As with clothes driers, heat is a poor substitute for volume. Unless you live somewhere like FL where the humidity is over 80% most of the year, those joules are better spent on more powerful fan.
Except the problem is that the electricity market is not fluid that way. If you had no cost for sending it across the grid the long way, then you could cut out the 8 plants. Unfortunately, that's actually quite inefficient, so what you end up with is a distributed reduction of usage of less than 2% per plant.
I still don't think the number can be that high. Thanks to you, my Kill-A-Watt is going to get some usage this month.
it will have the same expected return no matter how many people the jackpot is shared amongst. (This isn't necessarily true true once you start buying up a significant chunk of the tickets, of course.)
If it's not true then, it's not true *ever*. Expected Reture, aka Payout Ratio is simply (Prize/bet)*Odds_of_winning. It doesn't matter how many tickets you buy, because your odds of winning increase as your bet increases.
Cumulative lotteries are actually pretty interesting from a game theory perspective because the payout does depend on how many other people play.
Assume most people are rational (a number can't be, though, because someone has to grow the pot). Taking the simple route, and simply calculating a positive expectation value based on single-winner, there is a pretty obvious point below which you shouldn't bother betting. Unfortunately, if lots of people know this, then there will be a lot more chances for a double winner in the next round.
If you have information about the number of people betting in any round, you should be able to compute the odds of multiple winners, and form a new estimate of the crossover point based on that. Of course, if everyone has that information, then the number of new bets can be expected to be just enough to kill that idea, too.
And, come to think of it, that's interesting enough that I'll bet there's a study somewhere on the "efficiency" of the lottery market, tracking the expected return as the pot increases over the single-player unity payout mark.
Like news is more interesting with handheld cameras and fast cuts.
No, it really isn't. Fast cuts are ok, but if the shaking isn't caused by my own head, I feel like I'm being lead around. It's not very comfortable. I'm talking to you Ronald D. Moore.
>70W (because sometimes the devices will.. you know.. be on)
Seriously?
average?
Well, even if that's the case, it's still only 8,000 MW. Which, while a big number, only accounts for about 6 plants.
I still maintain that you'd be hard pressed to find 6 actual plants that you could take offline.
Further, even at the levels you maintain, it's only costing each consumer $63 per year (or about 3.6 work-hours per year: 4 minutes per week). If sacrificing the soft-start convenience means wasting more than 4 minutes per week plugging and unplugging things, it's just not worth it to bother.
1) intelligent by virtue of conglomeration of simple parts 2) made of the same stuff as us 3) capable of consuming us to build more of itself 4) reproduces up to the limits of the available resources.
We have a huge advantage over any newcomers, though, by virtue of our having already sussed out some passable specialty organs, which do wonders for our efficiency.
If you cut off all the standby power in *every* home device, you end up saving enough power over the whole country that you could shut down one small power plant. But only if electricity was fungible, which it isn't.
Um.. car batteries are deep cycle batteries. Of course, they mean that the battery can take a significant voltage drop (due to basically short-circuiting every start) without damage.
Your choice of definitions of "deep cycle" is also a valid meaning, but considering what it does to cycle life in *any* chemistry, I'm not sure it's a particularly wise one for the application you intend.
A 60" plasma, probably not so great, but I used to run a 18" CRT TV (about 45W, I think, maybe a li'l less) off of a radio shack inverter and a used 12 A-h gel cell during hurricanes. It ran for somewhere between an hour and a half and three hours (I was running other things as well, one of which was a ceiling fan, which was *very* noisy due to the cheapo inverter, but it was summertime in FL, so I had to do *something*)
The problem is actually quite similar to the education problem: we don't seem to be able to improve their efficiency through the use of machines very much. Possibly gains we do make are being eaten up by mission creep.
But anyway, that's the real problem: we "need" a lot of them, an significant portion of the working population, just to poke people's bags. If you had t ask me to pick a cause of our current economic difficulties, I'd put some serious thought into "giant govenment agency that doesn't actually produce a single bit of wealth" over "people who work hard, but payed too much for a house."
Ok, but don't bring an entire suitcase and claim it's a carry-on because it juuuust squeezes through the alloted space.
I like my leg-room, and if I have to stow my jacket at my feet (where it will get trampled and take up part of the already scant foot-space) because some jackass with "early boarding" decided to bring his entire wardrobe as a "carry-on," I'm very put out. Don't be a dick.
While you don't want to let your debt get too high, surplus is more of a crime than deficit: Politicians know only one way to deal with even temporary surpluses, and that is by creating additional long-term liabilities.
Further, all government debt is not a bad thing: Where do you think T-bills, a big part of many retirement plans, come from?
And then there's the whole purpose of debt: to finance a project *now* whose benefits are long-term. With debt, you can pay for a bridge over the life of the bridge, rather than all at once in one lump sum. Or you don't have to worry about that money sitting around doing nothing but causing deflation while you save up.
Debt is only bad if you use it to buy things you can't afford, as opposed to using it to spreading out lump costs over the lifetime of something.
There's been plenty of protests. It's just that it's morphed from the somewhat political outdoor party to an outdoor party with somewhat political overtones. It's still just an excuse for people with too much time on their hands to get together to bang on bongoes, shout, and kinda' move around in motions that are almost, but not entirely, unlike dancing, wear stupid clothing, go let hygiene slide, and sell overpriced herbs, incense, and the occasional "dose" of "medical" marijuana.
Some are organized, some are stupid, some are vulgar...
But they're about as helpful as they've always been. A caricature of the real demonstrations and protests that HAVE been effective for reasons that the organizers of college protests will never understand.
They don't dream at all. In fact, they don't sleep. They just spend their nights reading People Magazine to so they can constantly mention famous people they've never heard of.
My cable company only even offers the OTA digital HD channels you insensitive clod. Actually.. that's not even true. They "offer" six of the roughly thirty-three OTA digital channels I can get, though many of the ones they don't offer or pass through aren't HD.
Thieves who want to steal SSNs can just throw darts, and check the SSA for whether or not they exist (I remember some services advertised years ago that did -e lookups for free and info dumps for like $5).
Even if they were well distributed the thieves would have something like a 1/3 chance, so it wouldn't take too much effort for "monte carlo" identity theft to be fairly profitable. AND go largely unnoticed: the thieves may have a high chance of guessing a number, but the number of actually stolen identities depends on the number of thieves.
This is why we really need to reign in SSNs back to their intended domain only, and/or begin upgrading to SSNv6.
It doesn't get 300 mpg. It gets a more reasonable, (and still quite impressive) 130 mpg. Why people feel the need to inflate mileage with "free" electricity in the hybrid parts is quite a mystery to me.
To properly gauge you have to take a holistic approach to these things: what is it's "miles per dollar."
It's not a question of whether or not it is in the public interest. Clearly the public benefits from funding in the sciences, and less easily measurable in the arts. But how does that interest weigh against a man's right to the fruits of his own labors?
The question is who funds it. If I believe (and I do, btw) that funding basic sciences and building particle accelerators a boon to myself and mankind, I'm inclined to donate some money to universities or other organizations engaged in the research I'm interested in (or that someone makes a cogent argument as to why I ought to be interested in.)
The question is: do I have the right to demand YOUR treasure for things that make ME happy. I'm willing to concede that I have the right to spend *some* of your money on projects of particular import: police, fire, national defense, certain critical infrastructure, but every expenditure of public monies (even those I just mentioned) should be thoroughly debated, for every dollar spent was taken under threat of violence.
Slashdot Mirror
If the chance of flood really is practically nil, flood insurance should be really, really cheap. There shouldn't be any reason *not* to get it.
If it's not cheap.. you probably need it anyway.
capillary action.
As with clothes driers, heat is a poor substitute for volume. Unless you live somewhere like FL where the humidity is over 80% most of the year, those joules are better spent on more powerful fan.
Except the problem is that the electricity market is not fluid that way. If you had no cost for sending it across the grid the long way, then you could cut out the 8 plants. Unfortunately, that's actually quite inefficient, so what you end up with is a distributed reduction of usage of less than 2% per plant.
I still don't think the number can be that high. Thanks to you, my Kill-A-Watt is going to get some usage this month.
If it's not true then, it's not true *ever*. Expected Reture, aka Payout Ratio is simply (Prize/bet)*Odds_of_winning. It doesn't matter how many tickets you buy, because your odds of winning increase as your bet increases.
Cumulative lotteries are actually pretty interesting from a game theory perspective because the payout does depend on how many other people play.
Assume most people are rational (a number can't be, though, because someone has to grow the pot). Taking the simple route, and simply calculating a positive expectation value based on single-winner, there is a pretty obvious point below which you shouldn't bother betting. Unfortunately, if lots of people know this, then there will be a lot more chances for a double winner in the next round.
If you have information about the number of people betting in any round, you should be able to compute the odds of multiple winners, and form a new estimate of the crossover point based on that. Of course, if everyone has that information, then the number of new bets can be expected to be just enough to kill that idea, too.
And, come to think of it, that's interesting enough that I'll bet there's a study somewhere on the "efficiency" of the lottery market, tracking the expected return as the pot increases over the single-player unity payout mark.
No, it really isn't. Fast cuts are ok, but if the shaking isn't caused by my own head, I feel like I'm being lead around. It's not very comfortable. I'm talking to you Ronald D. Moore.
>70W (because sometimes the devices will.. you know.. be on)
Seriously?
average?
Well, even if that's the case, it's still only 8,000 MW. Which, while a big number, only accounts for about 6 plants.
I still maintain that you'd be hard pressed to find 6 actual plants that you could take offline.
Further, even at the levels you maintain, it's only costing each consumer $63 per year (or about 3.6 work-hours per year: 4 minutes per week). If sacrificing the soft-start convenience means wasting more than 4 minutes per week plugging and unplugging things, it's just not worth it to bother.
Let's see:
1) intelligent by virtue of conglomeration of simple parts
2) made of the same stuff as us
3) capable of consuming us to build more of itself
4) reproduces up to the limits of the available resources.
We have a huge advantage over any newcomers, though, by virtue of our having already sussed out some passable specialty organs, which do wonders for our efficiency.
Which is really quite insignificant.
If you cut off all the standby power in *every* home device, you end up saving enough power over the whole country that you could shut down one small power plant. But only if electricity was fungible, which it isn't.
Um.. car batteries are deep cycle batteries. Of course, they mean that the battery can take a significant voltage drop (due to basically short-circuiting every start) without damage.
Your choice of definitions of "deep cycle" is also a valid meaning, but considering what it does to cycle life in *any* chemistry, I'm not sure it's a particularly wise one for the application you intend.
Plus, what are you supposed to put in the bathrooms? I really don't think they really thought through all those bans.
Quite a long time, depending on the TV.
A 60" plasma, probably not so great, but I used to run a 18" CRT TV (about 45W, I think, maybe a li'l less) off of a radio shack inverter and a used 12 A-h gel cell during hurricanes. It ran for somewhere between an hour and a half and three hours (I was running other things as well, one of which was a ceiling fan, which was *very* noisy due to the cheapo inverter, but it was summertime in FL, so I had to do *something*)
Except, they're not being paid minimum.
The problem is actually quite similar to the education problem: we don't seem to be able to improve their efficiency through the use of machines very much. Possibly gains we do make are being eaten up by mission creep.
But anyway, that's the real problem: we "need" a lot of them, an significant portion of the working population, just to poke people's bags. If you had t ask me to pick a cause of our current economic difficulties, I'd put some serious thought into "giant govenment agency that doesn't actually produce a single bit of wealth" over "people who work hard, but payed too much for a house."
Ok, but don't bring an entire suitcase and claim it's a carry-on because it juuuust squeezes through the alloted space.
I like my leg-room, and if I have to stow my jacket at my feet (where it will get trampled and take up part of the already scant foot-space) because some jackass with "early boarding" decided to bring his entire wardrobe as a "carry-on," I'm very put out. Don't be a dick.
While you don't want to let your debt get too high, surplus is more of a crime than deficit: Politicians know only one way to deal with even temporary surpluses, and that is by creating additional long-term liabilities.
Further, all government debt is not a bad thing: Where do you think T-bills, a big part of many retirement plans, come from?
And then there's the whole purpose of debt: to finance a project *now* whose benefits are long-term. With debt, you can pay for a bridge over the life of the bridge, rather than all at once in one lump sum. Or you don't have to worry about that money sitting around doing nothing but causing deflation while you save up.
Debt is only bad if you use it to buy things you can't afford, as opposed to using it to spreading out lump costs over the lifetime of something.
Bwa ha ha.
There's been plenty of protests. It's just that it's morphed from the somewhat political outdoor party to an outdoor party with somewhat political overtones. It's still just an excuse for people with too much time on their hands to get together to bang on bongoes, shout, and kinda' move around in motions that are almost, but not entirely, unlike dancing, wear stupid clothing, go let hygiene slide, and sell overpriced herbs, incense, and the occasional "dose" of "medical" marijuana.
Some are organized, some are stupid, some are vulgar...
But they're about as helpful as they've always been. A caricature of the real demonstrations and protests that HAVE been effective for reasons that the organizers of college protests will never understand.
A small bag of gemstones.
They don't dream at all. In fact, they don't sleep. They just spend their nights reading People Magazine to so they can constantly mention famous people they've never heard of.
He dreams in ascii text?
My cable company only even offers the OTA digital HD channels you insensitive clod. Actually.. that's not even true. They "offer" six of the roughly thirty-three OTA digital channels I can get, though many of the ones they don't offer or pass through aren't HD.
Thieves who want to steal SSNs can just throw darts, and check the SSA for whether or not they exist (I remember some services advertised years ago that did -e lookups for free and info dumps for like $5).
Even if they were well distributed the thieves would have something like a 1/3 chance, so it wouldn't take too much effort for "monte carlo" identity theft to be fairly profitable. AND go largely unnoticed: the thieves may have a high chance of guessing a number, but the number of actually stolen identities depends on the number of thieves.
This is why we really need to reign in SSNs back to their intended domain only, and/or begin upgrading to SSNv6.
It doesn't get 300 mpg. It gets a more reasonable, (and still quite impressive) 130 mpg. Why people feel the need to inflate mileage with "free" electricity in the hybrid parts is quite a mystery to me.
To properly gauge you have to take a holistic approach to these things: what is it's "miles per dollar."
It's not a question of whether or not it is in the public interest. Clearly the public benefits from funding in the sciences, and less easily measurable in the arts. But how does that interest weigh against a man's right to the fruits of his own labors?
The question is who funds it. If I believe (and I do, btw) that funding basic sciences and building particle accelerators a boon to myself and mankind, I'm inclined to donate some money to universities or other organizations engaged in the research I'm interested in (or that someone makes a cogent argument as to why I ought to be interested in.)
The question is: do I have the right to demand YOUR treasure for things that make ME happy. I'm willing to concede that I have the right to spend *some* of your money on projects of particular import: police, fire, national defense, certain critical infrastructure, but every expenditure of public monies (even those I just mentioned) should be thoroughly debated, for every dollar spent was taken under threat of violence.
"Howard the Duck," actually, I think.
I suppose, if 35 km (25 km if you go wingtip to wingtip) is "nothing like" 27 km.