Generators should not be below ground, and at least 2-12 ft above ground if possible (or higher depending on risk).
They should not be too high, lest you have trouble fueling them.,
As with anything this likely came down to a retrofit risk assessment. The risk of fire or not making code is far higher than floods in manhattan, but being an island and subject to the ocean, still a high risk and should have been planned for. To me, it comes down to money at the end of the day. Cheaper is often better sadly.
Seems to me Manhattan has been a true flood risk, forever.
Now, what happens when we balance that assessment with other risks, such as fire risk of storing a generator on the 2nd floor. Say the risk survives to the next phase, where Fire Risk A and Flood Risk A are both on the table.
Then you get a room full of managers or politicians that say: We have X dollars and Risk A costs Y to mitigate and risk B costs Y+1 to mitigate. X is already Y. And that's how you have your generators underground and your datacenter wherever it will fit.
Well being ARM it's going to be a brave new world but at least there will be build tools and APIs to support RT and x86 one supposes. Consider me optimistic about Win8 and positively enthused when it comes to the MS tablet.
I am a linux nerd, and well Windows RT looks damn attractive to having an office-friendly tablet in my household....because really that's about as far as Microsoft will ever get in my house.
But damn, I want (wife needs) one more than I think I need another droid device in my house. Pretty slick indeed.
Ok, so you are at a parking garage with a lot of cars.
Some of these cars are Porsches and some of them are Ladas and they've all got to drive around and ingress/egress from the garage as smoothly as possible. Some want to go to fast and others want to go slow and some want to be safe, so you put the good engines in the Porches and the seatbelts in the Ford (are you still with me?) and leave the Ladas be since they won't go fast enough to require seatbelts.
This is a perfect analogy for what you are talking about.
1) it's about cars 2) it sounds logical 3) it makes no sense 4) ??? 5) Profit.
Grounded on their beliefs which may or may not have religious origins or intentions. I'm not sure why you insist that they are defacto religious statutes.
Besides, your statement is still incorect as the intention of the piece of paper was to be ENSHRINED, not to enshrine worship the 'one true God', so your original statement is inaccurate at best. AC at worst.
Imagine this as a Venn Diagram, where not all People are religious AND stupid. I would say we owe our rights to several smart religious people, and some smart not-so-religious people. Either way your statement/logic is simple incorrect and incoherent. Which of course, is why I suspect you decided to post AC.
Right, so ergo, it is not profitable to maintain two lines of nuclear reactors, two R&D channels- one for civilian power and one for weapon grade uranium if you can kill two birds with one stone....Your answer to this riddle is Uranium fission, rather than Thorium.
I think the point is that this so called "anarchy" of the individual is absolutely NOTHING NEW and in fact the 'natural order of law' if I may paraphrase.
This is baloney. MY slim has no such issues, and gets no where near as hot as my two 60GB fats. Both stutter in the same situations.
There is ZERO scientific confirmation of this in the wild, which would indicate the SLIM runs hotter which would lead to framerate stutter issues. It certainly wouldn't stutter because it's cooler.
I for one find my secured tablet to be useful for things like playing DrugWars by myself on the toilet.
But one has to realize that there are likely some people out there for which security is not a concern and would like to connect their tablet to access cloud content occaisionally. While these "hackers", information sneakers, are a bane to information freedom (and should be stopped) but at this time I don't see any practical way to lock down everyone's tablet so that they can communicate only securely with themselves.
How do we convince others that the safest computing is no computing? Should we give out free wireless jammers to everyone? or is this overstepping our boundaries a bit? It's bound (no pun intended) to upset SOMEONE.
I believe the answer (and the only answer) is education. We should teach network abstinence to every young boy and girl, so when the time comes to 'hook up' to the Internet, we can be sure they will be safe.
> It was designed to make us think this was the actual capability of the device, and it simply is not.
This is the disconnect. This is precisely the capability of the device. Your car commercial example is also terrible as most car commercials are 100% FAKED, and merely only say "Professional driver on closed course". When of course, most of the course and parts of the car are 100% CG.
Slashdot Mirror
This has to be the most obtuse Ask Slashdot in a long time.
Has OP been under a rock?
Nope, once again +5 Insightful is meaningless.
Generators should not be below ground, and at least 2-12 ft above ground if possible (or higher depending on risk).
They should not be too high, lest you have trouble fueling them.,
As with anything this likely came down to a retrofit risk assessment. The risk of fire or not making code is far higher than floods in manhattan, but being an island and subject to the ocean, still a high risk and should have been planned for. To me, it comes down to money at the end of the day. Cheaper is often better sadly.
And to bungle risk assessments.
Seems to me Manhattan has been a true flood risk, forever.
Now, what happens when we balance that assessment with other risks, such as fire risk of storing a generator on the 2nd floor. Say the risk survives to the next phase, where Fire Risk A and Flood Risk A are both on the table.
Then you get a room full of managers or politicians that say: We have X dollars and Risk A costs Y to mitigate and risk B costs Y+1 to mitigate. X is already Y. And that's how you have your generators underground and your datacenter wherever it will fit.
I'll field this one, slashdot.
Managers. Lots of them.
Well being ARM it's going to be a brave new world but at least there will be build tools and APIs to support RT and x86 one supposes. Consider me optimistic about Win8 and positively enthused when it comes to the MS tablet.
I am a linux nerd, and well Windows RT looks damn attractive to having an office-friendly tablet in my household....because really that's about as far as Microsoft will ever get in my house.
But damn, I want (wife needs) one more than I think I need another droid device in my house. Pretty slick indeed.
Ok, so you are at a parking garage with a lot of cars.
Some of these cars are Porsches and some of them are Ladas and they've all got to drive around and ingress/egress from the garage as smoothly as possible. Some want to go to fast and others want to go slow and some want to be safe, so you put the good engines in the Porches and the seatbelts in the Ford (are you still with me?) and leave the Ladas be since they won't go fast enough to require seatbelts.
This is a perfect analogy for what you are talking about.
1) it's about cars
2) it sounds logical
3) it makes no sense
4) ???
5) Profit.
Seriously? This is a board of Computer Geeks- I can only assume you are ignoring the concept of recursive inheritance to make a 'funny'
Grounded on their beliefs which may or may not have religious origins or intentions. I'm not sure why you insist that they are defacto religious statutes.
Besides, your statement is still incorect as the intention of the piece of paper was to be ENSHRINED, not to enshrine worship the 'one true God', so your original statement is inaccurate at best. AC at worst.
Stupid slashdot ACs.
(Stupid) (Religious) (People)
Imagine this as a Venn Diagram, where not all People are religious AND stupid. I would say we owe our rights to several smart religious people, and some smart not-so-religious people. Either way your statement/logic is simple incorrect and incoherent. Which of course, is why I suspect you decided to post AC.
>They even started a country that used those concepts and grounded all of those concepts in a piece of paper
FTFY
Ubiquity != Human right.
Humans have a right to communicate. Full stop. If you had a (legal or inalienable) right to a phone you wouldn't have to pay for it.
It's a luxury stupid.
50 years from now people will reminisce about cablemodem "party lines" and such, but just because a luxury is cheap, does not make it a human right.
You have a inalienable human right to speak and to listen, but not to be heard (by whatever means of conveyance is completely irrelevant).
Conveyance beyond your own two feet, larynx and lungs, is a luxury. Plain and simple.
Seriously. It was so bad the people who make the harddrives couldn't even buy them, from themselves at full price.
Right, so ergo, it is not profitable to maintain two lines of nuclear reactors, two R&D channels- one for civilian power and one for weapon grade uranium if you can kill two birds with one stone....Your answer to this riddle is Uranium fission, rather than Thorium.
Capitalism and the fact Thorium does not produce products which can be weaponized.
I guess it sort of made sense at the time.
I'm pretty sure he was talking to the boomer generation whom was sitting beside him in an empty chair.
He simply assumed you were are a part of it because some of your hyperbole belongs in a museum. Quaint, and realistic 50-70 years ago.
>Im 28 years old, and I disagree in the strongest terms. You assume far too much.
He's not talking to you
I think the point is that this so called "anarchy" of the individual is absolutely NOTHING NEW and in fact the 'natural order of law' if I may paraphrase.
This is baloney. MY slim has no such issues, and gets no where near as hot as my two 60GB fats. Both stutter in the same situations.
There is ZERO scientific confirmation of this in the wild, which would indicate the SLIM runs hotter which would lead to framerate stutter issues. It certainly wouldn't stutter because it's cooler.
I for one find my secured tablet to be useful for things like playing DrugWars by myself on the toilet.
But one has to realize that there are likely some people out there for which security is not a concern and would like to connect their tablet to access cloud content occaisionally. While these "hackers", information sneakers, are a bane to information freedom (and should be stopped) but at this time I don't see any practical way to lock down everyone's tablet so that they can communicate only securely with themselves.
How do we convince others that the safest computing is no computing? Should we give out free wireless jammers to everyone? or is this overstepping our boundaries a bit? It's bound (no pun intended) to upset SOMEONE.
I believe the answer (and the only answer) is education. We should teach network abstinence to every young boy and girl, so when the time comes to 'hook up' to the Internet, we can be sure they will be safe.
Oh no an injection *string* in memory! Swab the decks, pull down the mast. REVERSE COURSE!
It seems the concern in this thread regarding this issue is proportional to the size of your /. UID.
> It was designed to make us think this was the actual capability of the device, and it simply is not.
This is the disconnect. This is precisely the capability of the device. Your car commercial example is also terrible as most car commercials are 100% FAKED, and merely only say "Professional driver on closed course". When of course, most of the course and parts of the car are 100% CG.
There is more at issue than the rig. Like unions, time constraints, budget, pre-existing commitments.
I don't expect A/C to know anything about producing commercials for national television, or marketing to begin with.