In 1994 people were using Iomega ZIP drives which suffered from none of that DRM nonsense. Then CD-RW became commonplace. Sony had a short time frame to be successful with MiniDisc for data storage purposes. They only needed to sell a couple of drives which connected to parallel and IDE ports, use the exact same media as the recordable audio MiniDisc for manufacturing scale effects to kick in, and license their production earning the money on licensing. They blew it. I bet all the changes to MiniDisc data to suit their music recording side of the business were the cause for all the data product delays.
Sure the audio tracks needed to be compressed somehow so you could fit a CD album in a lower capacity device but it did not need to have DRM built-in.
It used to be common for aircraft prototypes to carry no radar at all. Even as recently as the SEPECAT Jaguar some production lightweight fighters came without on board radar. I assume this is just a full scale mockup. The radar Iran probably have available would come from the F-5 so it would be small enough to fit on such a small plane.
Given the present state of Iran's economy they have found themselves to be relying on lightweight fighters. The problem is they cannot manufacture either engines or radar of good enough quality for them. I do not doubt they could manufacture most of the composites for a low observable aircraft it they wanted to. If they can manufacture composite rotors for uranium centrifuges this shouldn't be particularly hard.
The trouble of doing accounting like that is that you are skewing the results to prove a point which may not even correspond with reality. There are other schemes for load leveling like pumped-storage-hydro.
Considering Microsoft themselves prefer to use Perforce for Windows development I would venture to guess that TFS doesn't scale all that well in reality.
Actually all liquid water reactors can shut down partly by pushing only some of the rods, or work in units, and keep generating power from the heated energy in the conduits. They cannot spool up very quickly but shutting them down is reasonably easy to do.
You are better off having some peak power plants but in countries like France they managed that just fine using hydroelectric pumped storage.
Instead of using petroleum they used tons of grass and had to clean up tons of excrement. If anything oil is cleaner. Oil is not the ultimate method for storing energy for transportation but it is quite better in comparison.
People have done the math. PV modules are net energy positive and the payback period keeps getting smaller as they a) get more efficient b) use less material.
The article is full of lies, damned lies, and murderous discourse:
As Derek Abbott has reported elsewhere in the Bulletin, nuclear power is not globally scalable because of the limited availability of the relatively scarce metals used to construct reactor vessels and cores, which appears to be a harder limit than the supply of uranium fuel.
Nuclear fission reactors are made of steel and concrete. Neither are particularly rare. The fuel is not rare either and exploration only began in full swing in the XXth century. Fast reactors, thorium, etc further make the notion that nuclear has hit some kind of a wall laughable. There are only 80 years known reserves of uranium left because no one has bothered prospecting for more. Why waste time doing it when you have so much of it for so cheap? In the 1990s many uranium mines closed because of the abundance of blended down nuclear warhead stockpiles from the former USSR. You couldn't give it away. Only now have these mines started entering in service again.
billions of rooftop photovoltaic systems, millions of jumbo-size wind turbines, hundreds of thousands of wave devices and tidal turbines, tens of thousands of concentrated solar power plants and photovoltaic plants, thousands of geothermal plants, and hundreds of hydroelectric dams. But the construction work doesn't end there, because population and living standards are expected to continue rising after 2030. At best, such a plan simply kicks the can down the road.
Try doing the math assuming 18% efficient solar PV power and place the panels in deserts where there is a lot of solar insulation and the land is worth next to nothing and see how much land area you need. You would be surprised. This efficiency is today regularly achieved by both silicon PV and CIGS and I would not be surprised if they managed to do it in other roll to print technologies as well. Wind can easily power 20% of current energy needs economically. The dams are useful for flood control and ensuring a safe water supply even if they did not generate any power. Making a global energy grid is as impossible as it was impossible to make a global communications grid.
astrophysicist Tom Murphy calculates that, even with an annual energy growth rate of only 2.3 percent, a civilization powered by solar energy would have to cover every square inch of Earth's land area with 100-percent-efficient solar panels within a few hundred years.
A few hundred years ago we did not have global maritime trade or steam engines. Or viable electricity for that matter. The Earth's land area is 1/3rd of its total surface area and there are other surfaces in the solar system besides that. This with current technology. With future technology we could be harvesting energy from black holes or anti-matter for all we know.
There's another way to approach the problem: start with supply instead of demand, and work backward from there. In his book Sustainable Energy -- Without the Hot Air, physicist David J.C. MacKay calculates how much energy could sustainably be produced in the United Kingdom with a massive expansion of existing technology. The total turns out to be less than the nation's energy consumption, which suggests to MacKay that the only path forward is to reduce demand -- through energy efficiency improvements, for example -- until it balances with supply.
To which I say: Why don't we just not do it? Let's not build any new power plants except to replace old, inefficient ones. Let's not dig up all the oil. Let's not drive to work alone. Let's not eat meat every day. Let's not turn the thermostat up so high. Let's not buy so many things we don't really need. And above all, let's not accept continued energy growth as a necessary or even desirable way of life.
Yes let us freeze, starve, and stop having children while ignoring the prime directive of the natural world to satisfy some max
I used to compile my own kernel on Slackware back when the ELF binary format came out. I have since figured out I am more productive compiling the application source code I am writing instead.
Still it is cool to have choice. FWIW I use Ubuntu. Unity has got less bad with the upgrades but the Compiz crashes and lockups sometimes make me want to hit the wall.
The problem with Oracle is they always do it like this. First they acquire a major competitor in a major cash transaction then they milk it for a couple of years firing most of the development team and selling licenses while they can. Then they cease support altogether. They are not interested in further developing anything they acquire. It is all slash and burn. Their main expertise was never development it is sales and support.
MySQL was created by an European company called MySQL AB. It was later acquired by Oracle where development has mostly languished. The MySQL AB founder decided to found MariaDB by forking MySQL. Underhanded my ass. Did you read what Oracle did with InnoDB? They undermined MySQL to the point where they felt they had to sell more like it.
To me it seems like all basic PV technologies (excluding multi-junction cells, concentrated solar, and the like) are converging in performance. The question is how cheap they will be and how much manufacturing scale is possible. 20% efficiency is actually quite a lot.
No. The moral course of action is to pay sales taxes where you sell the product and corporate tax where you actually operate your business. Which is certainly not Ireland.
The 787 is supposed to use electrical actuators instead of hydraulics powered by engine bleed air. That is where the need for all that power comes from.
Slashdot Mirror
In 1994 people were using Iomega ZIP drives which suffered from none of that DRM nonsense. Then CD-RW became commonplace. Sony had a short time frame to be successful with MiniDisc for data storage purposes. They only needed to sell a couple of drives which connected to parallel and IDE ports, use the exact same media as the recordable audio MiniDisc for manufacturing scale effects to kick in, and license their production earning the money on licensing. They blew it. I bet all the changes to MiniDisc data to suit their music recording side of the business were the cause for all the data product delays.
Sure the audio tracks needed to be compressed somehow so you could fit a CD album in a lower capacity device but it did not need to have DRM built-in.
Given the present state of Iran's economy they have found themselves to be relying on lightweight fighters. The problem is they cannot manufacture either engines or radar of good enough quality for them. I do not doubt they could manufacture most of the composites for a low observable aircraft it they wanted to. If they can manufacture composite rotors for uranium centrifuges this shouldn't be particularly hard.
For large matrix computations you are better off using OpenCL. Curiously there is a WebCL extension bundled in a lot of browsers today as well.
Python is slow and does not come bundled with a high speed recent VM. That is one issue I can think of.
File:/// Or whatever.
"not easily exploitable"? How about inserting it in a text input form and opening it in Safari?
Let me guess. The Google search box in Firefox was not implemented using Apple's Cocoa widget Framework.
From what I understand most of the EU comission is full of people like that.
The trouble of doing accounting like that is that you are skewing the results to prove a point which may not even correspond with reality. There are other schemes for load leveling like pumped-storage-hydro.
Considering Microsoft themselves prefer to use Perforce for Windows development I would venture to guess that TFS doesn't scale all that well in reality.
You are better off having some peak power plants but in countries like France they managed that just fine using hydroelectric pumped storage.
Depends on where you would need to build the power plant. If it was in the US I would use natural gas. If it was Japan I would use nuclear fission.
Instead of using petroleum they used tons of grass and had to clean up tons of excrement. If anything oil is cleaner. Oil is not the ultimate method for storing energy for transportation but it is quite better in comparison.
People have done the math. PV modules are net energy positive and the payback period keeps getting smaller as they a) get more efficient b) use less material.
The article is full of lies, damned lies, and murderous discourse:
As Derek Abbott has reported elsewhere in the Bulletin, nuclear power is not globally scalable because of the limited availability of the relatively scarce metals used to construct reactor vessels and cores, which appears to be a harder limit than the supply of uranium fuel.
Nuclear fission reactors are made of steel and concrete. Neither are particularly rare. The fuel is not rare either and exploration only began in full swing in the XXth century. Fast reactors, thorium, etc further make the notion that nuclear has hit some kind of a wall laughable. There are only 80 years known reserves of uranium left because no one has bothered prospecting for more. Why waste time doing it when you have so much of it for so cheap? In the 1990s many uranium mines closed because of the abundance of blended down nuclear warhead stockpiles from the former USSR. You couldn't give it away. Only now have these mines started entering in service again.
billions of rooftop photovoltaic systems, millions of jumbo-size wind turbines, hundreds of thousands of wave devices and tidal turbines, tens of thousands of concentrated solar power plants and photovoltaic plants, thousands of geothermal plants, and hundreds of hydroelectric dams. But the construction work doesn't end there, because population and living standards are expected to continue rising after 2030. At best, such a plan simply kicks the can down the road.
Try doing the math assuming 18% efficient solar PV power and place the panels in deserts where there is a lot of solar insulation and the land is worth next to nothing and see how much land area you need. You would be surprised. This efficiency is today regularly achieved by both silicon PV and CIGS and I would not be surprised if they managed to do it in other roll to print technologies as well. Wind can easily power 20% of current energy needs economically. The dams are useful for flood control and ensuring a safe water supply even if they did not generate any power. Making a global energy grid is as impossible as it was impossible to make a global communications grid.
astrophysicist Tom Murphy calculates that, even with an annual energy growth rate of only 2.3 percent, a civilization powered by solar energy would have to cover every square inch of Earth's land area with 100-percent-efficient solar panels within a few hundred years.
A few hundred years ago we did not have global maritime trade or steam engines. Or viable electricity for that matter. The Earth's land area is 1/3rd of its total surface area and there are other surfaces in the solar system besides that. This with current technology. With future technology we could be harvesting energy from black holes or anti-matter for all we know.
There's another way to approach the problem: start with supply instead of demand, and work backward from there. In his book Sustainable Energy -- Without the Hot Air, physicist David J.C. MacKay calculates how much energy could sustainably be produced in the United Kingdom with a massive expansion of existing technology. The total turns out to be less than the nation's energy consumption, which suggests to MacKay that the only path forward is to reduce demand -- through energy efficiency improvements, for example -- until it balances with supply. To which I say: Why don't we just not do it? Let's not build any new power plants except to replace old, inefficient ones. Let's not dig up all the oil. Let's not drive to work alone. Let's not eat meat every day. Let's not turn the thermostat up so high. Let's not buy so many things we don't really need. And above all, let's not accept continued energy growth as a necessary or even desirable way of life.
Yes let us freeze, starve, and stop having children while ignoring the prime directive of the natural world to satisfy some max
Nah Windows 7 is fine.
Still it is cool to have choice. FWIW I use Ubuntu. Unity has got less bad with the upgrades but the Compiz crashes and lockups sometimes make me want to hit the wall.
The problem with Oracle is they always do it like this. First they acquire a major competitor in a major cash transaction then they milk it for a couple of years firing most of the development team and selling licenses while they can. Then they cease support altogether. They are not interested in further developing anything they acquire. It is all slash and burn. Their main expertise was never development it is sales and support.
Oh and MySQL is GPLed software so anyone can fork it if they want to.
MySQL was created by an European company called MySQL AB. It was later acquired by Oracle where development has mostly languished. The MySQL AB founder decided to found MariaDB by forking MySQL. Underhanded my ass. Did you read what Oracle did with InnoDB? They undermined MySQL to the point where they felt they had to sell more like it.
Clippy is that you?
You can find a more up to date graph in Wikipedia.
To me it seems like all basic PV technologies (excluding multi-junction cells, concentrated solar, and the like) are converging in performance. The question is how cheap they will be and how much manufacturing scale is possible. 20% efficiency is actually quite a lot.
No. The moral course of action is to pay sales taxes where you sell the product and corporate tax where you actually operate your business. Which is certainly not Ireland.
How a US company, from a monopoly too big to fail, convinced the US government regulator to accept it? Hah.
The 787 is supposed to use electrical actuators instead of hydraulics powered by engine bleed air. That is where the need for all that power comes from.