Paraphrases shouldn't be in quotes. Quotes are reserved for quotes.
My position was unrelated to what you said. Correcting you would be as relevant to your comments as explaining what my favorite car is, and why. How about this:
"Everyone that says you can count calories is a liar"
"Everyone who says you can do what they did and you will lose weight is a liar."
Can you understand those? My comments weren't about what someone should do with regards to losing weight, but about what to listen to. Those topics are orthogonal.
The step is never larger than $1 per hour. The difference is that rather than 10 raises 1 year apart, with a $10 difference over 10 years, this is a single act with a $1 rise over multiple years. If they had actually done it $1 at a time, one year apart from every raise, it probably would have gotten to $20 an hour before it was an issue.
That's great. The devil is in the details. Will the machine salt and bag the fries as well? How do you handle "unsalted" fries? The salt is applied as they are removed from the fryer, so the oils left on are still hot and liquid, and the salt is applied while still hot and oily, for best flavor/texture. So "unsalted" is taking a bag of fries before they are salted. They are "hotter" "fresher" and unsalted, so if you like your fries straight from the deep fry, always order unsalted fries.
The exceptions will prove the downfall of the system. Building in all the exceptions and you'll end up with a more expensive robot. The humans were good at it because they handle exceptions well.
The one I worked at 10+ years ago was still 100% manual. They are out of business now and closed. Probably got the bill for the upgrades for what you mention. But I look backwards in the new theaters when they start a movie, and there's someone in the booth.
And for the recent re-plays of Legend, they were all print-only, so the smaller theaters must still handle prints
So in a discussion about cars, if I talk about their fuel, as an isolated system, I'm somehow off topic?
Or you realize you are 100% wrong, and are blaming me for misleading you by being clear and consistent about what portion I was discussing? Yes, I shouldn't have mislead you by only taking about a sub-system. Or, you could start reading, rather than lashing out against all those who don't share the same chip on their shoulders.
Congress has the power to create IP laws, but not the requirement, duty, or other motivation to do so, other than the bribes they take.
A simple law change could wipe out IP. As I said, a Constitutional Amendment isn't needed, unless you wanted the states and President to be the ones to make IP laws in Congress' absence.
I've created lots, and his point is spot on. The purpose of IP laws is to support the art and sciences, and if the IP laws don't, they are unconstitutional. They have been for a while. They protect profits. There would be more creative works if there was no copyright. There would be more innovation if there was no patent.
The early systems did that because there wasn't a standard defined yet. The only "modern" systems that do that are the super-cheap ones that are explicitly designed to never work without the grid (to save $ by cutting out important parts).
You just slid in an assumption there, which is that hydrogen has to be stored at a gas, by the way.
Nobody has ever come up with a theory to store H2 as anything else. LPG can be liquified. H2 has to be too cold and pressurized to be liquid. So it must be a gas. Or not H2.
But your firm certainty that there are no possible technological approaches that allow any possible way to make fuel cells efficient and cost effective is just an opinion, until and unless you have investigated every possible technological approach, including the ones you haven't thought of.
Now you are making assumptions. I never said anything even close to what you said I did. I never once talked about "fuel cells". I just discussed H2 generation and storage. Nothing else.
That you can't separate H2 from a fuel cell indicates your blind narrow-mindedness, not mine. Stop projecting your bigoted ignorance on others.
Then there's no reason to "measure" anything. Do more of what's good for you, and less of what's bad. Calorie counting, and shaming others based on what you see them eat, or exercise is silly. But that's what you get here on Slashdot. "Just eat less" said to someone who already eats half of what others do, but still gains weight just means you don't know what you are talking about.
So everyone else abuses their stuff, other than you? They'll be charged. And if you don't like them, swap them again, when empty. And they aren't "used" and abused. They are refurbished and fresh, every time.
I use an LPG bottle swap that has all the same potential problems as battery swaps, and you know what? None of the irrational fears apply in practice.
I do the same with gas bottle swap (LPG). So long as your bottle isn't two generations obsolete, they'll even take an obsolete bottle and replace it with a new one on the current standard. Yes, if everyone were to fill (not swap) and only swap when their bottle was no longer safe to fill, the swaps would cost more and be worse, but that's not how things work in reality. So have cars built for battery swaps, and you could have replacement take place as fast or faster than filling up, and then charge them over days.
The cost of cracking 2H2O into 2H2 and O2 is high. There is no known path to make it cheaper. The problem is that it can never cost less than what you can get back from burning 2H2 and O2 into 2H2O. Then, you have H2 gas. It's small. It's volatile. The energy density of H2 gas can never be better than a lithium battery or gasoline. So again, these are facts, not opinions. The "opinion" piece comes in when people bring up unproven theories. If you were to make some intermittent compound that was greater density, then you are no longer storing the energy in gaseous H2. No matter how you do it, H2 is an inefficient way to store energy. At best, you could locally generate H2 from LPG, but you'll lose all the "carbon neutral" claims that go with an H2 fuel cell.
Gaseous H2 can never be an efficient way to store energy. That's not opinion. That's scientific fact.
I've never seen one that did that. I'm sure they are out there, but all the "reasonable" ones turn into a pure off-grid system when the grid is down, and when the grid comes back up, will re-link back with it. Meter runs both ways. And when the grid is down, an isolation circuit kicks in and separates you from the grid.
Maybe the rules are different where you are, but seems common. I even found a standard for disconnecting a working solar system from a dead grid. DIN VDE 0126.1. Why have a standard on how to do it if it was never done?
Then the patents claim all kinds of combinations of that feature with other usual smartphone things, but only as combinations with that feature.
So they were obvious (but theoretically novel) combinations of features. Still obvious. Looks like someone saw the obvious direction of the industry, and patented it.
Slashdot Mirror
Paraphrases shouldn't be in quotes. Quotes are reserved for quotes.
My position was unrelated to what you said. Correcting you would be as relevant to your comments as explaining what my favorite car is, and why. How about this:
"Everyone that says you can count calories is a liar"
"Everyone who says you can do what they did and you will lose weight is a liar."
Can you understand those? My comments weren't about what someone should do with regards to losing weight, but about what to listen to. Those topics are orthogonal.
The step is never larger than $1 per hour. The difference is that rather than 10 raises 1 year apart, with a $10 difference over 10 years, this is a single act with a $1 rise over multiple years. If they had actually done it $1 at a time, one year apart from every raise, it probably would have gotten to $20 an hour before it was an issue.
That's great. The devil is in the details. Will the machine salt and bag the fries as well? How do you handle "unsalted" fries? The salt is applied as they are removed from the fryer, so the oils left on are still hot and liquid, and the salt is applied while still hot and oily, for best flavor/texture. So "unsalted" is taking a bag of fries before they are salted. They are "hotter" "fresher" and unsalted, so if you like your fries straight from the deep fry, always order unsalted fries.
The exceptions will prove the downfall of the system. Building in all the exceptions and you'll end up with a more expensive robot. The humans were good at it because they handle exceptions well.
The Electrical generators petitioned to make sell-back illegal. They lost, and instead erected barriers.
"Where the renewable energy system is not intended to be interconnected with the supply authority"
Where we don't like it...
the system shall be designed so that it is impossible to have both systems connected at the same time."
We get to say you can't do it.
But not defining who gets to say what the "intentions" of a solar panel is, the installer can say it is intended to work, and everyone is compliant.
$15 per hour wouldn't even be the highest it's ever been. $15 per hour isn't a high number.
The one I worked at 10+ years ago was still 100% manual. They are out of business now and closed. Probably got the bill for the upgrades for what you mention. But I look backwards in the new theaters when they start a movie, and there's someone in the booth.
And for the recent re-plays of Legend, they were all print-only, so the smaller theaters must still handle prints
Where are you? In the US, "excess" is called "deductible".
Which is why it's "illegal" to do it yourself (in most places, as per electrical code - at least where I've lived).
http://stuffblackpeopledontlik...
That black-hating blog puts the number at 21% But I guess that rounds to 50%, right?
Nope. I didn't say that at all. Next time, try reading, rather than vomiting a response before looking closely.
So in a discussion about cars, if I talk about their fuel, as an isolated system, I'm somehow off topic?
Or you realize you are 100% wrong, and are blaming me for misleading you by being clear and consistent about what portion I was discussing? Yes, I shouldn't have mislead you by only taking about a sub-system. Or, you could start reading, rather than lashing out against all those who don't share the same chip on their shoulders.
You apology is accepted, even if belated.
And you've proven you can't read.
Congress has the power to create IP laws, but not the requirement, duty, or other motivation to do so, other than the bribes they take.
A simple law change could wipe out IP. As I said, a Constitutional Amendment isn't needed, unless you wanted the states and President to be the ones to make IP laws in Congress' absence.
Nope. It wouldn't. Not a single word of the Constitution would need to be changed to abolish all copyright and patent.
I've created lots, and his point is spot on. The purpose of IP laws is to support the art and sciences, and if the IP laws don't, they are unconstitutional. They have been for a while. They protect profits. There would be more creative works if there was no copyright. There would be more innovation if there was no patent.
Not directly...
Which is trivial. An isolation switch approaches $0.01 as volume increases.
The early systems did that because there wasn't a standard defined yet. The only "modern" systems that do that are the super-cheap ones that are explicitly designed to never work without the grid (to save $ by cutting out important parts).
You just slid in an assumption there, which is that hydrogen has to be stored at a gas, by the way.
Nobody has ever come up with a theory to store H2 as anything else. LPG can be liquified. H2 has to be too cold and pressurized to be liquid. So it must be a gas. Or not H2.
But your firm certainty that there are no possible technological approaches that allow any possible way to make fuel cells efficient and cost effective is just an opinion, until and unless you have investigated every possible technological approach, including the ones you haven't thought of.
Now you are making assumptions. I never said anything even close to what you said I did. I never once talked about "fuel cells". I just discussed H2 generation and storage. Nothing else.
That you can't separate H2 from a fuel cell indicates your blind narrow-mindedness, not mine. Stop projecting your bigoted ignorance on others.
"Moderating calorie intake is useless because you can't be 100% accurate".
When you have to lie to make up quotes to insult someone with, that just makes you a lying liar.
Then there's no reason to "measure" anything. Do more of what's good for you, and less of what's bad. Calorie counting, and shaming others based on what you see them eat, or exercise is silly. But that's what you get here on Slashdot. "Just eat less" said to someone who already eats half of what others do, but still gains weight just means you don't know what you are talking about.
So everyone else abuses their stuff, other than you? They'll be charged. And if you don't like them, swap them again, when empty. And they aren't "used" and abused. They are refurbished and fresh, every time.
I use an LPG bottle swap that has all the same potential problems as battery swaps, and you know what? None of the irrational fears apply in practice.
I do the same with gas bottle swap (LPG). So long as your bottle isn't two generations obsolete, they'll even take an obsolete bottle and replace it with a new one on the current standard. Yes, if everyone were to fill (not swap) and only swap when their bottle was no longer safe to fill, the swaps would cost more and be worse, but that's not how things work in reality. So have cars built for battery swaps, and you could have replacement take place as fast or faster than filling up, and then charge them over days.
The cost of cracking 2H2O into 2H2 and O2 is high. There is no known path to make it cheaper. The problem is that it can never cost less than what you can get back from burning 2H2 and O2 into 2H2O. Then, you have H2 gas. It's small. It's volatile. The energy density of H2 gas can never be better than a lithium battery or gasoline. So again, these are facts, not opinions. The "opinion" piece comes in when people bring up unproven theories. If you were to make some intermittent compound that was greater density, then you are no longer storing the energy in gaseous H2. No matter how you do it, H2 is an inefficient way to store energy. At best, you could locally generate H2 from LPG, but you'll lose all the "carbon neutral" claims that go with an H2 fuel cell.
Gaseous H2 can never be an efficient way to store energy. That's not opinion. That's scientific fact.
I've never seen one that did that. I'm sure they are out there, but all the "reasonable" ones turn into a pure off-grid system when the grid is down, and when the grid comes back up, will re-link back with it. Meter runs both ways. And when the grid is down, an isolation circuit kicks in and separates you from the grid.
Maybe the rules are different where you are, but seems common. I even found a standard for disconnecting a working solar system from a dead grid. DIN VDE 0126.1. Why have a standard on how to do it if it was never done?
Then the patents claim all kinds of combinations of that feature with other usual smartphone things, but only as combinations with that feature.
So they were obvious (but theoretically novel) combinations of features. Still obvious. Looks like someone saw the obvious direction of the industry, and patented it.