There were going to be four processor families supported by Windows NT and 2000. Guess that didn't happen, although the ports were completed.
Apple is known for this behavior. It's part of their business model, viz the Palm Pre, and so on. Apple gets control; you have to put up with that or go to a different platform.
Good. Plant more stuff. That same photosynthesis will breathe, although at night, it's C02. The net sum is that it's a good idea. Eliminating the sources as a concept is a still-better idea.
Worse, there are five major design schools and perhaps two of them have international blessings for safety over a 50 year life cycle.
Your sense of incompetence of the staff notwithstanding, Chernobyl lay waste to a huge amount of land.... and has caused enormous human toll. We still learn from it. And I'm hoping there's a design that can make fission become successful. Fusion even better.
Look to Chernobyl. Look to Japan (which uses the same designs as ones built in the US from Babcock & Wilcox) if you want to find the horror stories. Look at the design failures in Washington State, Three Mile Island, and Southern Indiana.
We would agree that nuclear options are likely the best long term solution. They'd be lovely if we could find the combinations that allow safe spent nuclear fuel and contaminant disposal. No argument there.
And you damn me by being able to compare and contrast. This is your prejudice, not mine. There are more options on the table. You believe that because I claim to be an environmentalist that somehow I can't evaluate. I have. Solar's wonderful but currently expensive. Wind power is useful be requires some work. Hydro is great if you don't kill estuaries and fish (and many kill neither).
Your seeming ease at blind prejudice proves nothing, except that you aren't willing to consider consequences.
Your statements aren't true. We're neither hippies or pot smokers, or what you believe us to be. We have a radical fringe, just like the Dems and the Repubs. More of us are interested in coal being a problem than nuclear plants. The problem with nuclear plants are that they don't behave well, and leave nasty poo that doesn't become safe for about 300,000 years. Look it up.
That said, you can scrub anything. It depends on how much it costs as to whether it's practical. Coal burning plants are difficult to scrub. Alternatives will, work, but it's the costs that are difficult to surmount.
And you think that catalytic converters all are in fine condition, and none of the trucks and trains and airliners in this country exhaust rosewater?
For a moment, let's just say that all of that CO2 and water are healthy emissions. We'll ignore using coal to generate electricity. The long term effects are here.
Would nuclear generation of power be useful? Yes, save we haven't figured out how to deal with the waste products, contamination, and safety issues. I invite a cogent redesign of nuclear power. I'd love it. I'd enjoy better hydro generation. Better and more efficient batteries.
The soot issue isn't solved. Just because you can't see the particulate matter doesn't mean it's not there, and that's only in the case of passenger autos fueled in the North American and Brazilian market by gasoline and ethanol (a better but weaker choice). Diesel autos fuel the EU and Asia, as well as much of Africa. Yes, they're improving, but on the whole, not by very much.
You say "environmental extremeists" as though it's one word.
Environmentalism has a long grey scale that you might be unfamiliar with. And like both current political leanings, there are a lot of other vectors to understand, too.
FWIW, I firmly believe that there's far more oil, pumpable at low cost, than we even know about. The problem isn't exporting oil dollars. The problem isn't exploiting domestic sources. The problem is that burning it blows carbon-oxygen atoms out tailpipes, where they pollute, and ultimately cause atmospheric damage. You can't tell me all of that soot is a good thing.
Let's see what the hit count looks like when answers no longer are found from his pubs, in popular search engine results. Will it spawn anger, or will the noise be just a little bit noisy? Perhaps there'll be someone to fill the 'void' left by the Murdoch publications absence.
Personally, I think Murdoch flatters himself to think that his content is that good. People will vote with clicks. Aim that barrel between metatarsals #2 and 3, and click that trigger.
Gosh, we build, then it's at capacity. That's not what we had with landlines!
Remember: this isn't the AT&T of old, with wizened scholars. This is Southwest Bell that sucked up the other Baby Bells, then chose GSM as their infrastructure and got in over their heads. They're still clueless as to what success they've had as a result of Apple's business models. Apple, OTOH, could have 5x the customers if they simply shipped a (w)CDMA/GSM world phone.
I've seen a lot of extra stuff (burritos in servers, coke cans in speaker cabinets), but you'd think that all of the euros that have been slammed into the LHC would at least have had a QA team that knows how to keep birds and flotsam that could kick the thing into an expensive meltdown inhibition process.
Yeegawds-- there are some engineers that need a spanking over there.
The AT&T uses the *world* as its domain-- where UMTS, EDGE, and GPRS are available to portend that it has the most coverage.
Limit the scope to the 50 US States, and Verizon is right.
But they had to save face..... and perhaps customers that are giving Verizon and (damnation by faint praise) Sprint share-- despite the iPhone phenomenon. AT&T is crippling Apple's growth, and Apple and AT&T know it.
CDMA may or may not suck (this is the transport with 1xRTT and ED.VO and ED.VOa) but capacity is king in saturated airspace and CDMA can do it; GSM is having more problems- and AT&T's GSM deployment is clearly #4 out of five in the US cell service list.
Would I get an iPhone if it could use EV? Maybe. I don't like buying into Apple's Jailed Ecosystems.
The Organlegger *has* been writing. But the collaborations that produced 'Mote' and "Footfall' and others haven't been any good since Pournelle ventured into his medical problems-- now happily fixed. But like other hard sci fi authors, they're in semi-retirement and collab-with-somebody-else mode. This produces only books of marginal quality, I find.
There's Andy Grove's aphorism about the challenge being two eyes and 24 hours.
Yet Stephenson's tome is 1000 pages and I'll lay odds that the readers are also Internet users like me. I have to spend about six hours a day on the net, both professionally and personally in terms of interest.
The Star Wars genre seems to have shifted the money spent on hard science fiction, IMHO. Books became part of an overall marketing package, rather than being written for entertainment. Spiderman, X-Men, the Matrix, all of these seem to provide entertainment value that didn't require slogging thru a book-- unless you wanted to consume books as a co-marketed device of the publisher's main content offering, which was a movie.
After all, why wait for three years books sales when in three months, you get tens, even hundreds of millions of dollars return on your creative content investment?
Mod parent up, not troll. Holder, in a position of defending the people, instead injures them by violating his oath to uphold the constitution. Holder needs to thrown from this office, disbarred, and exiled to the UK-- where there right to peaceably assemble under cameras is inviolate.
Plot development is one thing; dozens of pages of building and architectural descriptions are another. Badly woven histories are still another. It's poorly contrived.
I have an attention span. Being battered by bad prose shortens it. Slogging through 250 pages of pseudo-intellectual tripe with 750 more in the offing is torturous at best, and damnable at worst.
Slashdot Mirror
Today: Commodore 64.
Tomorrow: VAX/VMS
Tuesday: Plan 9
Thursday: MacOS
Oh, wait....
No, it was a typo.
They patented *sume*. Long 'e' by the way.
There were going to be four processor families supported by Windows NT and 2000. Guess that didn't happen, although the ports were completed.
Apple is known for this behavior. It's part of their business model, viz the Palm Pre, and so on. Apple gets control; you have to put up with that or go to a different platform.
Good. Plant more stuff. That same photosynthesis will breathe, although at night, it's C02. The net sum is that it's a good idea. Eliminating the sources as a concept is a still-better idea.
So is San Jose.
I guess they couldn't bribe ORD enough. Boingo still rules, if you want to call it that....
You see, whereas before you couldn't be tracked, Google (see google.com/dashboard) is an expert. The TSA needs experts.
That's true. But they still use them.
Worse, there are five major design schools and perhaps two of them have international blessings for safety over a 50 year life cycle.
Your sense of incompetence of the staff notwithstanding, Chernobyl lay waste to a huge amount of land.... and has caused enormous human toll. We still learn from it. And I'm hoping there's a design that can make fission become successful. Fusion even better.
You're being myopic.
Look to Chernobyl. Look to Japan (which uses the same designs as ones built in the US from Babcock & Wilcox) if you want to find the horror stories. Look at the design failures in Washington State, Three Mile Island, and Southern Indiana.
We would agree that nuclear options are likely the best long term solution. They'd be lovely if we could find the combinations that allow safe spent nuclear fuel and contaminant disposal. No argument there.
And you damn me by being able to compare and contrast. This is your prejudice, not mine. There are more options on the table. You believe that because I claim to be an environmentalist that somehow I can't evaluate. I have. Solar's wonderful but currently expensive. Wind power is useful be requires some work. Hydro is great if you don't kill estuaries and fish (and many kill neither).
Your seeming ease at blind prejudice proves nothing, except that you aren't willing to consider consequences.
Your statements aren't true. We're neither hippies or pot smokers, or what you believe us to be. We have a radical fringe, just like the Dems and the Repubs. More of us are interested in coal being a problem than nuclear plants. The problem with nuclear plants are that they don't behave well, and leave nasty poo that doesn't become safe for about 300,000 years. Look it up.
That said, you can scrub anything. It depends on how much it costs as to whether it's practical. Coal burning plants are difficult to scrub. Alternatives will, work, but it's the costs that are difficult to surmount.
You'll get that property, all right. Invest in Nevada now! I hear it's really inexpensive....
What soot? Are you blind, man?
And you think that catalytic converters all are in fine condition, and none of the trucks and trains and airliners in this country exhaust rosewater?
For a moment, let's just say that all of that CO2 and water are healthy emissions. We'll ignore using coal to generate electricity. The long term effects are here.
Would nuclear generation of power be useful? Yes, save we haven't figured out how to deal with the waste products, contamination, and safety issues. I invite a cogent redesign of nuclear power. I'd love it. I'd enjoy better hydro generation. Better and more efficient batteries.
The soot issue isn't solved. Just because you can't see the particulate matter doesn't mean it's not there, and that's only in the case of passenger autos fueled in the North American and Brazilian market by gasoline and ethanol (a better but weaker choice). Diesel autos fuel the EU and Asia, as well as much of Africa. Yes, they're improving, but on the whole, not by very much.
You say "environmental extremeists" as though it's one word.
Environmentalism has a long grey scale that you might be unfamiliar with. And like both current political leanings, there are a lot of other vectors to understand, too.
FWIW, I firmly believe that there's far more oil, pumpable at low cost, than we even know about. The problem isn't exporting oil dollars. The problem isn't exploiting domestic sources. The problem is that burning it blows carbon-oxygen atoms out tailpipes, where they pollute, and ultimately cause atmospheric damage. You can't tell me all of that soot is a good thing.
Let's see what the hit count looks like when answers no longer are found from his pubs, in popular search engine results. Will it spawn anger, or will the noise be just a little bit noisy? Perhaps there'll be someone to fill the 'void' left by the Murdoch publications absence.
Personally, I think Murdoch flatters himself to think that his content is that good. People will vote with clicks. Aim that barrel between metatarsals #2 and 3, and click that trigger.
There's someone that has to vet the code. A few snippets could leak thru. I'd find it flattery by plaigarism.
Then I'd laugh at how a jr coder might do such a thing. After all, no one ever steals code, ever. That would be wrong.
Sorry-- you're technically correct. I should have left off the W.
It's a telco monopolist mentality.
Gosh, we build, then it's at capacity. That's not what we had with landlines!
Remember: this isn't the AT&T of old, with wizened scholars. This is Southwest Bell that sucked up the other Baby Bells, then chose GSM as their infrastructure and got in over their heads. They're still clueless as to what success they've had as a result of Apple's business models. Apple, OTOH, could have 5x the customers if they simply shipped a (w)CDMA/GSM world phone.
Yeah, this is what I'm wondering, too.
I've seen a lot of extra stuff (burritos in servers, coke cans in speaker cabinets), but you'd think that all of the euros that have been slammed into the LHC would at least have had a QA team that knows how to keep birds and flotsam that could kick the thing into an expensive meltdown inhibition process.
Yeegawds-- there are some engineers that need a spanking over there.
The AT&T uses the *world* as its domain-- where UMTS, EDGE, and GPRS are available to portend that it has the most coverage.
Limit the scope to the 50 US States, and Verizon is right.
But they had to save face..... and perhaps customers that are giving Verizon and (damnation by faint praise) Sprint share-- despite the iPhone phenomenon. AT&T is crippling Apple's growth, and Apple and AT&T know it.
CDMA may or may not suck (this is the transport with 1xRTT and ED.VO and ED.VOa) but capacity is king in saturated airspace and CDMA can do it; GSM is having more problems- and AT&T's GSM deployment is clearly #4 out of five in the US cell service list.
Would I get an iPhone if it could use EV? Maybe. I don't like buying into Apple's Jailed Ecosystems.
The Organlegger *has* been writing. But the collaborations that produced 'Mote' and "Footfall' and others haven't been any good since Pournelle ventured into his medical problems-- now happily fixed. But like other hard sci fi authors, they're in semi-retirement and collab-with-somebody-else mode. This produces only books of marginal quality, I find.
I'm honestly glad you enjoyed it.
For some, his journey is not a reward. For others, it probably is. IMHO, it's more like a bad Russian novel.... Dostoevsky comes to mind.
Thanks.
There's Andy Grove's aphorism about the challenge being two eyes and 24 hours.
Yet Stephenson's tome is 1000 pages and I'll lay odds that the readers are also Internet users like me. I have to spend about six hours a day on the net, both professionally and personally in terms of interest.
The Star Wars genre seems to have shifted the money spent on hard science fiction, IMHO. Books became part of an overall marketing package, rather than being written for entertainment. Spiderman, X-Men, the Matrix, all of these seem to provide entertainment value that didn't require slogging thru a book-- unless you wanted to consume books as a co-marketed device of the publisher's main content offering, which was a movie.
After all, why wait for three years books sales when in three months, you get tens, even hundreds of millions of dollars return on your creative content investment?
I love his stuff.
Mod parent up, not troll. Holder, in a position of defending the people, instead injures them by violating his oath to uphold the constitution. Holder needs to thrown from this office, disbarred, and exiled to the UK-- where there right to peaceably assemble under cameras is inviolate.
Sorry. 250 pages isn't an introduction.
Plot development is one thing; dozens of pages of building and architectural descriptions are another. Badly woven histories are still another. It's poorly contrived.
I have an attention span. Being battered by bad prose shortens it. Slogging through 250 pages of pseudo-intellectual tripe with 750 more in the offing is torturous at best, and damnable at worst.
Many others were omitted. Clark's Childhood's End is one of my favorites. There are dozens and dozens of others.