You've got a good point there. Power producers have a special place in the green market IMHO. Not just because of their responsibility, but also a bit because of their 'chicken and the egg' situation.
Will consumers buy green energy if it's noticeably more expensive than normal/grey energy? No. Will green energy become cheaper if it's not produced on a massive scale? Not very much. Will power producers invest heavily in mass producing green energy if the alternative is much cheaper. Not likely.
Bit of a circle thing going on in that field. There are however some nice developments going on in the field of energy research. For example, take a look at the news items here:
So I'll try to be and stay hopefull! (Very nice site in general as well!)
For now, I try to consume less grey energy by supporting the more energy efficient and eco-friendly products. Trying to steer at least that side of the market in the right direction.;)
On the other hand: does it matter if in the long term the doomsday scenario results in 5C* or 6.2C* temperature rise? or in 'doomsday'* or 'doomsday ^ 2'* ?
It's safe to assume that in the long run something is going to happen.
Taking action at a later time might be:
a) impossible; certain thresholds have been overstepped and there's no recovery possible for centuries* b) far more costly than starting to take action right now
It's unrealistic to think that the world, or even the Western world alone, can switch to a far more eco-friendly society in a single year.
But to quote the famous saying: 'even the longest road starts with a single step'.
It might and will take time to switch, but an economy can also profit on producing products that are far more eco-friendly. Think interesting research and new developments, think 'buy this product now, it uses less energy, is cheaper to use/maintain/recycle/etc.
At least at this moment we still have some time available.
* The numbers and examples are made up for the general argument which is not about the 0.1 centigrade detailed climate-warming discussion thingy.:)
I've always wondered why these networks use 2.4GHz radio waves.
I'm not a physicist, so really: is there an advantage to this frequency? Why not 1.2GHz.. or 3.6GHz, etc.? Why something so close to the frequency range of microwave ovens?
If this is a really dumb question, I already ask for forgiveness.:)
In the beginning the client was quite nice and simple. Later on it became soo bloated I decided to follow my friends and to start using the MSN Messenger which was sooo nice and simple. Now the latter is also filled with useless features.:(
Don't these companies understand that there are many people who just want a simple, graphical chat window?
And yes, I also use IRC in a screen session every day.. but unfortunately just 5-10 other _technical_ friends are there. My experience is that it's nearly impossible to teach quite a number of less technical people how to use IRC.
Slashdot Mirror
One Ring finger to Rule Them All! :D
R1ng? Where?!? My preciousssss!
Direct linkage for those who are interested:
/ 18/0420247
Google Releases Paper on Disk Reliability:
http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/02
My laptop IS a local hot spot! ;XD
(sorry, could not resist)
You've definitely got a point there.
When typing my first reply, I was more thinking in the direction of serving 8 different users at the same time on a single machine.
Sorry for not being explicit enough (I haven't had coffee for three weeks, sometimes it's noticeable ;P)
I'm not very familiar with Matlab and OSX, but is it not just possible to start 8 Matlab instances and point them each to run on a particular core?
Basically like a compiled function?
All possible girlfriend wave functions collapsed instantly! :P
You've got a good point there. Power producers have a special place in the green market IMHO. Not just because of their responsibility, but also a bit because of their 'chicken and the egg' situation.
l ar_energy/
;)
Will consumers buy green energy if it's noticeably more expensive than normal/grey energy? No.
Will green energy become cheaper if it's not produced on a massive scale? Not very much.
Will power producers invest heavily in mass producing green energy if the alternative is much cheaper. Not likely.
Bit of a circle thing going on in that field. There are however some nice developments going on in the field of energy research. For example, take a look at the news items here:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/news/matter_energy/so
So I'll try to be and stay hopefull! (Very nice site in general as well!)
For now, I try to consume less grey energy by supporting the more energy efficient and eco-friendly products. Trying to steer at least that side of the market in the right direction.
First of all, I certainly understand your point about being able to measure succes.
;)
.001C global temperature differences is of course another story. :)
On the other hand, a clean electric car that is not polluting is something I can measure by just walking on the street.
Measuring
On the other hand: does it matter if in the long term the doomsday scenario results in 5C* or 6.2C* temperature rise? or in 'doomsday'* or 'doomsday ^ 2'* ?
:)
It's safe to assume that in the long run something is going to happen.
Taking action at a later time might be:
a) impossible; certain thresholds have been overstepped and there's no recovery possible for centuries*
b) far more costly than starting to take action right now
It's unrealistic to think that the world, or even the Western world alone, can switch to a far more eco-friendly society in a single year.
But to quote the famous saying: 'even the longest road starts with a single step'.
It might and will take time to switch, but an economy can also profit on producing products that are far more eco-friendly. Think interesting research and new developments, think 'buy this product now, it uses less energy, is cheaper to use/maintain/recycle/etc.
At least at this moment we still have some time available.
* The numbers and examples are made up for the general argument which is not about the 0.1 centigrade detailed climate-warming discussion thingy.
And reading this on Slashdot is a rare sight on its own. :P
This gives 'FeedBurner' a whole new perspective! ;-D
Is that before or after looking at the machine? ;-)
(forgive me, I love quantum-related jokes... ^_~)
I've always said that 'Plug & Play' can cause problems. I would like to point your attention to the parent post for yet another example. ^_~
Are you not entertained?!? ;-)
(note: includes graphical scenery from the movie 'Gladiator')
Ah, that explains things quite a bit. Thank you for the fast replies! :)
I've always wondered why these networks use 2.4GHz radio waves.
:)
I'm not a physicist, so really: is there an advantage to this frequency? Why not 1.2GHz.. or 3.6GHz, etc.? Why something so close to the frequency range of microwave ovens?
If this is a really dumb question, I already ask for forgiveness.
But be careful! History learns us that fast race cars don't go too well with the '-Wall' parameter. ;O
I bet you're hiding such an item using Heisenberg's uncertainty principle! :P
Has anyone seen my cat? ;-(
Tor networks are generally not *that* fast.. so causing a data storm is not likely. ;)
;P
Sometimes such connections are sooo slow, it makes users cry. They don't call it onion routing for nothing, eh?
In real life that is half my body weight! (even though I am 1.80m tall
Too bad that for those 123 times there is not an easily accessible 'Cancel All' button.. ;P
In the beginning the client was quite nice and simple. Later on it became soo bloated I decided to follow my friends and to start using the MSN Messenger which was sooo nice and simple. Now the latter is also filled with useless features. :(
Don't these companies understand that there are many people who just want a simple, graphical chat window?
And yes, I also use IRC in a screen session every day.. but unfortunately just 5-10 other _technical_ friends are there. My experience is that it's nearly impossible to teach quite a number of less technical people how to use IRC.