Then why do remote towns in Alaska, completely off the grid, use Diesel generation for a grid power, not local generators per house, if that were more economical?
In reality, centralized generation, including Diesel, is cheaper than distributed generation. Distributed generation is only cheaper when land is the expensive part (solar PV, and to a lesser extent, wind).
If there's a rush, they'd hire an entire ship to do the LA to SYD run in under 2 weeks. If that's not possible, then air freight would be trivial. There are a number of C-130s in civilian hands, and you can pack quite a bit in one of those.
You are missing the possibility of sending a robot factory to the moon, and having the robots process moondust into a telescope. Send up a 10 lb robot that makes 10 more robots from moondust, then those 11 robots make the telescope. Bonus points if you tell them to make an infinite number of themselves and call themselves "replicators".
It happens with https as well. All DNS no domain results are "intercepted" by the ISP, and redirected to an advertisement page. HTTP/HTTPS is irrelevant. If you go to https://doesntexist.com/ you'll get a result for the add page, and get the https version of the advertisement page.
And because user DNS is insecure, if you use a 3rd party DNS, they can MITM that and redirect you, even if you use someone else's DNS. MITM is legal, so long as you "allowed" it in the TOS you never read.
Cheaper to build, cheaper to run is PRT, whether this takes the form of cooperative autonomous vehicles on roads (or paths), or an elevated system like http://www.skytran.com/ depends on who gets a working system deployed first. SkyTran hasn't shown a working mesh network. How does the system scale to NYC levels, replacing all the roads and trains with a single integrated PRT system with billions of trips a day?
Then, once you have NYC done and DC done, and Phily and Baltimore between, you can have a quiet 100 mph trip between NYC and DC with no stops, about 2 hours from start to destination, beating trains, and planes (unless you fly a private plane with no security and fly a helicopter to the airport to avoid the drive to an airport). And the cost should be less than any of the other options.
Radio Shack could have resisted the transition, by having Morse Code competitions, and family radio days, and other things. But instead, the one near me dropped components, and sold phones and RC cars. I think their component section consisted of extension cords, and things like that you could get anywhere else. They adapted, and adapted poorly.
If ZTE simply didn't pay, there'd be no problem. The US would have to ask China to enforce the ruling. China wouldn't need to "swoop" to protect anything, simply respond slowly, or not at all to protect ZTE. All that goodwill China has with Trump? Trump China-bashes quite often. Both Trump and China would be happy if China didn't enforce the ruling. That would give both fodder to stir up the locals into a frenzy.
So no exits to the airport, downtown, or really anywhere else where a majority of people might like to go.
You sound like a traffic engineer. No, the solution to too many people taking exits isn't to reduce exits, but increase them. If there were 4 exits for the airport, any one of them alone wouldn't work, but spread to 4 works fine. Clear signs for Domestic or International, and you have solved the problem. The problem is trying to tell people where they should go. That never works. Like your example, more exits for the next 3 lights would help. But the other error always made is matching exits and entrances, so traffic is always merging/slowing.
Nobody would do it, but all left exits, and all right entrances in urban areas would simplify traffic. Fights to exit would never block entrances, and vice versa. But nobody has ever studied that, other than one irregular left exit when all others are right exits seems to cause confusion. Not because people can't figure out left from right, but because it's irregular. So make it regular. No more crossing traffic required. Middle lanes would be the fast lanes, and slower lanes on both sides, more like a liquid in a tube, than the current system. Having to get over fast and hard would also decrease the people getting on the freeway for a single exit.
Traffic is caused by people trying to move. So move the people. Don't move the cars.
Or move the cars, and move them fast. There are millions of solutions. The right answer for NYC isn't the right answer for Houston, so asking for the answer is the wrong question. PRT is the answer. Cheaper than roads, and faster.
Diverging diamond intersections with no stop lights at all coming off the offramp are possible. And 60 to 45 is fine, so long as less than 50% of the outside lane exits, which is a reasonable design constraint. The technical is trivial and solved. It's the political will to eliminate traffic that doesn't exist.
There are not too many people driving. That's an anti-car sentiment pushed by Greens. The roads are simply not made to move people. People complain about the poor throughput of roads while demanding speed humps and more pedestrian crossings.
Transportation is a simple problem, with a simple solution that we'll never see because the technical solutions are politically inconvenient.
Stop considering it a technical issue (too many people/cars or anything like that). The issue is simply that the anti-car people don't want a solution, and the pro-road people don't want a permanent solution. When nobody wants a solution, no solution will present itself.
Improving roads doesn't add to congestion. It reveals the extent of the neglect, but that's a different issue. Most of the studies into "adding" to congestion were looking at roads operating at 500% capacity, which then add 10% to capacity, and see an increase in throughput. This is by design. Roads can be congestion free. But if they were, the greens wouldn't have any traffic to complain about, so they don't want it, and the capitalists/politiicans wouldn't have an endless supply of ineffective billion dollar projects to get profits/bribes to build.
So the 99% is stuck in traffic, because transportation is a political problem, not a technical one.
So, nobody will give a rats ass until they hear about it on the news? That's a much lower standard, because if 3 non-typical users are hacked, and make a big stink, it may end up on the news before any typical users are even hacked.
How would someone upload on bittorrent if they've not downloaded first?
They could rip the DVD, then upload it. How is that relevant to the fact that nobody in the US has ever been sued or prosecuted for downloading? Yes, they may have downloaded, but that's not the act that's gotten them into trouble.
By your implied logic, we should ban milk, as every mass murderer has drunk milk.
Nobody in the US has ever been sued or charged for downloading. The media organizations have lied and called prosecuting a bittorrent uploader "a downloader" while prosecuting solely for the act of uploading. This is a deliberate lie to convince people that downloading is illegal, when it isn't. The proof of this is the fact that nobody ever has been prosecuted or persecuted solely for downloading.
If someone hacks it to make it rise 1 degree a week, it'll be a minor annoyance. If they set it to +100 for 20 seconds then -100 for 20 seconds (or 2 ms each), alternating until your system catches fire and burns down your house, you'll care.
Why is the officer going home while on-duty, driving their personal vehicle?
And someone planning on executing a cop spending years methodically studying video of route and habit only happens on CSI. The actual people who do that walk in the front door, and start shooting every cop they see, hoping to get the one they wanted before they die. So worrying about that (or even bring it up conversationally) demonstrates a great rift between you and reality, not supporting some insane theory.
Tire flex is much greater on a motorbike than a car. A hybrid gains not just from regenerative braking, but from all the engines running at max efficiency. My 100 mpg motorbike is rarely running at peak efficiency.
Slashdot Mirror
Rare earth minerals aren't rare, and aren't hard to recycle.
And you've not established that the batteries will be rare earth minerals. So your response is simply a non sequitur.
Costs will come down if they spend their money more wisely.
Then why do remote towns in Alaska, completely off the grid, use Diesel generation for a grid power, not local generators per house, if that were more economical?
In reality, centralized generation, including Diesel, is cheaper than distributed generation. Distributed generation is only cheaper when land is the expensive part (solar PV, and to a lesser extent, wind).
And there's no transport cost to get Diesel to a remote farm? The cost of moving liquid is higher than moving electrons.
If a home user (including light industrial like farms) can generate for less than the grid cost, why isn't the grid using Diesel and doing it cheaper?
This isn't about "Diesel", this is about the abuses of a privatized utility.
If there's a rush, they'd hire an entire ship to do the LA to SYD run in under 2 weeks. If that's not possible, then air freight would be trivial. There are a number of C-130s in civilian hands, and you can pack quite a bit in one of those.
You are missing the possibility of sending a robot factory to the moon, and having the robots process moondust into a telescope. Send up a 10 lb robot that makes 10 more robots from moondust, then those 11 robots make the telescope. Bonus points if you tell them to make an infinite number of themselves and call themselves "replicators".
Yup, because using 8.8.8.8 can still be intercepted. Encryption and signatures are the only way to ensure you got what you asked for.
It happens with https as well. All DNS no domain results are "intercepted" by the ISP, and redirected to an advertisement page. HTTP/HTTPS is irrelevant. If you go to https://doesntexist.com/ you'll get a result for the add page, and get the https version of the advertisement page.
And because user DNS is insecure, if you use a 3rd party DNS, they can MITM that and redirect you, even if you use someone else's DNS. MITM is legal, so long as you "allowed" it in the TOS you never read.
Cheaper to build, cheaper to run is PRT, whether this takes the form of cooperative autonomous vehicles on roads (or paths), or an elevated system like http://www.skytran.com/ depends on who gets a working system deployed first. SkyTran hasn't shown a working mesh network. How does the system scale to NYC levels, replacing all the roads and trains with a single integrated PRT system with billions of trips a day?
Then, once you have NYC done and DC done, and Phily and Baltimore between, you can have a quiet 100 mph trip between NYC and DC with no stops, about 2 hours from start to destination, beating trains, and planes (unless you fly a private plane with no security and fly a helicopter to the airport to avoid the drive to an airport). And the cost should be less than any of the other options.
Radio Shack could have resisted the transition, by having Morse Code competitions, and family radio days, and other things. But instead, the one near me dropped components, and sold phones and RC cars. I think their component section consisted of extension cords, and things like that you could get anywhere else. They adapted, and adapted poorly.
Was the Bowling Green Massacre an inside job?
If ZTE simply didn't pay, there'd be no problem. The US would have to ask China to enforce the ruling. China wouldn't need to "swoop" to protect anything, simply respond slowly, or not at all to protect ZTE. All that goodwill China has with Trump? Trump China-bashes quite often. Both Trump and China would be happy if China didn't enforce the ruling. That would give both fodder to stir up the locals into a frenzy.
So no exits to the airport, downtown, or really anywhere else where a majority of people might like to go.
You sound like a traffic engineer. No, the solution to too many people taking exits isn't to reduce exits, but increase them. If there were 4 exits for the airport, any one of them alone wouldn't work, but spread to 4 works fine. Clear signs for Domestic or International, and you have solved the problem. The problem is trying to tell people where they should go. That never works. Like your example, more exits for the next 3 lights would help. But the other error always made is matching exits and entrances, so traffic is always merging/slowing.
Nobody would do it, but all left exits, and all right entrances in urban areas would simplify traffic. Fights to exit would never block entrances, and vice versa. But nobody has ever studied that, other than one irregular left exit when all others are right exits seems to cause confusion. Not because people can't figure out left from right, but because it's irregular. So make it regular. No more crossing traffic required. Middle lanes would be the fast lanes, and slower lanes on both sides, more like a liquid in a tube, than the current system. Having to get over fast and hard would also decrease the people getting on the freeway for a single exit.
Traffic is caused by people trying to move. So move the people. Don't move the cars.
Or move the cars, and move them fast. There are millions of solutions. The right answer for NYC isn't the right answer for Houston, so asking for the answer is the wrong question. PRT is the answer. Cheaper than roads, and faster.
Diverging diamond intersections with no stop lights at all coming off the offramp are possible. And 60 to 45 is fine, so long as less than 50% of the outside lane exits, which is a reasonable design constraint. The technical is trivial and solved. It's the political will to eliminate traffic that doesn't exist.
There are not too many people driving. That's an anti-car sentiment pushed by Greens. The roads are simply not made to move people. People complain about the poor throughput of roads while demanding speed humps and more pedestrian crossings.
Transportation is a simple problem, with a simple solution that we'll never see because the technical solutions are politically inconvenient.
Stop considering it a technical issue (too many people/cars or anything like that). The issue is simply that the anti-car people don't want a solution, and the pro-road people don't want a permanent solution. When nobody wants a solution, no solution will present itself.
Improving roads doesn't add to congestion. It reveals the extent of the neglect, but that's a different issue. Most of the studies into "adding" to congestion were looking at roads operating at 500% capacity, which then add 10% to capacity, and see an increase in throughput. This is by design. Roads can be congestion free. But if they were, the greens wouldn't have any traffic to complain about, so they don't want it, and the capitalists/politiicans wouldn't have an endless supply of ineffective billion dollar projects to get profits/bribes to build.
So the 99% is stuck in traffic, because transportation is a political problem, not a technical one.
So, nobody will give a rats ass until they hear about it on the news? That's a much lower standard, because if 3 non-typical users are hacked, and make a big stink, it may end up on the news before any typical users are even hacked.
How would someone upload on bittorrent if they've not downloaded first?
They could rip the DVD, then upload it. How is that relevant to the fact that nobody in the US has ever been sued or prosecuted for downloading? Yes, they may have downloaded, but that's not the act that's gotten them into trouble.
By your implied logic, we should ban milk, as every mass murderer has drunk milk.
Nobody in the US has ever been sued or charged for downloading. The media organizations have lied and called prosecuting a bittorrent uploader "a downloader" while prosecuting solely for the act of uploading. This is a deliberate lie to convince people that downloading is illegal, when it isn't. The proof of this is the fact that nobody ever has been prosecuted or persecuted solely for downloading.
Yeah, but CR is incompetent hacks that are prone to sensationalize results to drive magazine subscriptions. Anyone else would be better than them.
If someone hacks it to make it rise 1 degree a week, it'll be a minor annoyance. If they set it to +100 for 20 seconds then -100 for 20 seconds (or 2 ms each), alternating until your system catches fire and burns down your house, you'll care.
Why is the officer going home while on-duty, driving their personal vehicle?
And someone planning on executing a cop spending years methodically studying video of route and habit only happens on CSI. The actual people who do that walk in the front door, and start shooting every cop they see, hoping to get the one they wanted before they die. So worrying about that (or even bring it up conversationally) demonstrates a great rift between you and reality, not supporting some insane theory.
Tire flex is much greater on a motorbike than a car. A hybrid gains not just from regenerative braking, but from all the engines running at max efficiency. My 100 mpg motorbike is rarely running at peak efficiency.