In other news, Slashdot editor kdawson has engineered a method to take credit for stories fellow Slashdot editor Soulskill posted to the front page one month earlier. The hope is to eventually never worry about a slow news day, but there's still a lot of research and development to done before it scales to widespread production.
The methane being released from the world's oceans is estimated at 14 teragrams (about 15.4 tons) a year, half of which is from just the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. Researchers are pretty sure the reason it's matching the rest of the oceans is because the type of methane hydrates that we've been talking about are releasing gas and becoming increasingly unstable.
It seems some researchers blame releases from methane hydrates below the seas and below melting permafrost for past rapid warming trends. This is said to be the sort of warming feedback loop that carbon dioxide by itself probably couldn't trigger.
Do note the dates of some of these articles. This is recent reporting.
The short-term effects of methane are very important.
For one, you and I probably won't be worried about it personally in a century. For another, when you have methane estimated in the billions of tons in little sections of the ocean and it seems that a little warming gets that all released, things start to compound rapidly.
GWP of 20 (to 33, with 33 being more accepted lately) is for 100 years. Over 20 years, it's a GWP of 72 or so for methane. I'm not sure that includes the byproducts of methane breaking down in the atmosphere in the 100-year figure or even the 20-year figure, because it doesn't last that long as methane typically. Some of the reactions that break it down result in other greenhouse gases, though.
What's more important for short-term policy, the 100-year load of a gas or the 20-year load of the same gas?
Those above do not, AFAIK, take into account the greenhouse gases that are formed when the methane itself reacts with other parts of the atmosphere. They all talk about the methane breaking down quickly, but carbon dioxide and ozone are two of the gases formed when that happens IIRC.
There are also reports that don't mention time frames that list methane as anywhere from 10 to 58 times as effective as carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas.
The 100-year figure you're likely to read is anywhere from 20 to 33 GWP for methane, with 33 being common in recent reports.
I'm not a climatologist, but I know how to read news sites and I know how to search the fucking web for my damn self. Do you?
Released his changes to whom? I'm sure if he's being paid to improve the work he has provided the work to the employer. You never need to "publish" source code to follow the GPL. You only need to provide the source to those to whom you provided the binaries and third parties who ask for it after receiving the binaries from someone.
If the uni never distributes the binaries, then the OP never has to provide the source to anyone other than the uni.
If it's methane gas that will otherwise be freed to the atmosphere, it's much better to burn that for fuel than to free it and drill for oil under it. Methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, by about 80 times.
It's interesting you mention the Fallout games. Does that include as far back as Fallout 1? I ask because Windows 7, no matter what compatibility settings I try, does not present proper colors for Fallout 1 without XP Mode.
Those DOS games mostly run fine under DOSBox, and if someone really wants to run them then FreeDOS runs fine under a VM and games that old are nothing to run on a recent machine. The really classic Windows games should do okay under Wine for the most part, as they're all under 9x or XP. Many of the older Windows games actually run better under Wine than on Windows 7 (unless you use XP mode, but that's virtualizing an OS again).
Unfortunately, the higher-end lens replacements are still often not covered by insurance. I'm glad you got yours. I wish more people would pay the extra $1900 out of pocket like your journal post mentions.
Interestingly enough, my sister's eyes were perfectly shaped to need no replacement lens, since any of the less expensive replacements would have given her no advantage over no lens at all. You have to be really myopic for that to work, though, and in her case she's already had retinal reattachment done on one eye when she was in her mid 30's.
I'm kind of hoping I get cataracts soon, but not before I get decent insurance. I wouldn't want a preexisting condition and all that nonsense. It sure sounds better than Lasik.
To be more exact, myopia isn't caused by a fault of the retina (other than perhaps the retina being misshapen along with the rest of the eye), but extreme cases of myopia can be a risk factor for certain problems with the retina. In particular, there's a link between myopia and retinal detachment.
That fact still doesn't mean that rod and cone counts have anything to do with myopia. There really is nothing to do with genetic predisposition to low receptors and myopia as far as I've ever heard. The radically misshaped eyeball of a very myopic person (like, say, myself or my sister) is a huge risk factor for retinal detachment, though. About two thirds to four fifths of retinal detachments involve highly myopic eyes.
I'm not an ophthalmologist or an optometrist. I just have an unusually deep lay background, having worn corrective lenses since I was three and going to a low-vision specialist most of my life. Any eye doctor should be able to tell you whether your level of myopia (or hyperopia, but that's not nearly as prevalent a link according to what I've read) puts you at greater risk for retinal detachment better than any study of a group, and certainly better than reading a post here.
A weight machine, parallel bars, a treadmill, a stethoscope, a tongue depressor, gauze -- hell, syringes -- can be used for fun rather than therapy. An inventive person could probably figure out how to use a blood pressure cuff for entertainment. I know an exam table (with stirrups!) or a dental chair could probably be fun for two consenting adults. That doesn't mean they can't be used for therapy.
Seymour Cray always said the most important and most difficult part of a supercomputer is the plumbing. He didn't mean that figuratively. The Cray 1 system was a 115 kilowatt monster cooled by freon, after all... and it could peak at 160 MIPS at 80 MHz and in rare situations use its vector instructions to hit as high as 250 MFLOPs -- in 1976.
Worker's compensation in the US is an insurance policy the government requires an employer to pay so that if an employee gets injured on the job, the company's own financial situation doesn't keep them from paying for the employee's medical care and lost wages. The government itself doesn't pay anything but enforcement costs.
I'm not sure how it works elsewhere, but all the US folks on/. saying the government shouldn't be paying worker's comp claims for people employed by private companies are right, and their wish is already granted.
If by "long term" you mean two decades, then sure. The start-up, then, should be considered a general innovation company, because 20 years isn't a terribly long time for a corporation to have revenue. They'll need to create more things and license out more patents if that's the business model.
The real long-term way to make cash is to make the product better or at a lower cost than the competition, or to provide necessary services that complement the product.
IBM, Ford, BNSF, Otis elevator, Kraft Foods, and the like might view twenty years as a long term goal for a product or perhaps even some product lines. They certainly don't view them as the long term for the profitability of the company.
Really? They want to put nitrogen fertilizer down to clean up the beach environment?
So, let's harvest a bunch of coal and natural gas and put a bunch of energy into refining it into fertilizer.
Then, let's put it on the beach and in the shallows where it can help the bacteria break down the oil into fats and acids. That and the excess runoff of nitrogen fertilizer should really help with the algal explosion and resulting fish and sea plant dead zone to come.
So instead of having oil in the shallows of the gulf, we can have tons of dead sea life releasing fats and carbon dioxide into the water, further fucking up the environment and acidifying the water. And to get there, we need to process more fossil fuels to clean up these fossil fuels. While fertilizer can be made without fossil fuels, IIRC it rarely is at this point, at least in the US.
Also, TFA says that if we didn't have natural bacteria eating the oil that we'd be knee deep in the stuff. If oil is that abundant and all we have to do is get to it before the bacteria get it in the sea water, why the hell are we worried about peak oil again?
Even when that day comes, you'd want to dock your phone into a larger screen with larger input tools. Also, since PC-class chips and graphics cards are so cheap in their functionality vs. miniaturized phone equivalents, you'd likely also want a faster processor and better video handling at home anyway.
People do tend to forget even basic things like the memory requirements of decent video. 1920x1080 (or 1680x1050 or 1900x1200, etc.) at 32bpp is a lot more memory-intensive than 800x400 (or 800x480 or 480x320) at 16bpp or 24bpp.
Also, editing video on a 131:1 contrast ratio screen with 3.31 cd/m2 black level just sucks. You listening, Steve Jobs? Some phones do much better in this regard, but they're still tiny screens with the memory and processing power of phones behind them.
Forget the cops. Try explaining it to the oncoming car that didn't see you because you were driving dark. Headlights are a safety device in more than one way.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I can imagine there are a few "interest groups" involved.
In other news, Slashdot editor kdawson has engineered a method to take credit for stories fellow Slashdot editor Soulskill posted to the front page one month earlier. The hope is to eventually never worry about a slow news day, but there's still a lot of research and development to done before it scales to widespread production.
You asked for citations, and I provided six. There's no need to bitch about it again in a separate post. Dick.
Methane has a GWP of 33 in the latest reports, not 20, over 100 years. It has a GWP of 72 over 20 years.
One cubic meter of methane hydrates at the sea floor expands to over 164 cubic meters of natural gas at the surface.
The methane being released from the world's oceans is estimated at 14 teragrams (about 15.4 tons) a year, half of which is from just the East Siberian Arctic Shelf. Researchers are pretty sure the reason it's matching the rest of the oceans is because the type of methane hydrates that we've been talking about are releasing gas and becoming increasingly unstable.
It seems some researchers blame releases from methane hydrates below the seas and below melting permafrost for past rapid warming trends. This is said to be the sort of warming feedback loop that carbon dioxide by itself probably couldn't trigger.
Do note the dates of some of these articles. This is recent reporting.
The short-term effects of methane are very important.
For one, you and I probably won't be worried about it personally in a century. For another, when you have methane estimated in the billions of tons in little sections of the ocean and it seems that a little warming gets that all released, things start to compound rapidly.
GWP of 20 (to 33, with 33 being more accepted lately) is for 100 years. Over 20 years, it's a GWP of 72 or so for methane. I'm not sure that includes the byproducts of methane breaking down in the atmosphere in the 100-year figure or even the 20-year figure, because it doesn't last that long as methane typically. Some of the reactions that break it down result in other greenhouse gases, though.
What's more important for short-term policy, the 100-year load of a gas or the 20-year load of the same gas?
Here are citations for a GWP of 72 over 20 years:
Those above do not, AFAIK, take into account the greenhouse gases that are formed when the methane itself reacts with other parts of the atmosphere. They all talk about the methane breaking down quickly, but carbon dioxide and ozone are two of the gases formed when that happens IIRC.
There are also reports that don't mention time frames that list methane as anywhere from 10 to 58 times as effective as carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas.
The 100-year figure you're likely to read is anywhere from 20 to 33 GWP for methane, with 33 being common in recent reports.
I'm not a climatologist, but I know how to read news sites and I know how to search the fucking web for my damn self. Do you?
Released his changes to whom? I'm sure if he's being paid to improve the work he has provided the work to the employer. You never need to "publish" source code to follow the GPL. You only need to provide the source to those to whom you provided the binaries and third parties who ask for it after receiving the binaries from someone.
If the uni never distributes the binaries, then the OP never has to provide the source to anyone other than the uni.
If it's methane gas that will otherwise be freed to the atmosphere, it's much better to burn that for fuel than to free it and drill for oil under it. Methane is a much more powerful greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, by about 80 times.
It's interesting you mention the Fallout games. Does that include as far back as Fallout 1? I ask because Windows 7, no matter what compatibility settings I try, does not present proper colors for Fallout 1 without XP Mode.
Well, did they remove the other of the two most controversial edits from the original trilogy? You know, where originally Han shot first?
Those DOS games mostly run fine under DOSBox, and if someone really wants to run them then FreeDOS runs fine under a VM and games that old are nothing to run on a recent machine. The really classic Windows games should do okay under Wine for the most part, as they're all under 9x or XP. Many of the older Windows games actually run better under Wine than on Windows 7 (unless you use XP mode, but that's virtualizing an OS again).
Unfortunately, the higher-end lens replacements are still often not covered by insurance. I'm glad you got yours. I wish more people would pay the extra $1900 out of pocket like your journal post mentions.
Interestingly enough, my sister's eyes were perfectly shaped to need no replacement lens, since any of the less expensive replacements would have given her no advantage over no lens at all. You have to be really myopic for that to work, though, and in her case she's already had retinal reattachment done on one eye when she was in her mid 30's.
I'm kind of hoping I get cataracts soon, but not before I get decent insurance. I wouldn't want a preexisting condition and all that nonsense. It sure sounds better than Lasik.
To be more exact, myopia isn't caused by a fault of the retina (other than perhaps the retina being misshapen along with the rest of the eye), but extreme cases of myopia can be a risk factor for certain problems with the retina. In particular, there's a link between myopia and retinal detachment.
That fact still doesn't mean that rod and cone counts have anything to do with myopia. There really is nothing to do with genetic predisposition to low receptors and myopia as far as I've ever heard. The radically misshaped eyeball of a very myopic person (like, say, myself or my sister) is a huge risk factor for retinal detachment, though. About two thirds to four fifths of retinal detachments involve highly myopic eyes.
I'm not an ophthalmologist or an optometrist. I just have an unusually deep lay background, having worn corrective lenses since I was three and going to a low-vision specialist most of my life. Any eye doctor should be able to tell you whether your level of myopia (or hyperopia, but that's not nearly as prevalent a link according to what I've read) puts you at greater risk for retinal detachment better than any study of a group, and certainly better than reading a post here.
A weight machine, parallel bars, a treadmill, a stethoscope, a tongue depressor, gauze -- hell, syringes -- can be used for fun rather than therapy. An inventive person could probably figure out how to use a blood pressure cuff for entertainment. I know an exam table (with stirrups!) or a dental chair could probably be fun for two consenting adults. That doesn't mean they can't be used for therapy.
He needs that kid holding the Wii... on his lawn?
Seymour Cray always said the most important and most difficult part of a supercomputer is the plumbing. He didn't mean that figuratively. The Cray 1 system was a 115 kilowatt monster cooled by freon, after all... and it could peak at 160 MIPS at 80 MHz and in rare situations use its vector instructions to hit as high as 250 MFLOPs -- in 1976.
Worker's compensation in the US is an insurance policy the government requires an employer to pay so that if an employee gets injured on the job, the company's own financial situation doesn't keep them from paying for the employee's medical care and lost wages. The government itself doesn't pay anything but enforcement costs.
I'm not sure how it works elsewhere, but all the US folks on /. saying the government shouldn't be paying worker's comp claims for people employed by private companies are right, and their wish is already granted.
As for the Wii Fit, the doctor should just say, "Fine, if you don't want to pay a few hundred for a Wii and Wii Fit, go pay $18,000 US for a balance treatment board from a medical supply company."
Clark and Superman fight for control after the synthetic green Kryptonite fails to kill him, too.
If by "long term" you mean two decades, then sure. The start-up, then, should be considered a general innovation company, because 20 years isn't a terribly long time for a corporation to have revenue. They'll need to create more things and license out more patents if that's the business model.
The real long-term way to make cash is to make the product better or at a lower cost than the competition, or to provide necessary services that complement the product.
IBM, Ford, BNSF, Otis elevator, Kraft Foods, and the like might view twenty years as a long term goal for a product or perhaps even some product lines. They certainly don't view them as the long term for the profitability of the company.
Really? They want to put nitrogen fertilizer down to clean up the beach environment?
So, let's harvest a bunch of coal and natural gas and put a bunch of energy into refining it into fertilizer.
Then, let's put it on the beach and in the shallows where it can help the bacteria break down the oil into fats and acids. That and the excess runoff of nitrogen fertilizer should really help with the algal explosion and resulting fish and sea plant dead zone to come.
So instead of having oil in the shallows of the gulf, we can have tons of dead sea life releasing fats and carbon dioxide into the water, further fucking up the environment and acidifying the water. And to get there, we need to process more fossil fuels to clean up these fossil fuels. While fertilizer can be made without fossil fuels, IIRC it rarely is at this point, at least in the US.
Also, TFA says that if we didn't have natural bacteria eating the oil that we'd be knee deep in the stuff. If oil is that abundant and all we have to do is get to it before the bacteria get it in the sea water, why the hell are we worried about peak oil again?
Even when that day comes, you'd want to dock your phone into a larger screen with larger input tools. Also, since PC-class chips and graphics cards are so cheap in their functionality vs. miniaturized phone equivalents, you'd likely also want a faster processor and better video handling at home anyway.
People do tend to forget even basic things like the memory requirements of decent video. 1920x1080 (or 1680x1050 or 1900x1200, etc.) at 32bpp is a lot more memory-intensive than 800x400 (or 800x480 or 480x320) at 16bpp or 24bpp.
Also, editing video on a 131:1 contrast ratio screen with 3.31 cd/m2 black level just sucks. You listening, Steve Jobs? Some phones do much better in this regard, but they're still tiny screens with the memory and processing power of phones behind them.
Did I mention tiny input devices?
Cars produce IR, including halogen or incandescent headlights.
Forget the cops. Try explaining it to the oncoming car that didn't see you because you were driving dark. Headlights are a safety device in more than one way.
It's going to the Wyse WinTerm and the Sun Network Computer?
What simple copy/paste/move functions don't work for you within a GUI?