How do you generate hydrogen in a molten salt reactor? What's the source?
The Fukushima reactors generated it because the water was boiling to steam and reacting with the zirconium-cladded fuel canisters. There are no such canisters in a molten salt reactor, and there is also no water and no pressurisation of the containment structure (what's the vapour pressure of Lithium Fluoride anyway?;) ).
The danger of overheating is also removed - the fuel is already molten *by design*, and is contained in the system by a plug of solid fuel that is kept below the melting point by active cooling. Should the power fail (or the temperature of the fuel go too high for the cooling if the plug to cope), the plug of fuel melts and the whole primary loop drains off and settles in a non-critical arrangement run off area. It will then either solidify, or remain as a liquid if the temperature is high.
It's similar on iOS too - there are a large number of ad-supported free apps, often just direct duplicates of the paid version and listed as "(app name) Lite" or "(app name) Free". It's a strong encouragement to upgrade to the paid version if you like the app and are annoyed by the ads (some more obnoxious than others).
Ironically, some apps make more money for the developers as free, ad-supported than they do as paid apps. It's probably due to volume of "sales" of the free apps though.
As far as I know there aren't any paid apps that also show ads - I certainly haven't seen any, but I'm only one data point. I'm sure the big-player game apps (like Zynga?) probably cross-promote their other games, but don't otherwise advertise products and services.
I used a free app the other day that was serving ads for a loan shark, err sorry a "payday loan company". Skeevy.
This is still a threat on iOS - ads don't just come in free apps, the browser can load them on websites too. Detecting and serving specific ads to specific hardware is trivial.
Ah yes, the "anyone who doesn't agree with me is a shill" argument.
On/.? How original!
I also note you didn't actually read his post carefully - I assume you just skimmed the first couple of paragraphs and decided you had enough to base a solid, informed response on.
So you're ignoring the positive sides of Apple's DIY-friendly efforts, like using socketed Intel "i" CPUs in the iMac that work with whitebox parts, or the design of the original Powermac G4 towers that could be opened and upgraded without any screws at all and had cable routing so that you could run the computer while it was in the open position (the logic board side opened to horizontal so you could easily get to the PCI slots). They also made it absurdly easy to upgrade and service the MBP line.
The iPhone 3G/3GS is similarly very easy to repair - 10 minutes and you have a new battery. The pentalobe screws in the 4 were an odd choice, given the way they have been changing their designs in recent years (if only for their own servicing needs - the machines have become *a lot* easier to assemble and to service compared to the old G4 laptops), but who knows why they decided to use that type of screw. It might have been manufacturing related (concerns with driver cam-out or engage/disengage time during automated assembly that made the pentalobe screw better than a torx or a cross-head. Or it could be that they want to discourage home tinkering.
It's not the first time Apple has been specific over screws - the G4 Powerbooks used a combination of philips head and torx on the external case. I remember the ranting about that back then since "who has a special torx screwdriver at home!!?!".
Make no mistake, Apple makes very few accommodations if it affects the design of the product consider the hilarious and fiddly, yet still perfectly functional internal latches to open the white polycarbonate iMac - they could very easily and perhaps even more effectively had the latches accessible from the outside, but then the back of the computer which you hardly ever see anyway would not have looked as nice. You might say that was "discouraging" home repair, but really it is just an aesthetic choice.
"Disassemble" is a bit of a stretch - other than the panel being held on with screws instead of clipped closed, there is no functional difference.
"Anyone" can replace the battery in a MBP. It's a really, really simple job.
Replacing the RAM requires that you take off the same panel - which Apple considers user-servicable. The only reason the battery isn't technically is because they don't sell them as spares (you have to buy third party), but all the "disassembly" is covered by the designed-by-Apple-to-be-user-servicable RAM installation instructions.
Changing the HD is similarly very quick. Upgrades to SSD drives, including the more esoteric double SSD drive setup (replacing the optical drive) are really not difficult.
And I fix my Apple hardware too, and I assure you I didn't ask permission from Apple.
Mainly it's HD and ODD upgrades, but I've done a few iPhone batteries too. Occasional inverter replacement on the PB G4 (it's right by the hinge and often gets damaged).
1) You send in your iPhone/iPad/iPod due to battery death 2) Apple sends you another one from the refurb pile so you receive it quickly. 3) Apple sends your old device out to their refurb line to be processed. 4) Device is refurbished and added to the refurb pile.
They did "invent" the round rectangle. Well, they were first to implement a way of drawing it quickly in a UI way back in the day. (ooh, I'll take some karma burn for that one, and yes DISCLAIMER: I am aware you are talking about the physical rounded rectangle, not the UI element).
Still, given that one of your arguments is that they "think they invented the round rectangle" I think we're done here.
They are actually retrofitting AC systems into the newer rolling stock. It's just difficult due to the size of the tunnels, which places quite strict limits on the size of the train but more importantly, the ability to dump all that waste heat - you can't just pump it into the tunnels as it's already quite warm down there.
You need to be able to use heat exchangers that are very efficient, or cycle the heat out of a transfer medium when the train comes up above ground (as they all tend to do outside of the centre).
Yes, it's really cool what they can do with INS these days, considering that back in the 60's for Apollo they strapped one into a plane and relied on it to fly coast to coast in the US and it was accurate all the way. These days the precision is even higher.
Incidentally, I thought that posting AC in the same thread where you have already moderated on your own account cancelled the mod (due to IP address/cookie tracking?)
It's very hard to tell on/. these days. Have you read some of the posts that are actually heartfelt. They read like satire from 5 or 6 years ago, but are actually genuine. I had someone argue with me that Apple are fudging their numbers for the App Store; that it's secretly running in gigantic profit, and that all these profits were being tallied in the iPhone 4S sales column, since the 4S was "selling so poorly". I mean, where do you even begin?
This was an edge case, but I read it as a hyperbolic sarcasm. So, I got got. Maybe I'll get the next one.
Depends how you look at it - it could be "Apple doesn't sell an open mobile device, but does sell relatively open computers as a whole".
It's up to them. Do you think their choice of setup on iOS is exclusively because they hate freedom, given their track record with the other things that they make? Or might it be for a whole range of complex reasons, that mainly centre around user experience (the vast, vast, vast majority of iOS users are not in the/. user demographic) and the desire to limit support issues?
It could just be down to their Machiavellian desire to destroy the world, of course.
So, you think a mission-critical, isolated software environment for a specific task (say, a flight computer, or a reactor monitoring system or similar) is the same as a consumer-level device that connects to the internet?
I can see what you're trying to do here, but all that software verification takes time and money, and while it could be argued that we should be equally rigorous with *all* software, there is a limit to what you can do economically. This doesn't mean that there is *no* verification in commercial software, but that it's not as exhaustive as for something like a flight system or an NSA-suitable device. Even with all that brutal testing, it's still not 100% guaranteed to exclude all security holes and bugs (unless you control the system in totality and do not make changes - eg, no external network access, no new modules, no new hardware once your exhaustive audit is completed).
Yes, he's free to do that, but he cannot mischaracterise it as "restricting freedom" - it is merely one of several products that the OP can choose from. It has a set of features, much like any other product. Just because they don't align with his beliefs doesn't make it "broken" - merely unsuitable for his needs.
Yes, iOS should have this by default. The Android quick access method for (especially) turning the wifi on and off is sorely missing from iOS. Ok, it's not a million miles away in iOS, but it would be much more convenient to have it quickly accessible from the main screen since I use it so often.
By that same token, if users "don't want to be screwed" then they are free to *not* purchase the device.
A company is free to decide the features of a product (assuming it is within the law), and a consumer is free to choose to buy or not buy it.
If the product doesn't fit your needs, then buy something else. You can't buy it, knowing the (fully legal) restrictions that Apple places on the thing and then complain that they are "limiting your freedom". Why did you buy it in the first place? You're free to do so of course, but you can't simply expect anything you don't agree with to be labelled "freedom limiting" because it doesn't do what you want it to do.
That's the whole reason Android exists - as an alternative and freer option to iOS.
My hammer doesn't have an attachment to put in screws. I could modify it with some effort to fit such an attachment, but I'm not claiming the hammer manufacturer is limiting my freedom because the head end is made of high speed tempered steel that is really difficult to machine at home for delicate modifications, nor that they're limiting my freedom for not coming with a screwdriver attachment built in.
You say "how is providing a switch that allows users to unlock their tablets restricting anyone's freedom?" yet you ignore Apple's freedom in this. They clearly don't want to include that switch, and it is their freedom to choose (NOTE: I disagree with that decision, but it is theirs to make).
That might hold some water if they actually did make lots of money from the App Store - they don't. The App Store is in profit for Apple, but not by much. It is a tool that exists to sell iOS devices, where they make vastly more profit.
(And again, as has come up before on/. these figures come from Apple's financial statements and if you think they're lying or hiding the money or misrepresenting it to "boost" iOS profits due to "flagging iPhone 4S sales" then call the SEC and tell them so. Not that I'm accusing you of that, but it is an argument I have seen on here before).
The App Store is not the profit engine for Apple that people seem to think it is - possibly because they think the "massive" 30% cut is what's driving it. It is indirectly the source of the majority of their profits because it drives sales of iOS devices. The fact that is has also been very profitable for third party developers is a bonus, and helps to further drive its success (and thus, more sales of hardware).
Slashdot Mirror
How do you generate hydrogen in a molten salt reactor? What's the source?
The Fukushima reactors generated it because the water was boiling to steam and reacting with the zirconium-cladded fuel canisters. There are no such canisters in a molten salt reactor, and there is also no water and no pressurisation of the containment structure (what's the vapour pressure of Lithium Fluoride anyway? ;) ).
The danger of overheating is also removed - the fuel is already molten *by design*, and is contained in the system by a plug of solid fuel that is kept below the melting point by active cooling. Should the power fail (or the temperature of the fuel go too high for the cooling if the plug to cope), the plug of fuel melts and the whole primary loop drains off and settles in a non-critical arrangement run off area. It will then either solidify, or remain as a liquid if the temperature is high.
It's similar on iOS too - there are a large number of ad-supported free apps, often just direct duplicates of the paid version and listed as "(app name) Lite" or "(app name) Free". It's a strong encouragement to upgrade to the paid version if you like the app and are annoyed by the ads (some more obnoxious than others).
Ironically, some apps make more money for the developers as free, ad-supported than they do as paid apps. It's probably due to volume of "sales" of the free apps though.
As far as I know there aren't any paid apps that also show ads - I certainly haven't seen any, but I'm only one data point. I'm sure the big-player game apps (like Zynga?) probably cross-promote their other games, but don't otherwise advertise products and services.
I used a free app the other day that was serving ads for a loan shark, err sorry a "payday loan company". Skeevy.
This is still a threat on iOS - ads don't just come in free apps, the browser can load them on websites too. Detecting and serving specific ads to specific hardware is trivial.
That was my girl's turn of phrase actually, when I was discussing this /. article with her.
Your MBP is not glued together. It's all screws.
If it's coming apart at one of those seams, you may have popped a screw post, or pulled a screw out of one. It happens rarely, but does happen.
Ah yes, the "anyone who doesn't agree with me is a shill" argument.
On /.? How original!
I also note you didn't actually read his post carefully - I assume you just skimmed the first couple of paragraphs and decided you had enough to base a solid, informed response on.
So you're ignoring the positive sides of Apple's DIY-friendly efforts, like using socketed Intel "i" CPUs in the iMac that work with whitebox parts, or the design of the original Powermac G4 towers that could be opened and upgraded without any screws at all and had cable routing so that you could run the computer while it was in the open position (the logic board side opened to horizontal so you could easily get to the PCI slots). They also made it absurdly easy to upgrade and service the MBP line.
The iPhone 3G/3GS is similarly very easy to repair - 10 minutes and you have a new battery. The pentalobe screws in the 4 were an odd choice, given the way they have been changing their designs in recent years (if only for their own servicing needs - the machines have become *a lot* easier to assemble and to service compared to the old G4 laptops), but who knows why they decided to use that type of screw. It might have been manufacturing related (concerns with driver cam-out or engage/disengage time during automated assembly that made the pentalobe screw better than a torx or a cross-head. Or it could be that they want to discourage home tinkering.
It's not the first time Apple has been specific over screws - the G4 Powerbooks used a combination of philips head and torx on the external case. I remember the ranting about that back then since "who has a special torx screwdriver at home!!?!".
Make no mistake, Apple makes very few accommodations if it affects the design of the product consider the hilarious and fiddly, yet still perfectly functional internal latches to open the white polycarbonate iMac - they could very easily and perhaps even more effectively had the latches accessible from the outside, but then the back of the computer which you hardly ever see anyway would not have looked as nice. You might say that was "discouraging" home repair, but really it is just an aesthetic choice.
"Disassemble" is a bit of a stretch - other than the panel being held on with screws instead of clipped closed, there is no functional difference.
"Anyone" can replace the battery in a MBP. It's a really, really simple job.
Replacing the RAM requires that you take off the same panel - which Apple considers user-servicable. The only reason the battery isn't technically is because they don't sell them as spares (you have to buy third party), but all the "disassembly" is covered by the designed-by-Apple-to-be-user-servicable RAM installation instructions.
Changing the HD is similarly very quick. Upgrades to SSD drives, including the more esoteric double SSD drive setup (replacing the optical drive) are really not difficult.
And I fix my Apple hardware too, and I assure you I didn't ask permission from Apple.
Mainly it's HD and ODD upgrades, but I've done a few iPhone batteries too. Occasional inverter replacement on the PB G4 (it's right by the hinge and often gets damaged).
The way it works is:
1) You send in your iPhone/iPad/iPod due to battery death
2) Apple sends you another one from the refurb pile so you receive it quickly.
3) Apple sends your old device out to their refurb line to be processed.
4) Device is refurbished and added to the refurb pile.
Not sure what sort of board gaming places you're going to, but my board game nights are a total clam-fest.
At the very least we're a 50/50 split along gender lines.
They did "invent" the round rectangle. Well, they were first to implement a way of drawing it quickly in a UI way back in the day. (ooh, I'll take some karma burn for that one, and yes DISCLAIMER: I am aware you are talking about the physical rounded rectangle, not the UI element).
Still, given that one of your arguments is that they "think they invented the round rectangle" I think we're done here.
They are actually retrofitting AC systems into the newer rolling stock. It's just difficult due to the size of the tunnels, which places quite strict limits on the size of the train but more importantly, the ability to dump all that waste heat - you can't just pump it into the tunnels as it's already quite warm down there.
You need to be able to use heat exchangers that are very efficient, or cycle the heat out of a transfer medium when the train comes up above ground (as they all tend to do outside of the centre).
Yes, it's really cool what they can do with INS these days, considering that back in the 60's for Apollo they strapped one into a plane and relied on it to fly coast to coast in the US and it was accurate all the way. These days the precision is even higher.
Incidentally, I thought that posting AC in the same thread where you have already moderated on your own account cancelled the mod (due to IP address/cookie tracking?)
Is that even possible?
It's very hard to tell on /. these days. Have you read some of the posts that are actually heartfelt. They read like satire from 5 or 6 years ago, but are actually genuine. I had someone argue with me that Apple are fudging their numbers for the App Store; that it's secretly running in gigantic profit, and that all these profits were being tallied in the iPhone 4S sales column, since the 4S was "selling so poorly". I mean, where do you even begin?
This was an edge case, but I read it as a hyperbolic sarcasm. So, I got got. Maybe I'll get the next one.
The consumer's freedom to choose ends at demanding that $vendor does something specific that they don't offer on $product.
Depends how you look at it - it could be "Apple doesn't sell an open mobile device, but does sell relatively open computers as a whole".
It's up to them. Do you think their choice of setup on iOS is exclusively because they hate freedom, given their track record with the other things that they make? Or might it be for a whole range of complex reasons, that mainly centre around user experience (the vast, vast, vast majority of iOS users are not in the /. user demographic) and the desire to limit support issues?
It could just be down to their Machiavellian desire to destroy the world, of course.
Among other things, yes.
So, you think a mission-critical, isolated software environment for a specific task (say, a flight computer, or a reactor monitoring system or similar) is the same as a consumer-level device that connects to the internet?
I can see what you're trying to do here, but all that software verification takes time and money, and while it could be argued that we should be equally rigorous with *all* software, there is a limit to what you can do economically. This doesn't mean that there is *no* verification in commercial software, but that it's not as exhaustive as for something like a flight system or an NSA-suitable device. Even with all that brutal testing, it's still not 100% guaranteed to exclude all security holes and bugs (unless you control the system in totality and do not make changes - eg, no external network access, no new modules, no new hardware once your exhaustive audit is completed).
Yes, he's free to do that, but he cannot mischaracterise it as "restricting freedom" - it is merely one of several products that the OP can choose from. It has a set of features, much like any other product. Just because they don't align with his beliefs doesn't make it "broken" - merely unsuitable for his needs.
Yes, iOS should have this by default. The Android quick access method for (especially) turning the wifi on and off is sorely missing from iOS. Ok, it's not a million miles away in iOS, but it would be much more convenient to have it quickly accessible from the main screen since I use it so often.
Probably, but it can also depend on the firmware in the device, which can vary between different iOS devices, even running the same version of iOS.
By that same token, if users "don't want to be screwed" then they are free to *not* purchase the device.
A company is free to decide the features of a product (assuming it is within the law), and a consumer is free to choose to buy or not buy it.
If the product doesn't fit your needs, then buy something else. You can't buy it, knowing the (fully legal) restrictions that Apple places on the thing and then complain that they are "limiting your freedom". Why did you buy it in the first place? You're free to do so of course, but you can't simply expect anything you don't agree with to be labelled "freedom limiting" because it doesn't do what you want it to do.
That's the whole reason Android exists - as an alternative and freer option to iOS.
My hammer doesn't have an attachment to put in screws. I could modify it with some effort to fit such an attachment, but I'm not claiming the hammer manufacturer is limiting my freedom because the head end is made of high speed tempered steel that is really difficult to machine at home for delicate modifications, nor that they're limiting my freedom for not coming with a screwdriver attachment built in.
You say "how is providing a switch that allows users to unlock their tablets restricting anyone's freedom?" yet you ignore Apple's freedom in this. They clearly don't want to include that switch, and it is their freedom to choose (NOTE: I disagree with that decision, but it is theirs to make).
That might hold some water if they actually did make lots of money from the App Store - they don't. The App Store is in profit for Apple, but not by much. It is a tool that exists to sell iOS devices, where they make vastly more profit.
(And again, as has come up before on /. these figures come from Apple's financial statements and if you think they're lying or hiding the money or misrepresenting it to "boost" iOS profits due to "flagging iPhone 4S sales" then call the SEC and tell them so. Not that I'm accusing you of that, but it is an argument I have seen on here before).
The App Store is not the profit engine for Apple that people seem to think it is - possibly because they think the "massive" 30% cut is what's driving it. It is indirectly the source of the majority of their profits because it drives sales of iOS devices. The fact that is has also been very profitable for third party developers is a bonus, and helps to further drive its success (and thus, more sales of hardware).