Nearly all of the commercially produced hydrogen today comes from cracking natural gas.
The other potential problem is that H2 is not terribly efficient. It takes more energy to crack the hydrogen from whatever molecule it's in than it produces when allowed to react in a fuel cell. When you look at production efficiency from the well to the tank in your car, diesel is 90% efficient, gasoline 80%, methanol 70%, and H2 60%. If you look at the complete energy chain, efficiencies of conventially fueled piston engines are about equal to H2 fueled fuel cells. If the prophecies come true, and we really do start running out of dino fuels, we'll potentially be wasting a lot of energy by using H2.
The question is, can someone come up with a way to produce commercial quantities of H2 in a truly 'clean' manner?
Yep, NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) worked hard to keep the FCC from requiring stations to use the full spectrum for TV. The rest can go to paging, interactive services, etc. In other words, free spectrum for the broadcasters. This was all decided several years back, and those of who read the trade mags at the time (and who didn't work for big broadcasters) were kinda pissed....
Agent Orange: What's your point? A number of chemical companies produced Agent Orange. The only thing possibly wrong with it is that a dioxin can contaminate it during the production process. When produced, no one knew anything was terribly dangerous about it. And we still don't have much evidence that there is anything terribly dangerous about it.
Roundup: It's a herbicide. It's one of the things that allows the U.S. to produce the large quantities of food that we do.
The fact that the U.S. government uses/used these chemicals doesn't really have any bearing on whether or not Monsanto/Solutia is good or evil...
the craziest part is that the people who the company terrorized are going to have to reach into their own pockets via taxes to federally bail out the clean-up. why not make the company pay? because it would go under?
Uh, the company _will_ be paying for cleanup. Read the article:
Today, Solutia is negotiating a final Anniston cleanup plan; EPA officials say the company has been aggressive in pressing for lower standards but generally cooperative.
And even if they didn't want to pay, federal laws allow the EPA to go after the responsible parties and force them to pay.
Re:There was this hot coffee incident, you know
on
Gift Card Hacking
·
· Score: 1
Plus, McDonalds acted like the Heartless-Corporation when the woman contacted them. Rather than helping her, they basically told her 'too bad' and 'go away'. It was because of this treatment that she took them to court, and the jury decided on the award that they did.
More details on the case:
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
There's no inherent problem with identifying the account on the receipt. The problem is with a system where simple knowledge of the existance of the account is presumed to imply authorization to charge to it. Unfortunately, it's this which is hopelessly broke.
Ahh, but even when the full account number isn't sufficient to provide authorization, printing the full number on a receipt is still a security risk. A few years ago, ATM machines routinely printed full ATM card numbers on receipts. Many people toss these receipts at the nearest trash receptacle. Crooks would set up in, say, a shopping mall, where there was lots of traffic and a good vantage point. One person would watch people punch in their PINs, and another would swoop in and recover the discarded receipt. After harvesting this info, a bunch of blank cards and a magstripe machine were all that was needed to suck accounts dry.
Because a large part of the cost is the local loop. More than 1/3 of our T-1 cost is the local loop.
There's surplus fiber running all over the country, but unless you're in an area where the backbone providers have run fiber to the buildings, the local telco still has you by the short ones as far as getting hooked up.
Well, SBC Communications is the monster formerly known as Southwestern Bell, which was one of the regional "Baby Bells" that was formed when the feds forced the breakup of the Bell System monopoly. This lead to the regional providers, which have since merged back into a handful of big companies, and an AT&T that had competition in the LD business from MCI, Sprint, etc.
Federal law was supposed to push the regional providers to open their markets to competition. The baby bells, which desperately want to offer their own LD service, had to open their markets to competitors before they would be allowed to offer LD. (ugh..run-on sentence) Anyway, while most large markets have some competition for business service, there isn't much for residential service. However, the regulators, in their wisdom, have been allowing SBC to offer LD service now, even though they've done little to open up their markets.
Uh, sorry, but my answer is exactly the same as you have given. However, I worked through an EXAMPLE of the problem to show that the answer is correct. A bunch of previous posters had given the wrong answer, so I ran through the example.
While you've given the correct answer, you didn't show how you arrive there, so as far as anyone can tell, you made a wild-ass guess (or copied the answer out of the back of the book without showing your work).
And sorry, but my posting a thorough example shows nothing about my abstract thinking abilities.
Let's run through things, with a couple of changes to keep thing straight. Let's say we have Container A, which has 10 gallons of red paint, and Container B, which has 10 gallons of blue.
In our first step, we transfer 10% of the blue paint into Container A:
Container A
10 gal red
1 gal blue
Container B
0 gal red
9 gal blue
We stir Container A, and we can say it has the following makeup:
Container A
10/11 x 11 gal red
1/11 x 11 gal blue
We now take a gallon of this mixture and transfer it to Container B, so we have the following:
Container A
10/11 x 10 gal red
1/11 x 10 gal blue
Container B
10/11 x 1 gal red
1/11 x 1 gal blue
9 gal blue
There are a number of ways to do the math from here, but it boils to them both being equally pure:
Well, as another St. Louisan, I can say that KDHX does a pretty decent job.
Now, what I can't figure out about all of this is how the RIAA has _any_ say in this whatsoever. The sub-$1000 fees mentioned in the Salon article are paid to ASCAP and BMI, the major groups which represent music composers. A college or community radio station only pays these reduced royalties to ASCAP and BMI for a 'performance license' to broadcast a composition. The RIAA has no say whatsoever in what you broadcast, and don't get any money from the station. How they're able to suddenly extort cash simply because you're streaming audio over the net as well is beyond me.
I don't understand what is going on at all.What exactly does (did?) Excite@home own?
Excite@Home was a combined company that ran the Excite portal, and the @Home ISP.
Did they do business with At&T, or with consumers directly?
With AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Charter, and a number of other cable companies.
What is AT&T@Home?
AT&T@Home was @Home service provided through AT&T to their broadband customers
And At&T Broadband is presumably the cable TV operation of AT&T?
Yes, along with digital phone service and internet access.
Think of @Home as an ISP, like Mindspring, AOL, or whatever. Think of the cable company as the phone company. With a standard dialup ISP, you use the phone company to connect to your ISP. With high speed cable access, you used your cable provider for a dedicated connection to @Home's service.
If you decide to change dialup ISPs, you change the number you dial. In this situation, the cable companies are unplugging their connection to @Home, and plugging into a different provider's network.
It doesn't take that much in the way of smarts on the receiver to convert between projections, spheroids, etc. The US$100 units can handle this kind of thing.
Good point. But I think most of us have had enough experience with the (mis)handling of boxes by UPS that we can easily believe the claims. As others have pointed out, he probably didn't do the best job of packing his stuff, but UPS is brutal.
Nearly every company I deal with ships via FedEx just because it's more likely to arrive without the box being caved in.
Well, yes, and most UPS distribution center employees are around 17 years old, or at least act like it.
When you live near a decently-sized UPS distribution center, you get inundated with radio and print advertising looking for people. Granted, a lot of these people are taking advantage of the UPS benefits to help them go to school, so they cycle out of the job pretty quick, but they still must have a tremendous turnover.
But their ads tout what a great place it is to work....there's a study area, basketball, foosball, etc. I guess it's up to the employees to pick a package to use as a basketball...:)
Ahh, but you have to remember that being profitable isn't good enough. You have to have double-digit growth in order to keep your stock price going up.
HP has a giant cash cow in the printer business. But printers aren't very buzzword compliant, and don't give analysts anything interesting to talk about. So the money coming in from printers is used to finance whatever projects Carly thinks will give the stock price a boost.
Well, you're using a slightly different definition of Scientific Creationism. I'm speaking of those who come up with "scientific" evidence to "prove" that the literal creation stories are true. They sound convincing, but don't hold any water when held to the light of science.
Boy, if we have more accurate techniques, the Scientific Creationism community is going to have to come up with new excuses to explain away why things test older than they claim the Earth to be...
I can verify the second statement. I was arranging for my then-employer to donate some systems to a charity, and one thing they wanted to be absolutely certain of is that the charity wouldn't be coming back to them and asking for support....
From the article: "Charities, she said, have to have site licenses or get them. Charities can make use of operating systems no earlier than Windows 98 and can receive only a limited number of copies of Windows or other software."
The way it reads to me is as though there is a law on how charities can use MS software. Even if I have 10 PCs with legit copies of Win98 or NT donated, I can use them. Same thing if I have 100 donated.
The statement implies that I can only have a certain number of licenses donated....
So the article mentions that charities need to have a site license and need to be running at least Win98. Uh, sez who?
If, as a charity, I'm using 10 PCs, all of which were (properly) donated with properly licensed copies of Windows 3.1, or Windows 95, I'm perfectly legal...
Slashdot Mirror
Nearly all of the commercially produced hydrogen today comes from cracking natural gas.
The other potential problem is that H2 is not terribly efficient. It takes more energy to crack the hydrogen from whatever molecule it's in than it produces when allowed to react in a fuel cell. When you look at production efficiency from the well to the tank in your car, diesel is 90% efficient, gasoline 80%, methanol 70%, and H2 60%. If you look at the complete energy chain, efficiencies of conventially fueled piston engines are about equal to H2 fueled fuel cells. If the prophecies come true, and we really do start running out of dino fuels, we'll potentially be wasting a lot of energy by using H2.
The question is, can someone come up with a way to produce commercial quantities of H2 in a truly 'clean' manner?
No, this wasn't the Supreme Court in this instance, but they did already uphold this particular court's ruling that Indy's law was unconstitutional.
g am es/2001/10/29/scotus-games.htm
I submitted the story at the end of October, but apparently it wasn't deemed important....
http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/review/
Yep, NAB (National Association of Broadcasters) worked hard to keep the FCC from requiring stations to use the full spectrum for TV. The rest can go to paging, interactive services, etc. In other words, free spectrum for the broadcasters. This was all decided several years back, and those of who read the trade mags at the time (and who didn't work for big broadcasters) were kinda pissed....
Agent Orange: What's your point? A number of chemical companies produced Agent Orange. The only thing possibly wrong with it is that a dioxin can contaminate it during the production process. When produced, no one knew anything was terribly dangerous about it. And we still don't have much evidence that there is anything terribly dangerous about it.
Roundup: It's a herbicide. It's one of the things that allows the U.S. to produce the large quantities of food that we do.
The fact that the U.S. government uses/used these chemicals doesn't really have any bearing on whether or not Monsanto/Solutia is good or evil...
Uh, the company _will_ be paying for cleanup. Read the article:
And even if they didn't want to pay, federal laws allow the EPA to go after the responsible parties and force them to pay.
Plus, McDonalds acted like the Heartless-Corporation when the woman contacted them. Rather than helping her, they basically told her 'too bad' and 'go away'. It was because of this treatment that she took them to court, and the jury decided on the award that they did.
More details on the case:
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm
Ahh, but even when the full account number isn't sufficient to provide authorization, printing the full number on a receipt is still a security risk. A few years ago, ATM machines routinely printed full ATM card numbers on receipts. Many people toss these receipts at the nearest trash receptacle. Crooks would set up in, say, a shopping mall, where there was lots of traffic and a good vantage point. One person would watch people punch in their PINs, and another would swoop in and recover the discarded receipt. After harvesting this info, a bunch of blank cards and a magstripe machine were all that was needed to suck accounts dry.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/treeview/default. asp?url=/technet/security/bulletin/MS01-059.asp
And as the bulletin states, it also impacts 98 and ME users if they have the Universal Plug and Play service installed and running.
Because a large part of the cost is the local loop. More than 1/3 of our T-1 cost is the local loop.
There's surplus fiber running all over the country, but unless you're in an area where the backbone providers have run fiber to the buildings, the local telco still has you by the short ones as far as getting hooked up.
Well, SBC Communications is the monster formerly known as Southwestern Bell, which was one of the regional "Baby Bells" that was formed when the feds forced the breakup of the Bell System monopoly. This lead to the regional providers, which have since merged back into a handful of big companies, and an AT&T that had competition in the LD business from MCI, Sprint, etc.
Federal law was supposed to push the regional providers to open their markets to competition. The baby bells, which desperately want to offer their own LD service, had to open their markets to competitors before they would be allowed to offer LD. (ugh..run-on sentence) Anyway, while most large markets have some competition for business service, there isn't much for residential service. However, the regulators, in their wisdom, have been allowing SBC to offer LD service now, even though they've done little to open up their markets.
Uh, sorry, but my answer is exactly the same as you have given. However, I worked through an EXAMPLE of the problem to show that the answer is correct. A bunch of previous posters had given the wrong answer, so I ran through the example.
While you've given the correct answer, you didn't show how you arrive there, so as far as anyone can tell, you made a wild-ass guess (or copied the answer out of the back of the book without showing your work).
And sorry, but my posting a thorough example shows nothing about my abstract thinking abilities.
In our first step, we transfer 10% of the blue paint into Container A:
We stir Container A, and we can say it has the following makeup:
We now take a gallon of this mixture and transfer it to Container B, so we have the following: There are a number of ways to do the math from here, but it boils to them both being equally pure:Well, as another St. Louisan, I can say that KDHX does a pretty decent job.
Now, what I can't figure out about all of this is how the RIAA has _any_ say in this whatsoever. The sub-$1000 fees mentioned in the Salon article are paid to ASCAP and BMI, the major groups which represent music composers. A college or community radio station only pays these reduced royalties to ASCAP and BMI for a 'performance license' to broadcast a composition. The RIAA has no say whatsoever in what you broadcast, and don't get any money from the station. How they're able to suddenly extort cash simply because you're streaming audio over the net as well is beyond me.
I don't understand what is going on at all.What exactly does (did?) Excite@home own?
Excite@Home was a combined company that ran the Excite portal, and the @Home ISP.
Did they do business with At&T, or with consumers directly?
With AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Charter, and a number of other cable companies.
What is AT&T@Home?
AT&T@Home was @Home service provided through AT&T to their broadband customers
And At&T Broadband is presumably the cable TV operation of AT&T?
Yes, along with digital phone service and internet access.
Think of @Home as an ISP, like Mindspring, AOL, or whatever. Think of the cable company as the phone company. With a standard dialup ISP, you use the phone company to connect to your ISP. With high speed cable access, you used your cable provider for a dedicated connection to @Home's service.
If you decide to change dialup ISPs, you change the number you dial. In this situation, the cable companies are unplugging their connection to @Home, and plugging into a different provider's network.
Neither the stories, nor the CP/M site referenced in them state anything about DR-DOS being freed...
It doesn't take that much in the way of smarts on the receiver to convert between projections, spheroids, etc. The US$100 units can handle this kind of thing.
Good point. But I think most of us have had enough experience with the (mis)handling of boxes by UPS that we can easily believe the claims. As others have pointed out, he probably didn't do the best job of packing his stuff, but UPS is brutal.
Nearly every company I deal with ships via FedEx just because it's more likely to arrive without the box being caved in.
Well, yes, and most UPS distribution center employees are around 17 years old, or at least act like it.
:)
When you live near a decently-sized UPS distribution center, you get inundated with radio and print advertising looking for people. Granted, a lot of these people are taking advantage of the UPS benefits to help them go to school, so they cycle out of the job pretty quick, but they still must have a tremendous turnover.
But their ads tout what a great place it is to work....there's a study area, basketball, foosball, etc. I guess it's up to the employees to pick a package to use as a basketball...
Ahh, but you have to remember that being profitable isn't good enough. You have to have double-digit growth in order to keep your stock price going up.
HP has a giant cash cow in the printer business. But printers aren't very buzzword compliant, and don't give analysts anything interesting to talk about. So the money coming in from printers is used to finance whatever projects Carly thinks will give the stock price a boost.
It's either:
a) A devious plot to increase revenue by getting a kickback on each pay-to-view
b) A way to show how many people comment on Slashdot without bothering to read the linked material...
Well, you're using a slightly different definition of Scientific Creationism. I'm speaking of those who come up with "scientific" evidence to "prove" that the literal creation stories are true. They sound convincing, but don't hold any water when held to the light of science.
See the Talk Origins web site....
Boy, if we have more accurate techniques, the Scientific Creationism community is going to have to come up with new excuses to explain away why things test older than they claim the Earth to be...
I can verify the second statement. I was arranging for my then-employer to donate some systems to a charity, and one thing they wanted to be absolutely certain of is that the charity wouldn't be coming back to them and asking for support....
From the article: "Charities, she said, have to have site licenses or get them. Charities can make use of operating systems no earlier than Windows 98 and can receive only a limited number of copies of Windows or other software."
The way it reads to me is as though there is a law on how charities can use MS software. Even if I have 10 PCs with legit copies of Win98 or NT donated, I can use them. Same thing if I have 100 donated.
The statement implies that I can only have a certain number of licenses donated....
So the article mentions that charities need to have a site license and need to be running at least Win98. Uh, sez who?
If, as a charity, I'm using 10 PCs, all of which were (properly) donated with properly licensed copies of Windows 3.1, or Windows 95, I'm perfectly legal...