I wasn't talking about ThinkSecret. I have no idea if they direct a portion of their profits towards tipsters, or if they sink it all into new cars, pay for expensive college educations, or donate it to the poor.
But I think it's safe to say that they're spending some of it on much-needed legal advicec.
Apple's crackdown on Web sites that love the company
Paying Apple employees to break an agreement with Apple and leak Apple's trade secrets isn't a manifestation of "love".
Some people have to grow up and understand that a company is about making money, and a company has corporate interests that some blogger may not be able to appreciate. A company isn't "open", like the government is (supposed) to be.
I'm not an Apple fan by any measure, but I wouldn't feel ashamed at all. Here's my take on it:
Apple has internal secrets about what they're going to do as a company. One of their own, violating a documented promise (signed contract), is leaking these secrets, permitting them to fall into the hands of the competition. They are leaking these secrets for personal gain and/or to damage Apple.
Apple wants to identify and stop this person. However, those who know who this person is, and those who willingly distributed these secrets, are not talking under the guise of "journalistic freedom".
The person publishing the information is simply protecting their personal business model. These "rumor" sites make a lot of money though advertising - and stopping the free flow of trade secrets - their business - will hurt their substantial income.
This isn't about journalistic freedom, and this isn't about keeping America free. It's about the buying and selling of trade secrets in order to make money.
These sites are all about making money, and their most profitable products are Apple's trade secrets.
Giving Apple credit for this idea is a bit absurd and making a mountain out of a mole hill. Blaming Intel for taking so long is also absurd since they only supply the CPU and chipset.
Nope, I'm not blaming Intel. I'm blaming the PC vendors, who have been quite lacking in new designs.
Instead, every signifcant PC vendor has produced the same exact box for the past 10 years. Sure, the guts have changed a little bit - but it's virtually the same box.
On the flip side, Apple is betting a large amount of cash (through design and marketing) to make something different than the standard PC desktop box. The other significant PC vendors are failing to push the envelope in ANY direction. Sure, they made a few blue and purple and multi-colored PCs... but that's the extent of their creativity in design.
Is this, in the end, important? No. But I feel it's an indicator of how they approach their business - no innovation, no improvements, no willingness to take a risk. Because their direct competitors aren't doing it.
Sadly, it does seem to me that Apple is the only one out there that innovates and inspires.
At one time, Compaq, Dell, and even Microsoft could be expected to innovate. Just look at the original Armada. Visual Basic 3.0. the Pre-inspiron laptops. Ya, they weren't the best products ever, but they were very innovative, industry-changing ideas at the time.
Now they're just a slow evolution of an old idea. For people who don't like the press that Apple gets, and would like to see others garner some press time - well, what the hell has ANYONE in the industry done in the past 5 years?
Intel does not need to inspire the industry with a Mac clone. The industry has seen it - and is merely betting that people won't switch.
That's a good bet, but it shows me how much the PC industry has totally lost it's spark of innovation, despite loads of inspiration from a non-competitor.
The trend towards super duper jumbo jets comes at the expense of the smaller regional jets which were all the rage 5 to 10 years ago. Companies like Bombardier and Embraer have run into trouble selling their small and mid sized jets as the airline market in general has tanked post 9-11.
Airbus is clearly gunning for the 747 market - the 747 series of aircraft have the basic design and efficiencies of the 1960s. Boeing has let the 747 become a technical laggard, and Airbus has poised itself to shut down the 747 production line with a much more modern aircraft in terms of cost. (many thanks to Boeing's poor management - where are the institutional shareholders when you need them?)
Big planes are great for reducing costs between large cities - say, New York to Tokyo. Or SF to London. Instead of two flights using two birds and two crews, you can do it once. And with modern, efficient, and quiet engines. And that's a huge cost savings all around.
And to get carriers to unload their 747s, you've got to make it compelling. A much more efficient plane with even more capacity is bound to result in airlines unloading the 747. It costs a lot of money to operate per passenger mile. The 747 expense has become too great.
But many flights these days are regional, and will remain that way. All of those 737 flights between cities will remain, and will continue to grow. Why have a 500+ passenger jet fly that can go 5000+ miles fly a 1500 mile vacation route that serves only 320 passengers? A couple 737 flights sounds better in that application.
So the smaller jets aren't going away - it is the 747 that's leaving commerical passenger service.
Apple is positioning itself to take advantage of the (shockingly lousy) flash-based Music Player marketplace. Apple's move gives opportunity to Creative.
There are two groups of music player vendors: Apple, and Everyone Else. Although Creative designs some very good products, they are part of that Everyone Else group. Creative has the very difficult task of differentiating their products from the hundreds of other competitors to John Q. Public.
The iPod Shuffle will certainly clear out weaker competitors by competing directly against all of the products in the "Everyone Else" group. This effect on the Flash marketplace will hold even if Apple doesn't top the flash-based market.
With the resulting shake-up of the overall MP marketplace, Creative will have a great opportunity (and perhaps their only opportunity) to build brand recognition. Creative will have to compete directly against Apple, instead of competeing mostly against the no-names like M-link and SuperMP.
To take on Apple, Creative will need to beat Apple in all areas at once: smaller packages, lower cost, more features, significantly more capacity, top-notch customer support, excellent software, and excellent ease-of-use.
Dropping the ball in any one of these areas dooms Creative to a sublimating marketshare.
Creative can do it - they make very good products - but they'll have to jump in with both feet and take some serious risks before someone else makes it into the pool.
At first I agreed with you, but then I read that the Mac mini is VGA compatible. You can buy a Mac mini-compatible monitor for $67 at Staples!
And I also learned that the Mac Mini uses USB - and quickly found that you can buy a USB keyboard and mouse for under $10 total.
So there is no need to buy a top-of-the-line equipment for a Mac mini. You can attach it to commodity hardware. In fact, I have a number of VGA monitors in the basement... if anyone wants one, let me know.
In the US, there are laws and regulations that exist to protect student privacy. These regulations are known as "FERPA". Although these FERPA laws seem to apply only to your "academic record", your academic record includes things like keeping the fact that you even attended a school (as being a student with an academic institution is defined as being part of your academic record).
Of course, no laws prevent an academic instituion from doing dumb things like not using quality security strategies or outsourcing key administrative and instructional systems to an incapable supplier that has a great glossy and great marketshare. Spyware is only going to make this kind of privacy leakage worse.
Of course, FERPA only applies to academic institutions - they do NOT apply to your employer, your church, or other non-academic institution.
Glad to see someone other than Woz and Jobs get attention for their time at Apple!
Andy always got a lot of attention in Mac circles. Classic Mac owners knew Andy very well.
It's just that Jobs gets a lot of press (being the on-again, off-again CEO of a large failing company since 1985 (sarcasm)).
And Woz is well known in geek circles for being the only famous nuts-and-bolts engineer in the history of the world. And he looks like an engineer too.
Andy - In my book, he's famous for taking Job's vision and delivering it way way back in the early 1980s.
Can or do people (individuals or VCs) invest in Rutan's company? I mean other than P. Allen and Virgin?
They get a shitload of press, both here and on TV. I figure they must be trying to build recognition. And from what I see, they're doing a kick-ass job at it.
Re:This is a new trend
on
Defining Google
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I hire people, and my organization went through a period of putting people through many rounds of interviews.
I put a stop to it - the problem was poor interviewing and poor decision making. Some interviewers were not skilled in asking good questions. And no one in the hiring process wanted to be the person to "veto" or "take the blame" when things go wrong.
But the fact is, we all had a good idea after the first round of interviews once we thought out our interview process. Subsequent interview rounds were just there to make some individuals happier with decision making - or to do a better job interviewing.
But I thought (and still think) subsequent interview rounds were simply abusive to the applicant.
So our new hiring proces is streamlined: (1) telephone interview, and then if still good, (2) a single round of personal interviews with a manager and then a peer.
If we don't know after this, then it's likely that there isn't a match, and the candidate is not hired.
If we think there is a match after this process, we make an offer to the person (which is sometimes accepted, sometimes rejected).
The candidate is initially hired with the caveat that it might not work out (in the USA it is very easy to release a new employee that isn't working out).
We only had to fire a new employee once, and this problem happened simply because my boss overrode my hiring veto (they attended the same university). Sadly, I had to do the firing.
Our small southern shop (an eleven man team) is about to commence development on some medical software geared for physician's offices and hospitals.
I assume that you're delivering a product, and that you have some previous expertise and previous experience building a somewhat similar product in a different field.
If so, my first answer would be to "do what you're an expert at". Why screw around with technologies that you all aren't expert in?
Is this an "old fashion" attitude?
You bet! You're there to deliver a successful product, not learn about the production issues of a.NET or J2EE environment that should have been caught at application design time.
Evidently your 11 person team is a technical team that has been built to deliver successful products. Use their expertise. Enhanse that expertise. Don't abandon it, and don't think that since you're great at one technology that you'll immediately be able to switch to another environment with any measurable degree of success.
If you're looking for an opportunity to learn new technologies - great! Just make it a minor part of the system, and make sure you have an "escape route" if it doesn't work out the way you hope it will.
PS - My ex-girlfriend's shop (she's an MD) runs both Windows and Unix on the back end. The IT folk treat applications like a black box - they don't care what application server you use - and they won't be messing with it. But I'm not a global expert on Hospital infrastructure and IT practices.
PS - I don't think it matters if you're a southern if you're planning to sell outside your regional medical area. However, if you plan to sell to a particular hospital, then it very well could matter how you build your product.
I personally don't care if people choose to run Firefox or Linux or any other software on their computers -- it's their computer, after all
He sure has a lot to say about something he doesn't care about.
He does suggest that Microsoft code signing technology somehow controls adware and spyware. Sadly, it doesn't seem to work yet, given that my brother-in-law's rather new XP laptop was loaded with the crap.
Coincidentally, I tried to remove myself from the iTunes list (which I had accidentally enlisted for when downloading QT) only the find that the unsubscribe-URL "contained no data". Hmm. Double hmm.
That happened to my mom too. But then I noticed that her modem was inadvertantly disconnected from AOL. No carrier.
Electric baseboard heating is 100% efficient. Every watt of energy put into a baseboard heater comes out as heat.
That's misleading. The conversion from electricity to heat is 100% efficient, but the conversion from fuel to electricity is far from 100% efficient - it's more like 30%. In the end, heating your home with electric resistance heating is much more expensive and much less efficient than heating by propane, gas, oil, or electric heat pump.
Similarly, every watt of energy put into a refrigerator comes out as heat.
But that heat is several times more expensive to produce than any heating system (except for "electrical resistance" heating systems.)
Likewise for your [...] washer/dryer, etc, etc.
Yeah, but these are in my unheated basement. They don't provide much benefit in my living space. The gas-fired dryer is vented outdoors. I'd love to capture that waste heat - any ideas?
(although exceptions can be made for the hot water heater and dishwasher - a lot of that heat energy goes towards heating the sewer pipes.)
One can buy a "drain heat exchanger" to pre-heat the cold water that enters your hot water heater from the hot discharge water of your shower & dishwasher. Of course heat still goes down the sewer, but heck, it's never bad to "steal back" some of that heat before the wastewater goes away!
If your recessed ceiling lamps are decent at reflecting radiant heat (infrared light), a significant fraction of their heat output will go towards heating your room.
Yep, and mine do have reflectors, and the attic is well insulated (thanks to a good landlord). But the lamps are in the ceiling, and despite reflectors and insulation, I contend that the net efficiency is far less than "100%".
It's more efficient to use efficient light bulbs and an efficient heating system, versus using inefficient lightbulbs with an efficient heating system. In every case, you still have the possibility of retaining the waste heat.
The ONLY exception is if you're currently heating with an "electric resistance" heating system. In this one case, you might break even.
I agree with your point that it is very smart to take advantage of all waste heat. But for most homes, the cost to produce waste heat is very expensive and therefore undesireable. And in non-heating months, such waste heat is very very undesirable.
I worked on the ISS program. My dad worked in the space program since Gemini. We both worked for large aerospace companies.
The Shuttle and ISS are amazing pieces of technology, and much has been learned by designing them and operating them. I don't think those facts are debatable.
HOWEVER, the ISS and the Shuttle are qualified failures. Desite their amazing abilities, they are grossly inefficient in terms of dollars. The money could be better spent.
Flying to the moon and Mars is a great, super-fabulous endeavor. Hanging out in a space station for a year is amazing. But there is no point in doing it as a rah-rah feel-good exercise. Honest scientific, commercial, and military goals should be set first, and only in the light of these goals should we see if it makes sense to pursue these manned missions.
The people of NASA aren't the problem - it's the mission that Congress has given them. With nebulous goals like "let's go to the moon", congress is forcing NASA to squander the tax payer's money.
Umm, to kill germs. That's why water is heated, not just for comfort.
Standard home hot water heaters aren't designed to kill germs, and they don't get hot enough to kill germs.
Furthermore, you should never use your hot tap water for cooking, due to hot water's better ability to carry lead found in home plumbing. Instead, boil cold tap water on your stovetop or in your microwave oven.
During the winter, your methods of saving electricity are limited to allowing lower temperatures inside and finding ways to prevent heat loss to the outside (such as the suggested curtains).
Your statement assumes that you use (inefficient) electric heat, and that your "wenergy wasting appliances" are nearly as efficient as your electric baseboard heating system.
Most of my lights are of the "ceiling recessed" variety. These ceiling lamps might be raising the temperature of my attic, but they are grossly inefficient in terms of heating my living space.
The article goes on and on about how Silicon Valley can capitalize on the solar energy business (and other forms of high-efficincy energy production). There are a couple new and exciting renewable energy companies in the valley.
The first order of business for an energy consumer should be to minimize energy consumption. The economics are simple: a reduction in demand will reduce costs.
Many people are shocked when they learn that it's very easy to save $1000 in energy costs a year by spending less than $100 and an hour's worth of time. This guy and this guy seemed to do just about nothing for 50% energy savings.
Even though it's always exciting to look at the state of the art in the energy business, it's more useful (but less exciting) to look at how it impacts you personally.
Slashdot Mirror
What evidence do you have that the Apple employee was paid for the information?
I wasn't refering to a particular case. I was just stating that corporate espionage often includes exchanging money for information.
I wasn't talking about ThinkSecret. I have no idea if they direct a portion of their profits towards tipsters, or if they sink it all into new cars, pay for expensive college educations, or donate it to the poor.
But I think it's safe to say that they're spending some of it on much-needed legal advicec.
Apple's crackdown on Web sites that love the company
Paying Apple employees to break an agreement with Apple and leak Apple's trade secrets isn't a manifestation of "love".
Some people have to grow up and understand that a company is about making money, and a company has corporate interests that some blogger may not be able to appreciate. A company isn't "open", like the government is (supposed) to be.
I'm not an Apple fan by any measure, but I wouldn't feel ashamed at all. Here's my take on it:
Apple has internal secrets about what they're going to do as a company. One of their own, violating a documented promise (signed contract), is leaking these secrets, permitting them to fall into the hands of the competition. They are leaking these secrets for personal gain and/or to damage Apple.
Apple wants to identify and stop this person. However, those who know who this person is, and those who willingly distributed these secrets, are not talking under the guise of "journalistic freedom".
The person publishing the information is simply protecting their personal business model. These "rumor" sites make a lot of money though advertising - and stopping the free flow of trade secrets - their business - will hurt their substantial income.
This isn't about journalistic freedom, and this isn't about keeping America free. It's about the buying and selling of trade secrets in order to make money.
These sites are all about making money, and their most profitable products are Apple's trade secrets.
Giving Apple credit for this idea is a bit absurd and making a mountain out of a mole hill. Blaming Intel for taking so long is also absurd since they only supply the CPU and chipset.
Nope, I'm not blaming Intel. I'm blaming the PC vendors, who have been quite lacking in new designs.
Instead, every signifcant PC vendor has produced the same exact box for the past 10 years. Sure, the guts have changed a little bit - but it's virtually the same box.
On the flip side, Apple is betting a large amount of cash (through design and marketing) to make something different than the standard PC desktop box. The other significant PC vendors are failing to push the envelope in ANY direction. Sure, they made a few blue and purple and multi-colored PCs... but that's the extent of their creativity in design.
Is this, in the end, important? No. But I feel it's an indicator of how they approach their business - no innovation, no improvements, no willingness to take a risk. Because their direct competitors aren't doing it.
Sadly, it does seem to me that Apple is the only one out there that innovates and inspires.
At one time, Compaq, Dell, and even Microsoft could be expected to innovate. Just look at the original Armada. Visual Basic 3.0. the Pre-inspiron laptops. Ya, they weren't the best products ever, but they were very innovative, industry-changing ideas at the time.
Now they're just a slow evolution of an old idea. For people who don't like the press that Apple gets, and would like to see others garner some press time - well, what the hell has ANYONE in the industry done in the past 5 years?
Intel does not need to inspire the industry with a Mac clone. The industry has seen it - and is merely betting that people won't switch.
That's a good bet, but it shows me how much the PC industry has totally lost it's spark of innovation, despite loads of inspiration from a non-competitor.
The trend towards super duper jumbo jets comes at the expense of the smaller regional jets which were all the rage 5 to 10 years ago. Companies like Bombardier and Embraer have run into trouble selling their small and mid sized jets as the airline market in general has tanked post 9-11.
Airbus is clearly gunning for the 747 market - the 747 series of aircraft have the basic design and efficiencies of the 1960s. Boeing has let the 747 become a technical laggard, and Airbus has poised itself to shut down the 747 production line with a much more modern aircraft in terms of cost. (many thanks to Boeing's poor management - where are the institutional shareholders when you need them?)
Big planes are great for reducing costs between large cities - say, New York to Tokyo. Or SF to London. Instead of two flights using two birds and two crews, you can do it once. And with modern, efficient, and quiet engines. And that's a huge cost savings all around.
And to get carriers to unload their 747s, you've got to make it compelling. A much more efficient plane with even more capacity is bound to result in airlines unloading the 747. It costs a lot of money to operate per passenger mile. The 747 expense has become too great.
But many flights these days are regional, and will remain that way. All of those 737 flights between cities will remain, and will continue to grow. Why have a 500+ passenger jet fly that can go 5000+ miles fly a 1500 mile vacation route that serves only 320 passengers? A couple 737 flights sounds better in that application.
So the smaller jets aren't going away - it is the 747 that's leaving commerical passenger service.
Apple is positioning itself to take advantage of the (shockingly lousy) flash-based Music Player marketplace. Apple's move gives opportunity to Creative.
There are two groups of music player vendors: Apple, and Everyone Else. Although Creative designs some very good products, they are part of that Everyone Else group. Creative has the very difficult task of differentiating their products from the hundreds of other competitors to John Q. Public.
The iPod Shuffle will certainly clear out weaker competitors by competing directly against all of the products in the "Everyone Else" group. This effect on the Flash marketplace will hold even if Apple doesn't top the flash-based market.
With the resulting shake-up of the overall MP marketplace, Creative will have a great opportunity (and perhaps their only opportunity) to build brand recognition. Creative will have to compete directly against Apple, instead of competeing mostly against the no-names like M-link and SuperMP.
To take on Apple, Creative will need to beat Apple in all areas at once: smaller packages, lower cost, more features, significantly more capacity, top-notch customer support, excellent software, and excellent ease-of-use.
Dropping the ball in any one of these areas dooms Creative to a sublimating marketshare.
Creative can do it - they make very good products - but they'll have to jump in with both feet and take some serious risks before someone else makes it into the pool.
---
Now back to my regular market analysis job.
PC? It's not a PC it's a Mac! *fume*
My Apple II+'s shipping box has the slogan "Apple: The Most Personal Computer".
At first I agreed with you, but then I read that the Mac mini is VGA compatible. You can buy a Mac mini-compatible monitor for $67 at Staples!
And I also learned that the Mac Mini uses USB - and quickly found that you can buy a USB keyboard and mouse for under $10 total.
So there is no need to buy a top-of-the-line equipment for a Mac mini. You can attach it to commodity hardware. In fact, I have a number of VGA monitors in the basement... if anyone wants one, let me know.
In the US, there are laws and regulations that exist to protect student privacy. These regulations are known as "FERPA". Although these FERPA laws seem to apply only to your "academic record", your academic record includes things like keeping the fact that you even attended a school (as being a student with an academic institution is defined as being part of your academic record).
Of course, no laws prevent an academic instituion from doing dumb things like not using quality security strategies or outsourcing key administrative and instructional systems to an incapable supplier that has a great glossy and great marketshare. Spyware is only going to make this kind of privacy leakage worse.
Of course, FERPA only applies to academic institutions - they do NOT apply to your employer, your church, or other non-academic institution.
Even better: not speaking lies is OK.
So given this change of policy, how many years would Bill Gates get in the slammer?
Or would this law only apply to those not affiliated with a large corporate entity?
Glad to see someone other than Woz and Jobs get attention for their time at Apple!
Andy always got a lot of attention in Mac circles. Classic Mac owners knew Andy very well.
It's just that Jobs gets a lot of press (being the on-again, off-again CEO of a large failing company since 1985 (sarcasm)).
And Woz is well known in geek circles for being the only famous nuts-and-bolts engineer in the history of the world. And he looks like an engineer too.
Andy - In my book, he's famous for taking Job's vision and delivering it way way back in the early 1980s.
Can or do people (individuals or VCs) invest in Rutan's company? I mean other than P. Allen and Virgin?
They get a shitload of press, both here and on TV. I figure they must be trying to build recognition. And from what I see, they're doing a kick-ass job at it.
I hire people, and my organization went through a period of putting people through many rounds of interviews.
I put a stop to it - the problem was poor interviewing and poor decision making. Some interviewers were not skilled in asking good questions. And no one in the hiring process wanted to be the person to "veto" or "take the blame" when things go wrong.
But the fact is, we all had a good idea after the first round of interviews once we thought out our interview process. Subsequent interview rounds were just there to make some individuals happier with decision making - or to do a better job interviewing.
But I thought (and still think) subsequent interview rounds were simply abusive to the applicant.
So our new hiring proces is streamlined: (1) telephone interview, and then if still good, (2) a single round of personal interviews with a manager and then a peer.
If we don't know after this, then it's likely that there isn't a match, and the candidate is not hired.
If we think there is a match after this process, we make an offer to the person (which is sometimes accepted, sometimes rejected).
The candidate is initially hired with the caveat that it might not work out (in the USA it is very easy to release a new employee that isn't working out).
We only had to fire a new employee once, and this problem happened simply because my boss overrode my hiring veto (they attended the same university). Sadly, I had to do the firing.
Our small southern shop (an eleven man team) is about to commence development on some medical software geared for physician's offices and hospitals.
.NET or J2EE environment that should have been caught at application design time.
I assume that you're delivering a product, and that you have some previous expertise and previous experience building a somewhat similar product in a different field.
If so, my first answer would be to "do what you're an expert at". Why screw around with technologies that you all aren't expert in?
Is this an "old fashion" attitude?
You bet! You're there to deliver a successful product, not learn about the production issues of a
Evidently your 11 person team is a technical team that has been built to deliver successful products. Use their expertise. Enhanse that expertise. Don't abandon it, and don't think that since you're great at one technology that you'll immediately be able to switch to another environment with any measurable degree of success.
If you're looking for an opportunity to learn new technologies - great! Just make it a minor part of the system, and make sure you have an "escape route" if it doesn't work out the way you hope it will.
PS - My ex-girlfriend's shop (she's an MD) runs both Windows and Unix on the back end. The IT folk treat applications like a black box - they don't care what application server you use - and they won't be messing with it. But I'm not a global expert on Hospital infrastructure and IT practices.
PS - I don't think it matters if you're a southern if you're planning to sell outside your regional medical area. However, if you plan to sell to a particular hospital, then it very well could matter how you build your product.
My favorite book on math is The Mathematical Tourist by Ivars Peterson.
It's very readable, and has chapters on interesting stuff like knot theory, cellular automata and primes.
I highly recommend it. It isn't going to turn anyone into a math professor, but it is very interesting reading.
I personally don't care if people choose to run Firefox or Linux or any other software on their computers -- it's their computer, after all
He sure has a lot to say about something he doesn't care about.
He does suggest that Microsoft code signing technology somehow controls adware and spyware. Sadly, it doesn't seem to work yet, given that my brother-in-law's rather new XP laptop was loaded with the crap.
Coincidentally, I tried to remove myself from the iTunes list (which I had accidentally enlisted for when downloading QT) only the find that the unsubscribe-URL "contained no data". Hmm. Double hmm.
That happened to my mom too. But then I noticed that her modem was inadvertantly disconnected from AOL. No carrier.
Electric baseboard heating is 100% efficient. Every watt of energy put into a baseboard heater comes out as heat.
That's misleading. The conversion from electricity to heat is 100% efficient, but the conversion from fuel to electricity is far from 100% efficient - it's more like 30%. In the end, heating your home with electric resistance heating is much more expensive and much less efficient than heating by propane, gas, oil, or electric heat pump.
Similarly, every watt of energy put into a refrigerator comes out as heat.
But that heat is several times more expensive to produce than any heating system (except for "electrical resistance" heating systems.)
Likewise for your [...] washer/dryer, etc, etc.
Yeah, but these are in my unheated basement. They don't provide much benefit in my living space. The gas-fired dryer is vented outdoors. I'd love to capture that waste heat - any ideas?
(although exceptions can be made for the hot water heater and dishwasher - a lot of that heat energy goes towards heating the sewer pipes.)
One can buy a "drain heat exchanger" to pre-heat the cold water that enters your hot water heater from the hot discharge water of your shower & dishwasher. Of course heat still goes down the sewer, but heck, it's never bad to "steal back" some of that heat before the wastewater goes away!
If your recessed ceiling lamps are decent at reflecting radiant heat (infrared light), a significant fraction of their heat output will go towards heating your room.
Yep, and mine do have reflectors, and the attic is well insulated (thanks to a good landlord). But the lamps are in the ceiling, and despite reflectors and insulation, I contend that the net efficiency is far less than "100%".
It's more efficient to use efficient light bulbs and an efficient heating system, versus using inefficient lightbulbs with an efficient heating system. In every case, you still have the possibility of retaining the waste heat.
The ONLY exception is if you're currently heating with an "electric resistance" heating system. In this one case, you might break even.
I agree with your point that it is very smart to take advantage of all waste heat. But for most homes, the cost to produce waste heat is very expensive and therefore undesireable. And in non-heating months, such waste heat is very very undesirable.
I worked on the ISS program. My dad worked in the space program since Gemini. We both worked for large aerospace companies.
The Shuttle and ISS are amazing pieces of technology, and much has been learned by designing them and operating them. I don't think those facts are debatable.
HOWEVER, the ISS and the Shuttle are qualified failures. Desite their amazing abilities, they are grossly inefficient in terms of dollars. The money could be better spent.
Flying to the moon and Mars is a great, super-fabulous endeavor. Hanging out in a space station for a year is amazing. But there is no point in doing it as a rah-rah feel-good exercise. Honest scientific, commercial, and military goals should be set first, and only in the light of these goals should we see if it makes sense to pursue these manned missions.
The people of NASA aren't the problem - it's the mission that Congress has given them. With nebulous goals like "let's go to the moon", congress is forcing NASA to squander the tax payer's money.
Umm, to kill germs. That's why water is heated, not just for comfort.
Standard home hot water heaters aren't designed to kill germs, and they don't get hot enough to kill germs.
Furthermore, you should never use your hot tap water for cooking, due to hot water's better ability to carry lead found in home plumbing. Instead, boil cold tap water on your stovetop or in your microwave oven.
Here are a couple references for your benefit:
About hot water's ability to kill germs
On lead and plumbing
There are many other (better) references than these two... these are just the ones I found first.
During the winter, your methods of saving electricity are limited to allowing lower temperatures inside and finding ways to prevent heat loss to the outside (such as the suggested curtains).
Your statement assumes that you use (inefficient) electric heat, and that your "wenergy wasting appliances" are nearly as efficient as your electric baseboard heating system.
Most of my lights are of the "ceiling recessed" variety. These ceiling lamps might be raising the temperature of my attic, but they are grossly inefficient in terms of heating my living space.
The article goes on and on about how Silicon Valley can capitalize on the solar energy business (and other forms of high-efficincy energy production). There are a couple new and exciting renewable energy companies in the valley.
The first order of business for an energy consumer should be to minimize energy consumption. The economics are simple: a reduction in demand will reduce costs.
Many people are shocked when they learn that it's very easy to save $1000 in energy costs a year by spending less than $100 and an hour's worth of time. This guy and this guy seemed to do just about nothing for 50% energy savings.
Even though it's always exciting to look at the state of the art in the energy business, it's more useful (but less exciting) to look at how it impacts you personally.