Is this one of those things where they site near a wind farm and tick a box on a form that says they want to buy green power but in reality the actual electrons that enter the data center are "from the grid" and not actually exclusively produced from renewable sources?
Probably, because that's what anyone with a brain would do.
It would be more impressive if the data center was completely powered by renewables ONLY and unable to tap into the non-renewable sources of the grid. Basically, make it an off grid only data center. But I imagine that this would be much harder and more expensive than simply checking a box and producing a spreadsheet that says you use renewable sources when in fact you're probably using baseline power from non-renewable sources.
What's even more environmentally friendly than your idea, is if instead of manufacturing unnecessary and inefficient energy storage and infrastructure, inefficiently co-locating their wind farm and servers or inefficient transmission, and wasteful backup power source in case of trouble with the wind farm... they could just connect to the grid. Their carbon footprint will be lower than what you are suggesting.
In the same way that discovering a painting previously thought to be a priceless original is actually a worthless imitation, changes only its valuation and not its value.* But you'll still be sad if it was your investment (ie, its primary value is its high valuation).
*in fact, you could say it increases its value, as long as you weren't planning to sell it, because you no longer have to worry about theft.
Yes, but they also need considerable government regulation to prevent those with power from abusing those without. That's why we have lending laws, truth in advertising laws, insider trading regulations, forced recalls of faulty and dangerous products, etc.
The free market doesn't need any of that, because all the consumers have perfect and complete information about everything.
Seriously, if there aren't enough doctors it doesn't matter how good they are, enjoy waiting a month to get emergency* treatment from an overworked doctor who's only going to spend 5 minutes with you. If you drastically reduce the requirements for becoming a doctor, then you'll get prompt treatment from a well-rested doctor who can afford to spend a good long while with you and still charge you less. Sure, they'll make some mistakes... but so do current doctors. Requiring less training might actually reduce the number of mistakes. Especially if the mistakes were of the class of waiting too long due to busy schedules, patients avoiding the hassle, doctors going to work sick/tired, or any of the various effects of not enough doctors.
* there's some conditions that are serious enough that you ought to receive immediate treatment, but don't officially qualify as emergencies.
Reminds me of the time some smartypants European country tried to take over the world, ended up deep in Russia with nothing but snow to eat or wear, having won every battle but with no supply chain. The enemy doesn't need to shoot you if you're dying of starvation/exposure.
Yes but most politicians talk in feel-good empty-speech which doesn't make any promises nor commitments (but hints as though they were) and usually doesn't even express an opinion (but hints as though it were the same opinion as yours).
Only if you're (as in you personally) are too stupid to know how to mail a letter.
Are you? Because that's the only way you could be so ignorant as to think Twitter is more accessible than postal service.
Acquire stamp Acquire envelope Acquire paper *Acquire computer *Acquire printer *Acquire printer ink Compose message Print message Label envelope (note: this step could easily be longer than your average twitter message) Take message to post office Wait Wait Wait Wait some more Wait for message to be cleared by security staff Wait for message or summary of message to be sent to politician Hope no one faked your name and address on envelope and message
*some steps can be replaced with a pen, but for many people this may be slower and less legible (but in many places, that marks your message as slightly more important)
Terrorists are attacking our homeland, reading our mail, threatening the security guaranteed to us by the First and Fourth Amendments. And if the terrorists find something they don't like, expect to see a large group of them show up with guns and take you away.
I think software should offer an option (disabled by default, but mentioned when first used) which switches the interface to that of the previous version. If more than half of your users switch back, you line up your UI "experts" and give them each a kick in the nuts and a pink slip.
We're at the point that we can actually have solar powered grow lights for our plants and still have greater energy efficiency than just plain sunlight (because you can have the LEDs at peak plant absorption wavelengths). Plus it's easier to transport, easier to deal with climate variability, easier to deal with insects or pests, plants can be fed extra CO2, and you can have more usable light with less heat stress, uses less water, easier to harvest, doesn't contain dirt, and arrives at the market fresher. And on top of all that, you can trick the plant into thinking it is any season you want or even go with 24 hr lighting.
Minuses: It costs more, at least for now.
But don't be too surprised if the future has all farmland converted to solar panels and all farming under grow lights. It'll be great practice for space colonization too.
Presumably it uses a closed loop cooler, rather than evaporative cooling. Evaporative cooling is very energy efficient, but sacrifices water for those energy savings.
Presumably another benefit is that due to the improved heat transfer from components to the cooling oil, not only are the components cooler but you can run the cooling system at a much higher temperature and skip the fans besides.
It works like this: Say the banks are allowed to lend 90% of the money that is deposited, and have to keep 10% of it. Then Alice deposits $1,000. This means that the banks lend out $10,000 since they had to keep 10% of the money. If the government wanted to create money, rather than bothering with silly printing presses at the mint, they could declare that banks could lend 95% of the money deposited. Then if Alice deposits $1,000, the banks could lend out $20,000.
Now, you might have noticed my numbers aren't quite what you expected. Well, it works like this (when the banks lend 90% of a deposit). Alice deposits $1,000. Then Bob borrows $900, and deposits it in a bank. Then Charlie borrows $810, and deposits it. Then Dylan borrows $729, and deposits it... By the time everyone is done borrowing, depositing, and lending, 10 dollars have been lent for every 1 deposited. Of course, in reality only some of the borrowed money gets deposited immediately -- some of the money gets spent and put in a bank, and some gets kept around in wallets or under a mattress. But yeah, most of the money people "have" is in fact created out of thin air, not even paper.
Just don't ask what happens when too many people want to withdraw their money from the bank.
You mean, a troll might do something *specifically* to draw out a reaction, like suggesting laws against harassment shouldn't protect personal choices/preferences in general nor religion in particular?
Slashdot Mirror
100 K
Is this one of those things where they site near a wind farm and tick a box on a form that says they want to buy green power but in reality the actual electrons that enter the data center are "from the grid" and not actually exclusively produced from renewable sources?
Probably, because that's what anyone with a brain would do.
It would be more impressive if the data center was completely powered by renewables ONLY and unable to tap into the non-renewable sources of the grid. Basically, make it an off grid only data center. But I imagine that this would be much harder and more expensive than simply checking a box and producing a spreadsheet that says you use renewable sources when in fact you're probably using baseline power from non-renewable sources.
What's even more environmentally friendly than your idea, is if instead of manufacturing unnecessary and inefficient energy storage and infrastructure, inefficiently co-locating their wind farm and servers or inefficient transmission, and wasteful backup power source in case of trouble with the wind farm... they could just connect to the grid. Their carbon footprint will be lower than what you are suggesting.
In the same way that discovering a painting previously thought to be a priceless original is actually a worthless imitation, changes only its valuation and not its value.* But you'll still be sad if it was your investment (ie, its primary value is its high valuation).
*in fact, you could say it increases its value, as long as you weren't planning to sell it, because you no longer have to worry about theft.
Yes, but they also need considerable government regulation to prevent those with power from abusing those without. That's why we have lending laws, truth in advertising laws, insider trading regulations, forced recalls of faulty and dangerous products, etc.
The free market doesn't need any of that, because all the consumers have perfect and complete information about everything.
Seriously, if there aren't enough doctors it doesn't matter how good they are, enjoy waiting a month to get emergency* treatment from an overworked doctor who's only going to spend 5 minutes with you. If you drastically reduce the requirements for becoming a doctor, then you'll get prompt treatment from a well-rested doctor who can afford to spend a good long while with you and still charge you less. Sure, they'll make some mistakes... but so do current doctors. Requiring less training might actually reduce the number of mistakes. Especially if the mistakes were of the class of waiting too long due to busy schedules, patients avoiding the hassle, doctors going to work sick/tired, or any of the various effects of not enough doctors.
* there's some conditions that are serious enough that you ought to receive immediate treatment, but don't officially qualify as emergencies.
Reminds me of the time some smartypants European country tried to take over the world, ended up deep in Russia with nothing but snow to eat or wear, having won every battle but with no supply chain. The enemy doesn't need to shoot you if you're dying of starvation/exposure.
I know a lot of people who were afraid of drones going postal.
Yes but most politicians talk in feel-good empty-speech which doesn't make any promises nor commitments (but hints as though they were) and usually doesn't even express an opinion (but hints as though it were the same opinion as yours).
Only if you're (as in you personally) are too stupid to know how to mail a letter.
Are you? Because that's the only way you could be so ignorant as to think Twitter is more accessible than postal service.
Acquire stamp
Acquire envelope
Acquire paper
*Acquire computer
*Acquire printer
*Acquire printer ink
Compose message
Print message
Label envelope (note: this step could easily be longer than your average twitter message)
Take message to post office
Wait
Wait
Wait
Wait some more
Wait for message to be cleared by security staff
Wait for message or summary of message to be sent to politician
Hope no one faked your name and address on envelope and message
*some steps can be replaced with a pen, but for many people this may be slower and less legible (but in many places, that marks your message as slightly more important)
What could be simpler?
Terrorists are attacking our homeland, reading our mail, threatening the security guaranteed to us by the First and Fourth Amendments. And if the terrorists find something they don't like, expect to see a large group of them show up with guns and take you away.
Maybe focus on writing good code so you don't have to update it as much? Plus, you can save money by firing all your UI developers.
What sort of devices is this invention geared towards?
I think software should offer an option (disabled by default, but mentioned when first used) which switches the interface to that of the previous version. If more than half of your users switch back, you line up your UI "experts" and give them each a kick in the nuts and a pink slip.
We're at the point that we can actually have solar powered grow lights for our plants and still have greater energy efficiency than just plain sunlight (because you can have the LEDs at peak plant absorption wavelengths). Plus it's easier to transport, easier to deal with climate variability, easier to deal with insects or pests, plants can be fed extra CO2, and you can have more usable light with less heat stress, uses less water, easier to harvest, doesn't contain dirt, and arrives at the market fresher. And on top of all that, you can trick the plant into thinking it is any season you want or even go with 24 hr lighting.
Minuses: It costs more, at least for now.
But don't be too surprised if the future has all farmland converted to solar panels and all farming under grow lights. It'll be great practice for space colonization too.
Presumably it uses a closed loop cooler, rather than evaporative cooling. Evaporative cooling is very energy efficient, but sacrifices water for those energy savings.
Presumably another benefit is that due to the improved heat transfer from components to the cooling oil, not only are the components cooler but you can run the cooling system at a much higher temperature and skip the fans besides.
There are rules to be in the Euro zone. Nobody forced anybody to accept those rules.
Maybe they should have refused to allow countries who didn't follow the rules into the Eurozone.
oops
The ISPs don't care about their clients' privacy -- what they're objecting to is all the expensive hardware to gather and store all those records.
It works like this: Say the banks are allowed to lend 90% of the money that is deposited, and have to keep 10% of it. Then Alice deposits $1,000. This means that the banks lend out $10,000 since they had to keep 10% of the money. If the government wanted to create money, rather than bothering with silly printing presses at the mint, they could declare that banks could lend 95% of the money deposited. Then if Alice deposits $1,000, the banks could lend out $20,000.
Now, you might have noticed my numbers aren't quite what you expected. Well, it works like this (when the banks lend 90% of a deposit). Alice deposits $1,000. Then Bob borrows $900, and deposits it in a bank. Then Charlie borrows $810, and deposits it. Then Dylan borrows $729, and deposits it... By the time everyone is done borrowing, depositing, and lending, 10 dollars have been lent for every 1 deposited. Of course, in reality only some of the borrowed money gets deposited immediately -- some of the money gets spent and put in a bank, and some gets kept around in wallets or under a mattress. But yeah, most of the money people "have" is in fact created out of thin air, not even paper.
Just don't ask what happens when too many people want to withdraw their money from the bank.
Most money is created out of thin air (by adjusting the percentage of deposited money banks are required to keep).
What do you think the Virtual Reality version of Frogger would be classified as?
Can it tag a switch to Beta (either all at once or feature by feature over a year) as suicidal behavior?
Yeah, America's founding fathers thought they were above the law too, and look where it got them.
You mean, a troll might do something *specifically* to draw out a reaction, like suggesting laws against harassment shouldn't protect personal choices/preferences in general nor religion in particular?
Indeed, who is going to tell what constitutes "serious emotional distress"?
DMCA notices come to mind.