It's not silenced. The government is providing the protection of law for trade names. They've decided to remove the protection of law because they don't like the words you used.
Oh. You said President Obama's ACA was incompetent the other day. We're no longer sending the fire department to your house if it's on fire, or the police if you get robbed.
Now hold on hold on, what's this N word? People get offensive when you use the nigger word on them, but is it really a big deal? I mean it's just a word. What if we called more people nigger? What if we had a whole family whose name... was nigger?
The arguments given are insane. Price competition? We can all look up the inventory price; salespeople try to talk you up to the MSRP, and you try to talk them down to inventory. Consumer safety? No more than any other sales method. Local economy? That's always been a bogus argument; this is simply rent-seeking behavior making the local economy poorer. Added value? You buy a car, the warranty they sell you is from the manufacturer, the parts are from the manufacturer, you have to pay for anything like an upgraded stereo if you want them to add one; what added value?
Parabolic mirrors tend to concentrate light on a fixed point due to the curve. They're less like flat mirrors, where the angle of entry determines the angle of reflection; but there is some influence.
Water towers are a good way to store solar, but I'm not advocating solar as 24 hour base load technology. Still, yes, water towers are great: you can pump them up with your excess energy, and then cut back on the water pumps and let the tower supply pressure when you haven't got excess.
There have been designs for 250MT nuclear bombs. They stopped building bigger bombs because they worked out how to use boosted fission to no practical purpose: a single, small H-Bomb can blow up the state of Colorado in its entirety. This isn't strategically useful.
A war is when you have a fight against people who are trying to invade and destroy.
Murder is when you kill people for some odd reason, not including necessity for preservation of life and safety.
When the Romans march into your town and start trying to decapitate people, and you start killing them, that's a war. Well, a skirmish; but basically the same thing on a smaller scale. You have people who are coming to kill you, and you are fighting back. This escalates out, and you have an adversary who will continue to kill people until it is broken, and so you now make battle to break that adversary.
If you have a situation where some group of people is not your threat, and you kill them for any reason--including to show of to some other group of people you perceive as a threat--you are committing murder. The explanation given was that the Americans killed a bunch of Japanese to show off to the Russians that they shouldn't push the Americans around.
The issue was of spare roof space: the comment about a roof-mounted CSP was out of hand.
I don't believe in multi-junction solar panel technology. You can build one, it works, the science is sound; but it's also excessively complex and fragile, and would tend to heat and cool during its duty cycle... you see where this is going: they're going to degrade quickly. Photovoltaics are restricted to the materials that have the correct electrical generation properties, and so you can't just make them out of transparent aluminum or something to make them more durable: if those junctions are frail to thermal expansion, you're stuck with the lifespan impacts.
Stirling engines should use super-alloys like Inconel, because they require high operating temperatures: hot steel will wear down from thermal stress much faster. In large-scale, high-temperature applications, Inconel can safely run at up to 2000F for some forms of the alloy, without losing its strength or durability. The high temperature drop improves efficiency.
You could water cool a Stirling engine to generate a steam channel to drive a turbine, but you'll get better efficiency by using better cooling. A Rankine engine with a 1000 degree drop--coal power plants heat water to 1000F and drop it to about 80F--runs at 42% efficiency (63% theoretical). Salt towers often operate at 1400F. If you drop that to 1000F with a water cooling loop (i.e. the hot side is 1400F, the coolant loop takes it down to 1000F), you can get 42% off the output; but you could also drop it to 80F and get 71% efficiency off the bat, rather than 42% and 21%.
Still, a steam turbine follower is a good strategy if you can't cool well enough. That is: if your design runs at 1400F because it's not possible to cool from 2000F, then you could run at 2000F and use a Rankine follower. I can't think of a situation where you couldn't just build a better cooling system for cheaper than a steam follower, though.
Oh, and yeah. 71% is theoretically possible. 55% is more likely in practice.
No, the marginal cost of technology refinement is decreasing. The cost of construction of PV panels is going up; we're using newer construction techniques and better-tooled lines, so we've reached an inflection point and started to produce PVs more readily. When that levels out, the cost of PVs will continue to increase.
We did this with solar thermal systems thousands of years ago. We called it "the iron age", and it's when we learned to make steel. It's why the Romans had such a huge advantage in their invasion of Europe: they had good steel swords.
You also forget that you need to construct and manage twice as much area coverage of 19% active sun-tracking motorized PV to get the return of little 38% fixed-position solar thermal parabolic collectors, never mind salt towers with active-tracking mirrors.
So the historical excuse given by the victors is well-documented? Do tell.
It's well-documented that global warming isn't a real thing. It's also well-documented that fracking isn't dangerous to the environment. It's well-documented that North Korea is a prosperous democracy.
So, instead of blowing shit up to see how blowing people up with nuclear weapons works, we blow shit up to show people we're fucking strong? That's murder.
The germans didn't run out of fuel and weapons. The germans had endless bombs, they had processes to turn natural gas into diesel (and they had tons of nat), and they didn't stop until we came in and kicked their asses. They still had weapons to fight with.
The Japanese were running out of fuel, they were out of bombs. All they had left were bodies, and they were rapidly approaching a situation where they'd be trapped on a tiny island that we could just bomb the shit out of at our leisure. The whole collective of Japan would have to be severely retarded not to surrender; they may as well strip naked and march into the ocean to drown.
It's not really much plutonium. Sure, you can make about 40 city-sized Fat Man bombs out of it, but the scale is kind of pointless now: with a little hydrogen, you can turn a 14kg bomb up to eleven, and get yields that could blow up half of Japan instead of one small city.
So, Japan can make 40 bombs. If Japan had only 20kg of plutonium, it could still make 3 or 4 devastating small warheads with fusion-boosted-fission, enough to blow holes in Russia or devastate the United States.
If you think that's unrealistic, take a crash course in nuclear weapons. Fat Man had 14,000 grams of plutonium; it converted less that 1 gram into energy before the plutonium core blew apart. A fission-boosted-fusion bomb uses that explosion to trigger nuclear fusion in a second stage, which provides compressive force to hold the core together: the plutonium ball that burns a gram and blows apart now gets crushed together. With the right structure, you can burn 100 grams of the fuel, making the bomb 100 times bigger. A 1kg bomb would still be 7 times bigger than the 14kg Fat Man bomb.
Some serious upgrades have been made to nuclear weapons. They're largely conventional explosive, with a little nuclear core; some are boosted with fusion, which sometimes has startling effects--once, they had a blast go off 100 times bigger than the models projected.
Nuclear weapons are devastating. A handful of nuclear fuel is an arsenal. When you start getting into truckloads of fissile material, you're just wasting effort.
Japan was already suing for peace. They had run out of bombs, and the kamikaze were coming because they had no fuel to get back to Japan; die in the ocean, or die smashing your plane into a military target.
The arguments around this drift over time. A lot of veterans have started telling me Japan was ready to drop plague-infested fleas on America. They'd hit California, and it would wipe out the entire nation. They've already tested them on China, and it worked.... except China wasn't wiped out, and Japan could never reach California. The whole story paints a narrative where varied analysis tells you that either it's made-up completely, or Japan has a weapon that kills as many people as a conventional drop-bomb.
The truth is the nuclear attack was a science experiment. Military has a long history of telling leaders they need to strike for whatever reason, just to try out their own weaponry. Japan is running out of weapons? They're getting desperate! They'll kill us all soon! We won't be able to take Japan, even though we've outlasted them, and they're out of fight and we have enough bombs to pave their countryside in blood and bones! We need to demoralize them further! DROP THE BOMB! DROP! THE! BOMB!
Truman did what he thought was necessary. Somebody, somewhere, knew it was bullshit, and put a lot of effort into drawing up a narrative that would make Truman think it was necessary.
We use expensive photovoltaic panels for ginormous solar power plants with active arrays spanning huge fields. We should use salt towers or parabolic reflectors.
Who says you can't mount a shiny satellite dish on top your house?
7.5 years. You start with one panel producing 1 unit, produce another panel in 5 years. Now you have 2 panels producing 2 units, produce another panel in 5/2 years or 2.5 years.
And they would generate twice as much energy in the same land area with lower cost of manufacture if they had used parabolic reflector dishes and sterling engines attached to dynamo.
Jags last 50 years or more, and they're retained for way more than 5 years. People don't sell off cars that are still as reliable as a brand new car; you'll lose 50 years' worth of fuel costs in depreciation.
My highly-reliable cars retain 80% of their value after 5 years. Mazda and Toyota do that pretty well.
I bought a 2008 Cobalt brand new for $11,000, and it was worth $8,000 a year later. That was with a GM Employee Discount; the normal inventory is $14,000.
You're quite right that the cost of ownership and the meeting of requirements is all that's needed. My point is that a manufactured product that's had corners cut to the bone but can reliably run your duty cycle is cheaper than a manufactured product that doesn't. If the resale value remains high, it implies that the product retains usefulness longer; if you're selling out by then, you're wasting money, and you should optimize your *requirements*, not your *acceptance criteria*. Vehicles readily-available for cheap that are useful to us for 10 years? That's going to save us money; we can try to find cheap-made ones, or we could adjust our requirements to run the fleet with a 10 year turn-over.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? What speech of the owner's is silenced?
It's not silenced. The government is providing the protection of law for trade names. They've decided to remove the protection of law because they don't like the words you used.
Oh. You said President Obama's ACA was incompetent the other day. We're no longer sending the fire department to your house if it's on fire, or the police if you get robbed.
Most people who can use a computer and make an argument on an online forum don't actually watch Fox News.
Now hold on hold on, what's this N word? People get offensive when you use the nigger word on them, but is it really a big deal? I mean it's just a word. What if we called more people nigger? What if we had a whole family whose name... was nigger?
Tesla has service centers.
The arguments given are insane. Price competition? We can all look up the inventory price; salespeople try to talk you up to the MSRP, and you try to talk them down to inventory. Consumer safety? No more than any other sales method. Local economy? That's always been a bogus argument; this is simply rent-seeking behavior making the local economy poorer. Added value? You buy a car, the warranty they sell you is from the manufacturer, the parts are from the manufacturer, you have to pay for anything like an upgraded stereo if you want them to add one; what added value?
Parabolic mirrors tend to concentrate light on a fixed point due to the curve. They're less like flat mirrors, where the angle of entry determines the angle of reflection; but there is some influence.
Water towers are a good way to store solar, but I'm not advocating solar as 24 hour base load technology. Still, yes, water towers are great: you can pump them up with your excess energy, and then cut back on the water pumps and let the tower supply pressure when you haven't got excess.
Also, it is "Stirling".
I use the pistons for my secret stockpile of silver.
There have been designs for 250MT nuclear bombs. They stopped building bigger bombs because they worked out how to use boosted fission to no practical purpose: a single, small H-Bomb can blow up the state of Colorado in its entirety. This isn't strategically useful.
A war is when you have a fight against people who are trying to invade and destroy.
Murder is when you kill people for some odd reason, not including necessity for preservation of life and safety.
When the Romans march into your town and start trying to decapitate people, and you start killing them, that's a war. Well, a skirmish; but basically the same thing on a smaller scale. You have people who are coming to kill you, and you are fighting back. This escalates out, and you have an adversary who will continue to kill people until it is broken, and so you now make battle to break that adversary.
If you have a situation where some group of people is not your threat, and you kill them for any reason--including to show of to some other group of people you perceive as a threat--you are committing murder. The explanation given was that the Americans killed a bunch of Japanese to show off to the Russians that they shouldn't push the Americans around.
The issue was of spare roof space: the comment about a roof-mounted CSP was out of hand.
I don't believe in multi-junction solar panel technology. You can build one, it works, the science is sound; but it's also excessively complex and fragile, and would tend to heat and cool during its duty cycle... you see where this is going: they're going to degrade quickly. Photovoltaics are restricted to the materials that have the correct electrical generation properties, and so you can't just make them out of transparent aluminum or something to make them more durable: if those junctions are frail to thermal expansion, you're stuck with the lifespan impacts.
Stirling engines should use super-alloys like Inconel, because they require high operating temperatures: hot steel will wear down from thermal stress much faster. In large-scale, high-temperature applications, Inconel can safely run at up to 2000F for some forms of the alloy, without losing its strength or durability. The high temperature drop improves efficiency.
You could water cool a Stirling engine to generate a steam channel to drive a turbine, but you'll get better efficiency by using better cooling. A Rankine engine with a 1000 degree drop--coal power plants heat water to 1000F and drop it to about 80F--runs at 42% efficiency (63% theoretical). Salt towers often operate at 1400F. If you drop that to 1000F with a water cooling loop (i.e. the hot side is 1400F, the coolant loop takes it down to 1000F), you can get 42% off the output; but you could also drop it to 80F and get 71% efficiency off the bat, rather than 42% and 21%.
Still, a steam turbine follower is a good strategy if you can't cool well enough. That is: if your design runs at 1400F because it's not possible to cool from 2000F, then you could run at 2000F and use a Rankine follower. I can't think of a situation where you couldn't just build a better cooling system for cheaper than a steam follower, though.
Oh, and yeah. 71% is theoretically possible. 55% is more likely in practice.
No, the marginal cost of technology refinement is decreasing. The cost of construction of PV panels is going up; we're using newer construction techniques and better-tooled lines, so we've reached an inflection point and started to produce PVs more readily. When that levels out, the cost of PVs will continue to increase.
We did this with solar thermal systems thousands of years ago. We called it "the iron age", and it's when we learned to make steel. It's why the Romans had such a huge advantage in their invasion of Europe: they had good steel swords.
You also forget that you need to construct and manage twice as much area coverage of 19% active sun-tracking motorized PV to get the return of little 38% fixed-position solar thermal parabolic collectors, never mind salt towers with active-tracking mirrors.
So the historical excuse given by the victors is well-documented? Do tell.
It's well-documented that global warming isn't a real thing. It's also well-documented that fracking isn't dangerous to the environment. It's well-documented that North Korea is a prosperous democracy.
My argument was more that blowing up those cities was pointless.
So, instead of blowing shit up to see how blowing people up with nuclear weapons works, we blow shit up to show people we're fucking strong? That's murder.
The germans didn't run out of fuel and weapons. The germans had endless bombs, they had processes to turn natural gas into diesel (and they had tons of nat), and they didn't stop until we came in and kicked their asses. They still had weapons to fight with.
The Japanese were running out of fuel, they were out of bombs. All they had left were bodies, and they were rapidly approaching a situation where they'd be trapped on a tiny island that we could just bomb the shit out of at our leisure. The whole collective of Japan would have to be severely retarded not to surrender; they may as well strip naked and march into the ocean to drown.
Perhaps. Messing with the timeline is considered a very bad idea for just about this reason.
But you see my point. It was a bad decision on false pretense. Japan was tapped out, like a man living with a nymphomaniac after two weeks.
i.e. nobody finds out because it's 1km underground.
It's not really much plutonium. Sure, you can make about 40 city-sized Fat Man bombs out of it, but the scale is kind of pointless now: with a little hydrogen, you can turn a 14kg bomb up to eleven, and get yields that could blow up half of Japan instead of one small city.
So, Japan can make 40 bombs. If Japan had only 20kg of plutonium, it could still make 3 or 4 devastating small warheads with fusion-boosted-fission, enough to blow holes in Russia or devastate the United States.
If you think that's unrealistic, take a crash course in nuclear weapons. Fat Man had 14,000 grams of plutonium; it converted less that 1 gram into energy before the plutonium core blew apart. A fission-boosted-fusion bomb uses that explosion to trigger nuclear fusion in a second stage, which provides compressive force to hold the core together: the plutonium ball that burns a gram and blows apart now gets crushed together. With the right structure, you can burn 100 grams of the fuel, making the bomb 100 times bigger. A 1kg bomb would still be 7 times bigger than the 14kg Fat Man bomb.
Some serious upgrades have been made to nuclear weapons. They're largely conventional explosive, with a little nuclear core; some are boosted with fusion, which sometimes has startling effects--once, they had a blast go off 100 times bigger than the models projected.
Nuclear weapons are devastating. A handful of nuclear fuel is an arsenal. When you start getting into truckloads of fissile material, you're just wasting effort.
Japan was already suing for peace. They had run out of bombs, and the kamikaze were coming because they had no fuel to get back to Japan; die in the ocean, or die smashing your plane into a military target.
The arguments around this drift over time. A lot of veterans have started telling me Japan was ready to drop plague-infested fleas on America. They'd hit California, and it would wipe out the entire nation. They've already tested them on China, and it worked. ... except China wasn't wiped out, and Japan could never reach California. The whole story paints a narrative where varied analysis tells you that either it's made-up completely, or Japan has a weapon that kills as many people as a conventional drop-bomb.
The truth is the nuclear attack was a science experiment. Military has a long history of telling leaders they need to strike for whatever reason, just to try out their own weaponry. Japan is running out of weapons? They're getting desperate! They'll kill us all soon! We won't be able to take Japan, even though we've outlasted them, and they're out of fight and we have enough bombs to pave their countryside in blood and bones! We need to demoralize them further! DROP THE BOMB! DROP! THE! BOMB!
Truman did what he thought was necessary. Somebody, somewhere, knew it was bullshit, and put a lot of effort into drawing up a narrative that would make Truman think it was necessary.
We use expensive photovoltaic panels for ginormous solar power plants with active arrays spanning huge fields. We should use salt towers or parabolic reflectors.
Who says you can't mount a shiny satellite dish on top your house?
7.5 years. You start with one panel producing 1 unit, produce another panel in 5 years. Now you have 2 panels producing 2 units, produce another panel in 5/2 years or 2.5 years.
And they would generate twice as much energy in the same land area with lower cost of manufacture if they had used parabolic reflector dishes and sterling engines attached to dynamo.
Supplemental power is liquid return. It reduces your costs, thus leaving more liquid capital on hand. The original investment is ill-liquid.
PV panels are also far less efficient than parabolic reflectors.
I wish solar panels would die already. They are the worst fucking lag in tech... the US is a damned third world country.
Jags last 50 years or more, and they're retained for way more than 5 years. People don't sell off cars that are still as reliable as a brand new car; you'll lose 50 years' worth of fuel costs in depreciation.
My highly-reliable cars retain 80% of their value after 5 years. Mazda and Toyota do that pretty well.
I bought a 2008 Cobalt brand new for $11,000, and it was worth $8,000 a year later. That was with a GM Employee Discount; the normal inventory is $14,000.
You're quite right that the cost of ownership and the meeting of requirements is all that's needed. My point is that a manufactured product that's had corners cut to the bone but can reliably run your duty cycle is cheaper than a manufactured product that doesn't. If the resale value remains high, it implies that the product retains usefulness longer; if you're selling out by then, you're wasting money, and you should optimize your *requirements*, not your *acceptance criteria*. Vehicles readily-available for cheap that are useful to us for 10 years? That's going to save us money; we can try to find cheap-made ones, or we could adjust our requirements to run the fleet with a 10 year turn-over.