"Anyone know how many more years they can squeeze hot stuff out of the Alpha? And is there any margin for cutting the price a bit?"
The current roadmap shows an additional 25 years, taking the chip up to EV12 (currently EV6). As far as pricing goes, it's simple: They cost a lot now because Compaqs goal is not market proliferation, but exacting the highest possible profit per chip that they can (IIRC, in Economics there's a couple equations you use to set a products price. One of them maximizes sales, the maximizes profits).
Also, look at how the chips are currently being fabbed, in.25um 6-layer CMOS. This isn't particularly asonishing, and the chips are currently 225mm2. If I were in charge, I'd have IBM (who is already fabbing them) fab in there CMOS-9S process. This is a.13um, Silicon-on-Insulator, Copper interconnects, low-k dialectric process that can be used in up to 9 layers. The chip would now be ~ 78mm2. That's a smaller than anything else in the desktop arena and would dramatically shave prices. It would also ramp the clock up to well over 1GHz, probably around 1.6GHz, and would consume under 90W (probably around 70W).
Considering that tick for tick the EV6 is twice as fast as a Thunderbird, anyone want to comment on how fast a 1.6GHz Alpha would be?
Then you could be like Samsung and make a 760-based MB for it, or go a step better and make an nForce-based MB for it. Of course, if you changed the packaging from 587-pin to 462-pin (and all these extras are power & ground, which can be trimmed if done right) then you wouldn't have to make any special MBs for it, just make a special BIOS to use it in any current/forthcoming TBird MBs.
It's this simple. You have the right to free speech. You do not have the right to be heard. I can put a sign on my lawn that says "no soliciting" and you can't stand out there shouting your wares at me. Somehow I am not able to do this with my telephone, unless I buy a box from the phone company and pay a monthly fee, or my net connection, unless I setup spam filters, which you can't expect the common person to even know what is.
The simple fact of the matter is that when you show up on someone's doorstep to sell something, call them on the phone to sell something, and spam them to sell something, you are invading that persons privacy.
By all means, say whatever you want. But when I want to go shopping, I'll visit your store, your website, or call you.
I find your post offensive. My being a Libertarian has nothing to do with some desire to be a non-conformist, a strong group identity, feeling smug about who I am and others aren't, or any of the other drivel you offer.
You don't put inane labels like that on others. Why do you do it to me?
I don't feel superior to you or others in the Dem or GOP. I think you may be misguided on certain issues, the same as you feel about me.
Before you espouse that the "attraction" of being a Libertarian is its "extraordinarily simplistic and rigid ideology" perhaps you should research the subject a little. I recommend reading "What it Means to be a Libertarian" by Charles Murray for the basics. If you want something more indepth, try "The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith.
It's too bad you listen to what reviewers say. You seem to be missing the point of movies in general, and comedies in particular: to have fun. I saw it, I thought it was really cool. The "It's a Ghostbusters knock-off because it was directed by Ivan Reitman" is a load of bull. You can play the similarities game with every movie out there. Does that stop you or anyone else from going?
This is such incredibly old news. The story was in Reader's Digest (?) a few years back. I personally know this guy. We served aboard CVN-65 USS Enterprise together. I was nuke mechanic, this guy worked in Air Department (as an ILARTZ/LENS tech that's the carrier's landing lights that the pilots call "the ball") w/ my best friend. The guy is a complete fuck up. He's a racist and a drug addict (and was part of one of the largest drug rings in US Naval history) as well as being prone to stealing government property and selling it. He was such a fuck up that they booted his ass down to Deck Dept with all the Bosuns. Complete waste of perfectly good genetic material.
"Repeat after me: The Internet is not just in the USA!"
Now repeat after me: The Internet was created by the US military as a communications net to see whether or not the government could be run from NORAD in the event of nuclear war.
Do not take this to mean that I think that means the US government should have total say, the largest portion of input, or even any input as to how the Internet of today and tomorrow is regulated. Just remember where it came from and show a little respect.
"He lived in an unsafe part of town and had carried the gun for self defense."
"If you have unsafe parts in your town then do something about it. It is not normal.
If you dont like the way the police acts then do something about it. You employ them.
And no, giving out guns to senile old men is not going to make the world a safer place."
What an obvious response. If a neighborgood turns to crap, it must be the fault of the law-abiding citizens that have the misfortune of living there. Since your blessed Raw Deal does such a fantastic job of taking care of the senior population I suppose you would expect him to use those huge paychecks to move? Sure.
I never said he was senile, you did. Congratulations on insulting the entire retired community in one shot, I'm really proud of you.
"Guns don't kill people; people kill people; so here is no need for guns."
There was a WW2 vet who had his gun confiscated because the state felt he was too old to have a conceal and carry permit. He lived in an unsafe part of town and had carried the gun for self defense. The Police did little patrolling in the area and refused to provide him with an escort (I find it interesting to note that the Police can have slogans like "To protect and to serve" when it has been established in court that they have no responsibility to do so.). One night while walking home from his shop, he was mugged, beaten, and murdered.
The State took away his basic human right to defend himself, then refused to defend him since he was no longer allowed. Then he was murdered. I'm sure his family will be happy to know that you don't think he should've been allowed to defend himself either.
"They demanded that emperorhood (wihtout any politacal power) should remain in place.
After the bombings peace was made and emperorhood was not abolished"
You are misinformed. It is quite well documented that the Japanese government was appalled when MacArthur presented his plan to them, which allowed them to keep their Emperor, but with less political power than the Queen of England. The Japanese wanted the Emperor to keep all of his power.
Don't forget, MacArthur was doing the Japanese a favor by allowing them to keep the Emperor. He went out of his way to ensure that no evidence of the Emperor's hand in any of the events leading up to WW2 ever came to light. The Emperor was known for richly rewarding his most rutheless generals during the Chinese campaigns. During the war crimes trial, Tojo actually stated that none of the generals would have proceeded if they had not been given the go ahead from the Emperor. (If you think Tojo said this to protect his own skin, then you have no understanding of the General, the Bushido code, or anything else regarding Japanese psychology)
Fortunately, MacArthur's staff was able to overcome this statement and keep the Emperor alive and on his thrown.
And everyone needs to get off their high horse about the US dropping two bombs on the Japanese. Their was no single reason for doing, but many. The casualty estimates of ground campaign on Japan itself were 1 million US soldiers dead. The US has lost only ~450K dead in all of the wars its been in (Revolutionary to present) combined. Does anyone here realise what is actually required to conquer a city? The Japanese are not the French, they wouldn't roll over just because the lost one city.
Also don't forget, both the Japanese and the Germans were working on nuclear weapons of their own, and were within 6-12 months of having them ready. You might think a little differently had the US been bombed.
Furthermore, had Hitler waited 6 months for his next generation of Hydrazine turbine subs to be ready, he probably would have won. (how do you fight stop a sub that dives deeper than yours and can outrun your torpedoes?)
"There is no good political reason for this inhumane brutal killing of 80000 civian person. Only reasons I see are militarian. US wanted to scare shit out of the world or something like that"
At one point in time the US and the USSR were across the negotiating table from each other. Things were not going well. The USSR rep says, "We'd like to take this moment to remind the United States that they are the only nation to ever use a nuclear weapon against another nation."
You're going to have to face the sad fact that there is no perfect solution. If you're going to be terrified that someone will still the vast amounts of Plutonium (right, because we wouldn't bother trying to guard it) then you need to move to some place in Africa. Be sure to send post cards.
The use of breeder reactors works just fine in France.
"I'm not sure where you're getting such incorrect information from. France has had several problems with their breeder reactors; they had to shut down their Superphenix reactor, the largest breeder reactor in the world, was shut down permanently because of the constant problems it was having. The Japanese have had similar problems."
And no other type of fuel has problems associated with it?! That's just naive. You've never seen an oil field on fire, have you. I have, it's not pretty.
Please share your solution. I'm sure the world's entrpeneur's would love to hear it. Solar and wind power, right? Sure, visit CA sometime. They make nice *supplements* but will never suffice.
Proud owner of '91 Porsche 928GT (as well as my TDI Jetta). 0-60 in 6, top end 180mph, I've had it up to 165.
Re:My take on the death of the Trek series...
on
Voyager Eulogy
·
· Score: 1
I stand corrected. IMHO though, of all the incarnations that ST has seen, the universe used in the Star Fleet Battles war game are the best. It is more closely based on what Roddenbuy wanted then any other incarnation. It is also by far the most consistent. Just about everything from TNG was a ripoff from SFB: The 'Q' instead of the Organians, the Ferrangi instead of the Orion Pirates (which were so much cooler I can't even begin to describe), the list goes on and on. A much broader range of characters in the varios stories told, etc. And last but not least, the General War, a galactic wide Civil War with a dozen major participating races. Oh, yeah, almost forgot about the Andromedan invasion. Way more cool than the Borg.
Re:My take on the death of the Trek series...
on
Voyager Eulogy
·
· Score: 1
They don't necessarily need to put the franchise on hold, they just need to offer a story that people want. This new series "Enterprise" sounds completely lame. I read the character bios and think they're remaking TOS, but with new special effects. Add to that, IIRC, The original Constitution class Enterprise was captained by Kirk senior, then to Pike, then to Kirk junior. So who the heck is this new guy? There was a pretty serious movement in the ST fan base to have the next ST series be about the voyages of the Excelsior under Capt Sulu. George Takei was all for it. Now *that* would be a cool series. Too bad Berman's a moron.
TNG had its moments. DS9 was completely lame. The notion that Star Fleet would guard the entrance of a stable wormhole to a known hostile quadrant with anything other than a starbase with it's own fleet compliment is assinine. Suggesting that they would *let* Bajor (or whoever) guard it with a base station is so far beyond any semblance of rational thought that it completely destroys any credibility the series may have had.
You obviously have no clue. The use of breeder reactors works just fine in France. You don't hear anyone bitching about it there. The reason it's a problem in the US is because 1)ignorant louts such as youself that don't bother to take the time to research a topic before spouting off, and 2)no two plants in the US are the same, therefore R&D costs go up, and the various regulatory commitees leap all over it to see if it's up to spec, causing costs to skyrocket. Again, the French model is better: build two complimentary breeder models next door to each other, repeat.
I know just what you mean. I really, really wanted a Quattro. Didn't even bother me that it would cost $12k more. But I don't particularly *need* AWD in the SW. And the almost 50mpg really sold me. Amusingly enough, the Diesel prices down here aren't changing, but the gas prices are soaring. I now pay $1.53/gal, compared to $1.65/gal for gas. I love this car.
Rudolf Diesel's mentallity in designing the Diesel engine was the exact opposite of the mentallity everyone else was exhibiting. This includes Thomas Edison, who Diesel worked with for a while. Edison's philosophy was to just keep plugging away until they came up with something that worked. Diesel's philosophy was to look at an ideal Rankine Cycle/heat engine, and to try to get as close to it as possible. Incidentally, don't imply that the only engines in American cars are gasoline, or that only American cars use gasoline. I've travelled to 14 countries outside of the US (all in Europe & MidEast), and everyone ese uses gasoline as well.
I whole-heartedly agree, except for the "VW if you're on a budget..." I paid ~$21K for my '01 VW Jetta TDI. It's the most expensive car in its class, by several thousand. But I love it and I actually get better milage than the sticker says, even with a full load. The big reason Diesel has never been real popular in the US is because during the mid-70's(?) GM(?) tried to make a Diesel car. Anyone who knows anything about cars knows that the typical compression ratio for gasoline engine is ~11-14:1. Diesel's require ~18:1 compression. So what happens when you build a Diesel engine that uses gasoline engine quality parts? That's right, things blow up. So because GM has a bunch of morons in the penny-pinching department, Diesel's got a bad rap.
Frankly, I don't give a rip if my TDI Jetta puts out more particulate pollutants than a conventional car. I average almost 50mpg. Compare that w/ some jack ass in an SUV getting 15mpg. Which one of us is harming the environment more? Which one of is using up more natural resources?
And considering that a Diesel is basically a "Mr.Fusion" (Back to the Future 2), meaning that it'll run on just about any Carbon bi-product, the engines would probably burn cleaner if the refineries would bother to refine it to a level beyond Kerosene.
And that they have the nerve to charge as much for this un-refined Petroleum just pisses me off. Supply and demand, right? Guess what, if it wasn't for Semi trucks, every city in the US would be out of food in under 2 weeks. How's that for supply and demand.
Friggin' Oil companies. Damn OPEC.
And for all you who hate GW, just remember, Gore helped open up the US Strategic Oil Reserve to a select few Oil companies, including one he owns an awful lot of stock in (no conflict of interests here, move along). Read his book to find out what else he thinks of energy issues. Try $3.50 at the pump for gasoline. And how about wanting to ban the internal combustion engine? How he managed to get the support of the United Auto Workers is beyond me.
Slashdot Mirror
"Anyone know how many more years they can squeeze hot stuff out of the Alpha? And is there any margin for cutting the price a bit?"
.25um 6-layer CMOS. This isn't particularly asonishing, and the chips are currently 225mm2. If I were in charge, I'd have IBM (who is already fabbing them) fab in there CMOS-9S process. This is a .13um, Silicon-on-Insulator, Copper interconnects, low-k dialectric process that can be used in up to 9 layers. The chip would now be ~ 78mm2. That's a smaller than anything else in the desktop arena and would dramatically shave prices. It would also ramp the clock up to well over 1GHz, probably around 1.6GHz, and would consume under 90W (probably around 70W).
The current roadmap shows an additional 25 years, taking the chip up to EV12 (currently EV6). As far as pricing goes, it's simple: They cost a lot now because Compaqs goal is not market proliferation, but exacting the highest possible profit per chip that they can (IIRC, in Economics there's a couple equations you use to set a products price. One of them maximizes sales, the maximizes profits).
Also, look at how the chips are currently being fabbed, in
Considering that tick for tick the EV6 is twice as fast as a Thunderbird, anyone want to comment on how fast a 1.6GHz Alpha would be?
Then you could be like Samsung and make a 760-based MB for it, or go a step better and make an nForce-based MB for it. Of course, if you changed the packaging from 587-pin to 462-pin (and all these extras are power & ground, which can be trimmed if done right) then you wouldn't have to make any special MBs for it, just make a special BIOS to use it in any current/forthcoming TBird MBs.
And run AlphaLinux.
That's just what I would do if I was in charge.
It's this simple. You have the right to free speech. You do not have the right to be heard. I can put a sign on my lawn that says "no soliciting" and you can't stand out there shouting your wares at me. Somehow I am not able to do this with my telephone, unless I buy a box from the phone company and pay a monthly fee, or my net connection, unless I setup spam filters, which you can't expect the common person to even know what is. The simple fact of the matter is that when you show up on someone's doorstep to sell something, call them on the phone to sell something, and spam them to sell something, you are invading that persons privacy. By all means, say whatever you want. But when I want to go shopping, I'll visit your store, your website, or call you.
I find your post offensive. My being a Libertarian has nothing to do with some desire to be a non-conformist, a strong group identity, feeling smug about who I am and others aren't, or any of the other drivel you offer.
You don't put inane labels like that on others. Why do you do it to me?
I don't feel superior to you or others in the Dem or GOP. I think you may be misguided on certain issues, the same as you feel about me.
Before you espouse that the "attraction" of being a Libertarian is its "extraordinarily simplistic and rigid ideology" perhaps you should research the subject a little. I recommend reading "What it Means to be a Libertarian" by Charles Murray for the basics. If you want something more indepth, try "The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith.
Does that mean that www.whitehouse.com (it's a porn site) is going to have to change its name?
Looks like a perfect 4097-point landing to me...
It's too bad you listen to what reviewers say. You seem to be missing the point of movies in general, and comedies in particular: to have fun. I saw it, I thought it was really cool. The "It's a Ghostbusters knock-off because it was directed by Ivan Reitman" is a load of bull. You can play the similarities game with every movie out there. Does that stop you or anyone else from going?
This is such incredibly old news. The story was in Reader's Digest (?) a few years back. I personally know this guy. We served aboard CVN-65 USS Enterprise together. I was nuke mechanic, this guy worked in Air Department (as an ILARTZ/LENS tech that's the carrier's landing lights that the pilots call "the ball") w/ my best friend. The guy is a complete fuck up. He's a racist and a drug addict (and was part of one of the largest drug rings in US Naval history) as well as being prone to stealing government property and selling it. He was such a fuck up that they booted his ass down to Deck Dept with all the Bosuns. Complete waste of perfectly good genetic material.
"Repeat after me: The Internet is not just in the USA!" Now repeat after me: The Internet was created by the US military as a communications net to see whether or not the government could be run from NORAD in the event of nuclear war. Do not take this to mean that I think that means the US government should have total say, the largest portion of input, or even any input as to how the Internet of today and tomorrow is regulated. Just remember where it came from and show a little respect.
"He lived in an unsafe part of town and had carried the gun for self defense."
"If you have unsafe parts in your town then do something about it. It is not normal.
If you dont like the way the police acts then do something about it. You employ them.
And no, giving out guns to senile old men is not going to make the world a safer place."
What an obvious response. If a neighborgood turns to crap, it must be the fault of the law-abiding citizens that have the misfortune of living there. Since your blessed Raw Deal does such a fantastic job of taking care of the senior population I suppose you would expect him to use those huge paychecks to move? Sure.
I never said he was senile, you did. Congratulations on insulting the entire retired community in one shot, I'm really proud of you.
"Guns don't kill people; people kill people; so here is no need for guns." There was a WW2 vet who had his gun confiscated because the state felt he was too old to have a conceal and carry permit. He lived in an unsafe part of town and had carried the gun for self defense. The Police did little patrolling in the area and refused to provide him with an escort (I find it interesting to note that the Police can have slogans like "To protect and to serve" when it has been established in court that they have no responsibility to do so.). One night while walking home from his shop, he was mugged, beaten, and murdered. The State took away his basic human right to defend himself, then refused to defend him since he was no longer allowed. Then he was murdered. I'm sure his family will be happy to know that you don't think he should've been allowed to defend himself either.
"They demanded that emperorhood (wihtout any politacal power) should remain in place.
After the bombings peace was made and emperorhood was not abolished"
You are misinformed. It is quite well documented that the Japanese government was appalled when MacArthur presented his plan to them, which allowed them to keep their Emperor, but with less political power than the Queen of England. The Japanese wanted the Emperor to keep all of his power.
Don't forget, MacArthur was doing the Japanese a favor by allowing them to keep the Emperor. He went out of his way to ensure that no evidence of the Emperor's hand in any of the events leading up to WW2 ever came to light. The Emperor was known for richly rewarding his most rutheless generals during the Chinese campaigns. During the war crimes trial, Tojo actually stated that none of the generals would have proceeded if they had not been given the go ahead from the Emperor. (If you think Tojo said this to protect his own skin, then you have no understanding of the General, the Bushido code, or anything else regarding Japanese psychology)
Fortunately, MacArthur's staff was able to overcome this statement and keep the Emperor alive and on his thrown.
And everyone needs to get off their high horse about the US dropping two bombs on the Japanese. Their was no single reason for doing, but many. The casualty estimates of ground campaign on Japan itself were 1 million US soldiers dead. The US has lost only ~450K dead in all of the wars its been in (Revolutionary to present) combined. Does anyone here realise what is actually required to conquer a city? The Japanese are not the French, they wouldn't roll over just because the lost one city.
Also don't forget, both the Japanese and the Germans were working on nuclear weapons of their own, and were within 6-12 months of having them ready. You might think a little differently had the US been bombed.
Furthermore, had Hitler waited 6 months for his next generation of Hydrazine turbine subs to be ready, he probably would have won. (how do you fight stop a sub that dives deeper than yours and can outrun your torpedoes?)
"There is no good political reason for this inhumane brutal killing of 80000 civian person. Only reasons I see are militarian. US wanted to scare shit out of the world or something like that"
At one point in time the US and the USSR were across the negotiating table from each other. Things were not going well. The USSR rep says, "We'd like to take this moment to remind the United States that they are the only nation to ever use a nuclear weapon against another nation."
The US rep responded, "Remember that."
You're going to have to face the sad fact that there is no perfect solution. If you're going to be terrified that someone will still the vast amounts of Plutonium (right, because we wouldn't bother trying to guard it) then you need to move to some place in Africa. Be sure to send post cards.
The use of breeder reactors works just fine in France.
"I'm not sure where you're getting such incorrect information from. France has had several problems with their breeder reactors; they had to shut down their Superphenix reactor, the largest breeder reactor in the world, was shut down permanently because of the constant problems it was having. The Japanese have had similar problems."
And no other type of fuel has problems associated with it?! That's just naive. You've never seen an oil field on fire, have you. I have, it's not pretty.
Please share your solution. I'm sure the world's entrpeneur's would love to hear it. Solar and wind power, right? Sure, visit CA sometime. They make nice *supplements* but will never suffice.
Proud owner of '91 Porsche 928GT (as well as my TDI Jetta). 0-60 in 6, top end 180mph, I've had it up to 165.
I stand corrected. IMHO though, of all the incarnations that ST has seen, the universe used in the Star Fleet Battles war game are the best. It is more closely based on what Roddenbuy wanted then any other incarnation. It is also by far the most consistent. Just about everything from TNG was a ripoff from SFB: The 'Q' instead of the Organians, the Ferrangi instead of the Orion Pirates (which were so much cooler I can't even begin to describe), the list goes on and on. A much broader range of characters in the varios stories told, etc. And last but not least, the General War, a galactic wide Civil War with a dozen major participating races. Oh, yeah, almost forgot about the Andromedan invasion. Way more cool than the Borg.
They don't necessarily need to put the franchise on hold, they just need to offer a story that people want. This new series "Enterprise" sounds completely lame. I read the character bios and think they're remaking TOS, but with new special effects. Add to that, IIRC, The original Constitution class Enterprise was captained by Kirk senior, then to Pike, then to Kirk junior. So who the heck is this new guy? There was a pretty serious movement in the ST fan base to have the next ST series be about the voyages of the Excelsior under Capt Sulu. George Takei was all for it. Now *that* would be a cool series. Too bad Berman's a moron.
TNG had its moments. DS9 was completely lame. The notion that Star Fleet would guard the entrance of a stable wormhole to a known hostile quadrant with anything other than a starbase with it's own fleet compliment is assinine. Suggesting that they would *let* Bajor (or whoever) guard it with a base station is so far beyond any semblance of rational thought that it completely destroys any credibility the series may have had.
You obviously have no clue. The use of breeder reactors works just fine in France. You don't hear anyone bitching about it there. The reason it's a problem in the US is because 1)ignorant louts such as youself that don't bother to take the time to research a topic before spouting off, and 2)no two plants in the US are the same, therefore R&D costs go up, and the various regulatory commitees leap all over it to see if it's up to spec, causing costs to skyrocket. Again, the French model is better: build two complimentary breeder models next door to each other, repeat.
I know just what you mean. I really, really wanted a Quattro. Didn't even bother me that it would cost $12k more. But I don't particularly *need* AWD in the SW. And the almost 50mpg really sold me. Amusingly enough, the Diesel prices down here aren't changing, but the gas prices are soaring. I now pay $1.53/gal, compared to $1.65/gal for gas. I love this car.
Rudolf Diesel's mentallity in designing the Diesel engine was the exact opposite of the mentallity everyone else was exhibiting. This includes Thomas Edison, who Diesel worked with for a while. Edison's philosophy was to just keep plugging away until they came up with something that worked. Diesel's philosophy was to look at an ideal Rankine Cycle/heat engine, and to try to get as close to it as possible. Incidentally, don't imply that the only engines in American cars are gasoline, or that only American cars use gasoline. I've travelled to 14 countries outside of the US (all in Europe & MidEast), and everyone ese uses gasoline as well.
I have an '01 TDI Jetta. It's awesome. I originally was looking at getting an Audi A4 Quattro.
I whole-heartedly agree, except for the "VW if you're on a budget..." I paid ~$21K for my '01 VW Jetta TDI. It's the most expensive car in its class, by several thousand. But I love it and I actually get better milage than the sticker says, even with a full load. The big reason Diesel has never been real popular in the US is because during the mid-70's(?) GM(?) tried to make a Diesel car. Anyone who knows anything about cars knows that the typical compression ratio for gasoline engine is ~11-14:1. Diesel's require ~18:1 compression. So what happens when you build a Diesel engine that uses gasoline engine quality parts? That's right, things blow up. So because GM has a bunch of morons in the penny-pinching department, Diesel's got a bad rap.
Frankly, I don't give a rip if my TDI Jetta puts out more particulate pollutants than a conventional car. I average almost 50mpg. Compare that w/ some jack ass in an SUV getting 15mpg. Which one of us is harming the environment more? Which one of is using up more natural resources? And considering that a Diesel is basically a "Mr.Fusion" (Back to the Future 2), meaning that it'll run on just about any Carbon bi-product, the engines would probably burn cleaner if the refineries would bother to refine it to a level beyond Kerosene. And that they have the nerve to charge as much for this un-refined Petroleum just pisses me off. Supply and demand, right? Guess what, if it wasn't for Semi trucks, every city in the US would be out of food in under 2 weeks. How's that for supply and demand. Friggin' Oil companies. Damn OPEC. And for all you who hate GW, just remember, Gore helped open up the US Strategic Oil Reserve to a select few Oil companies, including one he owns an awful lot of stock in (no conflict of interests here, move along). Read his book to find out what else he thinks of energy issues. Try $3.50 at the pump for gasoline. And how about wanting to ban the internal combustion engine? How he managed to get the support of the United Auto Workers is beyond me.