I believe you are wrong, at least from a practical standpoint. There are no reliable and practical way to store electricity to power the east coast during two days. I hope there will be someday, but as of today, there is none.
Well, after a hurricane I wouldn't bet on the stuff you just screwed on your rooftop.
That said, it all sounds nice except from the fact that cloudy winter days will require another source of energy. And at night. And on cloudy summer days to a lesser extent.
So while it could reduce the need for a central plant, it can in no way replace it. You will still need approximately the same central power generation structures we have today, because there will be time where all your shiny stuff won't generate a whole lot of power. The only difference is that they could be turned down from time to time.
Except that they can't be turned on and off with that kind of flexibility.
What makes you think it will ever go out? Here's a hint: It will not.
As it become scarcer and scarcer it will become more and more expensive to drill and so at the pump too. Already at current rates everyone if looking for alternatives. The higher the price, the more affordable the alternatives (because relatively they will go down, and bacause of zillions of $$ of R&D)
I believe Hydro is much much worse than that. Since 1970 there are more than 1M people that died out of a failed dam (volcanoes, earthquakes, defects, etc.).
Relatively safe in the US though. (My source is in French.)
Which is more deadly than Nuclear in addition of being kind of maxed out as you mentionned.
Solar PV
Which cannot be our only source of energy.
Tidal power (futuristic)
Which we have no clue if it will work in a reasonable way, so we cannot rely on it today even in future planning. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
Energy storage by cooling cold-storage warehouses extra during off-peak hours (EU plan)
Well, a bit experimental to base our future on it just right now.
I'd say that wind turbines are much quicker to build (2-3 years?) than nuclear plants, so why on earth would you need
- use nuclear as a stopgap for renewable/fusion
for anyway.
Because how are you going to explain to the people that when there's no wind, there's no power? Or when it's cloudy?
Well, I don't know. My stereo system came with a big sticker stating you should not place the subwoofer next to a computer. Sure it couldn't destroy the HDD data in a few seconds, but over time - say a year - of this treatment, I think the huge magnet in there could have had some harmfull effect.
So you're of the old school that believe that if their users can't use their product it must be because they are too stupid. And yet, it's their target.
You miss the point entirely. People (most) don't RTFA, and that is a fact that slashdot lives with every single day. Now it's easy claiming "The world will end Soon" even though the article linked might say otherwise. It's simply somewhere in the muddy ground between outright lies and good advertising.
I just wish slashdot was just news for nerds, not in that muddy ground.
I'm pretty confident that if I bother to hold on to the cdroms in my draw, provided they're kept in their cases/good condition they'll be just as playable (on the same hardware) in 100 years
You're up for a big surprise in a 100 years... Oh wait...
Well, as much as I hate it, I'll have to say that the problem you're talking about has nothing to do with real time. Real time is being able to give a response to a signal in a given time frame. What you are describing is just having a very high throughput btw your input and your output of your soundcard.
BTW, I forgot, but for those who think I am kidding, I am not! The link above relate to a recent post from a slashdot editor, clearly stating he trusts the submitter on knowing what he's talking about.
No, no, you lissed the point! There is no 'getting laid' just as there is no spoon! It is just an illusion. I have still to see some hard facts proving to me that this concept hasn't been artificially introduced to better control us by our great computer evermind.
In the meantime, I'll stop trying as it clearly doesn't work and is mostly a vast waste of my time.;)
Oh, sorry. I never said it is impossible. But it is clearly said that they purposefully reject stories without giving a hint as to why. As long as this is their rule, don't expect anything in your mailbox...
Google is NOTHING like Napster was. It is all a matter of point of view. Napster was little more than a search engine on music. Granted, it provided a software for publishing said music as well.
With Google, non-infringing uses aren't merely a token or a some statistical anamoly. Google takes all comers. That will inevitably mean that Google finds some illegal activity. This is correct, and I never said otherwise. Note that Napster took all comers as well. It's just that most of the people using it exclusively had illegal content to share...
Google doesn't enable that illegal activity any more than a newspaper or phone book. Of course it does. Google does index its stuff automatically without human inference (or so it is said to...). This is a huge difference. It also provides a direct link to the infringer with a preview of the infringed material! How can you compare this to a phone book?
It is up the police or other interested parties to bust/sue the actual offending parties. I do not say it is not their job, I say they didn't do it for Napster, so who knows if they might do it with Google?
This is like a DA prosecuting AT&T for putting out a phone book that contains entries for companies that engage in illegal conduct. But AT&T doesn't show thumbnails of the illegal content, hance you don't know the company is doing anything illegal. Napster did and Google do show sneak previews (or names) of stuff that can be determined to be illegal already at that stage.
You don't sue/prosecute the printer of the phone book. You deal with the actual perpetrator. Again, wrong comparison.
Googe is *not* like napster was. Learn how to read. I did not say that. I merely pointed out that Google is in a position somewhat comparable to the one napster was in, from a somewhat twisted point of view.
Google is a tool people use to find sites Wrong. I do use it also to find pictures.
without search engines the internet would be pretty pointless, and most average joes just wouldn't use it. Who said otherwise?
If Google is comparable to napster, than I'm going to take a leap forward and say that the whole Internet is too. You are correct on that count.
Those sites that stole the copyrighted material, they did so over the internet, and they are accessed by the internet, and without the internet, they wouldn't be available. Again, you are correct. But think about Napster: They merely provided links to files published (most of the time illegally) by other people. How is that different than Google's case? The only difference is that Napsters clearly aimed at illegal content and Google does not. But google does also provides links to published material, the same as napster.
Let's sue the internet. So, I guess we go for Al Gore right? I'll take that as an attempt to be humorous. Or you misdjuged me and are assuming that I want google to be sued. Where did you read that?
Going after Google, which is merely showing thumbnails of publicly available (whether legitimately or otherwise) is missing the point entirely As said in another thread, Napster was just showing mp3s publicly available (whether legitimately or otherwise). They took it down anyways.
Of course, the problem has different configuration here, in that Google is not used primarily to circumvent copyright. But still, in the hard facts, Google is like Napster was.
So when slashdot post old news, everyone screams that these aren't news. And when slashdot post 'advanced news' (that will be real news in the future), now people scream these aren't effective yet?
But, if Windows were as easy as Microsoft claims, there wouldn't have been anything to troubleshoot.
What you are describing is 'magic', not 'easy'. Windows - as any other OS - cannot obviously know how to interact perfectly with every possible printer in existence. Moreover, nothing proves the problems you experienced weren't caused by a third party application.
In fact, your description was so vague that it is difficult to get anything out of it. Maybe the printer wasn't properly plugged, maybe the cable was faulty, maybe it was defective, maybe the default Win driver was incompatible,.... pointless to put that on or off Microsoft's back at that stage of the discussion.
Slashdot Mirror
the muslims in europe are slowly conquering by outbreeding the local population.
While completely offtopic, it is entirely true !
You do realize that power can be stored right?
I believe you are wrong, at least from a practical standpoint. There are no reliable and practical way to store electricity to power the east coast during two days. I hope there will be someday, but as of today, there is none.
Well, after a hurricane I wouldn't bet on the stuff you just screwed on your rooftop. That said, it all sounds nice except from the fact that cloudy winter days will require another source of energy. And at night. And on cloudy summer days to a lesser extent. So while it could reduce the need for a central plant, it can in no way replace it. You will still need approximately the same central power generation structures we have today, because there will be time where all your shiny stuff won't generate a whole lot of power. The only difference is that they could be turned down from time to time. Except that they can't be turned on and off with that kind of flexibility.
What makes you think it will ever go out? Here's a hint: It will not. As it become scarcer and scarcer it will become more and more expensive to drill and so at the pump too. Already at current rates everyone if looking for alternatives. The higher the price, the more affordable the alternatives (because relatively they will go down, and bacause of zillions of $$ of R&D)
I believe Hydro is much much worse than that. Since 1970 there are more than 1M people that died out of a failed dam (volcanoes, earthquakes, defects, etc.). Relatively safe in the US though. (My source is in French.)
You left out :
Which cannot be our only source energy.
Better insulated homes
Which doesn't solve all of our problems
Solar thermal
Which cannot be our only source of energy.
Hydro (most capacity probably already in use)
Which is more deadly than Nuclear in addition of being kind of maxed out as you mentionned.
Solar PV
Which cannot be our only source of energy.
Tidal power (futuristic)
Which we have no clue if it will work in a reasonable way, so we cannot rely on it today even in future planning. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.
Energy storage by cooling cold-storage warehouses extra during off-peak hours (EU plan)
Well, a bit experimental to base our future on it just right now.
I'd say that wind turbines are much quicker to build (2-3 years?) than nuclear plants, so why on earth would you need
for anyway.
Because how are you going to explain to the people that when there's no wind, there's no power? Or when it's cloudy?
Well, I don't know. My stereo system came with a big sticker stating you should not place the subwoofer next to a computer. Sure it couldn't destroy the HDD data in a few seconds, but over time - say a year - of this treatment, I think the huge magnet in there could have had some harmfull effect.
So you're of the old school that believe that if their users can't use their product it must be because they are too stupid. And yet, it's their target.
You miss the point entirely. People (most) don't RTFA, and that is a fact that slashdot lives with every single day. Now it's easy claiming "The world will end Soon" even though the article linked might say otherwise. It's simply somewhere in the muddy ground between outright lies and good advertising.
I just wish slashdot was just news for nerds, not in that muddy ground.
I'm pretty confident that if I bother to hold on to the cdroms in my draw, provided they're kept in their cases/good condition they'll be just as playable (on the same hardware) in 100 years
You're up for a big surprise in a 100 years... Oh wait...
Well, as much as I hate it, I'll have to say that the problem you're talking about has nothing to do with real time. Real time is being able to give a response to a signal in a given time frame. What you are describing is just having a very high throughput btw your input and your output of your soundcard.
BTW, I forgot, but for those who think I am kidding, I am not! The link above relate to a recent post from a slashdot editor, clearly stating he trusts the submitter on knowing what he's talking about.
o ld=1&commentsort=0&tid=185&mode=thread&cid=1343322 4
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=160477&thresh
You would think the editor did indeed RTFA... Alas, they are humans like most of us and RTFAing is just too much of a burden.
Oh, wait...
No, no, you lissed the point! There is no 'getting laid' just as there is no spoon! It is just an illusion. I have still to see some hard facts proving to me that this concept hasn't been artificially introduced to better control us by our great computer evermind.
;)
In the meantime, I'll stop trying as it clearly doesn't work and is mostly a vast waste of my time.
Oh, sorry. I never said it is impossible. But it is clearly said that they purposefully reject stories without giving a hint as to why. As long as this is their rule, don't expect anything in your mailbox...
You have obviously never tried to submit a story. Stories are either accepted or rejected, with no comments at all.
Google is NOTHING like Napster was.
It is all a matter of point of view. Napster was little more than a search engine on music. Granted, it provided a software for publishing said music as well.
With Google, non-infringing uses aren't merely a token or a some statistical anamoly. Google takes all comers. That will inevitably mean that Google finds some illegal activity.
This is correct, and I never said otherwise. Note that Napster took all comers as well. It's just that most of the people using it exclusively had illegal content to share...
Google doesn't enable that illegal activity any more than a newspaper or phone book.
Of course it does. Google does index its stuff automatically without human inference (or so it is said to...). This is a huge difference. It also provides a direct link to the infringer with a preview of the infringed material! How can you compare this to a phone book?
It is up the police or other interested parties to bust/sue the actual offending parties.
I do not say it is not their job, I say they didn't do it for Napster, so who knows if they might do it with Google?
This is like a DA prosecuting AT&T for putting out a phone book that contains entries for companies that engage in illegal conduct.
But AT&T doesn't show thumbnails of the illegal content, hance you don't know the company is doing anything illegal. Napster did and Google do show sneak previews (or names) of stuff that can be determined to be illegal already at that stage.
You don't sue/prosecute the printer of the phone book. You deal with the actual perpetrator.
Again, wrong comparison.
Googe is *not* like napster was.
Learn how to read. I did not say that. I merely pointed out that Google is in a position somewhat comparable to the one napster was in, from a somewhat twisted point of view.
Google is a tool people use to find sites
Wrong. I do use it also to find pictures.
without search engines the internet would be pretty pointless, and most average joes just wouldn't use it.
Who said otherwise?
If Google is comparable to napster, than I'm going to take a leap forward and say that the whole Internet is too.
You are correct on that count.
Those sites that stole the copyrighted material, they did so over the internet, and they are accessed by the internet, and without the internet, they wouldn't be available.
Again, you are correct. But think about Napster: They merely provided links to files published (most of the time illegally) by other people. How is that different than Google's case? The only difference is that Napsters clearly aimed at illegal content and Google does not. But google does also provides links to published material, the same as napster.
Let's sue the internet. So, I guess we go for Al Gore right?
I'll take that as an attempt to be humorous. Or you misdjuged me and are assuming that I want google to be sued. Where did you read that?
Going after Google, which is merely showing thumbnails of publicly available (whether legitimately or otherwise) is missing the point entirely
As said in another thread, Napster was just showing mp3s publicly available (whether legitimately or otherwise). They took it down anyways.
Of course, the problem has different configuration here, in that Google is not used primarily to circumvent copyright. But still, in the hard facts, Google is like Napster was.
But for the fact that Napster was used almost exclusively to download illegal content. This can hardly be asserted for Google...
So when slashdot post old news, everyone screams that these aren't news. And when slashdot post 'advanced news' (that will be real news in the future), now people scream these aren't effective yet?
Jeez...
Previously, I could invite my friends from France or Swaziland and they could sign up no problem
Don't worry, you still can. Second hint: Don't blindly believe what you read on slashdot. GMail is still in Beta.
You forgot one of the gem the grammar nazis like to push on:
"What is you're experience"
Shall I say it? ok, here it goes:
your: possesive form, as in 'his computer', 'your car'.
you're: contraction of 'you are'.
I guess the first one should've been used in the story. Too bad they fixed the title but not the rest...
PS: I'm not even a native speaker!
But, if Windows were as easy as Microsoft claims, there wouldn't have been anything to troubleshoot.
.... pointless to put that on or off Microsoft's back at that stage of the discussion.
What you are describing is 'magic', not 'easy'. Windows - as any other OS - cannot obviously know how to interact perfectly with every possible printer in existence. Moreover, nothing proves the problems you experienced weren't caused by a third party application.
In fact, your description was so vague that it is difficult to get anything out of it. Maybe the printer wasn't properly plugged, maybe the cable was faulty, maybe it was defective, maybe the default Win driver was incompatible,
Oh, what happened to the JavaScript debugger? Lost...
And don't talk to me about the Mozilla Suite, as it's not being maintained/developped anymore...
The GP is talking about 8MB, not 8GB...