It takes electricity to seperate Hydrogen from water. Then you ignite the hydrogen and regerse the process. It's a lossy inefficient process. You're better off storing the electricity and using it in a motor
Maybe, maybe not. Efficiency needs to be measured from cradle-to-grave for the particular system, not just for one's favorite agenda. Hydrogen may be less efficient to separate, and even less efficient to "burn", but the overall effect to the enviornemnt, and the actaul sunk and operating costs over 50 years (or whatever), may make it the best process to go with - BMW believes so much that using hydrogen in a minimally modified engine as we're all familiar with today is the right approach that they've invested a billion dollars in that belief. There's not enough detail shaken out of the various alternatives to oil, which of course is for now still the most viable energy source, to decide what to commit to fully - so people continue to try a little fo this and that, and the process will eventually go in some direction.
So to avoid these things I'd open a business in... the USA? You're joking, right?
News flash: the vast majority of the US, its citizens and even its businessmen are of vastly higher character than Hollywood portrays them to the world at large.
The last 3 companies I worked for, and 2 orginizations I am involved with all have disater recovery plans.
Having worked in serious disaster recovery, and disaster areas, I can tell you that the majoirty of disaster recovery plans are complete eyewash. Unless companies make a CEO level decision to actually exercise the personnel and processes involved in those plans, at a frequency that shows measureably the quality of the efforts, then no one will really know what to do. No one likes practice bleeding, so it doesn't happen.
My point was you don't setup and depend on a shop in a place like India or such if they're not a stable enough region in terms of political, economical and academic senses.
Sure you do... risk assessment is about relative relationships, not about absolutes.
If I were to hire an employee, I would disregard any degrees from online universities.
Yes, it's far more important to only hire people who earn degrees from brick and mortar universities, where attention to academic quality is of the first order, such as Auburn.
It's a good idea to recomend this, it does save money and the ability of a country to prosper has become bound up with it's ability to keep enough energy to do what it needs.,br>
What is good for the people of a country is for government to stay as much as possible out of the decisions of how the people elect to spend their money. If a person or company feels it is to their advantage to spend more money on energy in the short term to gain an advantage, or perhaps because they do not believe the added cost of whatever is energy efficient will pay back the additional upfront expense (such as all those alternative energy cars car manufacturers announce to great fanfare and then quietly let fade away), then that is the risk those companies should be allowed to take without meddlesome legislation. What's next - legislation saying everyone must ride a bike to work? - except for important people like elected officials, of course.
I really think it is a stretch for a laser to stick in an airport control tower to actually shoot down a missile by zapping it with the laser. I think it would be a much safer thing, especially around a civilian airport, to spoof such a missle by pulsing it with IR
The best Suppression of an Enemy Air Defense system is to hard-kill that system.
They don't need to see the Stinger prior to launch. The system has sufficient time to detect a high speed object on a vector towards an aircraft, or towards the facility, and to then target the system while in flight.
No - but after repeatedly bashing my head against the wall trying to teach some basic security concepts to the windows-using side of my family (siblings, etc.), I declined to repair their machine last time and instead made them take it to a local repair shop to have all the crap cleaned out. 300 bucks later and they now seem to listen to me... go figure.
People think that just because some application is open source it's secure; how wrong
they are to believe that.
Some people seem to think that just because the vendor of some application that is closed source never announces and only acknowledges its security errors when publicly called on it that the application must be more secure.
There has been a processing (budget?) freeze for a few months now. The 2 year average is increasing. Those who have active security clearances are in even greater demand (it's nice to live on the proper side of the railroad tracks).
Apparantly she didn't teach you the ability to distinguish between the statement of the parent article, single most significant factor, and the statement you turned it into, "not having a father" == criminal, so that you could then take *great* exception.
It really shouldn't be that way. If a company can stick a no-compete on you, then it is they that should have to pay you during the period that you cannot work
Was someone holding a gun at your head when you accepted the contract?
Maybe Intelligent Design can get some respect if other hard-to-test and long-shot hypotheses are allowed to be called "science".
Hardly. Scientists are quite happy to take whatever theory best explains whatever they are trying to answer and discard those that don't measure up or better (mathematically) fits the data. In Intelligent Design, there is only one answer allowed to be considered, and all nonconsideration of it is what was once called blasphemy.
That's what governments are for; doing that which is worth the expense of doing, but does not directly yield a profit.
With that attitude, governments become nothing more than a teat for the social program du jour. The role of government is to insure the secure the people against the tyranny of those who do not subscribe to the concept of liberty. The people are free to then do what they want - whether it be profitable or not.
It will be a frightening day when we start mining the moon. Rather than spreading out and destroying other planets/moons/celestial bodies, how about first learning, as a species, how to preserve the planet we are already on?
Oh give me a fucking break.
If we die out, well, we deserve it.
Tell you what - you stay here and die out, since you believe that you deserve it. The rest of us will go figure out how to reach for the stars.
Using a UAV to circumvent fences without a warrant is the same as using infrared cameras to circumvent fences without a warrant
Not hardly. When within a dwelling one has an expectation of privacy from the outside world. When in one's backyard, it's obvious that someone flying over could obsrve the area.
Slashdot Mirror
It takes electricity to seperate Hydrogen from water. Then you ignite the hydrogen and regerse the process. It's a lossy inefficient process. You're better off storing the electricity and using it in a motor
Maybe, maybe not. Efficiency needs to be measured from cradle-to-grave for the particular system, not just for one's favorite agenda. Hydrogen may be less efficient to separate, and even less efficient to "burn", but the overall effect to the enviornemnt, and the actaul sunk and operating costs over 50 years (or whatever), may make it the best process to go with - BMW believes so much that using hydrogen in a minimally modified engine as we're all familiar with today is the right approach that they've invested a billion dollars in that belief. There's not enough detail shaken out of the various alternatives to oil, which of course is for now still the most viable energy source, to decide what to commit to fully - so people continue to try a little fo this and that, and the process will eventually go in some direction.
I found it!
I consider our reliance on oil much more "evil" than our reliance on electronics. PDA's aren't killing the earth quite as fast as cars are
Their, and the electric cars', significantly limited-life batteries, and the inefficiences in recharging them, certainly are.
So to avoid these things I'd open a business in ... the USA? You're joking, right?
News flash: the vast majority of the US, its citizens and even its businessmen are of vastly higher character than Hollywood portrays them to the world at large.
The last 3 companies I worked for, and 2 orginizations I am involved with all have disater recovery plans.
Having worked in serious disaster recovery, and disaster areas, I can tell you that the majoirty of disaster recovery plans are complete eyewash. Unless companies make a CEO level decision to actually exercise the personnel and processes involved in those plans, at a frequency that shows measureably the quality of the efforts, then no one will really know what to do. No one likes practice bleeding, so it doesn't happen.
My point was you don't setup and depend on a shop in a place like India or such if they're not a stable enough region in terms of political, economical and academic senses.
... risk assessment is about relative relationships, not about absolutes.
Sure you do
Yes, it's far more important to only hire people who earn degrees from brick and mortar universities, where attention to academic quality is of the first order, such as Auburn.
It's a good idea to recomend this, it does save money and the ability of a country to prosper has become bound up with it's ability to keep enough energy to do what it needs. ,br>
What is good for the people of a country is for government to stay as much as possible out of the decisions of how the people elect to spend their money. If a person or company feels it is to their advantage to spend more money on energy in the short term to gain an advantage, or perhaps because they do not believe the added cost of whatever is energy efficient will pay back the additional upfront expense (such as all those alternative energy cars car manufacturers announce to great fanfare and then quietly let fade away), then that is the risk those companies should be allowed to take without meddlesome legislation. What's next - legislation saying everyone must ride a bike to work? - except for important people like elected officials, of course.
I really think it is a stretch for a laser to stick in an airport control tower to actually shoot down a missile by zapping it with the laser. I think it would be a much safer thing, especially around a civilian airport, to spoof such a missle by pulsing it with IR
The best Suppression of an Enemy Air Defense system is to hard-kill that system.
They don't need to see the Stinger prior to launch. The system has sufficient time to detect a high speed object on a vector towards an aircraft, or towards the facility, and to then target the system while in flight.
You charge friends and family?
... go figure.
No - but after repeatedly bashing my head against the wall trying to teach some basic security concepts to the windows-using side of my family (siblings, etc.), I declined to repair their machine last time and instead made them take it to a local repair shop to have all the crap cleaned out. 300 bucks later and they now seem to listen to me
Some people seem to think that just because the vendor of some application that is closed source never announces and only acknowledges its security errors when publicly called on it that the application must be more secure.
There has been a processing (budget?) freeze for a few months now. The 2 year average is increasing. Those who have active security clearances are in even greater demand (it's nice to live on the proper side of the railroad tracks).
Apparantly she didn't teach you the ability to distinguish between the statement of the parent article, single most significant factor, and the statement you turned it into, "not having a father" == criminal, so that you could then take *great* exception.
WGAS tag?
he's probably some alpha male king who collected wives from all over the world and actually mated with them
... so this is definitely pre-Slashdot era.
Ah
It really shouldn't be that way. If a company can stick a no-compete on you, then it is they that should have to pay you during the period that you cannot work
Was someone holding a gun at your head when you accepted the contract?
Now you're Really Saying Something.
Seemed a little off color (anti-color?)
Maybe Intelligent Design can get some respect if other hard-to-test and long-shot hypotheses are allowed to be called "science".
Hardly. Scientists are quite happy to take whatever theory best explains whatever they are trying to answer and discard those that don't measure up or better (mathematically) fits the data. In Intelligent Design, there is only one answer allowed to be considered, and all nonconsideration of it is what was once called blasphemy.
running after a rainbow can indeed be a waste of time
... till you trip over that pot of gold.
contrary to popular belief, letting people wallow in their own ignorance isn't a good way to go about life.
...
I guess I'll let you continue to believe this
That's what governments are for; doing that which is worth the expense of doing, but does not directly yield a profit.
With that attitude, governments become nothing more than a teat for the social program du jour. The role of government is to insure the secure the people against the tyranny of those who do not subscribe to the concept of liberty. The people are free to then do what they want - whether it be profitable or not.
It will be a frightening day when we start mining the moon. Rather than spreading out and destroying other planets/moons/celestial bodies, how about first learning, as a species, how to preserve the planet we are already on?
Oh give me a fucking break.
If we die out, well, we deserve it.
Tell you what - you stay here and die out, since you believe that you deserve it. The rest of us will go figure out how to reach for the stars.
Using a UAV to circumvent fences without a warrant is the same as using infrared cameras to circumvent fences without a warrant
Not hardly. When within a dwelling one has an expectation of privacy from the outside world. When in one's backyard, it's obvious that someone flying over could obsrve the area.