[the lines] Which they're not doing, of course. All this DRM and bad blood is killing their collective businesses. And without the record industry, we'll never see the next Britteny Spears. [/the lines]
Actually, my girlfriend (a graphic designer) complains about Photoshop all the time - less than she does about using the GIMP at my house, but she complains nonetheless.
And I'm sure - no, certain - that there are admins out there who complain about their Linux servers, even though they're rediculously proud of them.
It's all about degree of irritation when it comes to computers. The right tool for the job is the one that lets you get the job done without pissing you off too much.
GNU / Linux / KDE has no more in the way of problems than Windows XP, and has a similar featureset. Hence, it is ready to be competitive on the desktop target.
All Microsoft really needs is an idea guy. Some kind of eccentric with brilliant ideas and the authority to have them carried out.
Or, they can switch to Google's model and have ALL employees be the idea guy. If you've got the best and brightest working there, what so hard about letting them go all mad scientist for a day?
G asoline.pdf>This artielc</url> defines the subsidies, tax breaks, and government projects involved.
And they are provided in an effort to prevent the US citizen from paying much for gasoline. It partially pays for prospecting, distillation, distribution, pollution controls, etc. If you consider the gasoline tax that's separate from a sales tax, you're talking about something like a dollar's difference. Then there's the carbon offsetting (which, since corporations pay it, you should have to as well).
Depending on what you consider to pe part of the real price of gas, that brings it up to $5-$15 / gallon. I'm inclined to put the figure about where the EU's got it, at $6/gal.
Meanwhile, if a company isn't selling to the US, they're missing out on a giant market that they already have the investment of distribution channels to. So, rather than try and make a marginal double profit on another smaller market, they make a huge single profit on the US.
Meanwhile, if we were paying that, how long do you think the US would keep these measures in place? They are, after all, intended to keep the price of gasoline down for the consumer. Which is an admirable short-term goal (especially since they were meant to bolster the non-OPEC oil industry in the late 70's and early 80's), but in the long term is preventing alternative technology from seeming cost-efficient.
How long is that, exactly? I've always been a sort of "Oh, it's broke? Where's my Chilton's manual?" guy. Consequently, I drive a 1985 VW Cabrio that runs like a wet dream.
Wow. Low understanding threshold of the involved technologies. Not that I'm disagreeing with the main point of 'an electric system is more efficient than a combustion system', but more the specifics. I'd like to know where you got the 85% figure.
Ok, a direct ethanol fuel cell is rather limited in efficiency to around 50%. Our efficiency is now 50%. A 50HP prime-offset electric motor running at peak efficiency should be about 82%-90%. Our efficiency is now 41%. Add in theoretical friction losses of about 20%. Our efficiency is now 32.8%
Now, with the new tech in DEFC, our major limiting factor (the DEFC's efficiency) may be lifted. Still, we're not yet talking about unbelivable gains in fuel economy.
Re:Not even funny anymore
on
The Hybrid Scooter
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Actually, it wouldn't be a tax. It'd be the death of a subsidy.
Seriously. We pay $3/gallon of gas cos our government makes it that way. I think it's kind of annoying. I'll take the $6-12/Gal it takes to drill and make the stuff, and you can use that subsidy money to pay for research into new technologies (which will then be lapped up by gas-price-exhausted citizens).
Meanwhile, the millisecond US citizens have $6/Gallon gas, you'll see a huge surge in ethanol conversion. The changes to a car are mostly flow-based (although changing your car's timing is a good idea, to take advantage of eth's anti-knock properties), and a good mechanic could do it in a day or so (under an hour if he doesn't have to consult Chilton). That's mostly because eth only costs about $2.70/Gal at wholesale prices.
CBOT Ethanol presently runs at $2.624/US Gallon (EU 0.543/L). Given that you need about 20% more ethanol than gasoline in a converted vehicle, that bumps the price up to $3.149/gas gallon equivalency (EU 0.652/Petrol Litre equivalency).
Not a deal for us in the states, but a sweet concept for y'all in Europe.
Possibly. I'm not exactly chomping at the bit to build one myself. I can think of much simpler ways to utilize a parabolic reflector (stamped aluminum polished to an automotive finish would likely have the best cost/efficiency ratio) than putting it through a near-goldbergian heat-transfer device.
No, seriously. This is little more than a retrofitted air conditioner - and it wouldn't do bollocks even if you coupled the turbine directly to the compressor of another AC.
Now, question: How hard would it be to solicit new VC funding if you've suddenly got a big name customer? Crank that couple million to a couple hundered million.
I realize there's training timeline issues along with it, but an appropriately motivated company should be able to handle it.
I think it's just an issue of knowing when to change leadership (e.g., the guy that motivates a couple hundered programmers isn't necessarily the same guy capable of motivating a couple thousand tech support monkeys)
Slashdot Mirror
Nah, they used the term 'religious', which means that Linux users (like us) who actually enjoy Linux are now unofficially zealots.
Useless media fuckers.
GTK is a shitty toolkit. There, I said it.
Use Qt for full apps, or FLTK for light apps with short time-to-market, or native code for things that MUST be hella-fast.
GTK, as far as I'm concerned is an addictive mistake.
[the lines]
Which they're not doing, of course. All this DRM and bad blood is killing their collective businesses. And without the record industry, we'll never see the next Britteny Spears.
[/the lines]
Actually, my girlfriend (a graphic designer) complains about Photoshop all the time - less than she does about using the GIMP at my house, but she complains nonetheless.
And I'm sure - no, certain - that there are admins out there who complain about their Linux servers, even though they're rediculously proud of them.
It's all about degree of irritation when it comes to computers. The right tool for the job is the one that lets you get the job done without pissing you off too much.
Actually, there's a test.
Please state the commands necessary for building a Bash shell from source.
"'Frankly, a lot of people in the open-source community have done themselves a disservice by painting things' as either/or decisions"
Huhwha!?
Who the hell said open-source and proprietary are either/or?! There's so much OSS for Windows it's not just not funny, it's incredibly USEFUL.
An OSS OS v. proprietary isn't even either or. OS-X is a well-meshed mix between the two.
Someone's been FUDding this guy, and claiming to be an OSS advocate in the process.
I'll put it this way:
GNU / Linux / KDE has no more in the way of problems than Windows XP, and has a similar featureset. Hence, it is ready to be competitive on the desktop target.
All Microsoft really needs is an idea guy. Some kind of eccentric with brilliant ideas and the authority to have them carried out.
Or, they can switch to Google's model and have ALL employees be the idea guy. If you've got the best and brightest working there, what so hard about letting them go all mad scientist for a day?
Meh. I don't dabble in blue sky. I use Linux on my desktop. And barely use the konsole.
Linux IS ready for the desktop, and now awaits only adoption.
Still, I'm not here to convince you. The only people I'm worried about convincing are congress.
G asoline.pdf>This artielc</url> defines the subsidies, tax breaks, and government projects involved.
And they are provided in an effort to prevent the US citizen from paying much for gasoline. It partially pays for prospecting, distillation, distribution, pollution controls, etc. If you consider the gasoline tax that's separate from a sales tax, you're talking about something like a dollar's difference. Then there's the carbon offsetting (which, since corporations pay it, you should have to as well).
Depending on what you consider to pe part of the real price of gas, that brings it up to $5-$15 / gallon. I'm inclined to put the figure about where the EU's got it, at $6/gal.
Meanwhile, if a company isn't selling to the US, they're missing out on a giant market that they already have the investment of distribution channels to. So, rather than try and make a marginal double profit on another smaller market, they make a huge single profit on the US.
Meanwhile, if we were paying that, how long do you think the US would keep these measures in place? They are, after all, intended to keep the price of gasoline down for the consumer. Which is an admirable short-term goal (especially since they were meant to bolster the non-OPEC oil industry in the late 70's and early 80's), but in the long term is preventing alternative technology from seeming cost-efficient.
The end? Hell, the middle. I remember tearing up over Aeris' murder. All unexpected and shit.
Hm. I wonder if anyone makes a PacMan clone with bloodspray (ectospray?) That would be SWEET.
That's pretty wrong on a couple levels. Probably why it got modded funny.
Hey, mod parent funny! That was a good double entendre!
Ok. Was that meant to be a "you lucky fuck" post?
"well past the time you should buy a new car"
How long is that, exactly? I've always been a sort of "Oh, it's broke? Where's my Chilton's manual?" guy. Consequently, I drive a 1985 VW Cabrio that runs like a wet dream.
*blinks*
Wow. Low understanding threshold of the involved technologies. Not that I'm disagreeing with the main point of 'an electric system is more efficient than a combustion system', but more the specifics. I'd like to know where you got the 85% figure.
Ok, a direct ethanol fuel cell is rather limited in efficiency to around 50%. Our efficiency is now 50%.
A 50HP prime-offset electric motor running at peak efficiency should be about 82%-90%. Our efficiency is now 41%.
Add in theoretical friction losses of about 20%. Our efficiency is now 32.8%
Now, with the new tech in DEFC, our major limiting factor (the DEFC's efficiency) may be lifted. Still, we're not yet talking about unbelivable gains in fuel economy.
Actually, it wouldn't be a tax. It'd be the death of a subsidy.
Seriously. We pay $3/gallon of gas cos our government makes it that way. I think it's kind of annoying. I'll take the $6-12/Gal it takes to drill and make the stuff, and you can use that subsidy money to pay for research into new technologies (which will then be lapped up by gas-price-exhausted citizens).
Meanwhile, the millisecond US citizens have $6/Gallon gas, you'll see a huge surge in ethanol conversion. The changes to a car are mostly flow-based (although changing your car's timing is a good idea, to take advantage of eth's anti-knock properties), and a good mechanic could do it in a day or so (under an hour if he doesn't have to consult Chilton). That's mostly because eth only costs about $2.70/Gal at wholesale prices.
CBOT Ethanol presently runs at $2.624/US Gallon (EU 0.543/L). Given that you need about 20% more ethanol than gasoline in a converted vehicle, that bumps the price up to $3.149/gas gallon equivalency (EU 0.652/Petrol Litre equivalency).
Not a deal for us in the states, but a sweet concept for y'all in Europe.
Car v. Bike:
I was flung about ten feet, looked at my bike, gave it a kick to straighten its handlebars, and rode off into the sunset.
Possibly. I'm not exactly chomping at the bit to build one myself. I can think of much simpler ways to utilize a parabolic reflector (stamped aluminum polished to an automotive finish would likely have the best cost/efficiency ratio) than putting it through a near-goldbergian heat-transfer device.
No, seriously. This is little more than a retrofitted air conditioner - and it wouldn't do bollocks even if you coupled the turbine directly to the compressor of another AC.
the article clearly states "middle-end", does it not?
So it's a growth issue. I buy that.
Now, question: How hard would it be to solicit new VC funding if you've suddenly got a big name customer? Crank that couple million to a couple hundered million.
I realize there's training timeline issues along with it, but an appropriately motivated company should be able to handle it.
I think it's just an issue of knowing when to change leadership (e.g., the guy that motivates a couple hundered programmers isn't necessarily the same guy capable of motivating a couple thousand tech support monkeys)
Aren't you thinking "Trusted Computing"?