We saw the same thing happen with Xbox, PS2, and Gamecube. It's probably more of a valid argument to say that/. covers too much next-gen consoles in general, but I don't think they're being a blatant commercial for Microsoft.
WAIT a second there! Where and when did I say that Slashdot is "being a blatant commercial for Microsoft"? If you're going to throw mud at me, have the decency of supporting your stance.
Otherwise, I have to conclude that you have managed to missunderstand a fairly simple and short writing, and I don't know how you could do that.
By "fence-sitting" you mean those undecided whether to buy or not, I guess? I am not a fence-sitter, I know I won't buy, and my comment was really passionless. I don't care one which way it turns out, however, I stay by my original stance that a lot of precious money and time is going to be wasted in the following months. It's a large-scale social experiment, and I have the cool-headedness to appreciate it. I hope:o)
My impression is that Slashdot editors are pushing the Xbox 360 fever to incredible hights. Every time I visit Slashdot, there is a story on the 360.
It's interesting to watch this phenomenon from the outside (I am one of the few that will never buy an Xbox or Playstation), it's like enjoying the rain while you are at home. So much money will be spent on consoles and new games, and so much precious time squandered playing these games, it really makes me glad I am not a gamer!
Re:Everything bad for you is good for you again
on
Drink Decaf and Die
·
· Score: 1
and don't snack between meals.
And yet, most physicians and dietologists support "grazing" (many smaller meals) against few large meals.
Wow! I am genuinely impressed.... I never thought ReactOS would amount to anything. I am very glad you guys proved me dead wrong: I checked out the screenshots, and yes, ReactOS is running some honest-to-God win32 apps. If it can cope with directx 9.0, I could happily ditch my "Heroes of might and magic" partition.
Well, I won't dismiss your assertion, but I think (not sure, OK?) that cellulose does not decompose into methane and stuff - that's a process that would require high temperatures in te case of cellulose. Now, if we talk about the lignin in paper, that would probably, I think, behave the way you mentioned, but ther is notso much of it in paper.
You said "charcoal forburying". What do you mean by that? Burying what?
Agreed emphatically! And as shocking as it may sound, throwing paper and cardboard products in landfills (and NOT burning them) is also the best way to "sink" CO2 using trees!
They could have contacted the lady and cooperated with her to clean up the mess. Would have been great PR. Instead, they sue her for an amount they know she can't pay, basicaqlly strong-arming her.
Nice going. I am hoping this puts them in the public eye even more, and they get booted from tenders in Canada. Let's see how that affects their bottom line.
I like to compare MSFT to Bob Sapp: Sapp is really big, he can't truly fight and in the ring his movements are grotesque and uncoordinated. He gets tired VERY quickly and then his blocks are even more non-existent than usually.
But, nobody can beat him in spite of all this, because he's just too big, and no matter how bad his shots are, one or two are plenty to put down any of his opponents. (that said, Mirko Crocop did beat him with a nice right kick to the temple).
I think Solaris 10 is much faster of x86 than 9 (and 8) have ever been. And Solaris, versions 8, 9 and 10 (the ones I tested) run quite snappily on a single CPU, as long it's SPARC. But with Solaris 10, the difference in speed isn't there anymore.
Good points. BTW, what do you think would a good storage medium be, then? I wish flywheels were viable, but don't have any idea how they would work in a vehicle.
OK, but fuel cells can be suitably contained so that, whatever low temperature they might have been cooled down, they can heat up quickly enough to be practical even in harshest whather, after which they can maintain their own temperature.
Look, just think since how long have we had led-acid accumulators in cars? Well, since forever, no? And we coped with their susceptibility to cold quite well, didn't we? And they are much less resiliant towards cold than fuel cells. Taking this into account, don't you think it's a bit unfair to dismiss fuel cells for this reason?
33% is the theoretical top efficiency, while average is closer to 15%. The electric car prototypes I have seen recently have all had traction directly to the four wheels, and their efficiency was above 90%, even considerably. Fuel cells heat up a lot during operation. What do you think happens when hydrogen combines with oxygen, in those cells? Yeah, that reaction produces heat. The hydrogen containers in these cars are built specifically to store hydrogen without any loss.
- during operation, fuel cells heat up considerably, just like... - normal engines: the outside cold has an effect on their operation, in even greater measure, in fact, as they are either directly or indirectly cooled by the air (even water cooled engines are, in the end, dissipating the heat "outside", hence, in contact with the cold or warm air, as the case may be). - the problem with accumulators and batteries, working at low temperatures, is that they actually break down, i.e. their efficiency/capacity deteriorates considerably when working at low temperatures. As I understand, that's not the case with fuel cells.
Fair for you to ask, and hence for me to answer: In PDF document you can read the following quote:
Combustion heat engines tend to be relatively inefficient, because the heat that drives the machine also tends to dissipate easily into the environment. Energy is lost in the friction of moving parts, in overcoming rolling resistance (e.g., from irregularities in the road and flexing of tires), from air resistance, and from power-train resistance. Energy is also consumed by lubrication and cooling systems, which are necessary to make sure the heat engine does not destroy itself. The remainder of the heat is used by the engine to develop power. Because a great deal of heat is lost during engine operation, the efficiency of a gasoline engine may be as low as 15 percent and seldom is higher than 30 percent.
I could not find a comparable article on power plant thermal efficiency, but the factors mentioned in the quote above, are under much better control there, than in a car. Also, the turbines work always at top efficiency levels, unlike the engine in a car - you must admit this to be evidently true.
Most accumulators are sensitive to cold, that's true.
But what makes you think fuel cells, which basically transform hydrogen into electrical energy, would be as susceptible to cold? There is no proof of that.
We hear this argument on Slashdot every time this is brought up, and every time it's equally wrong: electricity is produced by many means, many of them renewable or non-polluting, like nuclear energy. Furthermore, natural gas creates less CO2 than gasoline or diesel. Also, and very importantly, producing electrical energy in any powerplant, is much more efficient than transforming the thermal energy into motion, in cars. Finally, it is relatively easy to shift the source of electrical energy from carbon to nuclear and perhaps solar and wind. It is IMPOSSIBLE to do that if cars stay the same, i.e. gasoline-based.
Moving from gasoline to fuel cell is an enabler, it allows for a shift from polluting to non-polluting technology. If you don't have that enabler, you will never be able to do the shift.
They should have, I agree. Even then, it would have been a slightly awkward place to use them. What I mean, is: if you use a dash to logically divide one sentence from another, in compaund sentences, you don't do that twice in a row, in the same sentence. Not usually. At least, I have never seen that happen.
Anyhow, someone's removed the etimology completely, now.
That's actually a terrible idea. A highly rated page would only mean that many find it agreeable, rather than that the content is good and accurate.
Want an example? I'll give you two: Amazon Customer Reviews. These reviews are rated, but almost always -not- based on their quality, but on the opinion the one giving the rating, has on the product (book, CD, DVD, video game). So if a review is perceived negative on the product, and a majority of people like that product, the review will receive negative ratings, regardless of the quality of the review itself!
And the second example is IMDB movie reviews. Same thing as with the Amazon customer reviews.
Does Wikipedia really want to sink to that level? If so, I think I'll really completely stop contributing to it.
I am pretty sure you're just karmawhoring, but that argument won't fly anymore: a general fact of life that what we do is not perfect, but that doesn't mean we have to give up on trying, and just let everything fall apart.
OK, it is fair for you to ask, and hence for me to answer: The term is most often used in the sense of biological homeostasis. homeo- similar or same. stasis- standing or stopping.
The hyphen implies that stasis is a prefix, as I said.
Slashdot Mirror
We saw the same thing happen with Xbox, PS2, and Gamecube. It's probably more of a valid argument to say that /. covers too much next-gen consoles in general, but I don't think they're being a blatant commercial for Microsoft.
WAIT a second there! Where and when did I say that Slashdot is "being a blatant commercial for Microsoft"? If you're going to throw mud at me, have the decency of supporting your stance.
Otherwise, I have to conclude that you have managed to missunderstand a fairly simple and short writing, and I don't know how you could do that.
By "fence-sitting" you mean those undecided whether to buy or not, I guess? I am not a fence-sitter, I know I won't buy, and my comment was really passionless. I don't care one which way it turns out, however, I stay by my original stance that a lot of precious money and time is going to be wasted in the following months. It's a large-scale social experiment, and I have the cool-headedness to appreciate it. I hope :o)
My impression is that Slashdot editors are pushing the Xbox 360 fever to incredible hights. Every time I visit Slashdot, there is a story on the 360.
It's interesting to watch this phenomenon from the outside (I am one of the few that will never buy an Xbox or Playstation), it's like enjoying the rain while you are at home. So much money will be spent on consoles and new games, and so much precious time squandered playing these games, it really makes me glad I am not a gamer!
and don't snack between meals.
And yet, most physicians and dietologists support "grazing" (many smaller meals) against few large meals.
Wow! I am genuinely impressed.... I never thought ReactOS would amount to anything. I am very glad you guys proved me dead wrong: I checked out the screenshots, and yes, ReactOS is running some honest-to-God win32 apps. If it can cope with directx 9.0, I could happily ditch my "Heroes of might and magic" partition.
Good job!
Well, I won't dismiss your assertion, but I think (not sure, OK?) that cellulose does not decompose into methane and stuff - that's a process that would require high temperatures in te case of cellulose. Now, if we talk about the lignin in paper, that would probably, I think, behave the way you mentioned, but ther is notso much of it in paper.
You said "charcoal forburying". What do you mean by that? Burying what?
Agreed emphatically! And as shocking as it may sound, throwing paper and cardboard products in landfills (and NOT burning them) is also the best way to "sink" CO2 using trees!
They could have contacted the lady and cooperated with her to clean up the mess. Would have been great PR. Instead, they sue her for an amount they know she can't pay, basicaqlly strong-arming her.
Nice going. I am hoping this puts them in the public eye even more, and they get booted from tenders in Canada. Let's see how that affects their bottom line.
I like to compare MSFT to Bob Sapp: Sapp is really big, he can't truly fight and in the ring his movements are grotesque and uncoordinated. He gets tired VERY quickly and then his blocks are even more non-existent than usually.
But, nobody can beat him in spite of all this, because he's just too big, and no matter how bad his shots are, one or two are plenty to put down any of his opponents. (that said, Mirko Crocop did beat him with a nice right kick to the temple).
They can't be 90% efficient and still get hot, can they?
You answered your own question: if they are 90% eficient, then of course they get hot.
Long answer: even a very small car needs about 40 horsepowers to be useful.
1 hp ~ 0.75 KW so 40 hp = 30 KW approximately. 10% * 30 KW = 3 KW.
That's 3000 watts to dissipate. It will get pretty hot.
I think Solaris 10 is much faster of x86 than 9 (and 8) have ever been.
And Solaris, versions 8, 9 and 10 (the ones I tested) run quite snappily on a single CPU, as long it's SPARC. But with Solaris 10, the difference in speed isn't there anymore.
Good points. BTW, what do you think would a good storage medium be, then? I wish flywheels were viable, but don't have any idea how they would work in a vehicle.
OK, but fuel cells can be suitably contained so that, whatever low temperature they might have been cooled down, they can heat up quickly enough to be practical even in harshest whather, after which they can maintain their own temperature.
Look, just think since how long have we had led-acid accumulators in cars? Well, since forever, no? And we coped with their susceptibility to cold quite well, didn't we? And they are much less resiliant towards cold than fuel cells. Taking this into account, don't you think it's a bit unfair to dismiss fuel cells for this reason?
33% is the theoretical top efficiency, while average is closer to 15%.
The electric car prototypes I have seen recently have all had traction directly to the four wheels, and their efficiency was above 90%, even considerably.
Fuel cells heat up a lot during operation. What do you think happens when hydrogen combines with oxygen, in those cells? Yeah, that reaction produces heat.
The hydrogen containers in these cars are built specifically to store hydrogen without any loss.
*ok?*
That's perhaps true, but:
...
- during operation, fuel cells heat up considerably, just like
- normal engines: the outside cold has an effect on their operation, in even greater measure, in fact, as they are either directly or indirectly cooled by the air (even water cooled engines are, in the end, dissipating the heat "outside", hence, in contact with the cold or warm air, as the case may be).
- the problem with accumulators and batteries, working at low temperatures, is that they actually break down, i.e. their efficiency/capacity deteriorates considerably when working at low temperatures. As I understand, that's not the case with fuel cells.
Fair for you to ask, and hence for me to answer: In PDF document you can read the following quote:
Combustion heat engines tend to be relatively inefficient, because the heat that drives the machine also tends to dissipate easily into the environment. Energy is lost in the friction of moving parts, in overcoming rolling resistance (e.g., from irregularities in the road and flexing of tires), from air resistance, and from power-train resistance. Energy is also consumed by lubrication and cooling systems, which are necessary to make sure the heat engine does not destroy itself. The remainder of the heat is used by the engine to develop power. Because a great deal of heat is lost during engine operation, the efficiency of a gasoline engine may be as low as 15 percent and seldom is higher than 30 percent.
I could not find a comparable article on power plant thermal efficiency, but the factors mentioned in the quote above, are under much better control there, than in a car. Also, the turbines work always at top efficiency levels, unlike the engine in a car - you must admit this to be evidently true.
Abso-fucking-lutely. You hit the nail on the head, hard.
Mod parent up +10.
Most accumulators are sensitive to cold, that's true.
But what makes you think fuel cells, which basically transform hydrogen into electrical energy, would be as susceptible to cold? There is no proof of that.
We hear this argument on Slashdot every time this is brought up, and every time it's equally wrong: electricity is produced by many means, many of them renewable or non-polluting, like nuclear energy. Furthermore, natural gas creates less CO2 than gasoline or diesel. Also, and very importantly, producing electrical energy in any powerplant, is much more efficient than transforming the thermal energy into motion, in cars.
Finally, it is relatively easy to shift the source of electrical energy from carbon to nuclear and perhaps solar and wind. It is IMPOSSIBLE to do that if cars stay the same, i.e. gasoline-based.
Moving from gasoline to fuel cell is an enabler, it allows for a shift from polluting to non-polluting technology. If you don't have that enabler, you will never be able to do the shift.
They should have, I agree. Even then, it would have been a slightly awkward place to use them. What I mean, is: if you use a dash to logically divide one sentence from another, in compaund sentences, you don't do that twice in a row, in the same sentence. Not usually. At least, I have never seen that happen.
Anyhow, someone's removed the etimology completely, now.
However, it's Sisyphus' work, i.e. pointless, repetitive and painful.
Did I mention it's pointless?
That's actually a terrible idea. A highly rated page would only mean that many find it agreeable, rather than that the content is good and accurate.
Want an example? I'll give you two: Amazon Customer Reviews. These reviews are rated, but almost always -not- based on their quality, but on the opinion the one giving the rating, has on the product (book, CD, DVD, video game). So if a review is perceived negative on the product, and a majority of people like that product, the review will receive negative ratings, regardless of the quality of the review itself!
And the second example is IMDB movie reviews. Same thing as with the Amazon customer reviews.
Does Wikipedia really want to sink to that level? If so, I think I'll really completely stop contributing to it.
I am pretty sure you're just karmawhoring, but that argument won't fly anymore: a general fact of life that what we do is not perfect, but that doesn't mean we have to give up on trying, and just let everything fall apart.
It may be uncertain, before I have a look at it, but once I go there and read it, it has to actualize :o)
OK, it is fair for you to ask, and hence for me to answer:
The term is most often used in the sense of biological homeostasis. homeo- similar or same. stasis- standing or stopping.
The hyphen implies that stasis is a prefix, as I said.