If the oil wells are hundreds, if not thousands, of miles from where the oil is burned are you going to transport the C02 back to the well head?
Very little CO2 is collected from burning oil. Oil is mostly used in transportation, where is is not feasible to collect it. Most CO2 that is collected comes from burning coal or natural gas to generate electricity, or make cement, etc. One option is that instead of moving the CO2 to the oilfield, you can move the generator there, and burn the coal/NG locally. Many oilfields generate a lot of gas as a byproduct. There are a lot of geographically dispersed oil and gas fields, so the CO2 does not need to be piped far. For instance, there are plenty of suitable sites in Southern California, and Pennsylvania, which are close to population centers, and thus close to power plants.
But anyway, CCS is a bridge technology, until we can move away from fossil fuels completely. It is not a permanent solution.
Except that I seem to recall that most such CO2 tends to leak back into the atmosphere within several years
No. A good site will retain 99% of the sequestered CO2 for at least 1000 years. The CO2 is typically injected into geologic formations that were able to hold methane for millions of years. If the methane didn't leak, why would the CO2?
Most of the changes were pushed upstream, but not all. If they were all pushed, and accepted, then there would be no reason for Microsoft to have their own version.
This process is expensive and there are better ways to do it. CO2 can be used for enhanced oil recovery which can sequester carbon while also helping improve yield. Since it has positive economic value, it is much more likely to actually happen.
Stop clear-cutting all the trees for lumber and to put up crappy strip malls and subdivisions!
That is backwards. A mature forest does not remove net CO2. You need to cut it down, sequester the wood in housing or whatever, and then let the forest regrow. If forests are going to be used to remove carbon, we need to cut down more of them.
Cars were once only for the 1%. President Wilson called them a symbol of "the arrogance of wealth". He predicted that the country would move toward socialism because the middle class would envy the rich for their automobiles, something they obviously could never afford for themselves. It didn't turn out that way.
Maybe these lower class and minorities would do better in an apprenticeship role,
so that they can be replaced by a robot within the next twenty years.
The easiest jobs to automate are not necessarily those requiring less education. In fact, knowledge intensive jobs may fall first. Medical radiologists are already being replaced with computer image analysis and/or doctors in India. Robots help with surgery. A lot of legal work is being automated (or offshored). Medical diagnosis may be easier to automate than repairing a leaky faucet.
2016 freedom of the press, the USA is 41 according to https://rsf.org/en/ranking Democracy Ranking put the USA 16th (The top 5 were all EU countries)
The main reason for this ranking is America's lack of a journalist shield law that gives reporters special privileges and protections. In America, ALL citizens have a right to say and write what they want, not just the elite, so it is silly to penalize America for that.
It's as if Slashdot users approve and encourage this type of behavior. Why?
Because the solution to the problem is better security, not more ethical hackers. Hackers will hack, regardless of the severity of the punishment. How many hackers do you think will be dissuaded by stern disapproval from Slashdot?
Seriously, find out who this guy is, arrest him, destroy his data, and execute him.
I assume you mean the idiot at Twitter who thought it was acceptable to store plain text passwords in a database. A server should never even see a plain text password. Passwords should be salted and encrypted in the browser, using SHA-256 or stronger, before being transmitted to the server.
there was commentary in the previous thread to the effect that you can now be served by mail.
Your initial summons cannot be served by mail, unless you agree to be served by mail and voluntarily acknowledge receiving it. The initial filing must be hand delivered, and looks very different from just a letter. If you are a corporation, you cannot avoid service by hiding in the restroom. You must accept service at your registered place of business during regular business hours.
It is still disturbing that they considered mandatory online IDs to be an idea worth exploring. The Wannsee Conference was also just some European leaders exploring ideas.
While I think that, since we're all carrying chip & pin cards, that they should be useable as login credentials,
I don't see how that solves anything. My daughter makes money writing fake reviews, and she uses her real name. At most, an identity check will prevent someone from posting more than one review about the same product, but with millions of products and millions of reviewers, that is not much of a limitation.
It advances machine learning by 3 generations? Compared to what?
They mean three Moore's law doublings. 2^3 = 8, so it is roughly 8 times as powerful as the previous state of the art, in terms of computation per watt. But that is only if you use their ASIC accelerator, which the iPhone doesn't have, so the "three generations" doesn't really apply here.
Also, it processes data the same way our brains do?
Basically, yes, artificial neural networks (ANN) work on the same principles as a brain, in the same way that 747s work on the same principles as hummingbirds.
I was unaware we understood how our brains processed data.
We don't understand how brains work at a gestalt level, but we have a good idea of how neurons and networks of neurons work. ANNs are modeled on biological neural networks (BNNs), can do similar (albeit simpler) things, and even make similar errors.
Somebody should inform the neuroscientists, they'll be excited to find this out.
Most neuroscientists are already well aware of research on artificial models of neurons.
It's not like the US has an unblemished record of openness and propriety when managing this either.
The US has stronger laws and a stronger tradition and culture of supporting freedom of expression. According to a Pew Research poll published in this week's Economist, 80% of Japanese, 70% of Germans, and 50% of French, think the government should be able to silence people offending others. In America, only a quarter felt the same. The next closest countries were Canada and Britain, both at about 40%.
US stewardship of the Internet has not been perfect, but I doubt if others can do better, either individually or collectively.
Seriously, what's the point? Given that the flight time is 23 minutes, this is virtually useless for any serious travel.
Nobody is going to use a quadcopter for long distance travel. That is not the use case. It would be useful as a short distance shuttle, say from a rooftop in downtown SF to SFO, or downtown NYC to JFK.
Furthermore, it's likely to be far more expensive than services like Uber and Lyft.
Yes, and Uber is more expensive than riding a bike, and a bike is more expensive than walking. People are willing to spend money to save time.
it solves a problem that doesn't exist and never will exist.
Except that there are many existing businesses that offer piloted helicopters for about a thousand dollars an hour, to do pretty much the same thing this drone does.
I once paid $300 to ride in a helicopter over Mauna Loa. It was worth it. I would have been happy to save money and take a drone instead, as long as it had a reasonable track record of safety (maybe established by hauling cargo to remote roadless sites).
By which point the victims have spent tens of thousands of dollars.
Only the stupid ones. Patent trolls shotgun out thousands and thousands of threatening letters, hoping someone will bite. That is why it is called "trolling". The biggest mistake you can make is to respond to their letter. That marks you as a target. They can't possibly afford to file so many lawsuits, so they only go after the fools. You should never respond to a patent troll until you have been served an actual filing by a legitimate process server.
IANAL, and if I were, I would give you the exact opposite advice: A letter from a patent troll requires a robust and muscular response, and I need a $10k retainer to do that.
My laptop has 16GB. I am using Chrome and have 18 tabs open. It is using less than 2GB in total. Why should I care if it is a hog as long as plentiful resources are available? The point of having resources is to use them. I am happy to trade memory for responsiveness and reliability.
Performance is the least of their problems. Security, first.
No, security second. The first priority should have been to think of a good name. "Electrolysis" already has a different meaning, which will cause confusion and make it difficult for people to Google for information, since nearly all the hits will be for the original meaning. There are billions of potential names, so why did they have to pick one of the few already being used? Even "Browsy McBrowseFace" would have been better than this.
In my experience if the testing process fails to identify functionality bugs it's definitely missing security bugs.
In my experience, testing for functionality, and testing for security, require completely different test vectors, and the tests for each are done by different people.
True but usually you can see some signs that there are neighbours there such as hearing their car or the music they are playing. In our case we have not heard anything so either we are not listening in the right way, they make practically no 'noise' or they don't exist at least close by.
When humans first invented radio, we broadcast strong simple signals because our technology was primitive. These signals would be detectable from very long distances away. But we are rapidly moving to much weaker and complex transmissions. This has the benefit of using far less power, and has much greater bandwidth. But it also makes the signal harder to detect and almost indistinguishable from background noise. There was only a 150 year window from when we started to transmit, and when our transmissions became indistinguishable from static. Compared to the age of the Universe, that window was a very tiny blip.
wild, speculation like this is a waste of time
Wasting time on wild speculation is the whole point of Slashdot.
Car manufacturers do not understand InfoSec and should not be networking cars.
That may be true, but it has nothing to do with the problem described in TFA. This was just a good old fashioned bug, not a security flaw. It was caused by poor coding and inadequate testing, not poor security.
The government is required to provide essential services
Mail delivery was an "essential service" in 1775. It is not essential today, and since 99% of what they deliver is unwanted garbage, I wouldn't even call it a "service".
Banking and finance should be considered an essential part of economic infrastructure and should be nationalised and simplified to stabilise the economy.
You should try looking at reality. Many countries have nationalized their banks, including Venezuela, Argentina, and Zimbabwe. Putting everyone's life savings into a political piggy bank did not lead to stability.
Slashdot Mirror
So by leaving an old growth forest in place, we sequester the carbon (in the forest) and improve the uptake.
No you don't, because those old trees die, fall over, and rot. Then the CO2 is returned to the atmosphere.
If the oil wells are hundreds, if not thousands, of miles from where the oil is burned are you going to transport the C02 back to the well head?
Very little CO2 is collected from burning oil. Oil is mostly used in transportation, where is is not feasible to collect it. Most CO2 that is collected comes from burning coal or natural gas to generate electricity, or make cement, etc. One option is that instead of moving the CO2 to the oilfield, you can move the generator there, and burn the coal/NG locally. Many oilfields generate a lot of gas as a byproduct. There are a lot of geographically dispersed oil and gas fields, so the CO2 does not need to be piped far. For instance, there are plenty of suitable sites in Southern California, and Pennsylvania, which are close to population centers, and thus close to power plants.
But anyway, CCS is a bridge technology, until we can move away from fossil fuels completely. It is not a permanent solution.
Except that I seem to recall that most such CO2 tends to leak back into the atmosphere within several years
No. A good site will retain 99% of the sequestered CO2 for at least 1000 years. The CO2 is typically injected into geologic formations that were able to hold methane for millions of years. If the methane didn't leak, why would the CO2?
the changes were pushed back upstream
Most of the changes were pushed upstream, but not all. If they were all pushed, and accepted, then there would be no reason for Microsoft to have their own version.
Then you did it wrong, and missed something.
This process is expensive and there are better ways to do it. CO2 can be used for enhanced oil recovery which can sequester carbon while also helping improve yield. Since it has positive economic value, it is much more likely to actually happen.
Stop clear-cutting all the trees for lumber and to put up crappy strip malls and subdivisions!
That is backwards. A mature forest does not remove net CO2. You need to cut it down, sequester the wood in housing or whatever, and then let the forest regrow. If forests are going to be used to remove carbon, we need to cut down more of them.
For the 1%ers, yes.
Cars were once only for the 1%. President Wilson called them a symbol of "the arrogance of wealth". He predicted that the country would move toward socialism because the middle class would envy the rich for their automobiles, something they obviously could never afford for themselves. It didn't turn out that way.
Maybe these lower class and minorities would do better in an apprenticeship role,
so that they can be replaced by a robot within the next twenty years.
The easiest jobs to automate are not necessarily those requiring less education. In fact, knowledge intensive jobs may fall first. Medical radiologists are already being replaced with computer image analysis and/or doctors in India. Robots help with surgery. A lot of legal work is being automated (or offshored). Medical diagnosis may be easier to automate than repairing a leaky faucet.
2016 freedom of the press, the USA is 41 according to https://rsf.org/en/ranking
Democracy Ranking put the USA 16th (The top 5 were all EU countries)
The main reason for this ranking is America's lack of a journalist shield law that gives reporters special privileges and protections. In America, ALL citizens have a right to say and write what they want, not just the elite, so it is silly to penalize America for that.
because stamping out bigotry, the things the divide us and create instability and chaos, is a bad thing....?
Censorship does not "stamp out" bigotry. It just pushes it out of public view, where it festers in the shadows.
It's as if Slashdot users approve and encourage this type of behavior. Why?
Because the solution to the problem is better security, not more ethical hackers. Hackers will hack, regardless of the severity of the punishment. How many hackers do you think will be dissuaded by stern disapproval from Slashdot?
Seriously, find out who this guy is, arrest him, destroy his data, and execute him.
I assume you mean the idiot at Twitter who thought it was acceptable to store plain text passwords in a database. A server should never even see a plain text password. Passwords should be salted and encrypted in the browser, using SHA-256 or stronger, before being transmitted to the server.
there was commentary in the previous thread to the effect that you can now be served by mail.
Your initial summons cannot be served by mail, unless you agree to be served by mail and voluntarily acknowledge receiving it. The initial filing must be hand delivered, and looks very different from just a letter. If you are a corporation, you cannot avoid service by hiding in the restroom. You must accept service at your registered place of business during regular business hours.
THEY ARE EXPLORING THE IDEA.
It is still disturbing that they considered mandatory online IDs to be an idea worth exploring. The Wannsee Conference was also just some European leaders exploring ideas.
While I think that, since we're all carrying chip & pin cards, that they should be useable as login credentials,
I don't see how that solves anything. My daughter makes money writing fake reviews, and she uses her real name. At most, an identity check will prevent someone from posting more than one review about the same product, but with millions of products and millions of reviewers, that is not much of a limitation.
It advances machine learning by 3 generations? Compared to what?
They mean three Moore's law doublings. 2^3 = 8, so it is roughly 8 times as powerful as the previous state of the art, in terms of computation per watt. But that is only if you use their ASIC accelerator, which the iPhone doesn't have, so the "three generations" doesn't really apply here.
Also, it processes data the same way our brains do?
Basically, yes, artificial neural networks (ANN) work on the same principles as a brain, in the same way that 747s work on the same principles as hummingbirds.
I was unaware we understood how our brains processed data.
We don't understand how brains work at a gestalt level, but we have a good idea of how neurons and networks of neurons work. ANNs are modeled on biological neural networks (BNNs), can do similar (albeit simpler) things, and even make similar errors.
Somebody should inform the neuroscientists, they'll be excited to find this out.
Most neuroscientists are already well aware of research on artificial models of neurons.
It's not like the US has an unblemished record of openness and propriety when managing this either.
The US has stronger laws and a stronger tradition and culture of supporting freedom of expression. According to a Pew Research poll published in this week's Economist, 80% of Japanese, 70% of Germans, and 50% of French, think the government should be able to silence people offending others. In America, only a quarter felt the same. The next closest countries were Canada and Britain, both at about 40%.
US stewardship of the Internet has not been perfect, but I doubt if others can do better, either individually or collectively.
Seriously, what's the point? Given that the flight time is 23 minutes, this is virtually useless for any serious travel.
Nobody is going to use a quadcopter for long distance travel. That is not the use case. It would be useful as a short distance shuttle, say from a rooftop in downtown SF to SFO, or downtown NYC to JFK.
Furthermore, it's likely to be far more expensive than services like Uber and Lyft.
Yes, and Uber is more expensive than riding a bike, and a bike is more expensive than walking. People are willing to spend money to save time.
it solves a problem that doesn't exist and never will exist.
Except that there are many existing businesses that offer piloted helicopters for about a thousand dollars an hour, to do pretty much the same thing this drone does.
I once paid $300 to ride in a helicopter over Mauna Loa. It was worth it. I would have been happy to save money and take a drone instead, as long as it had a reasonable track record of safety (maybe established by hauling cargo to remote roadless sites).
By which point the victims have spent tens of thousands of dollars.
Only the stupid ones. Patent trolls shotgun out thousands and thousands of threatening letters, hoping someone will bite. That is why it is called "trolling". The biggest mistake you can make is to respond to their letter. That marks you as a target. They can't possibly afford to file so many lawsuits, so they only go after the fools. You should never respond to a patent troll until you have been served an actual filing by a legitimate process server.
IANAL, and if I were, I would give you the exact opposite advice: A letter from a patent troll requires a robust and muscular response, and I need a $10k retainer to do that.
You can call Chrome a resource hog all you want
My laptop has 16GB. I am using Chrome and have 18 tabs open. It is using less than 2GB in total. Why should I care if it is a hog as long as plentiful resources are available? The point of having resources is to use them. I am happy to trade memory for responsiveness and reliability.
Performance is the least of their problems. Security, first.
No, security second. The first priority should have been to think of a good name. "Electrolysis" already has a different meaning, which will cause confusion and make it difficult for people to Google for information, since nearly all the hits will be for the original meaning. There are billions of potential names, so why did they have to pick one of the few already being used? Even "Browsy McBrowseFace" would have been better than this.
In my experience if the testing process fails to identify functionality bugs it's definitely missing security bugs.
In my experience, testing for functionality, and testing for security, require completely different test vectors, and the tests for each are done by different people.
True but usually you can see some signs that there are neighbours there such as hearing their car or the music they are playing. In our case we have not heard anything so either we are not listening in the right way, they make practically no 'noise' or they don't exist at least close by.
When humans first invented radio, we broadcast strong simple signals because our technology was primitive. These signals would be detectable from very long distances away. But we are rapidly moving to much weaker and complex transmissions. This has the benefit of using far less power, and has much greater bandwidth. But it also makes the signal harder to detect and almost indistinguishable from background noise. There was only a 150 year window from when we started to transmit, and when our transmissions became indistinguishable from static. Compared to the age of the Universe, that window was a very tiny blip.
wild, speculation like this is a waste of time
Wasting time on wild speculation is the whole point of Slashdot.
Car manufacturers do not understand InfoSec and should not be networking cars.
That may be true, but it has nothing to do with the problem described in TFA. This was just a good old fashioned bug, not a security flaw. It was caused by poor coding and inadequate testing, not poor security.
The government is required to provide essential services
Mail delivery was an "essential service" in 1775. It is not essential today, and since 99% of what they deliver is unwanted garbage, I wouldn't even call it a "service".
Banking and finance should be considered an essential part of economic infrastructure and should be nationalised and simplified to stabilise the economy.
You should try looking at reality. Many countries have nationalized their banks, including Venezuela, Argentina, and Zimbabwe. Putting everyone's life savings into a political piggy bank did not lead to stability.