2) Instead of a fat client on the desktop, you get a fat plugin in your browser.
For one thing, you get a single general-purpose plug-in instead of a separate one for each different 3D web application you want to use. For another thing, if it's a standard then it can be implemented as part of the base functionality of the browser, and not need a plug-in at all.
Yet another is working on constraints and parametric equation support. This will let modelers define objects that can more easily be articulated while still "keeping everything together". Model an object so that it's always be tangent to a surface, for example.
Yay! Constraint-based modeling is just about the best thing ever. I just wish there was a good line-based (and/or 2D) program that did it...
You say that because you've likely only experienced it played through a crappy sound card synthesizer. Remember, the thing about MIDI is that it's not an audio file. It's more like a musical score -- the result depends both on the MIDI file itself (the arrangement) and the synthesizer (the "musicians"). Play a well-composed MIDI file through a decent sythesizer (a newer SoundBlaster that supports those "soundfont" things would probably work, but a standalone one or MIDI keyboard that you'd find at a musical instrument store would be even better), and you'll be more impressed.
By that logic, a narrower exhaust pipe would increase pressure and flow rate, thereby increasing the power output of the engine. So maximum power would be made by building all car exhausts out of 3/16 ID brake line.
First, the smaller you make the exhaust, the more friction you get -- which means the engine is having to work harder to push the air out the tube.
know power output drops on a regular engine if you remove the exhaust completely, but if I understand correctly, it's simply that the exhaust has to be tuned to the displacement and output of the engine.
Second, you're right, it gets complicated. You have to start thinking about valve timing and scavenging and stuff like that.
Although that's to do with volumetric efficiency, not thermodynamic efficiency.
Volumetric efficiency and thermodynamic efficiency are not independent; they are related by the ideal gas law.
Anyway, I agree you might very well be able to increase efficiency with this device. However, I'm not entirely convinced it'd be better than a turbocharger or something like that.
This is a 1970's tune that was not that big of a deal at the time....Yes, I graduated High school in 1976..don't try to B.S. me what was relevant then....I know better!
Yeah, right. You're posting on Slashdot; you can't fool us! You were too busy listening to Mr. Spock's Music From Outer Space or something, and had no more clue about Queen than I do about Britney Spears (or whatever the Hell it is that popular assholes listen to these days)!
Ah, that's a good point -- I guess you answered my question.
Of course, even if the MIDI file was bad on purpose, it was still recognizable as Bohemian Rhapsody. I don't think it was changed enough to avoid being declared infringement if BMI decided to go after it.
I don't think it was necessarily a limitation of the instruments; the problem was -- as I said before -- timing, not timbre. It was inadequate in the same way that a perfectly normal instrument played by a robot would be. I think it was simply that the person who made the (presumably) MIDI file used to drive the thing just did a poor job of it, and that it would have sounded just as wrong if it had been played back using the sound card's synthesizer.
Some of the pitches weren't quite right either, but that really would be a limitation of the hardware, and I'm not complaining about it. Far from it; I think the hardware aspect of it was brilliant! I just wish he'd used a better score.
Never -- the RIAA doesn't control the copyright of the melody itself, only recordings of it made by RIAA-affiliated performers. You should be worried about BMI instead, I think.
The reproduction sounds too -- excuse me -- mechanical. I wonder, was it due to limitations in the timing granularity of the devices used, or just a bad MIDI file?
If you're taking heat out of the upper radiator hose, or the exhaust pipe, both of which are just dumped out to the atmosphere, anyway, then it really is waste heat, and you're not reducing the efficiency of anything.
If you take it out of the radiator hose, you're reducing the efficiency of the radiator circuit (because you're essentially insulating it). And the amount that efficiency decreases is directly proportional to the amount of energy you get from the device.
If you take the heat out of the exhaust, you'll reduce the pressure of the gas and thereby slow down the flow. In fact, now that I think about it, it would act the same way (thermodynamically speaking) as a turbocharger! (The exclamation mark isn't becuase that's a particularly good thing; it's because I was excited to realize it.) In that case, the question becomes this: which is more efficient, generating electricity using the thermoelectric effect, or doing it by hooking a turbine to a generator? I'm gonna have to take a wild guess and go for the latter, because otherwise there'd be thermocouples everywhere and the article would be talking about the revolutionary idea of using a turbine.
If you think about it, the only heat in a car that's really waste is the heat generated by the brakes. And if you decide to try to tap that, suddenly you're talking about a hybrid and you've just reasoned your way around a circle. : )
Another point not mentioned is the economics of the situation. Inherently the home device is going to raise the temperature of the appliance. Higher temp appliance means it wears out faster. Wears out faster means lots of energy spent on replacement.
Nah, you're still just talking about thermodynamics like everybody else. What you really said was that people should be careful to make sure everything important is included in the system before they try to analyze it.
Hopefully, the generator will provide the extra energy needed to power all the extra fans you'll need.
If you were using fans to begin with, this would always cause a net loss in efficiency. The only way to gain would be if the surroundings could absorb the extra heat fast enough without spending extra energy on cooling.
The way this works is that the hotter your CPU (or whatever is generating the heat) gets, the more electricity it generates. So if your CPU is already at the limit of its heat tolerance (e.g. if your laptop's heat management system has told the fan to turn on), then adding this would only make it worse because you'd use all the power -- and more* -- to run the fan faster. If, on the other hand, your laptop runs cool enough (without a fan) that it has room to get hotter without breaking, then you could benefit from adding one of these. Basically, it has the same effect on the laptop as increasing the ambient temperature would.
Most "eco-friendly" energy sources in fact either cause the same amount of pollution per energy unit or often more, such as biodiesel, ethanol, geothermal, and most wind farms barely break even after huge investment and CO2 emmissions from building them.
That depends greatly on how you go about using those energy sources. For example, ethanol from corn? Yeah, that's not worth it. Ethanol from sugar cane? That's worth it, unless you chop down the rain forest to grow the cane. Ethanol from cellulose grown with minimal effort (fertilization, etc.) on otherwise-unarable land? That's definitely worth it.
Next, biodiesel. Biodiesel from virgin oil diverted from the food supply? Not worth it. Biodiesel from waste oil thrown out by restaurants, or poultry processing byproducts? Totally worth it.
Geothermal: I don't even know why you don't think this is worth it (it apparently works great in Iceland), unless you're concerned that some lunatic is going to build a power plant on top of Old Faithful or something.
Wind farms: the old ones weren't worth it because the rotors were too small (those were also the ones that spun fast enough to endanger birds). New, big turbines are worth it (as long as you don't be stupid and build them where there's no wind).
There's a good situation to use every source of energy. The issue is finding the right situation for each one.
They probably don't add fancy features like that because the people who buy window air conditioners are too price-sensitive. If they weren't, they'd upgrade to central air instead (or fix the broken central air they already have, in the case of everyone I've seen who owned a window air conditioner).
Anyway, the solution is to just go buy a separate timer and be done with it. (They work well with other stuff, like cheap coffee makers, too.)
Slashdot Mirror
For one thing, you get a single general-purpose plug-in instead of a separate one for each different 3D web application you want to use. For another thing, if it's a standard then it can be implemented as part of the base functionality of the browser, and not need a plug-in at all.
You missed a step. The original Ghandi quote was thus (except for the bulleted list format):
But I agree, we're on stage 2-3 now.
Yay! Constraint-based modeling is just about the best thing ever. I just wish there was a good line-based (and/or 2D) program that did it...
You say that because you've likely only experienced it played through a crappy sound card synthesizer. Remember, the thing about MIDI is that it's not an audio file. It's more like a musical score -- the result depends both on the MIDI file itself (the arrangement) and the synthesizer (the "musicians"). Play a well-composed MIDI file through a decent sythesizer (a newer SoundBlaster that supports those "soundfont" things would probably work, but a standalone one or MIDI keyboard that you'd find at a musical instrument store would be even better), and you'll be more impressed.
First, the smaller you make the exhaust, the more friction you get -- which means the engine is having to work harder to push the air out the tube.
Second, you're right, it gets complicated. You have to start thinking about valve timing and scavenging and stuff like that.
Volumetric efficiency and thermodynamic efficiency are not independent; they are related by the ideal gas law.
Anyway, I agree you might very well be able to increase efficiency with this device. However, I'm not entirely convinced it'd be better than a turbocharger or something like that.
No, I mean like how Disney doesn't control Speedy Gonzales [because Warner Brothers* does instead].
(*For the purpose of this post, assume that Warner Bothers is equally obnoxious as Disney even though it isn't in reality.)
The ratio of your precautions to George Harrison's should be the same as the ratio between your fame and his.
Yeah, that's why I felt necessary to link it.
Yeah, right. You're posting on Slashdot; you can't fool us! You were too busy listening to Mr. Spock's Music From Outer Space or something, and had no more clue about Queen than I do about Britney Spears (or whatever the Hell it is that popular assholes listen to these days)!
But without his emotion chip.
I think it would be cool to dub in the vocals. Maybe run them through a vocoder first or someting.
Ah, that's a good point -- I guess you answered my question.
Of course, even if the MIDI file was bad on purpose, it was still recognizable as Bohemian Rhapsody. I don't think it was changed enough to avoid being declared infringement if BMI decided to go after it.
I don't think it was necessarily a limitation of the instruments; the problem was -- as I said before -- timing, not timbre. It was inadequate in the same way that a perfectly normal instrument played by a robot would be. I think it was simply that the person who made the (presumably) MIDI file used to drive the thing just did a poor job of it, and that it would have sounded just as wrong if it had been played back using the sound card's synthesizer.
Some of the pitches weren't quite right either, but that really would be a limitation of the hardware, and I'm not complaining about it. Far from it; I think the hardware aspect of it was brilliant! I just wish he'd used a better score.
Never -- the RIAA doesn't control the copyright of the melody itself, only recordings of it made by RIAA-affiliated performers. You should be worried about BMI instead, I think.
The reproduction sounds too -- excuse me -- mechanical. I wonder, was it due to limitations in the timing granularity of the devices used, or just a bad MIDI file?
But your ice cream melts faster!
If you take it out of the radiator hose, you're reducing the efficiency of the radiator circuit (because you're essentially insulating it). And the amount that efficiency decreases is directly proportional to the amount of energy you get from the device.
If you take the heat out of the exhaust, you'll reduce the pressure of the gas and thereby slow down the flow. In fact, now that I think about it, it would act the same way (thermodynamically speaking) as a turbocharger! (The exclamation mark isn't becuase that's a particularly good thing; it's because I was excited to realize it.) In that case, the question becomes this: which is more efficient, generating electricity using the thermoelectric effect, or doing it by hooking a turbine to a generator? I'm gonna have to take a wild guess and go for the latter, because otherwise there'd be thermocouples everywhere and the article would be talking about the revolutionary idea of using a turbine.
If you think about it, the only heat in a car that's really waste is the heat generated by the brakes. And if you decide to try to tap that, suddenly you're talking about a hybrid and you've just reasoned your way around a circle. : )
Nah, you're still just talking about thermodynamics like everybody else. What you really said was that people should be careful to make sure everything important is included in the system before they try to analyze it.
If you were using fans to begin with, this would always cause a net loss in efficiency. The only way to gain would be if the surroundings could absorb the extra heat fast enough without spending extra energy on cooling.
The way this works is that the hotter your CPU (or whatever is generating the heat) gets, the more electricity it generates. So if your CPU is already at the limit of its heat tolerance (e.g. if your laptop's heat management system has told the fan to turn on), then adding this would only make it worse because you'd use all the power -- and more* -- to run the fan faster. If, on the other hand, your laptop runs cool enough (without a fan) that it has room to get hotter without breaking, then you could benefit from adding one of these. Basically, it has the same effect on the laptop as increasing the ambient temperature would.
(* see Second Law of Thermodynamics)
That depends greatly on how you go about using those energy sources. For example, ethanol from corn? Yeah, that's not worth it. Ethanol from sugar cane? That's worth it, unless you chop down the rain forest to grow the cane. Ethanol from cellulose grown with minimal effort (fertilization, etc.) on otherwise-unarable land? That's definitely worth it.
Next, biodiesel. Biodiesel from virgin oil diverted from the food supply? Not worth it. Biodiesel from waste oil thrown out by restaurants, or poultry processing byproducts? Totally worth it.
Geothermal: I don't even know why you don't think this is worth it (it apparently works great in Iceland), unless you're concerned that some lunatic is going to build a power plant on top of Old Faithful or something.
Wind farms: the old ones weren't worth it because the rotors were too small (those were also the ones that spun fast enough to endanger birds). New, big turbines are worth it (as long as you don't be stupid and build them where there's no wind).
There's a good situation to use every source of energy. The issue is finding the right situation for each one.
An even better solution would be to make the car small enough and/or the driver skilled enough to not need power steering to begin with.
Yeah, just like homophones!
They probably don't add fancy features like that because the people who buy window air conditioners are too price-sensitive. If they weren't, they'd upgrade to central air instead (or fix the broken central air they already have, in the case of everyone I've seen who owned a window air conditioner).
Anyway, the solution is to just go buy a separate timer and be done with it. (They work well with other stuff, like cheap coffee makers, too.)
No, no, no... this is the Vatican we're talking about here. You're thinking of D.C.