These studies prompted a formal 2013 peer review by the European Food Safety Authority that said neonicotinoids pose an unacceptably high risk to bees, and that the industry-sponsored science upon which regulatory agencies' claims of safety have relied is flawed.[12] CCD is probably compounded by a combination of factors.[13][14][15][16] In 2007, some authorities attributed the problem to biotic factors such as Varroa mites,[17] Nosema apis parasites, and Israel acute paralysis virus.[18][19] Other contributing factors may include environmental change-related stress,[20] malnutrition, and migratory beekeeping.
Yes, of course *sarcasm* the science is settled *sarcasm* I think the science is pretty good against bees using tobacco -- but moderate use of marijuana is usually considered to be generally harmless and occasionally beneficial.
Actually, cold winters would not be a serious problem for pumped storage. At most, you get an ice layer a few feet thick on top of the water you are storing. You can heat the pipes, etc. as needed to keep them from freezing.
No, collecting getting solar energy will be a problem in the land of the midnight sun. I suppose wind-power would be a viable renewable power source though.
I don't know that answer, but I would hope that the answer was "quite a lot of it". Old cold is not bad code, it is the code that has generally stood the test of time. Not that it is defect free, but that the defect rates are generally lower than the newly written code. Even such basic steps as recompiling for 64-bit, causes new breakage (old code was defective, but the problem was masked). This appears likely to be one of those old problems that became unmasked with the latest patch.
Sarah Palin's personal account on Yahoo Email was hacked the guy that did this - got a 1 year sentence as a result. How is this any different in principal from getting into her email account vs. the IRS getting into email, other than the IRS being a bunch of government thugs?
Assuming that you are correct, why would this be a BIG problem?
The oxygen is not radioactive (at least not for very long as the longest oxygen half-life is about 2 minutes). Everything past hydrogen 3 has incredibly short half-life. So really, it is all about the tritium, half-life about 12.3 years
I would think that given the mass ratios for the hydrogen isotopes that separating out the tritium would be trivial compared to enriching uranium, and given our history of separating this out -- not a big problem, in fact there are commercial plants that do this already for water from nuclear reactors (thousands of tons per year). BTW tritium is a valuable commercial product, so much so that we intentional create it by other means.
Tritium decay is very easily mitigated beta decay. The thinnest wall, human skin, or even a little air will stop it. So, the real threat is if you manage to inhale or drink radioactive water. Even then, you get the safety bonus of the water in your body having a biological half life of about 1-2 weeks, so drink more water to flush the bad water out of your system faster.
So, compared to nuclear wastes, seems to be a fairly minor threat.
If the gravity at the "event horizon" were 1g, certainly light at the event horizon could go well outside the event horizon (but not to infinity) before the gravity curved it back into the well. If I had a rocket just inside that event horizon, I should be about to fly out of the black hole as well -- my exhaust would all be trapped, but I could move the part of the total ship mass containing me outside of the event horizon by sacrificing the momentum of the exhaust.
An observer at infinity would see the rocket disappear when it dropped below the event horizon, but then reappear after it returned outside the event horizon.
Well, the bill specifies notification via writing or email. Clearly, no risk of identity theft whatsoever. Also, they specific the info must be provided to the consumer at no charge, so no disincentive to phishers of men that way either.
Arguably, the LFTR reactor addresses both issues. Now, the LFTR design does not completely eliminate the nuclear weapon effect, but it would make it quite a bit harder to weaponize than existing reactor designs. For practical fission reactors, I am pretty sure it is impossible to eliminate ALL possible nuke weapon uses. However, since you can clearly make a nuclear weapon if you have the resources and desire, it is impossible to eliminate the threat of nuclear weapons at all. So, this standard seems like an useless standard for nuclear power, since it can be bypassed anyway.
LFTR would clearly extend the useful cycle of high-density energy sources by a lot -- at least millions of years -- this is probably even long enough to get us transitioned to Mr. Fusion based flying cars.
Lots of smart people are looking seriously at LFTR and similar designs as the next big energy source.
First of all, I was not really trolling, I was going for funny mostly. Second, reminding me that coal is also subsidized does not mean that I should be glad that wind is subsidized. If I had my druthers I would like to see LFTR reactors developed and deployed (assuming things pan out well when fully developed) without subsidies too. I would also very much like to eliminate most carbon-burning process for energy generation, not really because of global warming concerns but because of what it is doing to ocean PH, may be ocean PH can change more without serious harm, but I am a lot more worried about this that the harm of global warming.
But wind is also horrible as a primary energy source, you get a few days of widespread low or no wind and society would collapse as everything shuts down. That is my strongest reason for opposing large subsidies it -- it does not work in the large, and oh yeah, that complete unfairness of stealing from one person to subsidize another. Sure wind and solar and other energy source often referred to as green make sense some of the time, but there is not a single primary large-scale power source that is green. Wasting our time and energy on large wind farms (because some people feel good about green-energy) when we should actually be trying to solve the energy problem makes me angry. I'm an engineer by training. We need either replacement giga-watt power plants or cheap personal or neighborhood power plants that make sense economically as well as environmentally.
While I may dispute the fairness / accuracy of studies re: how much something is subsidized or externalizes costs, I am opposed to all direct industries subsidies everywhere at all times. Political reality is that I won't get my wish.
I'm a a serious conservative. The last president I liked was Calvin Coolidge -- and I am afraid to learn more about him as it could ruin my good opinion of him -- last good Democrat President was Grover Cleveland. Every one of them since Coolidge should have been impeached and tossed out of office for violation of oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. Same thing applies to nearly all judges and congresscritters too.
George W. Bush was in some ways worse than Obama. Look at the rate of spending increase under Bush 43 - worse than Obama. Look at the Medicare expansion worse than Obamacare (in terms of spending). Obama worse in other ways. Both parties are horid. Worse, they make the political rules so that it is very difficult to get a different party elected. In most years, the real election in most districts is the primary. The outcome of the general election rarely changes the party affiliation.
Got news for you, eliminating the $100 bill has been proposed occasionally as no-one has a need for such large money clips. Benefits said to include reduced drug traffic / organized crime due to larger stacks of cash needed with lower denomination currency and reduced counterfeiting -- as if N. Korea can't counterfeit a 20 dollar bill.
Real reason likely includes pushing toward a cashless society where all transactions can be tracked.
A better nuke design would allow for much faster adjustments to the power, but since nuke plants are typically run as base load (as they are cheap to run if you consider fuels costs only) it really does not matter until you get to very high percentages of your electricity from nukes. If you went hog wild with nukes, you would still need demand power via natural gas turbines, hydro, or pumped-water storage, etc.
Coal plants are not good choices for demand load, and oil-fuel plants use very expensive fuel compared to natural gas.
Look at the recent power plant choices, Mostly natural gas, a small amount of wind, just a little nuke and that is about all. I.e., Just about all of the recent fossil fuel electric grid additions are natural gas.
If I were betting, I would bet that the first real evidience we ever get of panspermia, is when we find evidence of life on Mars that is of terrestrial origin. Those earth rocks splashed up from meteor strikes have got to land on Mars as often as the reverse. And we know Earth rocks are filled with life.
If ISP's blocked outbound SMTP traffic everywhere (except to the ISP email servers). Consumer should be able easily to opt out of this. Then, even if the home computer was botted, no spam would be sent via the typical smtp channel. Webmail providers would have further incentive not to allow spamming via their network.
So, some parts of the tech-fix approach are feasible -- other parts are not.
Hey, no reason to back off on Microsoft Hatred just because of this.. Feel free to hate them for the rest of eternity -- I plan too.
Of course, since I am going to heaven, I don't expect to see much of Bill Gates or Steve Balmer (or Steve Jobs, or Scott McNealy, or Larry Ellison, or Mark Zuckerberg etc.)
95% of the processors on tablets and smartphones are ARM processors. ARM Holdings licenses out ARM to a number of chip vendors. In theory, Intel could license ARM also from ARM Holdings and start to manufacture ARM chips. Given the difference in margins, it is unlikely they will do so until they feel there is a significant threat to the business. Even better for Intel (in terms of non-x86 revenue) would be a cross-licensing agreement with ARM that gives Intel a slice of the ARM pie. So, it is not impossible for Intel to compete in the non-86 market, it is simply very difficult to establish a new processor architecture and gain significant market share. The ARM architectural roots are nearly as old as those of the X86 architecture.
This is not to say that Intel has not blown opportunities in the past, but a new architecture today would be very difficult. Intel has deep pockets, but were Intel successful in a new architecture today, it is plausible that US monopoly regs would stomp on Intel for using existing money to develop a new market.
Why not, considering that Azure will likely cost 2-3 times what AWS costs. Shouldn't MS be able to deliver a little more performance on dumb reads & writes. Even if the service is hosted on Windows boxes, surely they use something likely NAS for the actual backing store -- and the service hosting the service should be only a small portion of the end-to-end stack.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I can't get to it myself either, but I am pretty sure it just returns "Hello, World."
I would have thought you might enjoy munching the toasty Jesus. I know I would, especially with a little apple butter.
Or, from the obvious article Colony Collapse Disorder
These studies prompted a formal 2013 peer review by the European Food Safety Authority that said neonicotinoids pose an unacceptably high risk to bees, and that the industry-sponsored science upon which regulatory agencies' claims of safety have relied is flawed.[12] CCD is probably compounded by a combination of factors.[13][14][15][16] In 2007, some authorities attributed the problem to biotic factors such as Varroa mites,[17] Nosema apis parasites, and Israel acute paralysis virus.[18][19] Other contributing factors may include environmental change-related stress,[20] malnutrition, and migratory beekeeping.
Yes, of course *sarcasm* the science is settled *sarcasm* I think the science is pretty good against bees using tobacco -- but moderate use of marijuana is usually considered to be generally harmless and occasionally beneficial.
Actually, cold winters would not be a serious problem for pumped storage. At most, you get an ice layer a few feet thick on top of the water you are storing. You can heat the pipes, etc. as needed to keep them from freezing.
No, collecting getting solar energy will be a problem in the land of the midnight sun. I suppose wind-power would be a viable renewable power source though.
I don't know, he claimed to be cash broke during a divorce 3 years ago. Maybe coughing up $50K is harder than you would think.
I don't know that answer, but I would hope that the answer was "quite a lot of it". Old cold is not bad code, it is the code that has generally stood the test of time. Not that it is defect free, but that the defect rates are generally lower than the newly written code. Even such basic steps as recompiling for 64-bit, causes new breakage (old code was defective, but the problem was masked). This appears likely to be one of those old problems that became unmasked with the latest patch.
Sarah Palin's personal account on Yahoo Email was hacked the guy that did this - got a 1 year sentence as a result. How is this any different in principal from getting into her email account vs. the IRS getting into email, other than the IRS being a bunch of government thugs?
Assuming that you are correct, why would this be a BIG problem?
The oxygen is not radioactive (at least not for very long as the longest oxygen half-life is about 2 minutes). Everything past hydrogen 3 has incredibly short half-life. So really, it is all about the tritium, half-life about 12.3 years
I would think that given the mass ratios for the hydrogen isotopes that separating out the tritium would be trivial compared to enriching uranium, and given our history of separating this out -- not a big problem, in fact there are commercial plants that do this already for water from nuclear reactors (thousands of tons per year). BTW tritium is a valuable commercial product, so much so that we intentional create it by other means.
Tritium decay is very easily mitigated beta decay. The thinnest wall, human skin, or even a little air will stop it. So, the real threat is if you manage to inhale or drink radioactive water. Even then, you get the safety bonus of the water in your body having a biological half life of about 1-2 weeks, so drink more water to flush the bad water out of your system faster.
So, compared to nuclear wastes, seems to be a fairly minor threat.
If the gravity at the "event horizon" were 1g, certainly light at the event horizon could go well outside the event horizon (but not to infinity) before the gravity curved it back into the well. If I had a rocket just inside that event horizon, I should be about to fly out of the black hole as well -- my exhaust would all be trapped, but I could move the part of the total ship mass containing me outside of the event horizon by sacrificing the momentum of the exhaust.
An observer at infinity would see the rocket disappear when it dropped below the event horizon, but then reappear after it returned outside the event horizon.
If not, why not?
Take one lab report for Fluid Mechanics, measure the thickness with a micrometer -- look up the grade on the curve.
Maybe MS can upgrade The Button into Do what I Want in a service pack. Maybe the horse can learn to sing.
Well, the bill specifies notification via writing or email. Clearly, no risk of identity theft whatsoever. Also, they specific the info must be provided to the consumer at no charge, so no disincentive to phishers of men that way either.
Arguably, the LFTR reactor addresses both issues. Now, the LFTR design does not completely eliminate the nuclear weapon effect, but it would make it quite a bit harder to weaponize than existing reactor designs. For practical fission reactors, I am pretty sure it is impossible to eliminate ALL possible nuke weapon uses. However, since you can clearly make a nuclear weapon if you have the resources and desire, it is impossible to eliminate the threat of nuclear weapons at all. So, this standard seems like an useless standard for nuclear power, since it can be bypassed anyway.
LFTR would clearly extend the useful cycle of high-density energy sources by a lot -- at least millions of years -- this is probably even long enough to get us transitioned to Mr. Fusion based flying cars.
Lots of smart people are looking seriously at LFTR and similar designs as the next big energy source.
First of all, I was not really trolling, I was going for funny mostly. Second, reminding me that coal is also subsidized does not mean that I should be glad that wind is subsidized. If I had my druthers I would like to see LFTR reactors developed and deployed (assuming things pan out well when fully developed) without subsidies too. I would also very much like to eliminate most carbon-burning process for energy generation, not really because of global warming concerns but because of what it is doing to ocean PH, may be ocean PH can change more without serious harm, but I am a lot more worried about this that the harm of global warming.
But wind is also horrible as a primary energy source, you get a few days of widespread low or no wind and society would collapse as everything shuts down. That is my strongest reason for opposing large subsidies it -- it does not work in the large, and oh yeah, that complete unfairness of stealing from one person to subsidize another. Sure wind and solar and other energy source often referred to as green make sense some of the time, but there is not a single primary large-scale power source that is green. Wasting our time and energy on large wind farms (because some people feel good about green-energy) when we should actually be trying to solve the energy problem makes me angry. I'm an engineer by training. We need either replacement giga-watt power plants or cheap personal or neighborhood power plants that make sense economically as well as environmentally.
While I may dispute the fairness / accuracy of studies re: how much something is subsidized or externalizes costs, I am opposed to all direct industries subsidies everywhere at all times. Political reality is that I won't get my wish.
Windfarms make me sick when I think about how much money was wasted subsidizing power that is inherently unreliable and atleast somewhat unpredictable
I'm a a serious conservative. The last president I liked was Calvin Coolidge -- and I am afraid to learn more about him as it could ruin my good opinion of him -- last good Democrat President was Grover Cleveland. Every one of them since Coolidge should have been impeached and tossed out of office for violation of oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic. Same thing applies to nearly all judges and congresscritters too.
George W. Bush was in some ways worse than Obama. Look at the rate of spending increase under Bush 43 - worse than Obama. Look at the Medicare expansion worse than Obamacare (in terms of spending). Obama worse in other ways. Both parties are horid. Worse, they make the political rules so that it is very difficult to get a different party elected. In most years, the real election in most districts is the primary. The outcome of the general election rarely changes the party affiliation.
Calvin Coolidge (R) or Grover Cleveland (D) if you were actually looking for the most recent mostly honest politician of each party.
Got news for you, eliminating the $100 bill has been proposed occasionally as no-one has a need for such large money clips. Benefits said to include reduced drug traffic / organized crime due to larger stacks of cash needed with lower denomination currency and reduced counterfeiting -- as if N. Korea can't counterfeit a 20 dollar bill.
Real reason likely includes pushing toward a cashless society where all transactions can be tracked.
A better nuke design would allow for much faster adjustments to the power, but since nuke plants are typically run as base load (as they are cheap to run if you consider fuels costs only) it really does not matter until you get to very high percentages of your electricity from nukes. If you went hog wild with nukes, you would still need demand power via natural gas turbines, hydro, or pumped-water storage, etc.
Coal plants are not good choices for demand load, and oil-fuel plants use very expensive fuel compared to natural gas.
Look at the recent power plant choices, Mostly natural gas, a small amount of wind, just a little nuke and that is about all. I.e., Just about all of the recent fossil fuel electric grid additions are natural gas.
If I were betting, I would bet that the first real evidience we ever get of panspermia, is when we find evidence of life on Mars that is of terrestrial origin. Those earth rocks splashed up from meteor strikes have got to land on Mars as often as the reverse. And we know Earth rocks are filled with life.
If ISP's blocked outbound SMTP traffic everywhere (except to the ISP email servers). Consumer should be able easily to opt out of this. Then, even if the home computer was botted, no spam would be sent via the typical smtp channel. Webmail providers would have further incentive not to allow spamming via their network.
So, some parts of the tech-fix approach are feasible -- other parts are not.
Hey, no reason to back off on Microsoft Hatred just because of this.. Feel free to hate them for the rest of eternity -- I plan too.
Of course, since I am going to heaven, I don't expect to see much of Bill Gates or Steve Balmer (or Steve Jobs, or Scott McNealy, or Larry Ellison, or Mark Zuckerberg etc.)
95% of the processors on tablets and smartphones are ARM processors. ARM Holdings licenses out ARM to a number of chip vendors. In theory, Intel could license ARM also from ARM Holdings and start to manufacture ARM chips. Given the difference in margins, it is unlikely they will do so until they feel there is a significant threat to the business. Even better for Intel (in terms of non-x86 revenue) would be a cross-licensing agreement with ARM that gives Intel a slice of the ARM pie. So, it is not impossible for Intel to compete in the non-86 market, it is simply very difficult to establish a new processor architecture and gain significant market share. The ARM architectural roots are nearly as old as those of the X86 architecture.
This is not to say that Intel has not blown opportunities in the past, but a new architecture today would be very difficult. Intel has deep pockets, but were Intel successful in a new architecture today, it is plausible that US monopoly regs would stomp on Intel for using existing money to develop a new market.
So important that you could not even be bothered to even look at the article that tells you ~100x slower, 5% better compression compared to zlib.
Why not, considering that Azure will likely cost 2-3 times what AWS costs. Shouldn't MS be able to deliver a little more performance on dumb reads & writes. Even if the service is hosted on Windows boxes, surely they use something likely NAS for the actual backing store -- and the service hosting the service should be only a small portion of the end-to-end stack.