to do with a lower life expectancy
Part of the job of a healthcare system is addressing those issues before they cause big problems. Once again, in the US we get epic failure at twice the cost of other countries. (We do a great job treating erectile dysfunction, though.)
AND that you can buy insurance on your own directly from companies
You're deluded. Try buying full coverage individual insurance if you or any member of your family has *any* health problems. You can't, because there is NO free market solution for that.
I assume that you support Obamacare, because it does exactly what you want: Make people responsible for buying insurance. Am I wrong?
You're kidding, right? Regulations are NOT part of free market capitalism.
And yet regulations are necessary.
So, as I suspected, true free market capitalism is impossible. Thus, a faith-based belief in it as a solution to all problems is irrational and counterproductive.
If by "crappier results" you mean "the most advanced medicines and treatments" and "thousands of people fly to the US for surgeries that they can't get in their 'superior' country with government run health care", then sure - you're right.
Yet despite this, people on average die sooner here than most other developed countries. You have to look at bottom line results, nut just anecdotes about miracle treatments for a few lucky individuals. The bottom line here is: FAIL.
As you point out, our healthcare system looks like 4-star hotels in Cuba: only wealthy foreign tourists seem to be able to afford it.
Actually, if in fact hearing aids are overpriced, it's only because of interference in the market by the government, making it more difficult for people to get into the market with regulations.
Yeah, we're "willing to pay" them. We pay twice as much as any other country for healthcare, and we get crappier results than most of them, "doctor shortage" or not. That's a real free market success story.
Liberty, responsibility and sound economic policy - My ass.
An education in medicine isn't cheap. Nor is running an operation. If it can be done cheaper, someone will find a way. There are enough doctors out there that collusion is impossible.
It's amazing how you free market fanatics manage to cling to your faith-based beliefs in the face of all the real-world situations that conclusively disprove them.
Slashdot Mirror
Is the process pulling hydrogen out of water or are they providing pure hydrogen? If pulled from water would that mean the only byproduct is oxygen? If so this could be huge. Yes I did RTFA.
If this turns out to be legit (and it's a very big if), then it's a nuclear reaction. The energy available from nuclear reactions dwarfs that of chemical reactions by many orders of magnitude, so chemical nature of the source of hydrogen would be irrelevant.
Global warming of about 0.8 deg C over the last 100 years. Mt. Pinatubo's 1991 eruption cooled the earth by 0.6 deg C. Looks to me that one good volcanic eruption can cancel an entire century of global warming. Now add up all the volcanic eruptions we've had in the last century... I think you'll find they affect the climate a lot more than than man-made CO2.
It can cancel it ... for a couple of years. Then of course when the ash and sulfur falls out of the atmosphere, temperatures go right back up. We don't get the biggest volcanic eruption in a century as an annual event.
FFS - does anybody here have reasoning skills beyond a 3rd grade level?
Nice attempt to distract attention from your lack of knowledge on the subject by switching topics. Back to the point: Volcanoes are not significant sources of methane or water vapor either.
Methane released by human activities is a significant problem.
Water vapor has a half life in the atmosphere of a couple of days. It's levels are an *effect*, not a cause.
(Of course I should have taken my own advice, saved futile effort, and ignored your post.)
I am sure that recent volcanic activity alone has affected the global climate far more than human activity.
Well, you're DEAD WRONG. Volcanoes emit about 1% as much CO2 as human activities. Look it up. The main effect of volcanoes is *cooling* caused by ash, which only lasts a couple of years max.
Every time you see someone mention volcanoes as the culprit in a discussion about GW, you can be sure that they don't have a frigging clue what they're talking about, and everything they post can be safely ignored.
god no, why do you asset that life is imperative?
Because each of us exists as one location in 4-dimensional spacetime. Our existence is a single thread moving uniformly forward through time, attending to one task at a time. Almost nothing in the real wold is stateless or immutable. Our brains evolved to deal with this reality.
but apart, remember programming isn't something natural of the human, is learned.
When I looked at the first BASIC program listing I encountered almost 40 years ago, I immediately understood what it meant. I didn't have to learn anything to relate to it. It's a list of steps to take, just like we do every day in the physical world.
Most CS students struggle for a long time just to get a grasp on recursion, much less the various high-powered concepts from functional languages.
Or most of us didn't learn to program in a functional language, so our brains are used to thinking imperatively. Or were you born understanding code?
Our brains think imperatively because life is imperative.
Imperative languages dominate computing because the real world is imperative.
Anyhow, don't we only get some trivial % of oil from the Middle East, with most of it coming from much closer (hello, Canada)?
That's like saying you don't buy electricity from the power company because of the fact that the electrons that arrive at your house aren't the same ones that left the power station.
Oil is a fungible commodity. If they stopped producing it in the Middle East, then the countries closer to them would start buying up the Canadian and South American oil we now consume, driving up the price we pay by hundreds of dollars per barrel. That's why we prop up Middle East producers.
Thats because you're running unoptimized shitty software on it. .
Most of the software ever written is shitty and unoptimized. Where do you get the idea that that's going to change?
You won't need to ask web sites to re-code for mobile/arm devices - if performance is insufficient and they lose hits because performance is too bad, that will be motive enough.
The proliferation of bloated Flash content on the web is strong evidence that your theory is false. (For example: go to any restaurant chain to look at their menu. In theory, you want a couple of kilobytes of information to find the price of a few entrees. In reality, you get to wait half a minute while megabytes of animations download before you see even one hamburger basket.)
Even if your theory were valid, it would only apply to sites that have a large proportion of phone users. That has little correlation with business usage, which is largely in-house intranet stuff. That's generally even more shitty and unoptimized than average, and fixing it would usually cost a good deal more than the numbers I mentioned above.
When ATT went to push button phones, they intentionally put the numbers backwards from 10 key adding machines everyone used back then. Then didn't want the fast typers to outpace their new phone system and punch the numbers in to fast.
I doubt it. *MY* unverified explanation that I remember hearing somewhere is: They put the one in the upper left to make it more similar to the familiar rotary dial, where the numbers increase clockwise starting from upper left.
Anyway, is there a calculator on the market that has a phone-style rotary dial? Now that's something I might buy.
A few dollars a month for a desktop...
A few thousand dollars a month for an office full of desktops?
We have an "underpowered" Intel Atom-based mini desktop in the kitchen as a terminal, which is silent and uses negligible power.
While it would be usable for an office worker, it *is* noticeably slower than my standard Athlon computers. Just about every real-world web page or application launch takes several seconds longer than the normal PCs. Over the course of a month, all these little delays would almost certainly add up to more lost productivity than the additional power cost, especially if the normal PCs had an effective sleep mode that actually gets used when the computer is idle.
(For example, if the average user does 100 things per day that take an extra 3 seconds each, that's 5 minutes per day, or more than an hour lost time over a typical month. Even with low-wage employees, with overhead that lost time could cost the employer well over $20/month, enough to buy power for a couple of standard PCs going full tilt 24/7.)
Of course, you could try to convince every website operator in the world to recode their sites to not be full of bloated Javascript (starting with the site you're reading this on), but good luck with that.
Why does it need bubbles? Can't an X86 keep its other ALUs busy simultaneously doing other instructions nearby that sequence using standard register renaming and opcode reordering techniques?
At any rate, from what I've read it's the branch prediction that really bottlenecks performance with today's deep pipelines. The advanced runtime branch prediction in the latest CPUs (which can see and react to the actual data at hand) just plain outperforms static compile-time branch analysis.
When I saw this article and the direction the computer industry is headed, I thought: "RMS must be spinning in his grave." (...And he's not even dead.)
Ok, show me a reference.
Not to a $29 proprietary docking port adapter kludge, but to an actual USB connector on the iPad.
Thx.
It's like the people that were going off about how iPad's don't need USB functionality, insinuating that there is no point to having USB on the tablet. Uh, what? Who could possibly see more connectivity or functionality as a bad thing?
Connectivity is good, but not with a churlish port like USB, which is so often used by the hoi polloi.
We need to have the patience to wait while Apple develops a proprietary "iPort", which will provide exclusive connectivity to approved devices that meet the elite standards of the iPad and its users.
PC World is published by IDG. Ziff Davis published PCMag.
Confusingly, ZDNet isn't run by Ziff Davis either. (It's run by CNet, which is now owned by CBS).
I still appreciate Ziff Davis for one thing: In the days before the WWW or even Minesweeper, when things got boring at work, a good way to kill time was to grab a copy of PCWeek from the break room. I could spend a good part of a morning reading it cover to cover.
(Of course, times have changed, and now everyone can kill time by posting their very own pontifications for the world to see.)
My favorite example of computing (in)efficiency is the USAF's SAGE bomber tracking computers introduced in the 1950s. These vacuum tube machines had CPU horsepower probably in the same ballpark as an 80286, but could draw more than 2 megawatts of power each. They didn't decommission the last one until the 1980s.
Ok, ok... as soon as I hit the submit button, I saw my mistake and thought "Cue the 'you forgot the ++ comments' in 3, 2, 1".
And It's true: There's a bug in the program. It wouldn't work as intended. On this site, I can't go back and edit it. The flaw is cast in stone. All I can do now is express my regret for making the mistake and carry on with my life as best I can.
Microsoft's consistent marketing strategy for Windows over the past quarter century can be summed up in a few lines:
Yes, and the fact that the US has the worth diet for the typical person and the highest obesity rates has NOTHING to do with a lower life expectancy
Part of the job of a healthcare system is addressing those issues before they cause big problems. Once again, in the US we get epic failure at twice the cost of other countries. (We do a great job treating erectile dysfunction, though.)
AND that you can buy insurance on your own directly from companies
You're deluded. Try buying full coverage individual insurance if you or any member of your family has *any* health problems. You can't, because there is NO free market solution for that.
I assume that you support Obamacare, because it does exactly what you want: Make people responsible for buying insurance. Am I wrong?
You're kidding, right? Regulations are NOT part of free market capitalism.
And yet regulations are necessary.
So, as I suspected, true free market capitalism is impossible. Thus, a faith-based belief in it as a solution to all problems is irrational and counterproductive.
If by "crappier results" you mean "the most advanced medicines and treatments" and "thousands of people fly to the US for surgeries that they can't get in their 'superior' country with government run health care", then sure - you're right.
Yet despite this, people on average die sooner here than most other developed countries. You have to look at bottom line results, nut just anecdotes about miracle treatments for a few lucky individuals. The bottom line here is: FAIL.
As you point out, our healthcare system looks like 4-star hotels in Cuba: only wealthy foreign tourists seem to be able to afford it.
Actually, if in fact hearing aids are overpriced, it's only because of interference in the market by the government, making it more difficult for people to get into the market with regulations.
Thanks for proving my point.
Yeah, we're "willing to pay" them. We pay twice as much as any other country for healthcare, and we get crappier results than most of them, "doctor shortage" or not. That's a real free market success story.
Liberty, responsibility and sound economic policy - My ass.
An education in medicine isn't cheap. Nor is running an operation. If it can be done cheaper, someone will find a way. There are enough doctors out there that collusion is impossible.
It's amazing how you free market fanatics manage to cling to your faith-based beliefs in the face of all the real-world situations that conclusively disprove them.
DOS didn't have gettimeofday()
You didn't need gettimeofday() in DOS, because you could just use "in al, 40h" to directly read the (14.31818 / 12) MHz timer.