I believe I read a couple years ago about a car being released in Europe by VW that turned off the engine at stops. The trick? It was diesel (a warm diesel engine can theoretically start on the first stroke, practice is only slightly slower). When you stepped on the accelerator, there would be a slight hesitation as the engine restarted, then everyting was normal. This dramatically improved city mileage to near-highway mileage. They didn't market it in North America due to two reasons - weather (for some areas) and customer expectations. I never checked how it fared in Europe.
I have the classic extension to what you have. There are streets where I live that work that way if you go 5 km/h over the speed limit, others at 10 km/h (and one I know of that works at 5 km/h under). So why do they reward you for breaking the law? The only thing I can figure is so the cops can ticket you...
One of the best ways to mitigate the risk of anything is to have redundancy. And one of the biggest costs of doing anything in space is getting stuff there. The obvious solution is to make the priority of the newly-finished space elevator be to supply materials for the next space elevator. This also mitigates risk due to political instability, gives an international flavour, and further reduces cost to space. All of these things have been talked about before by the big visionaries, Arthur C. Clarke (The Fountains of Paradise) and Charles Sheffield (The Web Between the Worlds) among them.
Incidentally, this is exactly what Charles Sheffield proposed in the 70s. Very good book. The side benefit is that you have a fairly closed system. The only energy expense after startup is friction and the net (yes, net) load from earth.
Cute, but remember this. The only reason that 9/11 went as badly as it did was that the other passengers assumed that if they just obeyed the terrorists for a few hours, they could put it all behind them and get on with their lives. When the passengers in the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania realized this was not the case, they stopped the terrorists. Now no one in the world is assuming that if terrorists take control of a plane (or anything else), they will have the opportunity to walk away if they just obey the terrorists.
What this means is that, if terrorists attack again, they will do it in such a way that hostage complacency is not an option. Hostages will be disabled, killed, or held with overwhelming force. All of these have their drawbacks, one of them being resources (terrorists, mostly). This is why, for the longest time, car bombings and such have been so popular - they use very little resources (one or two poorly trained terrorists). The reason the 9/11 attacks were attractive was the risk-to-reward ratio. Sure, none of them were walking away from it, and they required extensive training, but the chance to strike at the heart of the enemy (WTC => economic, Pentagon => military, political was stopped?) was too great. But it had one great assumption that was beyond the control of the terrorists. Fortunately, years of experience had left some indication of how the hostages would behave, and they were right.
Also, keep in mind the goal of terrorism: to instill terror. Repeated failures don't tend to achieve that, so doing any activity with a fair chance of failure is counterproductive.
This leaves some simple assumptions for the terrorists' next move. They won't do anything that requires people to just sit back and wait. That means any potential hostages will be dealt with immediately, or their plan has to have a very short timeline. Also, it will have to be either unexpected, or unavoidable. Car bombings are a perfect example of this: They're expected, but unavoidable; They have no hostages; and, they have a short timeline.
There may be other actions that fit these criteria, but I can't think of any. One thing is certain, they will either use ubiquitous methods, or be quite innovative (unavoidable, or unexpected), and the problem with innovative is it's only innovative the first time. Hence, it's usually the last time.
Farenheit is no more accurate than Centigrade. How many decimals do you want to go down to? There's no reasonable limit. Also, note that delta 1 Kelvin = delta 1 degree Centigrade. So, if accuracy was an issue, it holds to Kelvin just as well as Centigrade. As far as where to start counting, I can see water freeze in nature 7 months of the year, and have a need to boil it year-round. This is a critical factor in human survival. Why not use it for basing temperature measurements on? Also, it very much follows the other rules of metric - the metre was initially based on planetary measurements, and base-10 is also very important. Not that I have a problem with Kelvin, I just don't have a problem with Centigrade, either.
Having worked in construction, which is still often imperial, I would say that metric is simpler than imperial. The reason is, there are no shortcuts. For example, convert 1 mile, to yards, feet, and inches. You probably won't, you'll just dredge up the memorized ones, and calculate the ones that aren't. Now, convert 1 km to m, cm, and mm. Easy, 1000 (from memory), 100 000 (the last times 100), and 1 000 000 (the last times 10). Most people typically aren't interested in going lower than mm, but I'll commoly use 1/32" (about a mm) or 1/64". Quick, what's the next size up, in 32nds of a inch, from 5/32" (I want a bit of play in the hole I have to drill for a 5/32" bolt)? Well, let's see, that's 6/32", which converts to 3/16". Or you can use factoring (WTF! I just want a bit size!) to figure out that there is only one factor (2) common to both. Yeah, that sounds easy. In metric, I can just add 1 mm.
And how exactly does this multitude of factors affect the choice to stay with Farenheit?
The idea that there are a number of factors is useful, in theory, but the implementation is difficult at best (do you want to pay for drill bit manufacturers to etch in 4 different fractional measurements so you don't have to do that "easy" conversion?). It's also not valid in a number of areas. If you want something that's useful, and easy to implement, stick with standard numbering systems. Nowadays, that's base-2 or base-10. It's time to bid a fond farewell to our last icon of base-12 numbering.
Well, at least that would be more valid than the whole French vs. Freedom thing, when applied to fries. Slice is to french is to dice what Earth is to Europe is to France. And lots of other words have multiple, unrelated meanings.
Be careful, you might make the God of Code angry, and who know what'll happen then. If he's like any other god, he'll prefer virgins. VB coders would be more like whores. I recommend CS graduates. Or slashdotters.
Yes, but will we have to call it Linux/Hurd? Or GNU/Linux/Hurd? GNU/Hurd? Hurd of GNU(/Linux optional)? Just plain ol' Hurd? The One True Operating System? For this reason alone, I think this idea should be approached with trepidation.
On the plus side, if this should ever happen, we'll be able to power the world on the flame wars.
That's a very broad view of the issue, and raises the question of why we have patents on organisms in the first place, but there are more issues besides.
For millenia, farmers have selected seed from their best producers for the year, causing their crops to be more accustomed to their locale. This will never happen with terminator seed.
There is a cost involved in buying seed every year.
There a number of other concerns with varying levels of likelihood and risk. This is a dangerous trend, and should be viewed with concern by all individuals involved, which is everyone.
Crowd control is the only chilling effect this would have, but is kind of redundant in that realm. If I want to disperse/disable a crowd, and I don't care about any risks, I can use tear gas or machine guns. Either way, it's about as effective as this for detaining dissidents. It's also a lot smaller and more maneuverable.
The article also mentioned use in torture, but I think any torturer (geek torturers excepted) would rather deal with jumper cables (or more sophisticated options) than that monstrosity.
You think that idea is bad? Read up on terminator seeds. The possibilities are terrifying. The funny part is, so many people are up in arms about terminator seeds, that Monsanto doesn't get on the first page of Google.
There was no country per se. Troops came from both Upper (southern Ontario) and Lower (southern Quebec) Canada, although many of them were imported from Europe. Here is a fairly comprehensive and realtively unbiased link.
The nearest military airport to my home is in a city with ~700k people. Residential zoning on all sides (of course, the military zone is fairly large). I've seen Hercules aircraft flying over the city on a regular basis (just this week, in fact). What's your point?
If you want an interesting view of the term "conservative", read 1633 from Baen Books (it's free on their free site). The premise is that a small town in the Appalacians gets sent back in time to 1600s Germany. One guy wants to change the way things are being done, and it is expected he will join the conservative political party du jour. The character snickers and says something along the lines of "I wonder how long it will take him to figure out he threw his vote in with the socialist party." The other person is surprised, and the first explains that conservative is about maintaining the status quo (keep things the way they were, conserve).
It makes you wonder why we use it to mean right-wing, when at best it is a relative term.
From this article, part of the problem with their Novell lawsuit was that they couldn't show where Novell's actions had caused them financial harm (they mention people not buying licenses, but they don't seem to differentiate between Linux indemnity licenses or new software licenses). Maybe this is some half-assed attempt to make it look like they have a product line (which isn't doing well), hence they've been harmed by Novell. Let's just hope. I'd love to see a judge say, "No, you're holding the gun that shot you in the foot..."
Slashdot Mirror
I believe I read a couple years ago about a car being released in Europe by VW that turned off the engine at stops. The trick? It was diesel (a warm diesel engine can theoretically start on the first stroke, practice is only slightly slower). When you stepped on the accelerator, there would be a slight hesitation as the engine restarted, then everyting was normal. This dramatically improved city mileage to near-highway mileage. They didn't market it in North America due to two reasons - weather (for some areas) and customer expectations. I never checked how it fared in Europe.
I have the classic extension to what you have. There are streets where I live that work that way if you go 5 km/h over the speed limit, others at 10 km/h (and one I know of that works at 5 km/h under). So why do they reward you for breaking the law? The only thing I can figure is so the cops can ticket you...
Well done! I almost choked on my tongue when I read that.
One of the best ways to mitigate the risk of anything is to have redundancy. And one of the biggest costs of doing anything in space is getting stuff there. The obvious solution is to make the priority of the newly-finished space elevator be to supply materials for the next space elevator. This also mitigates risk due to political instability, gives an international flavour, and further reduces cost to space. All of these things have been talked about before by the big visionaries, Arthur C. Clarke (The Fountains of Paradise) and Charles Sheffield (The Web Between the Worlds) among them.
Incidentally, this is exactly what Charles Sheffield proposed in the 70s. Very good book. The side benefit is that you have a fairly closed system. The only energy expense after startup is friction and the net (yes, net) load from earth.
Hmm, $10 billion, minus $2.5 million, plus the required political pork...we're only $20 billion from being able to fund this!
I'm gonna make a tinfoil hat, just for you. On the brim, I'll etch my .sig.
Conversely, Eric Flint has an interesting opinion, too. And, of course, the place to find those free books...
Cute, but remember this. The only reason that 9/11 went as badly as it did was that the other passengers assumed that if they just obeyed the terrorists for a few hours, they could put it all behind them and get on with their lives. When the passengers in the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania realized this was not the case, they stopped the terrorists. Now no one in the world is assuming that if terrorists take control of a plane (or anything else), they will have the opportunity to walk away if they just obey the terrorists.
What this means is that, if terrorists attack again, they will do it in such a way that hostage complacency is not an option. Hostages will be disabled, killed, or held with overwhelming force. All of these have their drawbacks, one of them being resources (terrorists, mostly). This is why, for the longest time, car bombings and such have been so popular - they use very little resources (one or two poorly trained terrorists). The reason the 9/11 attacks were attractive was the risk-to-reward ratio. Sure, none of them were walking away from it, and they required extensive training, but the chance to strike at the heart of the enemy (WTC => economic, Pentagon => military, political was stopped?) was too great. But it had one great assumption that was beyond the control of the terrorists. Fortunately, years of experience had left some indication of how the hostages would behave, and they were right.
Also, keep in mind the goal of terrorism: to instill terror. Repeated failures don't tend to achieve that, so doing any activity with a fair chance of failure is counterproductive.
This leaves some simple assumptions for the terrorists' next move. They won't do anything that requires people to just sit back and wait. That means any potential hostages will be dealt with immediately, or their plan has to have a very short timeline. Also, it will have to be either unexpected, or unavoidable. Car bombings are a perfect example of this: They're expected, but unavoidable; They have no hostages; and, they have a short timeline.
There may be other actions that fit these criteria, but I can't think of any. One thing is certain, they will either use ubiquitous methods, or be quite innovative (unavoidable, or unexpected), and the problem with innovative is it's only innovative the first time. Hence, it's usually the last time.
Well, since we're on the topic of lawyer jokes (don't tell me the USPTO isn't that), here's one I always enjoyed despite it's simplicity.
What's the difference between a lawyer and a bucket of shit?
A bucket.
Farenheit is no more accurate than Centigrade. How many decimals do you want to go down to? There's no reasonable limit. Also, note that delta 1 Kelvin = delta 1 degree Centigrade. So, if accuracy was an issue, it holds to Kelvin just as well as Centigrade. As far as where to start counting, I can see water freeze in nature 7 months of the year, and have a need to boil it year-round. This is a critical factor in human survival. Why not use it for basing temperature measurements on? Also, it very much follows the other rules of metric - the metre was initially based on planetary measurements, and base-10 is also very important. Not that I have a problem with Kelvin, I just don't have a problem with Centigrade, either.
Having worked in construction, which is still often imperial, I would say that metric is simpler than imperial. The reason is, there are no shortcuts. For example, convert 1 mile, to yards, feet, and inches. You probably won't, you'll just dredge up the memorized ones, and calculate the ones that aren't. Now, convert 1 km to m, cm, and mm. Easy, 1000 (from memory), 100 000 (the last times 100), and 1 000 000 (the last times 10). Most people typically aren't interested in going lower than mm, but I'll commoly use 1/32" (about a mm) or 1/64". Quick, what's the next size up, in 32nds of a inch, from 5/32" (I want a bit of play in the hole I have to drill for a 5/32" bolt)? Well, let's see, that's 6/32", which converts to 3/16". Or you can use factoring (WTF! I just want a bit size!) to figure out that there is only one factor (2) common to both. Yeah, that sounds easy. In metric, I can just add 1 mm.
And how exactly does this multitude of factors affect the choice to stay with Farenheit?
The idea that there are a number of factors is useful, in theory, but the implementation is difficult at best (do you want to pay for drill bit manufacturers to etch in 4 different fractional measurements so you don't have to do that "easy" conversion?). It's also not valid in a number of areas. If you want something that's useful, and easy to implement, stick with standard numbering systems. Nowadays, that's base-2 or base-10. It's time to bid a fond farewell to our last icon of base-12 numbering.
No, having units at 1 and 5 (and base-10 multiples thereof) is more than satisfactory, but the math is still hell.
Well, at least that would be more valid than the whole French vs. Freedom thing, when applied to fries. Slice is to french is to dice what Earth is to Europe is to France. And lots of other words have multiple, unrelated meanings.
I assume they would call it useless and outdated...
Be careful, you might make the God of Code angry, and who know what'll happen then. If he's like any other god, he'll prefer virgins. VB coders would be more like whores. I recommend CS graduates. Or slashdotters.
Yes, but will we have to call it Linux/Hurd? Or GNU/Linux/Hurd? GNU/Hurd? Hurd of GNU(/Linux optional)? Just plain ol' Hurd? The One True Operating System? For this reason alone, I think this idea should be approached with trepidation.
On the plus side, if this should ever happen, we'll be able to power the world on the flame wars.
Are the editors finally trying to verify things around here?
No, now they're just telling us that they aren't verifying things...
That's a very broad view of the issue, and raises the question of why we have patents on organisms in the first place, but there are more issues besides.
For millenia, farmers have selected seed from their best producers for the year, causing their crops to be more accustomed to their locale. This will never happen with terminator seed.
There is a cost involved in buying seed every year.
There a number of other concerns with varying levels of likelihood and risk. This is a dangerous trend, and should be viewed with concern by all individuals involved, which is everyone.
Crowd control is the only chilling effect this would have, but is kind of redundant in that realm. If I want to disperse/disable a crowd, and I don't care about any risks, I can use tear gas or machine guns. Either way, it's about as effective as this for detaining dissidents. It's also a lot smaller and more maneuverable.
The article also mentioned use in torture, but I think any torturer (geek torturers excepted) would rather deal with jumper cables (or more sophisticated options) than that monstrosity.
You think that idea is bad? Read up on terminator seeds. The possibilities are terrifying. The funny part is, so many people are up in arms about terminator seeds, that Monsanto doesn't get on the first page of Google.
There was no country per se. Troops came from both Upper (southern Ontario) and Lower (southern Quebec) Canada, although many of them were imported from Europe. Here is a fairly comprehensive and realtively unbiased link.
The nearest military airport to my home is in a city with ~700k people. Residential zoning on all sides (of course, the military zone is fairly large). I've seen Hercules aircraft flying over the city on a regular basis (just this week, in fact). What's your point?
If you want an interesting view of the term "conservative", read 1633 from Baen Books (it's free on their free site). The premise is that a small town in the Appalacians gets sent back in time to 1600s Germany. One guy wants to change the way things are being done, and it is expected he will join the conservative political party du jour. The character snickers and says something along the lines of "I wonder how long it will take him to figure out he threw his vote in with the socialist party." The other person is surprised, and the first explains that conservative is about maintaining the status quo (keep things the way they were, conserve).
It makes you wonder why we use it to mean right-wing, when at best it is a relative term.
From this article, part of the problem with their Novell lawsuit was that they couldn't show where Novell's actions had caused them financial harm (they mention people not buying licenses, but they don't seem to differentiate between Linux indemnity licenses or new software licenses). Maybe this is some half-assed attempt to make it look like they have a product line (which isn't doing well), hence they've been harmed by Novell. Let's just hope. I'd love to see a judge say, "No, you're holding the gun that shot you in the foot..."