Yeah! Dump all the people collecting all usage data. Don't provide any feedback for anything ever
Sometimes it's incredibly fucking obvious that you don't need the data enough to offset the consequences of someone finding you have it. This is one of those times.
See also keeping customers credit card details on file and just waiting for a rogue employee or a hack and those cards getting bled dry. If you no longer need the info and the consequences of having it can bite you on the arse then get rid of it.
These guys are going to be in and out of court for years because they fucked up in such an obvious way.
You'd think with multiple people involved in developing something like this that at least one person would spot the obvious impending shitstorm if it was found out they were recording this data.
Give it time:( We've had plenty of people the Russians support getting bombed by us (such as in the last 24 hours) and plenty of people we support getting bombed by the Russians. It's only a couple of fuckups away from someone intervening in one of the situations and air to air combat.
If the enemy has Soviet radar and SAM equipment from the 70s and 80s, which is now available readily and cheaply to anyone with a grudge against the USA
Or another likely situation is US gear from the 90's or later from someone overrunning a former ally or a change of government (Saudi, Indonesia, Phillipines, Pakisan etc) - or buying the same from China (eg. classified targeting system in tanks stolen by criminals in Israel in 2000, sold to China then onsold to Iran).
Very thin skinned types may play the anti-semite card but it's irrelevant. I'm sure the last thing those criminals who just happened to get access to classified US gear in Israel wanted was for the stuff they stole to end up in Iran and possibly be aimed at them some day.
The source is crap for anything related to science and engineering and you can do better almost anywhere else - including even the extreme stuff you put in to mock - that's how bad it is. Worse than a joke is pretty fucking bad isn't it?
With respect I think your information is slightly more than one decade out of date. The large scale field tests were done and results found at around the time this site started. Anybody getting a shock about results now is just not trying.
Meanwhile the Statfor hacker goes free because he was an FBI informant. A bit weird when a guy who was only poking about looking for UFO stuff could be facing 99 years.
Sorry to reply a lot to your posts but I've just seen them all at once so that's the way it is.
Wind and solar are cheaper in some situations because sometimes you only need a few MW and nukes become economically viable at a GW scale. There is a crossover point in the cost curve - simple as that. It's the nature of thermal power having to start big and then scaling up better than some other things.
Plus, their grid capacity is only 2.7 mgw, which is approx 3/100th of ours
However with a HUUUGE grid, especially one that runs east to west so has peaks spread a great deal over time, makes a vast range of options possible that Costa Rica couldn't implement. We can do better and most likely will some day.
There are a lot of long range HVDC links going in which means line losses from California to Florida are going to be ignorable. What was previously niches with little economic return like for example geothermal from near Yellowstone, or dozens of other ignored energy sources due to remoteness, are now becoming viable. By the time Atlanta goes to bed the sun is still shining bright in California.
the only type of clean energy that can handle our demands would be nuclear
Who told you THAT? Nuclear is fixed capacity so you need something to fill in the gaps. Demand is not constant so it can't match it. It definitely doesn't fit your claim. It's useful for what it does without making shit up to pretend it's the "one true energy". There is no "one true energy" - anyone trying to convince you otherwise is trying to trick you to sell you something.
Fusion has always been twenty years away - mostly because nowhere near enough funding has been applied to make progress so we've been stuck near the same point for decades.
Maybe it's just an easy way to get more up-to-date apps if you're too impatient for something like Gentoo or Arch
Nailed it. After all the applications are the reason you are using the computer. The guy on a recent fedora at work wanted the new version of gimp the week it came out and that was the easiest way to get it to run.
After a while any distro will run just about anything of course. If the program is well written FreeBSD and macs will be able to run it eventually as well.
For as long as software patents exist in the current form the Nvidia stuff will stay closed. A lot of SGI people who got badly burned in court over software patents ended up in Nvidia. Software patent idiocy of the day - older android phones given a choice between to WiFi access points of the same name switch to the stronger signal if you move. Recent android phones don't because Apple has patented something so incredibly fucking obvious.
The problem here is those who are loudest at proclaiming their faith are often those who diverge the most from what their faith is supposed to be. The "born again" reset switch is another thing abused a great deal. Doing good to make up for mistakes of the past is commendable but just using it as a way to escape criticism of prior evil is another.
There are a lot of "Merchants in the temple" out there pretending to be something other than opportunists.
What is worst is those who pretend that they have a God so petty that it does what it's told - sending a hurricane to smite the Godless New Yorkers for one example of a spectacularly evil televangelist piece of shit.
When the question about a simulation make you understand that we don't know enough about thing X for it to be simulated then you have a start on some understanding on thing X which didn't really stand out as an unknown before. That's what it's really about.
Feynman had some good stuff to say about thinking of the impossible as a way to get to the possible but I'm not sure where to find it (google Feynman diagrams and you'll eventually find something that describes this well). Treating stuff as if it was going back in time resulted in finding real relationships between particles in that case. The reality was not so mathematically simple (like the simulation idea is mathematically simple) so was a lot harder to see than thinking of the impossible than seeing what possible things came close
Thinking of the impossible is sometimes just a polarizing filter to make possible things stand out.
Something as mundane as engineering design often starts with impossibly simple forces on impossibly simple objects to make everything easier to calculate - for example finite element analysis. With each interation you build up towards something closer to reality, say an aircraft instead of a massless cube. The aircraft is initally modeled as a lot of little massless cubes (and sometimes triangular prisms) then relationships between other cubes and different properties are added so that really difficult problems can be solved in easy little chunks. It may take a lot of steps but you get there in the end by considering a complex thing in terms of much simpler things.
is supposedly worthy of consideration by the scientific community
It's a way of looking at things in a different way and identifying what stands out when you do so. Consider it being like staining a microscope slide to increase the contrast between two different cells. The cells don't really look like that but you can't get much information about them as they really are.
It's simple logic
Simple logic if not enough sometimes. How about this - you have a box and you want to keep things inside dry, so you imagine where the water could get in. Simple logic tells you to just not expose it to water but that's fairly pointless. It's the same sort of thing, thinking about possibilities. Thinking of the impossible can be a tool to identify real possibilities that are similar.
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes it's incredibly fucking obvious that you don't need the data enough to offset the consequences of someone finding you have it.
This is one of those times.
See also keeping customers credit card details on file and just waiting for a rogue employee or a hack and those cards getting bled dry.
If you no longer need the info and the consequences of having it can bite you on the arse then get rid of it.
These guys are going to be in and out of court for years because they fucked up in such an obvious way.
You'd think with multiple people involved in developing something like this that at least one person would spot the obvious impending shitstorm if it was found out they were recording this data.
Give it time :(
We've had plenty of people the Russians support getting bombed by us (such as in the last 24 hours) and plenty of people we support getting bombed by the Russians. It's only a couple of fuckups away from someone intervening in one of the situations and air to air combat.
Or another likely situation is US gear from the 90's or later from someone overrunning a former ally or a change of government (Saudi, Indonesia, Phillipines, Pakisan etc) - or buying the same from China (eg. classified targeting system in tanks stolen by criminals in Israel in 2000, sold to China then onsold to Iran).
Very thin skinned types may play the anti-semite card but it's irrelevant. I'm sure the last thing those criminals who just happened to get access to classified US gear in Israel wanted was for the stuff they stole to end up in Iran and possibly be aimed at them some day.
It's easier to say - "here are the ones already in use and here are the ones getting built soon".
It is already happening.
The source is crap for anything related to science and engineering and you can do better almost anywhere else - including even the extreme stuff you put in to mock - that's how bad it is.
Worse than a joke is pretty fucking bad isn't it?
With respect I think your information is slightly more than one decade out of date. The large scale field tests were done and results found at around the time this site started. Anybody getting a shock about results now is just not trying.
Meanwhile the Statfor hacker goes free because he was an FBI informant.
A bit weird when a guy who was only poking about looking for UFO stuff could be facing 99 years.
Sorry to reply a lot to your posts but I've just seen them all at once so that's the way it is.
Wind and solar are cheaper in some situations because sometimes you only need a few MW and nukes become economically viable at a GW scale. There is a crossover point in the cost curve - simple as that. It's the nature of thermal power having to start big and then scaling up better than some other things.
Then stop reading those fucking business fantasy magazines!
However with a HUUUGE grid, especially one that runs east to west so has peaks spread a great deal over time, makes a vast range of options possible that Costa Rica couldn't implement. We can do better and most likely will some day.
There are a lot of long range HVDC links going in which means line losses from California to Florida are going to be ignorable. What was previously niches with little economic return like for example geothermal from near Yellowstone, or dozens of other ignored energy sources due to remoteness, are now becoming viable. By the time Atlanta goes to bed the sun is still shining bright in California.
Who told you THAT?
Nuclear is fixed capacity so you need something to fill in the gaps. Demand is not constant so it can't match it. It definitely doesn't fit your claim. It's useful for what it does without making shit up to pretend it's the "one true energy". There is no "one true energy" - anyone trying to convince you otherwise is trying to trick you to sell you something.
A mix is the answer.
Anyone who says otherwise is selling something or has been conned by salesfolk.
Fusion has always been twenty years away - mostly because nowhere near enough funding has been applied to make progress so we've been stuck near the same point for decades.
I've go no idea. It seems software patents don't require the sort of novelty that is required when patenting other sorts of inventions.
Crumb and deep fry just about anything and it tastes good.
Bugger.
GTK3 is why all those idiots are saying that X doesn't work well remotely.
Nailed it.
After all the applications are the reason you are using the computer.
The guy on a recent fedora at work wanted the new version of gimp the week it came out and that was the easiest way to get it to run.
After a while any distro will run just about anything of course.
If the program is well written FreeBSD and macs will be able to run it eventually as well.
For as long as software patents exist in the current form the Nvidia stuff will stay closed. A lot of SGI people who got badly burned in court over software patents ended up in Nvidia.
Software patent idiocy of the day - older android phones given a choice between to WiFi access points of the same name switch to the stronger signal if you move. Recent android phones don't because Apple has patented something so incredibly fucking obvious.
The normal way is to make them eat a lot of warfarin until internal bleeding kills them.
If you want to kill stuff than is not neatly lined up in the stockyards it's generally going to be messy and horrible.
Keep on telling yourself as your wallet empties to the benefit of your "experts" in crystal healing, voodoo and other shit that isn't real.
Happens here too, domestic violence, and illegal in both countries just a LOT harder to convict over there.
The problem here is those who are loudest at proclaiming their faith are often those who diverge the most from what their faith is supposed to be.
The "born again" reset switch is another thing abused a great deal. Doing good to make up for mistakes of the past is commendable but just using it as a way to escape criticism of prior evil is another.
There are a lot of "Merchants in the temple" out there pretending to be something other than opportunists.
What is worst is those who pretend that they have a God so petty that it does what it's told - sending a hurricane to smite the Godless New Yorkers for one example of a spectacularly evil televangelist piece of shit.
When the question about a simulation make you understand that we don't know enough about thing X for it to be simulated then you have a start on some understanding on thing X which didn't really stand out as an unknown before.
That's what it's really about.
Feynman had some good stuff to say about thinking of the impossible as a way to get to the possible but I'm not sure where to find it (google Feynman diagrams and you'll eventually find something that describes this well). Treating stuff as if it was going back in time resulted in finding real relationships between particles in that case. The reality was not so mathematically simple (like the simulation idea is mathematically simple) so was a lot harder to see than thinking of the impossible than seeing what possible things came close
Thinking of the impossible is sometimes just a polarizing filter to make possible things stand out.
Something as mundane as engineering design often starts with impossibly simple forces on impossibly simple objects to make everything easier to calculate - for example finite element analysis. With each interation you build up towards something closer to reality, say an aircraft instead of a massless cube. The aircraft is initally modeled as a lot of little massless cubes (and sometimes triangular prisms) then relationships between other cubes and different properties are added so that really difficult problems can be solved in easy little chunks. It may take a lot of steps but you get there in the end by considering a complex thing in terms of much simpler things.
It's a way of looking at things in a different way and identifying what stands out when you do so.
Consider it being like staining a microscope slide to increase the contrast between two different cells. The cells don't really look like that but you can't get much information about them as they really are.
Simple logic if not enough sometimes. How about this - you have a box and you want to keep things inside dry, so you imagine where the water could get in. Simple logic tells you to just not expose it to water but that's fairly pointless. It's the same sort of thing, thinking about possibilities. Thinking of the impossible can be a tool to identify real possibilities that are similar.
Yet you did it.
With a paleo freak with nothing but a qualification for acupuncture from some weird place as your authority.
Epic fail.