They are pretty specific about "lawful content" so presumably if transfer of the content is prohibited by any other law (copyright) then the neutrality rules wouldn't apply.
Seems kind of weak to me. ISPs can screw you over first and make a half-assed attempt to determining if it was legal content or not afterwards... if they get called on it at all. =Smidge=
People complain that the space elevator would be too dangerous, but if that wiki article is correct you'd have about 700 TRILLION KILOGRAMS of iron whizzing about at Mach 42. Rough calcs place that stored energy somewhere around 16.2 million megatons equivalent.
Yeah. No. Space elevator might be a hazard but at least it won't cut the fucking planet in half. =Smidge=
If you're ever on the defending end of a case, would you REALLY trust people to "inform themselves" about your case? From the internet, of all places? It's bad enough people watch CSI and end up in a jury box honestly thinking that's how forensic evidence really works.
We can't even trust people to "inform themselves" about national issues like health care reform - something that would actually effect their own lives, let alone make or break yours.
Confiscate the damn phones at the door.
On a lighter note: don't forget that with only a few exceptions, the ones who end up in a jury are the people too stupid to get out of it.:) =Smidge=
> Firstly, recycling plastics is not the same as releasing the hydrocarbons
Never said it was? In fact I'm pretty sure I said the exact opposite elsewhere.
> Similar to glass, in that you don't want lots of green mixed in with clear, you don't want different types of plastic mixed up because you don't get a single type out... If all you want is the base hydrocarbons to burn, it doesn't matter.
I agree, except with recycling glass there's really only one type and it's all processed the same way: crush and melt. At best, sort by impurities to prevent cross-contamination.
However, not all plastics are the same. They have different mechanical and thermal properties as well as colorants and additives. What works well for decomposing acrylonitrile butadiene styrene may not work at all for polyvinyl chloride.
As for landfills, many of them already have methane takeoffs for power generation. When I say "mine them" I'm talking decades from now, of course. And it will be a mess, but it might be worth it. Think of all the nickle, tin, cadmium, aluminum, copper, lead etc that's simply been buried... =Smidge=
Flash point isn't a problem in an inert atmosphere.
Various technologies have been around to do this; the problem has always been scale and water consumption.
Hope these guys get somewhere with the process, and I hope the process is indifferent to the type of plastic involved. The wide variety of plastics used has always been a major problem for plastics recycling.
Of course, you're still left with a nasty sludge - plastic contains non-hydrocarbon chemicals - and this is not a replacement for petroleum since the plastics were made from petroleum to begin with. But! This may make "mining" landfills a more interesting proposition... now you can get methane, various metals (in relatively pure form) AND liquid fuels from old landfills. =Smidge=
Maybe the parents should take their precious little snowflake to a fucking doctor to check for hear problems if they're that concerned.
Seriously, I'm all for providing a safe environment for kids to play in (those stainless steel slides I had in elementary school put more kids in the nurse's office than anything on hot spring day) but there IS a limit to this.
The devices cost money that is sorely needed for actual education and the PE teachers almost certainly do not have the equipment or training to do anything more significant that call 911. God forbid they DO try to do something and the kid dies anyway. Hello lawsuit!
Have the parents sign a fucking waiver and let the kids run 'till they drop. Seriously. =Smidge=
>We can convert any plant matter into diesel pretty easily (just not on the large scale yet)
Biodiesel blends are readily available across the country. Typically it's a 15% Bio/85% Petrol blend to help prevent clouding problems in lower temperatures.
So yeah, large scale production already in progress. =Smidge=
"But, even in something like a math course, open textbooks run into the "staleness" issue. That is, students do the assignments or tests and then the solutions are passed on to the next year's students."
That's odd, because I remember using high school textbooks that were several years old. It was literally to the point where the teacher would certify the condition of each book using something similar to the check-out card in library books.
Each book was numbered and it was recorded who got what book, and what condition it was in. If you didn't return YOUR book at the end of the year, or it was in noticeably worse condition, you got billed for a new one. (Do I need to mention this was a public school?)
Despite those books being so old, there was never a problem with "handing down" answers to the included problems from one class to the next, mostly because nobody gave a shit about the class coming in behind them.
Though I did run into a few cases where people circled the wrong answers in the books... =Smidge=
How can you censor something that doesn't even exist? Wouldn't you need to have "repeatable experiments done with the scientific method" before you can suppress them?
Not sure how serious you intended to be, because that's not entirely out of the question.
It's called ergotism: A condition that rises from eating cereal grains contaminated with a fungus. Symptoms can include seizures ("demonic possession") and hallucinations ("divine inspiration").
One can easily imagine that, in an era before sophisticated food storage and preparation methods, such an affliction could be rather common... indeed there are many historical records of ergotism epidemics in the middle ages. Why not in pre-biblical times as well? =Smidge=
People who are pressured to meet review quotas despite being severely understaffed, underfunded, and severely backlogged all while not being - or having access to - anything approaching an expert in the appropriate technologies.
The USPTO has been unable to keep up and apparently resorts to strictly procedural methods for approval. Dot your "i"s and cross your "t"s and I bet you could get anything patented nowadays. =Smidge=
Because immediate demand for that energy is the only problem? Albeit it's one of the more significant ones. Think of how many vehicles your typical gas station serves in an 8-hour period.
But you seriously don't see any other practical problems with charging something with thousands of amps of current? Off the top of my head:
1) A less than perfect connection on the charging cable - gonna end up welding your car to the charging station...
2) Safety interlocks would you need to make sure nobody loses an arm if they accidentally touch the wrong thing. "Self-serve" is almost definitely not an option anymore.
3) Magnetic induction / EMP. High currents generate strong fields, which can cause heat buildup and mechanical stresses as well as present other dangers. =Smidge=
> There's no way I can wreck both vehicles at the same time.
Driving car #1, get into an accident and wreck it. Or it's stolen. Or whatever happens such that you file a claim and it is not available for use.
You'll very likely be driving car #2 in the meantime... so no, the risk to the insurer is not the same for two as it is for one. It might not be DOUBLE, but it's not the same.
Now if you want to talk only about LIABILITY insurance, that's another debate... =Smidge=
I've personally seen these in New Jersey and read articles about them in other places. Basically, build solar panel racks over the parking lots. Not only do you get to park in the shade, but it would generate power to freshen up your car's battery. Excess capacity could generate extra value with a grid-tie and buyback meter, or subsidize the building's operational needs.
Plus it helps reduce the heat island effects of all that pavement. =Smidge=
Think about that for a moment. What kind of current are you gonna need to recharge an electric car's energy pack in "5-10 seconds" ?
Hint: An electric car would probably have an energy pack rated about 80 amp-hours or so at their rated voltage. Convert that to "amp-seconds" to see why 5-10 second recharge times may be rather difficult.
Best solution I've seen so far is battery changing stations. Much like gas stations, except the battery pack is (robotically) removed and replaced. The advantage is not only is it just as fast as filling a gas tank, but the batteries can be inspected and tested before being used again. Disposing/recycling is also much easier logistically. The particular plan I saw involved vehicle owners leasing the batteries for liability purposes. =Smidge=
The license plate analogy only makes sense if people are required to register their computers/internet enabled appliances as they are with vehicles.
Even then, the license plate only identifies the car and owner, not the operator. It is entirely possible that a vehicle may be used by someone other than the registered owner. =Smidge=
Slashdot Mirror
They are pretty specific about "lawful content" so presumably if transfer of the content is prohibited by any other law (copyright) then the neutrality rules wouldn't apply.
Seems kind of weak to me. ISPs can screw you over first and make a half-assed attempt to determining if it was legal content or not afterwards... if they get called on it at all.
=Smidge=
People complain that the space elevator would be too dangerous, but if that wiki article is correct you'd have about 700 TRILLION KILOGRAMS of iron whizzing about at Mach 42. Rough calcs place that stored energy somewhere around 16.2 million megatons equivalent.
Yeah. No. Space elevator might be a hazard but at least it won't cut the fucking planet in half.
=Smidge=
If you're ever on the defending end of a case, would you REALLY trust people to "inform themselves" about your case? From the internet, of all places? It's bad enough people watch CSI and end up in a jury box honestly thinking that's how forensic evidence really works.
We can't even trust people to "inform themselves" about national issues like health care reform - something that would actually effect their own lives, let alone make or break yours.
Confiscate the damn phones at the door.
On a lighter note: don't forget that with only a few exceptions, the ones who end up in a jury are the people too stupid to get out of it. :)
=Smidge=
> Firstly, recycling plastics is not the same as releasing the hydrocarbons
Never said it was? In fact I'm pretty sure I said the exact opposite elsewhere.
> Similar to glass, in that you don't want lots of green mixed in with clear, you don't want different types of plastic mixed up because you don't get a single type out ... If all you want is the base hydrocarbons to burn, it doesn't matter.
I agree, except with recycling glass there's really only one type and it's all processed the same way: crush and melt. At best, sort by impurities to prevent cross-contamination.
However, not all plastics are the same. They have different mechanical and thermal properties as well as colorants and additives. What works well for decomposing acrylonitrile butadiene styrene may not work at all for polyvinyl chloride.
As for landfills, many of them already have methane takeoffs for power generation. When I say "mine them" I'm talking decades from now, of course. And it will be a mess, but it might be worth it. Think of all the nickle, tin, cadmium, aluminum, copper, lead etc that's simply been buried...
=Smidge=
If the sludge is "mostly hydrocarbons" then your process for extracting hydrocarbons has a lot of room for improvement.
=Smidge=
Flash point isn't a problem in an inert atmosphere.
Various technologies have been around to do this; the problem has always been scale and water consumption.
Hope these guys get somewhere with the process, and I hope the process is indifferent to the type of plastic involved. The wide variety of plastics used has always been a major problem for plastics recycling.
Of course, you're still left with a nasty sludge - plastic contains non-hydrocarbon chemicals - and this is not a replacement for petroleum since the plastics were made from petroleum to begin with. But! This may make "mining" landfills a more interesting proposition... now you can get methane, various metals (in relatively pure form) AND liquid fuels from old landfills.
=Smidge=
> And fuck the waivers. What the hell has this country come to when we need people to sign waivers to RUN?
The kind of country where lawsuits are considered a valid and viable business strategy.
Unfortunately.
=Smidge=
Maybe the parents should take their precious little snowflake to a fucking doctor to check for hear problems if they're that concerned.
Seriously, I'm all for providing a safe environment for kids to play in (those stainless steel slides I had in elementary school put more kids in the nurse's office than anything on hot spring day) but there IS a limit to this.
The devices cost money that is sorely needed for actual education and the PE teachers almost certainly do not have the equipment or training to do anything more significant that call 911. God forbid they DO try to do something and the kid dies anyway. Hello lawsuit!
Have the parents sign a fucking waiver and let the kids run 'till they drop. Seriously.
=Smidge=
>We can convert any plant matter into diesel pretty easily (just not on the large scale yet)
Biodiesel blends are readily available across the country. Typically it's a 15% Bio/85% Petrol blend to help prevent clouding problems in lower temperatures.
So yeah, large scale production already in progress.
=Smidge=
Presumably the high contact area with the dirt underneath will serve as a sink. Ground source heat pumps are a fairly well established technology.
Though I'm still a tad skeptical it'll work as planned, it's certainly worth a try given the opportunity. Hopefully we'll see a followup.
=Smidge=
"But, even in something like a math course, open textbooks run into the "staleness" issue. That is, students do the assignments or tests and then the solutions are passed on to the next year's students."
That's odd, because I remember using high school textbooks that were several years old. It was literally to the point where the teacher would certify the condition of each book using something similar to the check-out card in library books.
Each book was numbered and it was recorded who got what book, and what condition it was in. If you didn't return YOUR book at the end of the year, or it was in noticeably worse condition, you got billed for a new one. (Do I need to mention this was a public school?)
Despite those books being so old, there was never a problem with "handing down" answers to the included problems from one class to the next, mostly because nobody gave a shit about the class coming in behind them.
Though I did run into a few cases where people circled the wrong answers in the books...
=Smidge=
How can you censor something that doesn't even exist? Wouldn't you need to have "repeatable experiments done with the scientific method" before you can suppress them?
=Smidge=
Not sure how serious you intended to be, because that's not entirely out of the question.
It's called ergotism: A condition that rises from eating cereal grains contaminated with a fungus. Symptoms can include seizures ("demonic possession") and hallucinations ("divine inspiration").
One can easily imagine that, in an era before sophisticated food storage and preparation methods, such an affliction could be rather common... indeed there are many historical records of ergotism epidemics in the middle ages. Why not in pre-biblical times as well?
=Smidge=
> Why do tens or possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of work just for the chance that you might get payed? It seems absurd.
Challenge and notoriety.
For that matter, just about everything you do has a chance of failure, so why do anything?
=Smidge=
People who are pressured to meet review quotas despite being severely understaffed, underfunded, and severely backlogged all while not being - or having access to - anything approaching an expert in the appropriate technologies.
The USPTO has been unable to keep up and apparently resorts to strictly procedural methods for approval. Dot your "i"s and cross your "t"s and I bet you could get anything patented nowadays.
=Smidge=
What if the trash was almost entirely below the surface, or in pieces too small to see in a panoramic photo of the ocean?
=Smidge=
What, exactly, are you expecting to see a picture of?
Seriously. If someone presented you with a picture of the ocean at the location, what would you expect to see?
=Smidge=
> (well maybe not a machinegun)
Yeah, the recoil would bounce the thing all over.
Therefore; Rocket launcher.
=Smidge=
Because immediate demand for that energy is the only problem? Albeit it's one of the more significant ones. Think of how many vehicles your typical gas station serves in an 8-hour period.
But you seriously don't see any other practical problems with charging something with thousands of amps of current? Off the top of my head:
1) A less than perfect connection on the charging cable - gonna end up welding your car to the charging station...
2) Safety interlocks would you need to make sure nobody loses an arm if they accidentally touch the wrong thing. "Self-serve" is almost definitely not an option anymore.
3) Magnetic induction / EMP. High currents generate strong fields, which can cause heat buildup and mechanical stresses as well as present other dangers.
=Smidge=
> There's no way I can wreck both vehicles at the same time.
Driving car #1, get into an accident and wreck it. Or it's stolen. Or whatever happens such that you file a claim and it is not available for use.
You'll very likely be driving car #2 in the meantime... so no, the risk to the insurer is not the same for two as it is for one. It might not be DOUBLE, but it's not the same.
Now if you want to talk only about LIABILITY insurance, that's another debate...
=Smidge=
Two words: Solar Carparks.
I've personally seen these in New Jersey and read articles about them in other places. Basically, build solar panel racks over the parking lots. Not only do you get to park in the shade, but it would generate power to freshen up your car's battery. Excess capacity could generate extra value with a grid-tie and buyback meter, or subsidize the building's operational needs.
Plus it helps reduce the heat island effects of all that pavement.
=Smidge=
5-10 seconds?
Think about that for a moment. What kind of current are you gonna need to recharge an electric car's energy pack in "5-10 seconds" ?
Hint: An electric car would probably have an energy pack rated about 80 amp-hours or so at their rated voltage. Convert that to "amp-seconds" to see why 5-10 second recharge times may be rather difficult.
Best solution I've seen so far is battery changing stations. Much like gas stations, except the battery pack is (robotically) removed and replaced. The advantage is not only is it just as fast as filling a gas tank, but the batteries can be inspected and tested before being used again. Disposing/recycling is also much easier logistically. The particular plan I saw involved vehicle owners leasing the batteries for liability purposes.
=Smidge=
Not to worry, if we use a high enough signal power I'm sure we can get a reaction of some kind.
A few megawatts should just about do it.
=Smidge=
The license plate analogy only makes sense if people are required to register their computers/internet enabled appliances as they are with vehicles.
Even then, the license plate only identifies the car and owner, not the operator. It is entirely possible that a vehicle may be used by someone other than the registered owner.
=Smidge=
Still misleading, because a usage is not evenly distributed among the population.
It'll probably blow your mind that you get more than 1 barrel of refined product out of one barrel of crude, too.
But this is a good hedge bet. We have algae biodiesel, TDP diesel, cellulosic ethanol, and now algae ethanol.
No single tech will solve our petroleum needs, but the more diverse our options the closer we get to energy sustainability.
=Smidge=