It would pay for the cost differential between coal and the other options, it could also pay for the move from fossil fuel based home heating. Which would let the US decommission all coal power plants over the next 25 years and remove most oil based home heating. (Alaska and highly remote sights would probably stick with oil for as long as possible.)
The transition from gas powered cars and airplanes is another issue, but they are only part of the picture. And a lot of their carbon is released in the fuel manufacturing process which can be cheaply dealt with.
Most of the time you can safely get 5+% speed increase on a cheep chip and save money. The secret is to only jump 1 or 2 rungs up the ladder. AKA they sell 2.4, 2.6, 2.8,... GHz CPU's if you start with 2.4 be happy with 2.6. The more you push things the more damage you will probably do but chances are you are well within the reasonable range for your chip.
Not bad but a better solution, use an Index that points to the location of the start of the index.
Now you only need to change that index after the old one get's used up in ~50k writes. So now you have 50k * 50k = 2.5 million write cycles on the index. If that's not enough use a 3 stage index and you have 1.25 trillion writes to the index.
It's normal in High end cars to use voice activation and or steering wheel controwls to change the temperature, radio station, make phone calls etc. The center console is normally for a passenger use or driver use while parked.
The funny thing is the test for useful amounts of fusion is really simple. If someone standing in the room for 1 hour dies from an overdose of radiation you might have a useful amount of fusion. If it takes slightly over one hour to kill them, then it's not producing enough neutrons to matter.
Basically, if the guy demonstrating the "cold fusion" device is willing to stand in the same room as the device when it's running then it's useless.
Air pollution probably directly reduces exercise. Exercising in highly polluted air is extremely unpleasant, so when there is lot's of somog in the air I am far less willing to go for a walk outside let alone go biking ect.
ISP's have other costs than just their upstream bandwidth. Profitable small ISP's are limited to around 10$/month per user in upstream bandwidth. At 10$ / month per user we are talking about 0.2MB of real bandwidth which is "slow" but multiply that by 50 and your talking about 10MB of burst bandwidth which is not that hot. Someone that wants to saturate a 10MB line costs a small ISP ~500$ / month. There is no real solution to that basic problem.
With the correct tools scaling to 20 million users is trivial as is 99.5% up time. And.5% downtime (1.8 days a year) is considered crap in most projects as it's almost a fucking hour a week. Twitter is a bad joke that no competent person want's anything to do with building.
PS: I have worked on a project with a combined downtime over 10 years of less than 5 hours including scheduled downtime.
I was born in 1980 and I think 95% of the music of my time was crap. I liked Rage Against the Machine, Rhamstine, and a few others but mostly I prefer music from 60's bands. (Many of them produced great stuff after the 60's, but that's when they started.)
Not really it's not about the cost of refined materials it's the cost of putting *anything* in orbit. It cost's ~5,000$/pound to get it up there which means dirt in LEO is almost worth as much as solid gold. (August 2007, the price of gold was 8070$/lb now it's ~15,000$/lb)
We already have net neutrality. They want the ability to charge a website for bandwidth that their users are accessing. Now this might be silly but I assume people spending lot's of money lobbing for something only do so when they are planning to start doing it.
"Windows market share as of Dec. 1 is 89.6 percent."
"Meanwhile, Mac OS X posted its largest gain in two years, with 8.9 percent market share at the end of November."
"On the browser side, Internet Explorer's market share dropped below 70 percent to 69.8 percent for the first time in more than a decade. IE slid 1.5 percentage points in November, totaling a 5.8 percent market share loss for 2008, according to Net Applications."
It's not that hard to build a magnetic sail for the solar wind, it's a lot harder to build a light sail that produces significant acceleration. Think about it a large magnetic field, vs a huge single atom thick net.
"Modern iceboats designs are generally supported by three skate blades called "runners" supporting a triangular or cross-shaped frame with the steering runner in front." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_boat#Modern_designs
Ice boats don't use a keel, but their blades do the same thing. Blades such as ice skates provide plenty of resistance in one direction much like a keel does on the bottom of a boat.
You don't have a keel in space. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keel) The best approximation on earth would be a hot air balloon. In space you can't go faster than the solar wind without adding extra energy. You might be able to get a little by tacking between to planets but going to have some hard limits and it's not going to work with a magnetic solar sail.
It's not just a question of LWR (Light Water) vs LMFBR's(Sodium) there is also HWR(Heavy Water), solid graphite and plenty of others. By far the safest nuclear reactor is a Radioisotope thermoelectric generator which simple and driven by decay. Anyway, my point has to do with the fuel not the reactor design. The longer the fuel life cycle the wider the range of conditions the reactor needs to deal with. Also, direct reprocessing of Hot waste is possible, but letting it cool for 50+ years makes it much cheaper to deal with.
PS: Your link is vary biased and light on the content side. It avoids showing the basic design and life cycle let alone the range of downsides of a Sodium coolant system.
We can build stable, multi-Megawatt Fusion reactors that are close to break even. The basic idea is used by H-bomb's. They use the high neutron flux from fusion to increase fission yield. One of the basic fission problems is it becomes hard to have a stable reaction as you scale things up. You can use lot's of crappy fuel in a huge mound, but you have little control over what that pile is going to do. And as you burn fuel you change the nature of the fuel in such a way that it becomes even harder to maintain stability. If you can have a fixed source of neutron that feeds the pile you can setup a multiplier where 1 neutron in produces X reactions, but it's not self sustaining so it can't get out of control.
PS: Breeder reactors are far less stable than non breeder reactors. Think of a traditional oil lamp filled with gasoline. With with great care it can work, but it's just not as stable as heavy oil.
Slashdot Mirror
How are you storing these CD's? I have 10 year old disks that read just fine.
Note: I don't write on the back of the disk which helps them last longer.
Ok, that's some crazy shit.
It would pay for the cost differential between coal and the other options, it could also pay for the move from fossil fuel based home heating. Which would let the US decommission all coal power plants over the next 25 years and remove most oil based home heating. (Alaska and highly remote sights would probably stick with oil for as long as possible.)
The transition from gas powered cars and airplanes is another issue, but they are only part of the picture. And a lot of their carbon is released in the fuel manufacturing process which can be cheaply dealt with.
Best estimate for a 50% reduction in greenhouse gasses from today's level? A 3.5cents per gallon of gas tax. (The HORROR!!!)
Most of the time you can safely get 5+% speed increase on a cheep chip and save money. The secret is to only jump 1 or 2 rungs up the ladder. AKA they sell 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, ... GHz CPU's if you start with 2.4 be happy with 2.6. The more you push things the more damage you will probably do but chances are you are well within the reasonable range for your chip.
That seem like a huge lawsuit just waiting to happen.
It reduces drag relative to cargo and increases stability in bad weather which protects the cargo.
Not bad but a better solution, use an Index that points to the location of the start of the index.
Now you only need to change that index after the old one get's used up in ~50k writes. So now you have 50k * 50k = 2.5 million write cycles on the index. If that's not enough use a 3 stage index and you have 1.25 trillion writes to the index.
They exist slashdot readers have fnord learned to block them out. Think of it like a well tuned spam filter fnord for the mind.
It's normal in High end cars to use voice activation and or steering wheel controwls to change the temperature, radio station, make phone calls etc. The center console is normally for a passenger use or driver use while parked.
The funny thing is the test for useful amounts of fusion is really simple. If someone standing in the room for 1 hour dies from an overdose of radiation you might have a useful amount of fusion. If it takes slightly over one hour to kill them, then it's not producing enough neutrons to matter.
Basically, if the guy demonstrating the "cold fusion" device is willing to stand in the same room as the device when it's running then it's useless.
Air pollution probably directly reduces exercise. Exercising in highly polluted air is extremely unpleasant, so when there is lot's of somog in the air I am far less willing to go for a walk outside let alone go biking ect.
ISP's have other costs than just their upstream bandwidth. Profitable small ISP's are limited to around 10$/month per user in upstream bandwidth. At 10$ / month per user we are talking about 0.2MB of real bandwidth which is "slow" but multiply that by 50 and your talking about 10MB of burst bandwidth which is not that hot. Someone that wants to saturate a 10MB line costs a small ISP ~500$ / month. There is no real solution to that basic problem.
With the correct tools scaling to 20 million users is trivial as is 99.5% up time. And.5% downtime (1.8 days a year) is considered crap in most projects as it's almost a fucking hour a week. Twitter is a bad joke that no competent person want's anything to do with building.
PS: I have worked on a project with a combined downtime over 10 years of less than 5 hours including scheduled downtime.
I was born in 1980 and I think 95% of the music of my time was crap. I liked Rage Against the Machine, Rhamstine, and a few others but mostly I prefer music from 60's bands. (Many of them produced great stuff after the 60's, but that's when they started.)
Not really it's not about the cost of refined materials it's the cost of putting *anything* in orbit. It cost's ~5,000$/pound to get it up there which means dirt in LEO is almost worth as much as solid gold. (August 2007, the price of gold was 8070$/lb now it's ~15,000$/lb)
We already have net neutrality. They want the ability to charge a website for bandwidth that their users are accessing. Now this might be silly but I assume people spending lot's of money lobbing for something only do so when they are planning to start doing it.
Well, South Korea is putting in their 1GB/s network by 2012. etc.
The only well off country I can think of with a worse network than the US is Australia.
"Windows market share as of Dec. 1 is 89.6 percent."
"Meanwhile, Mac OS X posted its largest gain in two years, with 8.9 percent market share at the end of November."
"On the browser side, Internet Explorer's market share dropped below 70 percent to 69.8 percent for the first time in more than a decade. IE slid 1.5 percentage points in November, totaling a 5.8 percent market share loss for 2008, according to Net Applications."
From: http://www.cio.com/article/467916/Microsoft_Market_Share_Slips_Pressure_s_On_for_Windows_and_IE_
It's not that hard to build a magnetic sail for the solar wind, it's a lot harder to build a light sail that produces significant acceleration. Think about it a large magnetic field, vs a huge single atom thick net.
Nope: http://www.iceboat.org/seasons/08-09/index1-29-09-1.jpg
"Modern iceboats designs are generally supported by three
skate blades called "runners" supporting a triangular or cross-shaped frame with the steering runner in front." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_boat#Modern_designs
Ice boats don't use a keel, but their blades do the same thing. Blades such as ice skates provide plenty of resistance in one direction much like a keel does on the bottom of a boat.
You don't have a keel in space. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keel) The best approximation on earth would be a hot air balloon. In space you can't go faster than the solar wind without adding extra energy. You might be able to get a little by tacking between to planets but going to have some hard limits and it's not going to work with a magnetic solar sail.
It's not just a question of LWR (Light Water) vs LMFBR's(Sodium) there is also HWR(Heavy Water), solid graphite and plenty of others. By far the safest nuclear reactor is a Radioisotope thermoelectric generator which simple and driven by decay. Anyway, my point has to do with the fuel not the reactor design. The longer the fuel life cycle the wider the range of conditions the reactor needs to deal with. Also, direct reprocessing of Hot waste is possible, but letting it cool for 50+ years makes it much cheaper to deal with.
PS: Your link is vary biased and light on the content side. It avoids showing the basic design and life cycle let alone the range of downsides of a Sodium coolant system.
1) Yes.
2) Yes.
We can build stable, multi-Megawatt Fusion reactors that are close to break even. The basic idea is used by H-bomb's. They use the high neutron flux from fusion to increase fission yield. One of the basic fission problems is it becomes hard to have a stable reaction as you scale things up. You can use lot's of crappy fuel in a huge mound, but you have little control over what that pile is going to do. And as you burn fuel you change the nature of the fuel in such a way that it becomes even harder to maintain stability. If you can have a fixed source of neutron that feeds the pile you can setup a multiplier where 1 neutron in produces X reactions, but it's not self sustaining so it can't get out of control.
PS: Breeder reactors are far less stable than non breeder reactors. Think of a traditional oil lamp filled with gasoline. With with great care it can work, but it's just not as stable as heavy oil.
I don't think the "consumed" need a tax break. So, I expect he was talking about the robots.