They will probably always remain inherently beyond the reach of scientific evidence.
Yes. that's because they are 100% made-up. Just as Santa Claus is inherently beyond the reach of scientific evidence.
You will never find evidence, that is, anything manifesting as objective reality, for a wholly illusory concept. You can, of course, drown yourself in delusion. We appear to be well designed for exactly that exercise, we even practice it most nights during REM sleep. And it's perfectly acceptable, socially speaking. Imagine away.
Sounds nice, but without explicit control over what American companies are allowed to do at/across the border, (and foreign companies the other way) it's not going to happen. Right now, the door is wide open in every way: Hire offshore and have the hires work here *or* there, keep your money offshore and avoid taxes with blissful ease, manufacture elsewhere, all the while you're paying off congress and whatever agencies are involved.
Sure, corporations are people. Sociopaths. Psychopaths. Those kinds of people. Evil slimeballs, primarily. Exceptions are very rare, and will remain so, as long as being competitive means one company has to take advantage of the same things the next one over does.
That's the way it works now. And unless you can forward larger envelopes to congress (directly, indirectly, or metaphorically) than big business can, or somehow make congress actually ethical and focused on the betterment of the country, this is only going to become more so. Money for election chests. Sweet land deals for cousin George. Fully paid fact finding junkets. Post-congress speaking deals. Guaranteed book advances, complete with ghostwriter, sales irrelevant. Well paid lobbyist positions, commentator positions, corporate vice presidential or other high paid positions... or money... or a sweet deal on a boat, or a house, or whatever, all for 2nd cousins of course. It's so corrupt and ingrained you can't possibly picture it until you've had an inside view (yes, I have.)
Today, you want a great job? Start your own business. Are you really great at programming? Write a great program. Are you really great at electronics? Create a great device. The internet of things is rising, your opportunity is knocking. Real AI needs done (oooo, hard.) Are you really great at mechanicals? Create a wonderful mechanical thing. These are the *only* doors that remain open to technical people in general. Easy? Hell no. But there it is. Otherwise, change career tracks while you still can. Finance. Lawyers (it's the dark side, all right, but it's also a license to print money, especially with the extremely deep collection of bad law we have now.) Nursing -- medicine looks good right now, but doctors... not so sure.
Otherwise, prepare to be lowballed, then fall (or be thrown) from the workforce segment you're qualified for as you age. Also, just as a PS, you'll note that above, the apologists consistently talk about who is learning what in school. The underlying message is clear: Once you're out of school and if you manage to improve yourself, you're not particularly hirable. They're not even looking at/for you.
That's just the way it is. Be proactive and possibly suffer, or just definitely suffer. Choose.
Nonsense. Emoticons are pop culture detritus, not formal grammatical entities. But by all means, you let me know when they pop up in Strunk and White's.
Irrelevant. You're still limited by supply rates and feed wire heating.
LOL. No, you most certainly are not. Supply for the vehicle is from local storage, charged slowly over time, ready for fast discharge when needed; inevitable because of the requirement to move the load to the times when the plants have available generating capacity. You can't just pull at peak times, think about the consequences. What you're missing is the dynamics of supply. As for feed wire heating, that's absurd. At these lengths, and these voltages, it's simply not a problem. Then there's the obvious: you can always make the plug bigger, or use more plugs if charge rate limiting was a problem, which of course it isn't anyway for a vehicle in the weight range of a car, pickup or SUV. Commercial trucking might present some minor design challenges, but not serious ones. They're more likely to be resolved with conventional gearboxes than untoward amounts of raw power anyway. Now, an oceangoing vessel power plant, that might be interesting. However, then we have long times in port, so perhaps not even then.
Irrelevant. What, you think cars have multi-megawatt inverters and motors?
I know that with multiple high energy motors, motor peak current demands can be very high, particularly in the case of high power motors that batteries aren't good for, and that semiconductors can be arranged for very high parallelism.
10 years-ish isn't good enough for you?
Oh heck no, not even close. We own three vehicles; all are older than ten years, and none show any signs of needing anything more serious than the windshield wipers and tires needing replacement from time to time. I have no intention of replacing them in the next ten years, either, unless EVs real;ly take off. Furthermore, if the ones I have now were electric and UC powered, I'd just move the UCs to the next vehicle. There are plenty of vehicles on the road that are far older than ten years; the need to replace a huge battery pack at ten years has a serious impact on TCO and resale value (yeah, it's nine years old, in a year you're going to need a $10k pack. I'll give you the car for $500, how's that?). I expect to be able to replace the batteries in my vehicles with UCs, in fact, well before electric cars become common. Heck, I could do it now in the pickup, if I wanted to take up some space in the bed. The electronics required are trivial. It's tempting, too... -40 is quite a challenge for batteries, we have to keep a heating pad going under them in order to keep them working decently. Montana's not a great environment for batteries at times. I'd have to rig a cover for it all, probably lose 6 inches of depth in the bed. Hmmm.:)
The life expectancy of supercapacitors is identical to aluminum electrolytic capacitors
As it happens, I'm a collector of old audio gear. When kept in service, electrolytics run for many decades (lots of mine are from the 1970's, so that's 45 years so far) and they hold up, too. It's only when they are unused for long periods of times that they don't. Recapping is pointless if the unit has been kept in service -- I've put this to the test many times. The idea that their lifespan in use is ten years is a complete myth. Furthermore, check the cycle rate: the charge/discharge rate for a UC in vehicular motive service is doing so (perhaps) once a day. They allow for millions of cycles before any performance change is encountered. So use in a vehicle, as long as they keep being used, is many times the ten year underestimate. I've also got a bank of fifty of the early Maxwell UCs here in my radio room, they're well over fifteen years old and they're still just fine, every one of them. Because I *use* them. So I'm not buying any claims that they're much different than electrolytics (although I would expect that,
Explain to me, then, why none of the local shops can fab aluminum beyond cutting it, and all of them can, and do, work in iron and steel? Last time I went hunting for aluminum fabrication capability here (last year) I came up completely dry.
Near-instant charging. Much higher discharge rates, so much higher instantaneous power availability, and that without developing significant heat, because their series resistance is negligible, and that in turn means less energy spent as waste heat. Enormously more charge/discharge cycles than anything in battery tech - so many more, you could will ultracaps used in a vehicle context to your children, and they to theirs. No more replacement concerns. Much wider range of usable performance over temperature; much colder, much hotter. Much less need for recycling because of the comparatively much longer lifetime. They can't be overcharged at their rated voltage, they simply stop taking charge. Consequently, they can be infinitely trickle charged, so for instance, solar panels on the roof can help keep a vehicle topped up. They have completely predictable, and 100% stable, discharge curves, so a five year old ultracap performs just as well as a brand new one, plus the predictability and stability enable trivial measurement of consumption, hence permanently accurate gauges that tell you your remaining range, etc. Without having to take age or usage patterns into consideration. These are just the advantages the ultracap has over chemical batteries. Ultracaps also share every significant advantage batteries offer: power distribution system already in place (compare to building a hydrogen infrastructure); it's trivial to implement a bucket brigade style of charge storage so that the grid can be tapped when there is (presently) excess capacity; much more efficient use of power with electrical motors and centralized generation as compared to IC engines; ability to acquire and use solar power; agnostic as to where the power comes from, so as sources get greener, so do battery and UC uses of electrical power; no air pollution in operation; relief of pressure on petrochemical supplies and consequent relief of remaining dependence on foreign petrochemical supplies.
The show-stopper is insufficient energy density, or to look at it from the other direction, sufficient energy requires too much weight and space. The hope is that with so many attempts being made to solve that, it will happen sooner rather than later.
UC's have many characteristics that make them inherently superior to batteries. They have only that one failing. Fix that, and there would no reason at all to go with a battery.
For someone who only occasionally uses the vehicle, a roof full of solar panels would keep it fully charged and ready to go for the weekly trip to the grocery store. I no longer drive a great deal, and I've been thinking this might be just the thing for around-town use about 8-9 months out of the year here (can't see a sedan as a practical winter vehicle.) And it can charge while moving, and while you're in the store or other place doing what you need to do. Not too bad!
The only thing is that it has to be mostly parked. Otherwise, not enough power in as compared to power out, and then you're back to a tethered, cost-plus vehicle.
I got the impression that the cost savings were in manufacturing. Machining and otherwise dealing with steel is a quite different set of tasks and requirements as opposed to trying to make essentially the same components out of aluminum; admittedly, steel is heavier (hence the lesser range, perhaps) but it's a lot easier to fabricate steel. Every tiny shop I know of can do it, while handling aluminum is still somewhat of a speciality undertaking.
Ultracaps. So far, in the field, they're no threat WRT energy density. Pretty much everything else, though, they blow batteries away.
There are plenty of in-lab efforts ongoing right now that bring the energy densities up to par. It remains to be seen which one(s), if any, can make it to market in such a way as to displace the role of batterie; that's all about expense, presuming energy density is licked.
Bottom line, though, is that battery tech isn't likely to continue to hold its ground for much longer, barring some disruptive discovery in its own domain.
people who were bad, still are bad, and don't want you to find out easily
So the best solution is to brand everyone as untrustworthy? Please. If person X is still bad, that's a matter for law enforcement. Not for your back-fence gossip fest.
Some of this would be solved by simply not indexing local news stories and police blotters. As these are generally of interest mostly to locals (surprise!), little loss of significant information access would occur. I already know where to go for my local information. I don't really benefit from the ability to find your local news and police blotter without an actual interest in your locality (and in which case, hunting down your local websites is trivial.) The ability to see everything from everywhere by searching for the essential equivalent to "search term: John Doe" is only something really of benefit to the gossipmonger's mentality. I really don't think you could ever convince me that such gossip is of much positive use to society.
Google wouldn't even have to do anything; all it would take is a legislated robots.txt entry, and bingo, local news and blotter gossip is gone.
So for you, the only kind of suffering is "pain", eh? Are you always this simpleminded, or did you take a stupid pill especially for this conversation?
The point being made is that a distinct human is formed at the time of conception.
You think so? Ok, take it in your arms and rock it then, crooning nice things for it to hear. Wait, what? You can't? It can't hear! Or see! And there's no body! And no limbs! And no nothing else for that matter! And why? Because it's OBVIOUSLY not human. And it won't be for some time yet. How much? You already know my answer: when it develops an operating nervous system. That's debartable, certainly. But pretending that the first few days of undifferentiated cell division equate to humanity is ridiculous.
Where does an individual human begin or end?
Already addressed. Not my fault if you don't read.
other lines are more like fuzzy guidelines in comparison
Yes, exactly what I said. But I also said that at conception, it's not fuzzy: that is not a human, and a term, it's not fuzzy, that IS a human. All of the fuzziness lies in between those two points.
Is it alright to abort a currently single celled human because it didn't suffer?
Yes, absolutely. Women do it due to autonomic response all the time, doing it due to choice isn't in any way more troublesome, other than when superstition comes into play. Because the thing being disposed of is not a human being by any scientific rationale.
Would it be okay to painlessly kill an otherwise healthy sixteen year old in their sleep? Why would one be worse than the other?
Because the former is not human, and cannot suffer; while the 16 YO is, and can, nor is it ok that their years of work in developing personality and humanity go to waste; nor is it ok that the family's and society's investment in forming this human being do to waste, NOR is your presumption that suffering is not possible during sleep in any way valid -- of course, even if it were, the implied zero value of the developed person as compared to a clump of undifferentiated cells is a cognitive fail of brobdingnagian proportions.
Make sure you never fall asleep or get put under for surgery or go into a coma. Or better yet don't get instantly killed in any way since you would not suffer
The whole *point* of being put under for surgery is to decouple the brain -- which a mass of undifferentiated cells does not have -- from the nervous system; The whole *point* of sleep is to allow the brain -- which a mass of undifferentiated cells does not have -- to rest and adjust to new experiences; the whole *problem* with a coma is that the brain -- which a mass of undifferentiated cells does not have -- is unresponsive at a point where it is developed to the point where it *should* be.
Not one thing in your post addresses the objective reality at hand here: a clump of undifferentiated cells isn't a human being, doesn't have a brain, and treating it as if those things were not true is, at best, purest superstition and ignorance.
You want to care for it, give it time to develop, it'll be something else. You bet. But until, or unless, you do so, it won't be.
This is not opinion. Facts only. Objecting is futile.
I'm not sure it's the others that are using "hucksterism of philosophy".
Of your obvious severe cognitive problems, that one should go to the bottom of the list.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but this isn't sleep. This is more like watching Fox News.
Hmmm. A hint as to where to look for consciousness most similar to humans?
Yes. that's because they are 100% made-up. Just as Santa Claus is inherently beyond the reach of scientific evidence.
You will never find evidence, that is, anything manifesting as objective reality, for a wholly illusory concept. You can, of course, drown yourself in delusion. We appear to be well designed for exactly that exercise, we even practice it most nights during REM sleep. And it's perfectly acceptable, socially speaking. Imagine away.
grave. Good grief. :)
It's a grace situation. Revolting, in fact.
Sounds nice, but without explicit control over what American companies are allowed to do at/across the border, (and foreign companies the other way) it's not going to happen. Right now, the door is wide open in every way: Hire offshore and have the hires work here *or* there, keep your money offshore and avoid taxes with blissful ease, manufacture elsewhere, all the while you're paying off congress and whatever agencies are involved.
Sure, corporations are people. Sociopaths. Psychopaths. Those kinds of people. Evil slimeballs, primarily. Exceptions are very rare, and will remain so, as long as being competitive means one company has to take advantage of the same things the next one over does.
That's the way it works now. And unless you can forward larger envelopes to congress (directly, indirectly, or metaphorically) than big business can, or somehow make congress actually ethical and focused on the betterment of the country, this is only going to become more so. Money for election chests. Sweet land deals for cousin George. Fully paid fact finding junkets. Post-congress speaking deals. Guaranteed book advances, complete with ghostwriter, sales irrelevant. Well paid lobbyist positions, commentator positions, corporate vice presidential or other high paid positions... or money... or a sweet deal on a boat, or a house, or whatever, all for 2nd cousins of course. It's so corrupt and ingrained you can't possibly picture it until you've had an inside view (yes, I have.)
Today, you want a great job? Start your own business. Are you really great at programming? Write a great program. Are you really great at electronics? Create a great device. The internet of things is rising, your opportunity is knocking. Real AI needs done (oooo, hard.) Are you really great at mechanicals? Create a wonderful mechanical thing. These are the *only* doors that remain open to technical people in general. Easy? Hell no. But there it is. Otherwise, change career tracks while you still can. Finance. Lawyers (it's the dark side, all right, but it's also a license to print money, especially with the extremely deep collection of bad law we have now.) Nursing -- medicine looks good right now, but doctors... not so sure.
Otherwise, prepare to be lowballed, then fall (or be thrown) from the workforce segment you're qualified for as you age. Also, just as a PS, you'll note that above, the apologists consistently talk about who is learning what in school. The underlying message is clear: Once you're out of school and if you manage to improve yourself, you're not particularly hirable. They're not even looking at/for you.
That's just the way it is. Be proactive and possibly suffer, or just definitely suffer. Choose.
This. It was stupid.
Nonsense. Emoticons are pop culture detritus, not formal grammatical entities. But by all means, you let me know when they pop up in Strunk and White's.
LOL. No, you most certainly are not. Supply for the vehicle is from local storage, charged slowly over time, ready for fast discharge when needed; inevitable because of the requirement to move the load to the times when the plants have available generating capacity. You can't just pull at peak times, think about the consequences. What you're missing is the dynamics of supply. As for feed wire heating, that's absurd. At these lengths, and these voltages, it's simply not a problem. Then there's the obvious: you can always make the plug bigger, or use more plugs if charge rate limiting was a problem, which of course it isn't anyway for a vehicle in the weight range of a car, pickup or SUV. Commercial trucking might present some minor design challenges, but not serious ones. They're more likely to be resolved with conventional gearboxes than untoward amounts of raw power anyway. Now, an oceangoing vessel power plant, that might be interesting. However, then we have long times in port, so perhaps not even then.
I know that with multiple high energy motors, motor peak current demands can be very high, particularly in the case of high power motors that batteries aren't good for, and that semiconductors can be arranged for very high parallelism.
Oh heck no, not even close. We own three vehicles; all are older than ten years, and none show any signs of needing anything more serious than the windshield wipers and tires needing replacement from time to time. I have no intention of replacing them in the next ten years, either, unless EVs real;ly take off. Furthermore, if the ones I have now were electric and UC powered, I'd just move the UCs to the next vehicle. There are plenty of vehicles on the road that are far older than ten years; the need to replace a huge battery pack at ten years has a serious impact on TCO and resale value (yeah, it's nine years old, in a year you're going to need a $10k pack. I'll give you the car for $500, how's that?). I expect to be able to replace the batteries in my vehicles with UCs, in fact, well before electric cars become common. Heck, I could do it now in the pickup, if I wanted to take up some space in the bed. The electronics required are trivial. It's tempting, too... -40 is quite a challenge for batteries, we have to keep a heating pad going under them in order to keep them working decently. Montana's not a great environment for batteries at times. I'd have to rig a cover for it all, probably lose 6 inches of depth in the bed. Hmmm. :)
As it happens, I'm a collector of old audio gear. When kept in service, electrolytics run for many decades (lots of mine are from the 1970's, so that's 45 years so far) and they hold up, too. It's only when they are unused for long periods of times that they don't. Recapping is pointless if the unit has been kept in service -- I've put this to the test many times. The idea that their lifespan in use is ten years is a complete myth. Furthermore, check the cycle rate: the charge/discharge rate for a UC in vehicular motive service is doing so (perhaps) once a day. They allow for millions of cycles before any performance change is encountered. So use in a vehicle, as long as they keep being used, is many times the ten year underestimate. I've also got a bank of fifty of the early Maxwell UCs here in my radio room, they're well over fifteen years old and they're still just fine, every one of them. Because I *use* them. So I'm not buying any claims that they're much different than electrolytics (although I would expect that,
Explain to me, then, why none of the local shops can fab aluminum beyond cutting it, and all of them can, and do, work in iron and steel? Last time I went hunting for aluminum fabrication capability here (last year) I came up completely dry.
No? Here's the litany, then:
Near-instant charging. Much higher discharge rates, so much higher instantaneous power availability, and that without developing significant heat, because their series resistance is negligible, and that in turn means less energy spent as waste heat. Enormously more charge/discharge cycles than anything in battery tech - so many more, you could will ultracaps used in a vehicle context to your children, and they to theirs. No more replacement concerns. Much wider range of usable performance over temperature; much colder, much hotter. Much less need for recycling because of the comparatively much longer lifetime. They can't be overcharged at their rated voltage, they simply stop taking charge. Consequently, they can be infinitely trickle charged, so for instance, solar panels on the roof can help keep a vehicle topped up. They have completely predictable, and 100% stable, discharge curves, so a five year old ultracap performs just as well as a brand new one, plus the predictability and stability enable trivial measurement of consumption, hence permanently accurate gauges that tell you your remaining range, etc. Without having to take age or usage patterns into consideration. These are just the advantages the ultracap has over chemical batteries. Ultracaps also share every significant advantage batteries offer: power distribution system already in place (compare to building a hydrogen infrastructure); it's trivial to implement a bucket brigade style of charge storage so that the grid can be tapped when there is (presently) excess capacity; much more efficient use of power with electrical motors and centralized generation as compared to IC engines; ability to acquire and use solar power; agnostic as to where the power comes from, so as sources get greener, so do battery and UC uses of electrical power; no air pollution in operation; relief of pressure on petrochemical supplies and consequent relief of remaining dependence on foreign petrochemical supplies.
The show-stopper is insufficient energy density, or to look at it from the other direction, sufficient energy requires too much weight and space. The hope is that with so many attempts being made to solve that, it will happen sooner rather than later.
UC's have many characteristics that make them inherently superior to batteries. They have only that one failing. Fix that, and there would no reason at all to go with a battery.
Thanks. :)
For someone who only occasionally uses the vehicle, a roof full of solar panels would keep it fully charged and ready to go for the weekly trip to the grocery store. I no longer drive a great deal, and I've been thinking this might be just the thing for around-town use about 8-9 months out of the year here (can't see a sedan as a practical winter vehicle.) And it can charge while moving, and while you're in the store or other place doing what you need to do. Not too bad!
The only thing is that it has to be mostly parked. Otherwise, not enough power in as compared to power out, and then you're back to a tethered, cost-plus vehicle.
rimshot.
I got the impression that the cost savings were in manufacturing. Machining and otherwise dealing with steel is a quite different set of tasks and requirements as opposed to trying to make essentially the same components out of aluminum; admittedly, steel is heavier (hence the lesser range, perhaps) but it's a lot easier to fabricate steel. Every tiny shop I know of can do it, while handling aluminum is still somewhat of a speciality undertaking.
Ultracaps. So far, in the field, they're no threat WRT energy density. Pretty much everything else, though, they blow batteries away.
There are plenty of in-lab efforts ongoing right now that bring the energy densities up to par. It remains to be seen which one(s), if any, can make it to market in such a way as to displace the role of batterie; that's all about expense, presuming energy density is licked.
Bottom line, though, is that battery tech isn't likely to continue to hold its ground for much longer, barring some disruptive discovery in its own domain.
If only one could subsist off of irony. Slashdot alone could feed the world...
...but man, you should see how flat that train squashed my penny!
So the best solution is to brand everyone as untrustworthy? Please. If person X is still bad, that's a matter for law enforcement. Not for your back-fence gossip fest.
Some of this would be solved by simply not indexing local news stories and police blotters. As these are generally of interest mostly to locals (surprise!), little loss of significant information access would occur. I already know where to go for my local information. I don't really benefit from the ability to find your local news and police blotter without an actual interest in your locality (and in which case, hunting down your local websites is trivial.) The ability to see everything from everywhere by searching for the essential equivalent to "search term: John Doe" is only something really of benefit to the gossipmonger's mentality. I really don't think you could ever convince me that such gossip is of much positive use to society.
Google wouldn't even have to do anything; all it would take is a legislated robots.txt entry, and bingo, local news and blotter gossip is gone.
So for you, the only kind of suffering is "pain", eh? Are you always this simpleminded, or did you take a stupid pill especially for this conversation?
Can suffer. Not *will* suffer. Learn English. It's a great language.
You think so? Ok, take it in your arms and rock it then, crooning nice things for it to hear. Wait, what? You can't? It can't hear! Or see! And there's no body! And no limbs! And no nothing else for that matter! And why? Because it's OBVIOUSLY not human. And it won't be for some time yet. How much? You already know my answer: when it develops an operating nervous system. That's debartable, certainly. But pretending that the first few days of undifferentiated cell division equate to humanity is ridiculous.
Already addressed. Not my fault if you don't read.
Yes, exactly what I said. But I also said that at conception, it's not fuzzy: that is not a human, and a term, it's not fuzzy, that IS a human. All of the fuzziness lies in between those two points.
Yes, absolutely. Women do it due to autonomic response all the time, doing it due to choice isn't in any way more troublesome, other than when superstition comes into play. Because the thing being disposed of is not a human being by any scientific rationale.
Because the former is not human, and cannot suffer; while the 16 YO is, and can, nor is it ok that their years of work in developing personality and humanity go to waste; nor is it ok that the family's and society's investment in forming this human being do to waste, NOR is your presumption that suffering is not possible during sleep in any way valid -- of course, even if it were, the implied zero value of the developed person as compared to a clump of undifferentiated cells is a cognitive fail of brobdingnagian proportions.
The whole *point* of being put under for surgery is to decouple the brain -- which a mass of undifferentiated cells does not have -- from the nervous system; The whole *point* of sleep is to allow the brain -- which a mass of undifferentiated cells does not have -- to rest and adjust to new experiences; the whole *problem* with a coma is that the brain -- which a mass of undifferentiated cells does not have -- is unresponsive at a point where it is developed to the point where it *should* be.
Not one thing in your post addresses the objective reality at hand here: a clump of undifferentiated cells isn't a human being, doesn't have a brain, and treating it as if those things were not true is, at best, purest superstition and ignorance.
You want to care for it, give it time to develop, it'll be something else. You bet. But until, or unless, you do so, it won't be.
This is not opinion. Facts only. Objecting is futile.
Of your obvious severe cognitive problems, that one should go to the bottom of the list.
That's not suffering. That's degraded functionality. No feelings involved -- because no bring to have them.
Pitiful.