Switching speed, pixel density, energy consumption etc are features of a prototype product instead of a newly devised technology at the first announcement stage.
No information on the switching speed.
No information on the pixel density.
No information on the energy consumption.
No information on the reflectivity or whether it's transmissive instead or whether it emits light.
No information on whether it's a straight on-off effect or whether they can do pixel level grayscale.
No description of how it works.
Just descriptions of graphene and the sentence "we used it to make electronic paper." One of the articles did say that their time scale for having a product is "within a year.". I think I'll forget about it until then.
It's in the lab not a product FFS! If you don't want to read about emerging technology then read other articles.
Yes but currently those ones that can do both really suck in situations such as in direct sunlight. The "device that does everything" does not currently exist so there is no point using it as a comparison.
There are a lot of applications where both of your criteria are not needed. Do you really need to play movies on the wall panel that tells you what the airconditioner is doing?
Thinking way back to my introduction to civil engineering subject in first year before the courses split (that's the way we did things in the 1980s) there was a practical session about airflow around large structures. We put blocks in a tank with flowing water and squirted dye in - fun, but it showed why it gets windy at the base of skyscrapers unless effort is made to break up the airflow. The two topics are not disconnected even at the very entry level. City microclimates from large flat areas etc are another issue that has been considered even at the introductory level for decades.
Human pattern recognition may as well be magic as far as current "A.I." is going. One situation at a time is going into what is effectively a big collection of lookup tables but it's going to take a while.
What they hate is getting gasoline on their hands. I hate it too, but very few people are smart enough to carry rubber gloves to wear every time they fill up their vehicle
The nozzles etc must be a different design to the ones in Australia since I can't remember how many years it's been since I've got it on my hands. I haven't spilt it on my hands even filling little drums for mower fuel and I don't think I take much care.
Every darn farmer has sense to treat machinery with respect unlike some idiot zooming about the suburbs with a huge tank of fuel in the back of an SUV.
The current e-ink market is heavily controlled thus expensive niche items for products that are very cheap to manufacture. We've missed the boat with e-ink phones despite the technology being available for more than a decade - the patent holders didn't want their IP "cheapened" by ending up in inexpensive phones. Hopefully this will open things up a bit. I've wanted an e-ink monitor ever since the technology has been announced but the closest I've been able to get is an android tablet (Boox) and only in the last year.
My point is that "plant" is used to describe a variety of equipment and buildings on a single site thus meaning you are making a lot of misleading noise for nothing. Two units at one plant = two units at one site.
Somewhere an English teacher is either crying or turning in their grave about how you are twisting and torturing things just to get some sort of cheap "win" in a pointless argument.
I will not call you a moron, but what you have provided is not a population density at all - you have averaged over the entire state instead of given an indicative value of how densely cities are populated. On top of that you feel you need to play the man instead of the ball to get some kind of "win" - why bother?
An amusing thing the kids today don't know is the nuclear safety regulations at the time of three mile island were more lax than for a fertilizer works - hence things like not having a clue what was really going on for a week due to inadequate monitoring equipment. A week of media hype due to little real information had a lasting impression on attitudes to nuclear power. The regulations then went the other way, to more restrictive than other industries and some pretty nasty industry lobbying to add extra barriers of entry to new players filled in the rest.
Westinghouse etc LIKE the regulations as they are and WROTE most of them FFS! It keeps the Germans, French, Chinese and all the rest out of the US nuclear industry.
Also there are not many built because there are not many orgs with a lot of money that want to build them - simple as that. China want them and are putting up the money so they are getting built in China.
A lot of California is unpopulated desert so those density numbers are very misleading - laughably so. You should have a word with whoever misled you with such an argument and a laugh at yourself for falling for it. What really matters is the population density in areas where you want to put a station or terminal. It may still be far too low, I do not know, but the numbers above are totally irrelevant and just make people using them look silly.
Great wall - that was on the radio show in question - I heard a REPEAT of it last week outside the UK so not sure why it's on slashdot today. It turns out that there are a lot of walls instead of on making up the thing so it doesn't fit the "single object" definition. Wait a few years for an upcoming six reactor plant for something more expensive again.
Remember the guy on the BBC that debunked the comment that Saddam could attack the UK within minutes? Hounded to suicide. The BBC is that way as a literal survival tactic.
It's been that way for years apparently. Jimmy Saville spend six Christmases with the Thatcher family which may explain why all those complaints against him and efforts within the BBC to get rid of him came to nothing once they hit the top levels of management. Not being from the UK I'm hearing about it all after the fact, but it's part of a history of interference on many levels.
Just last week there was some guy trying to mislead everyone here with a "nuclear is cheap" lie. Where is he now?
If he really meant that nuclear is cost effective and just was not able to phrase it in any other way he'd better work on his English to get it to grade school level.
Oddly enough they are called creep voids, which leads to microcracking and then real cracks. I nearly wore my eyes out finding them by using a microscope to examine samples taken from high stress spots in the 1990s. Simply put, neutrons smash the shit out of everything they hit - sometimes leaving holes and more often making other stuff radioactive. Similar damage without the radioactivity happens in high temperature high stress situations to a lesser extent. Anyway, my comment above was to fend off the "just replace the reactor with a new one and keep the rest" types when the entire thing has hit end of life.
this sort of piping failure isn't supposed to be a safety issue
Why not just say "LEARN TO SPEAK AMERICAN!" and save me from sitting through a fucking advertisement before making it to some sort of joke as lame as mine above?
Q: Half of a decreasing amount after being corrected for inflation is and increase or decrease? Looks like a kid didn't get what used to be expected with mathematics as well. The weasel trick of trying to shift things from absolute terms to a portion of a moving target however shows the kid probably spent a lot of time in the debate club being very busy with mass debating. Yes I really do think so little of you and your petty evasions.
Slashdot Mirror
Switching speed, pixel density, energy consumption etc are features of a prototype product instead of a newly devised technology at the first announcement stage.
No information on the switching speed. No information on the pixel density. No information on the energy consumption. No information on the reflectivity or whether it's transmissive instead or whether it emits light. No information on whether it's a straight on-off effect or whether they can do pixel level grayscale. No description of how it works. Just descriptions of graphene and the sentence "we used it to make electronic paper." One of the articles did say that their time scale for having a product is "within a year.". I think I'll forget about it until then.
It's in the lab not a product FFS!
If you don't want to read about emerging technology then read other articles.
Yes but currently those ones that can do both really suck in situations such as in direct sunlight.
The "device that does everything" does not currently exist so there is no point using it as a comparison.
Now that's a post that should be modded up to eleven if it was possible.
There are a lot of applications where both of your criteria are not needed.
Do you really need to play movies on the wall panel that tells you what the airconditioner is doing?
Thinking way back to my introduction to civil engineering subject in first year before the courses split (that's the way we did things in the 1980s) there was a practical session about airflow around large structures. We put blocks in a tank with flowing water and squirted dye in - fun, but it showed why it gets windy at the base of skyscrapers unless effort is made to break up the airflow.
The two topics are not disconnected even at the very entry level. City microclimates from large flat areas etc are another issue that has been considered even at the introductory level for decades.
Human pattern recognition may as well be magic as far as current "A.I." is going. One situation at a time is going into what is effectively a big collection of lookup tables but it's going to take a while.
The nozzles etc must be a different design to the ones in Australia since I can't remember how many years it's been since I've got it on my hands. I haven't spilt it on my hands even filling little drums for mower fuel and I don't think I take much care.
Every darn farmer has sense to treat machinery with respect unlike some idiot zooming about the suburbs with a huge tank of fuel in the back of an SUV.
Those vehicles exploding in Hollywood movies could be imitated by an SUV near you!
Is it just me or is it starting to look like the USA is trying to regress to something like a third world country in a lot of little ways now?
The current e-ink market is heavily controlled thus expensive niche items for products that are very cheap to manufacture. We've missed the boat with e-ink phones despite the technology being available for more than a decade - the patent holders didn't want their IP "cheapened" by ending up in inexpensive phones. Hopefully this will open things up a bit. I've wanted an e-ink monitor ever since the technology has been announced but the closest I've been able to get is an android tablet (Boox) and only in the last year.
My point is that "plant" is used to describe a variety of equipment and buildings on a single site thus meaning you are making a lot of misleading noise for nothing. Two units at one plant = two units at one site.
Somewhere an English teacher is either crying or turning in their grave about how you are twisting and torturing things just to get some sort of cheap "win" in a pointless argument.
I will not call you a moron, but what you have provided is not a population density at all - you have averaged over the entire state instead of given an indicative value of how densely cities are populated.
On top of that you feel you need to play the man instead of the ball to get some kind of "win" - why bother?
An amusing thing the kids today don't know is the nuclear safety regulations at the time of three mile island were more lax than for a fertilizer works - hence things like not having a clue what was really going on for a week due to inadequate monitoring equipment. A week of media hype due to little real information had a lasting impression on attitudes to nuclear power. The regulations then went the other way, to more restrictive than other industries and some pretty nasty industry lobbying to add extra barriers of entry to new players filled in the rest.
Westinghouse etc LIKE the regulations as they are and WROTE most of them FFS! It keeps the Germans, French, Chinese and all the rest out of the US nuclear industry.
Also there are not many built because there are not many orgs with a lot of money that want to build them - simple as that. China want them and are putting up the money so they are getting built in China.
If by mediocre you mean aimed at the below average reader instead of someone who can follow a Greg Egan novel, then yes - it's childrens fiction!
A lot of California is unpopulated desert so those density numbers are very misleading - laughably so. You should have a word with whoever misled you with such an argument and a laugh at yourself for falling for it.
What really matters is the population density in areas where you want to put a station or terminal. It may still be far too low, I do not know, but the numbers above are totally irrelevant and just make people using them look silly.
Great wall - that was on the radio show in question - I heard a REPEAT of it last week outside the UK so not sure why it's on slashdot today. It turns out that there are a lot of walls instead of on making up the thing so it doesn't fit the "single object" definition.
Wait a few years for an upcoming six reactor plant for something more expensive again.
Two reactors in the same plant. Two units in the same plant. Two plants? No.
"Callan" was awesome.
Remember the guy on the BBC that debunked the comment that Saddam could attack the UK within minutes? Hounded to suicide. The BBC is that way as a literal survival tactic.
It's been that way for years apparently. Jimmy Saville spend six Christmases with the Thatcher family which may explain why all those complaints against him and efforts within the BBC to get rid of him came to nothing once they hit the top levels of management. Not being from the UK I'm hearing about it all after the fact, but it's part of a history of interference on many levels.
Just last week there was some guy trying to mislead everyone here with a "nuclear is cheap" lie. Where is he now?
If he really meant that nuclear is cost effective and just was not able to phrase it in any other way he'd better work on his English to get it to grade school level.
Oddly enough they are called creep voids, which leads to microcracking and then real cracks. I nearly wore my eyes out finding them by using a microscope to examine samples taken from high stress spots in the 1990s.
Simply put, neutrons smash the shit out of everything they hit - sometimes leaving holes and more often making other stuff radioactive. Similar damage without the radioactivity happens in high temperature high stress situations to a lesser extent.
Anyway, my comment above was to fend off the "just replace the reactor with a new one and keep the rest" types when the entire thing has hit end of life.
Eventually it's all failing.
Why not just say "LEARN TO SPEAK AMERICAN!" and save me from sitting through a fucking advertisement before making it to some sort of joke as lame as mine above?
Q: Half of a decreasing amount after being corrected for inflation is and increase or decrease?
Looks like a kid didn't get what used to be expected with mathematics as well.
The weasel trick of trying to shift things from absolute terms to a portion of a moving target however shows the kid probably spent a lot of time in the debate club being very busy with mass debating. Yes I really do think so little of you and your petty evasions.