'Sure, the keys are labeled wrong at that point, but how often do you look at your fingers while typing?'
Once you've mastered the layout? Never. When initially learning the key locations? Constantly.
Perhaps you have perfect recall of 100+ characters on the keyboard after one exposure but I don't. The biggest challenge in switching would be learning where the keys are now located. This means trying not to look but also means failing miserably and looking constantly for at least two weeks.
Unfortunately, I can't stay in a program that teaches me the location of dvorak characters for two weeks.
Well said. Violence and destruction are criminal offenses, blocking traffic is a criminal offense. Therefore there is no legitimate reason to require a permit to protest. What is the purpose of the permit, simply to add another charge to the list if someone committing violence or blocking roadways is protesting while they are doing it?
Others keep mentioning things protesters could do or that a protest can cover heinous actions, they ignore that those actions are not assembling and voicing a potentially unpopular opinion and that is the only thing a permit restricts. All the other things a large upset group of people might do are illegal whether you are protesting or not.
Violence and destruction are criminal offenses, blocking traffic is a criminal offense. Therefore there is no legitimate reason to require a permit to protest. What is the purpose of the permit, simply to add another charge to the list if someone committing violence or blocking roadways is protesting while they are doing it?
Exactly, violence and destruction are criminal offenses, blocking traffic is a criminal offense. Therefore there is no legitimate reason to require a permit to protest. What is the purpose of the permit, simply to add another charge to the list if someone committing violence or blocking roadways is protesting while they are doing it?
We like to think we have freedom of speech and a peaceful protest like this wouldn't be broken up here. That is false. In Russia they require permits and his permit was denied. He and some other protesters were arrested for marching without a permit.
Most don't know that here in the US you are required to have a permit also, just as they did in Russia they can refuse to grant your permit will try to silence your protest and just happened in Russia. If you March anyway you WILL be arrested for trying to exercise your free speech.
I wouldn't consider giving my data to a third party like Google. Sorry but all my business information is confidential and while Google might be able to have more guards, firewalls, and backups if I give Google information that information has already been compromised by Google.
I already run WebCalendar on my local server and it is an excellent program. But I would like to be able to tie it into lightning for calendar sharing. It doesn't work. First, the stable version of WebCalendar doesn't support publishing. The CVS version supposedly does, but while you can import a calendar into lighting, any changes you make there doesn't get published to WebCalendar. Lightning flashes a little bar, gives no errors but reloading the calendar or logging into webcalendar will show that the new changes were never uploaded.
I've never understood what is so difficult about combining email with a shared calendar. That solution alone would prevent the need to setup new exchange configurations. Most small and medium business only need integrated email and calendaring this leads them to Outlook, then they want to share calendars. That leads them to exchange.
As a developer I can't think of any great challenge involved in this (beyond not having time to write a solution myself). I have trouble believing that with (according to some EU state of FOSS paper) 2,000,000 OSS developers nobody has managed to come up with a solution for this basic fundamental and common need.
'Sure, people are buying Exchange and Outlook because of their feature set. But they also buy them for the support.'
This is about passing the buck. Nobody calls Microsoft when they have a problem unless are they are a huge corporation with the leverage to get a developer on the phone. For those who are not fortune 500 companies its unlikely support is going to know more about exchange or outlook than competent staff. Granted, there are plenty of windows staff but a competence shortage but having someone to scream at is just about offloading responsibility for problems.
When you are the tech and the VP's email is not working, its nice to be able to call and blame it on some Microsoft phone jockey so the boss doesn't blame your failure to get things done within his unreasonable expectations. That doesn't mean its essential and after the first round of firing the VP's would figure out that canning a tech is not the solution when the troubleshooting process takes more than 5 minutes.
You can buy support from someone who have intimate familiarity with the sourcecode for most open source applications and all distributions now. That will get you answers of superior quality to what you get from MS now and likely with a shorter wait time. But people aren't flocking to that choice because a tech calling one of those lines is admitting he doesn't know how to fix the problem. A tech calling Microsoft is saying that Microsoft screwed up and he has to deal with them to get their screwup fixed.
'I realize you're probably joking, but I'd like to make it clear that "related to" != "evolved from." Saying that we evolved from some species just because we are related to it would be like suggesting that your aunt gave birth to you.'
Technically you are right. It only means you shared a common ancestor. Just as you shared a common ancestor with your aunt.
Thank you for linking to the definition I provided. Does providing said link mean you are still unable to grasp the concept or do you just have a beef with the choice of word and are trolling? Its a roof, you have a very finite amount of area that can be covered. Existing panels are flat an inefficient. The RESEARCHER claims his design will be more efficient and take up less real estate on a roof. How difficult is that to grasp?
'Once again, surface area is only relevant when it is at the normal to the direction that the light travels. Period.'
This assertion is unsupported. The RESEARCHER (read, NOT ME) claims his design is able be more efficient without spreading over a larger surface area.
'Said another way, you can't exceed 100% efficiency.'
That is not an equivalent statement, it is a strawman. Nobody has claimed this design will operate at greater than 100% efficiency. Further, existing flat designs do not operate in the ballpark of 100% efficiency. The fact that you can't exceed 100% efficiency has nothing to do with whether or not this design exceeds the efficiency of current panel designs, there is plenty of room for improvement when panels only operate at 20% efficiency now.
You might disagree with whether or not this design is more efficient than existing ones but that is a debate to have with the researcher, not with me. You might claim that the principle on which his panels operate is not sound. Again, that is a debate to have with the researcher. You also claim that it is impossible to exceed 100% efficiency. I have no idea who you can debate that with, nobody here (including the researcher) ever claimed you could.
'The area wouldn't get any warmer than if some other equally light absorbent material was there.'
Well, it won't get warmer faster than if some other equally light absorbent material was there. The same would be true if 99% of the photons that hit the material reflected light back, since an equally light absorbent material would be one that reflects 99% of the photons back. How hot it would actually get depends on how well the material retains heat and how quickly the material is being cooled. Most photons reflect off of concrete but in sunlight concrete can get hot enough to cook on because it retains the heat. I've seen blacktop turn to goo and partially melt rubber shoes because it gets so hot in the sun.
In the parts of the world where solar panels operate at peak efficiency the sun is cable of getting a light absorbent material REALLY hot. Plastics melt in the sun even if they aren't particularly light absorbent. Don't buy it? Take your favorite CD and let it sit in the sun for a day, shiny side up on a bright day in California, Arizona, or Florida.
It isn't hard to get a rough idea how much light something reflects. If shape is defined and you can see it better after the sun comes out than in complete darkness then photons are bouncing off the material and being collected by your eye. The brighter the something is, the more photons it reflects. Solar panels are quite shiny, so they are certainly reflecting quite a few photons.
'Not a helpful answer. Merriam-Webster defines "bulk" (in part), "1 a : spatial dimension [. ..] synonyms [. ..] VOLUME" Does this not seem to conflict with "thin" to you?'
Looking in Merriam-Webster I failed to find your quote. But I did find bulk defined. 'BULK implies an aggregate that is impressively large, heavy, or numerous'
This fits rather well. Since the articles claim that 3D structures allow greater efficiency of collection they will require a smaller surface area. Large is relative, solar panels go on your roof. Since an object can extend vertically from your roof for an virtually indefinate distance then bulky on your roof is defined by surface area covered not volume. Of course anyone with an IQ of 3 understood that this was what the article and summary were referring to, claiming false ignorance because you think they have made a technical error in the words they have chosen is a far more severe misuse of language than any they could have made.
'I'm not convinced by your argument that most of the light is reflected form PVs, and these "towers" give a second chance to collect it.'
It is not my argument. It is the claim of the ones who developed this technology. I am not advocating the position but trying to explain the concept to someone who claimed they were too dense to understand it. If you do understand the point they were trying to make and disagree with that point then why didn't you say so. Instead you choose a coy 'I don't get it' game.
'I strongly suspect that most of the inefficiency of PVs comes from light being converted to heat instead of current, and current lost to resistance. (Granted that I don't have numbers in front of me.)'
You could be right. I don't have numbers either. Although current panels put out what, 40 watts per square foot and 20% efficient. Resistance converts to heat and absorbed light converts to heat. If you are right then current panels put out 180 watts in heat. That could get rather toasty.
'What does "trap" "sunlight" mean? How can the surface area of the panel being greater than the area covered by the panel help? How do "nano-towers", which are presumably structures that extend toward the light, help? (Given that they'd be more or less parallel to the direction of the photon's travel.)'
Photons strike existing panels. Some are absorbed in the right places and convert to electricity (about 20% of them), some are absorbed and convert to heat, most bounce off the panels. These new panels have solar cell nano-towers for these photons to hit and convert to electricity. If they bounce again they might hit another tower or the base surface again.
The ultimate benefit is that you can use a panel with depth to collect more photons in a less sprawling panel.
If he didn't have his cherries on he should receive a ticket. Police by and large don't believe the law applies to them, this camera doesn't abide by the buddy code they use so unlike their fellow officers it will ticket them. This is a good thing.
Police have a ridiculous amount of unchecked power. They carry arms and sticks, corroborate one another's stories so that they are the only ones who know what really happened outside the station and they can't be policed in turn. Further, it doesn't take much to become a cop. If you can pass a physical and have a fairly clean record you are in.
The only reason I support using a camera to ticket in this instance is because a police officer will always be the one driving his squad car. It is not a safe assumption that a civilian vehicle is being driven by the registered owner and the registered owner is NOT responsible if another driver speeds or runs red lights using his vehicle. Cameras and automated systems should never be used for ticketing.
'No, but the absence of lurid CNN reports is pretty good evidence of absence, you pedantic cockjockey.'
The only thing the absence of CNN reports is evidence of is the absence of CNN coverage. By your logic third party presidential candidates don't exist because major news outlets refuse to cover them.
'It's common for mirrors used in optics research to be coated not with silver, but with thin layers of dielectric that achieve >99% reflection at the wavelength of interest. (Silvered mirrors, on the other hand, reflect a broad swath of the electromagnetic spectrum, but commonly with 80-90% efficiency.)'
I didn't know this but it would certainly explain this puzzle. Thanks for the information.:)
Silvered glass mirrors absorb more light than freshly painted drywall and substantially more light than a reflective substance like mylar. Feel free to ask any high school science student. Actually a high school stoner might be a better choice, they discover this when they need to save every possible photon because the under-powered light they use to grow their pot in the closet.
Yes. Everything absorbs light but your typical glass mirror absorbs quite a bit more than say mylar.
'And they are hoping to reflect photons (which are light) not electrons.'
Yup, I thought one word and my fingers typed another. It happens to me quite a bit, especially at 4am.
'I think you need to go retake some science classes. Seriously.'
I would always love to take more science classes. That doesn't change the fact that there are much more reflective surfaces than mirrors. Drywall coated with flat white paint will bounce more photons back at you than a silvered glass mirror. Any school kid can tell you that.
Would people stop spreading this Cedegra is open source nonsense. There is some source available for Cedegra but only what they have to make available under the terms of the LGPL. Some is actually under the AFPL which is not an open source license at all because it bars commercial distribution. Everything that they can get away with not opening up isn't opened up. The CVS isn't compilable or even up to date.
As others have said, subscribing gets you updates. You can subscribe once and download all the binaries and never pay another dime if you like. Subscribing also used to get you a vote on what games/features they worked on next.
'the baseline changes, the interval doesn't. a degree of kelvin is a degree of celsius'
Yes but he didn't ask if it was one degree away from absolute zero in Celsius or Fahrenheit he asked if it was one degree Celsius or Fahrenheit and the answer is that it is one degree Kelvin. One degree Celsius would be above the freezing point and wouldn't even begin to approach absolute zero.
'Typical espresso machines are on the order of 1-2 kilowatts.'
If that is correct then I wonder how surprised your average green would be to discover they do more damage to the environment with the coal generated power required for their visits to Starbucks then any SUV driver.
Slashdot Mirror
True, that's why most projects require you to assign copyright for your contributions to them.
'Sure, the keys are labeled wrong at that point, but how often do you look at your fingers while typing?'
Once you've mastered the layout? Never. When initially learning the key locations? Constantly.
Perhaps you have perfect recall of 100+ characters on the keyboard after one exposure but I don't. The biggest challenge in switching would be learning where the keys are now located. This means trying not to look but also means failing miserably and looking constantly for at least two weeks.
Unfortunately, I can't stay in a program that teaches me the location of dvorak characters for two weeks.
Well said. Violence and destruction are criminal offenses, blocking traffic is a criminal offense. Therefore there is no legitimate reason to require a permit to protest. What is the purpose of the permit, simply to add another charge to the list if someone committing violence or blocking roadways is protesting while they are doing it?
Others keep mentioning things protesters could do or that a protest can cover heinous actions, they ignore that those actions are not assembling and voicing a potentially unpopular opinion and that is the only thing a permit restricts. All the other things a large upset group of people might do are illegal whether you are protesting or not.
Violence and destruction are criminal offenses, blocking traffic is a criminal offense. Therefore there is no legitimate reason to require a permit to protest. What is the purpose of the permit, simply to add another charge to the list if someone committing violence or blocking roadways is protesting while they are doing it?
Exactly, violence and destruction are criminal offenses, blocking traffic is a criminal offense. Therefore there is no legitimate reason to require a permit to protest. What is the purpose of the permit, simply to add another charge to the list if someone committing violence or blocking roadways is protesting while they are doing it?
We like to think we have freedom of speech and a peaceful protest like this wouldn't be broken up here. That is false. In Russia they require permits and his permit was denied. He and some other protesters were arrested for marching without a permit.
Most don't know that here in the US you are required to have a permit also, just as they did in Russia they can refuse to grant your permit will try to silence your protest and just happened in Russia. If you March anyway you WILL be arrested for trying to exercise your free speech.
Like umm, WHAT his problem with the government is and WHY hes protesting and WHY the government has a problem with it. Let me paraphrase.
Some guy has some problem with somebody big, somebody doesn't like his beef and told him to shut up.
I wouldn't consider giving my data to a third party like Google. Sorry but all my business information is confidential and while Google might be able to have more guards, firewalls, and backups if I give Google information that information has already been compromised by Google.
I already run WebCalendar on my local server and it is an excellent program. But I would like to be able to tie it into lightning for calendar sharing. It doesn't work. First, the stable version of WebCalendar doesn't support publishing. The CVS version supposedly does, but while you can import a calendar into lighting, any changes you make there doesn't get published to WebCalendar. Lightning flashes a little bar, gives no errors but reloading the calendar or logging into webcalendar will show that the new changes were never uploaded.
I've never understood what is so difficult about combining email with a shared calendar. That solution alone would prevent the need to setup new exchange configurations. Most small and medium business only need integrated email and calendaring this leads them to Outlook, then they want to share calendars. That leads them to exchange.
As a developer I can't think of any great challenge involved in this (beyond not having time to write a solution myself). I have trouble believing that with (according to some EU state of FOSS paper) 2,000,000 OSS developers nobody has managed to come up with a solution for this basic fundamental and common need.
'Sure, people are buying Exchange and Outlook because of their feature set. But they also buy them for the support.'
This is about passing the buck. Nobody calls Microsoft when they have a problem unless are they are a huge corporation with the leverage to get a developer on the phone. For those who are not fortune 500 companies its unlikely support is going to know more about exchange or outlook than competent staff. Granted, there are plenty of windows staff but a competence shortage but having someone to scream at is just about offloading responsibility for problems.
When you are the tech and the VP's email is not working, its nice to be able to call and blame it on some Microsoft phone jockey so the boss doesn't blame your failure to get things done within his unreasonable expectations. That doesn't mean its essential and after the first round of firing the VP's would figure out that canning a tech is not the solution when the troubleshooting process takes more than 5 minutes.
You can buy support from someone who have intimate familiarity with the sourcecode for most open source applications and all distributions now. That will get you answers of superior quality to what you get from MS now and likely with a shorter wait time. But people aren't flocking to that choice because a tech calling one of those lines is admitting he doesn't know how to fix the problem. A tech calling Microsoft is saying that Microsoft screwed up and he has to deal with them to get their screwup fixed.
'I realize you're probably joking, but I'd like to make it clear that "related to" != "evolved from." Saying that we evolved from some species just because we are related to it would be like suggesting that your aunt gave birth to you.'
Technically you are right. It only means you shared a common ancestor. Just as you shared a common ancestor with your aunt.
'bulk'
Thank you for linking to the definition I provided. Does providing said link mean you are still unable to grasp the concept or do you just have a beef with the choice of word and are trolling? Its a roof, you have a very finite amount of area that can be covered. Existing panels are flat an inefficient. The RESEARCHER claims his design will be more efficient and take up less real estate on a roof. How difficult is that to grasp?
'Once again, surface area is only relevant when it is at the normal to the direction that the light travels. Period.'
This assertion is unsupported. The RESEARCHER (read, NOT ME) claims his design is able be more efficient without spreading over a larger surface area.
'Said another way, you can't exceed 100% efficiency.'
That is not an equivalent statement, it is a strawman. Nobody has claimed this design will operate at greater than 100% efficiency. Further, existing flat designs do not operate in the ballpark of 100% efficiency. The fact that you can't exceed 100% efficiency has nothing to do with whether or not this design exceeds the efficiency of current panel designs, there is plenty of room for improvement when panels only operate at 20% efficiency now.
You might disagree with whether or not this design is more efficient than existing ones but that is a debate to have with the researcher, not with me. You might claim that the principle on which his panels operate is not sound. Again, that is a debate to have with the researcher. You also claim that it is impossible to exceed 100% efficiency. I have no idea who you can debate that with, nobody here (including the researcher) ever claimed you could.
'The area wouldn't get any warmer than if some other equally light absorbent material was there.'
Well, it won't get warmer faster than if some other equally light absorbent material was there. The same would be true if 99% of the photons that hit the material reflected light back, since an equally light absorbent material would be one that reflects 99% of the photons back. How hot it would actually get depends on how well the material retains heat and how quickly the material is being cooled. Most photons reflect off of concrete but in sunlight concrete can get hot enough to cook on because it retains the heat. I've seen blacktop turn to goo and partially melt rubber shoes because it gets so hot in the sun.
In the parts of the world where solar panels operate at peak efficiency the sun is cable of getting a light absorbent material REALLY hot. Plastics melt in the sun even if they aren't particularly light absorbent. Don't buy it? Take your favorite CD and let it sit in the sun for a day, shiny side up on a bright day in California, Arizona, or Florida.
It isn't hard to get a rough idea how much light something reflects. If shape is defined and you can see it better after the sun comes out than in complete darkness then photons are bouncing off the material and being collected by your eye. The brighter the something is, the more photons it reflects. Solar panels are quite shiny, so they are certainly reflecting quite a few photons.
'Not a helpful answer. Merriam-Webster defines "bulk" (in part), "1 a : spatial dimension [. . .] synonyms [. . .] VOLUME" Does this not seem to conflict with "thin" to you?'
Looking in Merriam-Webster I failed to find your quote. But I did find bulk defined. 'BULK implies an aggregate that is impressively large, heavy, or numerous'
This fits rather well. Since the articles claim that 3D structures allow greater efficiency of collection they will require a smaller surface area. Large is relative, solar panels go on your roof. Since an object can extend vertically from your roof for an virtually indefinate distance then bulky on your roof is defined by surface area covered not volume. Of course anyone with an IQ of 3 understood that this was what the article and summary were referring to, claiming false ignorance because you think they have made a technical error in the words they have chosen is a far more severe misuse of language than any they could have made.
'I'm not convinced by your argument that most of the light is reflected form PVs, and these "towers" give a second chance to collect it.'
It is not my argument. It is the claim of the ones who developed this technology. I am not advocating the position but trying to explain the concept to someone who claimed they were too dense to understand it. If you do understand the point they were trying to make and disagree with that point then why didn't you say so. Instead you choose a coy 'I don't get it' game.
'I strongly suspect that most of the inefficiency of PVs comes from light being converted to heat instead of current, and current lost to resistance. (Granted that I don't have numbers in front of me.)'
You could be right. I don't have numbers either. Although current panels put out what, 40 watts per square foot and 20% efficient. Resistance converts to heat and absorbed light converts to heat. If you are right then current panels put out 180 watts in heat. That could get rather toasty.
'What does "flat and bulky" mean?'
Flat and Bulky.
'What does "trap" "sunlight" mean? How can the surface area of the panel being greater than the area covered by the panel help? How do "nano-towers", which are presumably structures that extend toward the light, help? (Given that they'd be more or less parallel to the direction of the photon's travel.)'
Photons strike existing panels. Some are absorbed in the right places and convert to electricity (about 20% of them), some are absorbed and convert to heat, most bounce off the panels. These new panels have solar cell nano-towers for these photons to hit and convert to electricity. If they bounce again they might hit another tower or the base surface again.
The ultimate benefit is that you can use a panel with depth to collect more photons in a less sprawling panel.
If he didn't have his cherries on he should receive a ticket. Police by and large don't believe the law applies to them, this camera doesn't abide by the buddy code they use so unlike their fellow officers it will ticket them. This is a good thing.
Police have a ridiculous amount of unchecked power. They carry arms and sticks, corroborate one another's stories so that they are the only ones who know what really happened outside the station and they can't be policed in turn. Further, it doesn't take much to become a cop. If you can pass a physical and have a fairly clean record you are in.
The only reason I support using a camera to ticket in this instance is because a police officer will always be the one driving his squad car. It is not a safe assumption that a civilian vehicle is being driven by the registered owner and the registered owner is NOT responsible if another driver speeds or runs red lights using his vehicle. Cameras and automated systems should never be used for ticketing.
'No, but the absence of lurid CNN reports is pretty good evidence of absence, you pedantic cockjockey.'
The only thing the absence of CNN reports is evidence of is the absence of CNN coverage. By your logic third party presidential candidates don't exist because major news outlets refuse to cover them.
'It's common for mirrors used in optics research to be coated not with silver, but with thin layers of dielectric that achieve >99% reflection at the wavelength of interest. (Silvered mirrors, on the other hand, reflect a broad swath of the electromagnetic spectrum, but commonly with 80-90% efficiency.)'
:)
I didn't know this but it would certainly explain this puzzle. Thanks for the information.
Silvered glass mirrors absorb more light than freshly painted drywall and substantially more light than a reflective substance like mylar. Feel free to ask any high school science student. Actually a high school stoner might be a better choice, they discover this when they need to save every possible photon because the under-powered light they use to grow their pot in the closet.
'Mirrors absorb light?
Wow.'
Yes. Everything absorbs light but your typical glass mirror absorbs quite a bit more than say mylar.
'And they are hoping to reflect photons (which are light) not electrons.'
Yup, I thought one word and my fingers typed another. It happens to me quite a bit, especially at 4am.
'I think you need to go retake some science classes. Seriously.'
I would always love to take more science classes. That doesn't change the fact that there are much more reflective surfaces than mirrors. Drywall coated with flat white paint will bounce more photons back at you than a silvered glass mirror. Any school kid can tell you that.
Would people stop spreading this Cedegra is open source nonsense. There is some source available for Cedegra but only what they have to make available under the terms of the LGPL. Some is actually under the AFPL which is not an open source license at all because it bars commercial distribution. Everything that they can get away with not opening up isn't opened up. The CVS isn't compilable or even up to date.
As others have said, subscribing gets you updates. You can subscribe once and download all the binaries and never pay another dime if you like. Subscribing also used to get you a vote on what games/features they worked on next.
They are a monopoly, they figure nobody has a choice.
'the baseline changes, the interval doesn't. a degree of kelvin is a degree of celsius'
Yes but he didn't ask if it was one degree away from absolute zero in Celsius or Fahrenheit he asked if it was one degree Celsius or Fahrenheit and the answer is that it is one degree Kelvin. One degree Celsius would be above the freezing point and wouldn't even begin to approach absolute zero.
Then why use a mirror? Mirrors absorb light, there are much better materials if you are hoping to reflect electrons.
Force once Microsoft is trying to do the right thing.
'Typical espresso machines are on the order of 1-2 kilowatts.'
If that is correct then I wonder how surprised your average green would be to discover they do more damage to the environment with the coal generated power required for their visits to Starbucks then any SUV driver.