Oil won't last, cheap enough to use for power generation, for 50 years.
Coal is too damed poluting
Nuclear is not that easy to set up and then switch off again, that is... the nuclear waste will always be there and after switching off the reactor it will stay hot for years.
If I had to use one of the current technologies that provides most of our power (by no means all, Aussieland has quite a bit of wind power and solar these days) I would use natural gas, there's more of it than there is oil and it burns cleaner than coal.
Oh and by the way, I think if we can't find renewable power in 50 years we are screwed. Saying "I don't think that will be the case" won't help.
2 months ago someone kicked over my PS2, knocking it from vertical to horizontal with force. It knocked it around enough that the console never worked quite right again. However, when I replaced the console the disk was still perfect. Now, my case might have been a freak occurance but tell me this: why can they make CD walkmen that can handle being used by joggers without scratching the disk but Micro$oft with all their funds can't make a console that can be moved from vertical to horizontal without scratching the disk?
I remember from my university biology classes why giant insects are impossible. Insects breathe through breathing pores, the air enters their body through the entire surface of their carapace. Apparently if they get over a certain size the core of their bodies would die of oxygen starvation in the time It takes the air to get into their sustem.
Now think about big mammals. Imagine the size of the heart that would be needed to pump blood against gravity into King Kong's brain. Imagine the muscles that would be needed to force enough air into the lungs. Gravity would collapse lungs over a certain size.
Now, I imagine giant reptiles would find it easier than giant mammals. Their metabolism requires less oxygen and thus the requirement to breate might be tolerable. Though I would hazard that the size of the biggest dinosaurs that did exist was probably the size of the biggest that could exist.
Additionally, it makes sense to me that of all animals an ape would be least likely to survive at that kind of size. Apes have the largest brains in land mammals (besides ours) and the glucose requirements for a brain like that would be phenomenal. So, King Kong could never actually exist.
But I will ignore that and go watch the movie anyway. After all Go-Jira is one of my favorite movies of all time.
Peter Jackson is certainly capable of originality, ever seen Bad Taste for example? (sick... yes, original... definately) I think if Jackson has been unoriginal then it's a malaise of the entire film industry. Don't forget that in 1999 (or was it 2000) they made Godzilla, an American remake of an American remix of a Japanese movie. The Matrix, a movie praised by many for originality was made by directors/writers who were perfectly aware that there was nothing original about the "unique" style of the movie (you can even buy a box set of the Manga movies that "influenced" the style of the Matrix).
It seems these days that all Hollywood makes is remakes or rehashings of old ideas. Part of the reason for this could be that decisions to finance or distribute films are made with calculators. Let's face it, it's easy to predict that a remake of a loved film or a loved idea is likely to be successful.
I don't particularly dislike windows. I think windows is a security-less piece of crap but I can live with that most the time. You are welcome to your opinion but if you want to attack me it would help if you did something more than stating without qualification or even your reasons that I am "spewing lies". Your opinion lacks somewhat in clarity and substance.
I wouldn't call any of those things sustainable advantages. What is to stop competitors from taking their market away? Money? that will stop when the sales stop. You can't use money to maintain a competative advantage without some other advantage to leverage.
I don't actually care what the "experts" say. I don't think m$ is actually "scared". I do, however, believe that companies need sustainable competative advantage to compete. Tell me, what is micro$oft's advantage?
Anyone could predict that microsoft is currently vulnerable. They are losing their sustainable competative advantage and losing their market domination cannot be too far off.
It's not like it's somehow better for the environment to throw compost in the trash than it is to pitch banana peels - they will decompose in the landfill just as nicely as they decomposed in your kitchen, and without you having to harm the environment by purchasing a large lump of plastic and burning some electricity.
The real reason to compost is not getting fertiliser for your garden, it's preventing waste. Food scraps take up a large volume of the space in a "landfill" and most cities in the world are having to move their "landfill" further out. Food scraps are also a source of the nutrients of life, a resource that exists in large quantities but is still finite. It is a waste of these nurtients to dump them in a "landfill" that is so full of inorganic waste and toxic substances that it is unlikely that life will ever return there without help.
Composting is like most other recycling. It prevents waste from entering landfill unnecesarily and keeps a finite resource in circulation. The nitrogen and trace minerals in the food would be more useful being used to grow more food.
I personally would like to see cities building huge composting depots where you can dump your organic waste and they can sell/give the nutrients released (compost) to farmers who can turn those resources into a useful product (food) using an abundant natural energy source (the sun).
no wonder you're not good at math - you're fucking stupid!
If one is referring to the person a lower case v is appropriate. However, when referring to the architecture, as I was, a capital V is standard. Either way ending with 2 'n's is correct.
If you wish to insult me please don't resort to petty insults and hiding behind anonymity. Oh and please get your facts straight as well.
Well, I have learned my lesson. I made a JOKE at the expense of Apple and I get modded down to an incredible degree (as "flamebait" or "troll") yet badly researched mac bigotry with lines like "if it wasn't for companies like Apple, there would be NO innovation in the computing world." gets modded up. It seems one can say anything as long as it's pro-Mac. The Mac bigots have spoken.
It's Von NEUMANNactually (I am glad I payed attention in my Operating Systems and Assembly Language classes). Ok yes they are more than Kernals, so is Linux these days. Windows and OSX (and Linux) are Kernals that come packages with a lot of extra software. In that way Windows and MacOSX are no different than linux except in that you can update the kernal in Linux but not in Windows (no idea about OSX sorry).
All operating systems consist of a Kernal and it's support software. Depending on the design more or less of the core of the system is directly controlled by the Kernal. The Kernal of windows is just not transparent to the user.
The only reason there's PC cases in colors other than beige is because Apple created the iMac. The only reason there's a Windows "XP" is because there was a Mac OS "X".
Personally, I attribute the change in the appearance of PCs to two things, the case modding community (a lot of new PC cases look a lot like case mods to me) and the computer music people (the first non beige PC was stage black and came out before the IMac). XP, to my understanding, occured because they were porting the home version of windows to the NT shell rather than leaving it as a pretty front end tacked onto MSDos. I am not saying that Apple are not innovative, I am saying that they are not gods who drive the entire innovation in the industry.
A mac is a device using a Von Neumann architecture and a RISC chip. A PC is a similar device using a slightly different architecture and an X86 series chip. Windows and Mac OSX are kernals just like linux. Don't go splitting hairs with me.
well, I'm not a troll, and as far as I know Apple did steal from xerox. The only debate I have ever seen on the issue is on exactly how much of the Apple Mac OS was invented by Xerox PARC. Not that I care. Hell they are all Von Neumann machines anyway. A computer is a computer is a computer.
I'm no Mac bigot. In fact I don't care what OS people use but I must say that Macs do have benefits over PCs, ease of use and lack of spyware for a start. However, PCs have benefits over macs as well. And SHOCK HORROR macs and pcs have advantages over linux while linux has advantages over both.
My favorite computer is my PS2 and my second favorite is my Cheap-n-crappy DVD player.
Hashing data stores. When you build a hash table to sort and store large data sets it is usually best to use a large prime number in the hash function.
Slashdot Mirror
Oil won't last, cheap enough to use for power generation, for 50 years.
Coal is too damed poluting
Nuclear is not that easy to set up and then switch off again, that is... the nuclear waste will always be there and after switching off the reactor it will stay hot for years.
If I had to use one of the current technologies that provides most of our power (by no means all, Aussieland has quite a bit of wind power and solar these days) I would use natural gas, there's more of it than there is oil and it burns cleaner than coal.
Oh and by the way, I think if we can't find renewable power in 50 years we are screwed. Saying "I don't think that will be the case" won't help.
2 months ago someone kicked over my PS2, knocking it from vertical to horizontal with force. It knocked it around enough that the console never worked quite right again. However, when I replaced the console the disk was still perfect. Now, my case might have been a freak occurance but tell me this: why can they make CD walkmen that can handle being used by joggers without scratching the disk but Micro$oft with all their funds can't make a console that can be moved from vertical to horizontal without scratching the disk?
I remember from my university biology classes why giant insects are impossible. Insects breathe through breathing pores, the air enters their body through the entire surface of their carapace. Apparently if they get over a certain size the core of their bodies would die of oxygen starvation in the time It takes the air to get into their sustem.
Now think about big mammals. Imagine the size of the heart that would be needed to pump blood against gravity into King Kong's brain. Imagine the muscles that would be needed to force enough air into the lungs. Gravity would collapse lungs over a certain size.
Now, I imagine giant reptiles would find it easier than giant mammals. Their metabolism requires less oxygen and thus the requirement to breate might be tolerable. Though I would hazard that the size of the biggest dinosaurs that did exist was probably the size of the biggest that could exist.
Additionally, it makes sense to me that of all animals an ape would be least likely to survive at that kind of size. Apes have the largest brains in land mammals (besides ours) and the glucose requirements for a brain like that would be phenomenal. So, King Kong could never actually exist.
But I will ignore that and go watch the movie anyway. After all Go-Jira is one of my favorite movies of all time.
Peter Jackson is certainly capable of originality, ever seen Bad Taste for example? (sick... yes, original... definately) I think if Jackson has been unoriginal then it's a malaise of the entire film industry. Don't forget that in 1999 (or was it 2000) they made Godzilla, an American remake of an American remix of a Japanese movie. The Matrix, a movie praised by many for originality was made by directors/writers who were perfectly aware that there was nothing original about the "unique" style of the movie (you can even buy a box set of the Manga movies that "influenced" the style of the Matrix).
It seems these days that all Hollywood makes is remakes or rehashings of old ideas. Part of the reason for this could be that decisions to finance or distribute films are made with calculators. Let's face it, it's easy to predict that a remake of a loved film or a loved idea is likely to be successful.
someone as knowledgeable and as experiences as "Claire-plus-plus"
OMG, how do you know so much about me? Are you stalking me or something?
I don't particularly dislike windows. I think windows is a security-less piece of crap but I can live with that most the time. You are welcome to your opinion but if you want to attack me it would help if you did something more than stating without qualification or even your reasons that I am "spewing lies". Your opinion lacks somewhat in clarity and substance.
I wouldn't call any of those things sustainable advantages. What is to stop competitors from taking their market away? Money? that will stop when the sales stop. You can't use money to maintain a competative advantage without some other advantage to leverage.
I don't actually care what the "experts" say. I don't think m$ is actually "scared". I do, however, believe that companies need sustainable competative advantage to compete. Tell me, what is micro$oft's advantage?
Anyone could predict that microsoft is currently vulnerable. They are losing their sustainable competative advantage and losing their market domination cannot be too far off.
It's not like it's somehow better for the environment to throw compost in the trash than it is to pitch banana peels - they will decompose in the landfill just as nicely as they decomposed in your kitchen, and without you having to harm the environment by purchasing a large lump of plastic and burning some electricity.
The real reason to compost is not getting fertiliser for your garden, it's preventing waste. Food scraps take up a large volume of the space in a "landfill" and most cities in the world are having to move their "landfill" further out. Food scraps are also a source of the nutrients of life, a resource that exists in large quantities but is still finite. It is a waste of these nurtients to dump them in a "landfill" that is so full of inorganic waste and toxic substances that it is unlikely that life will ever return there without help.
Composting is like most other recycling. It prevents waste from entering landfill unnecesarily and keeps a finite resource in circulation. The nitrogen and trace minerals in the food would be more useful being used to grow more food.
I personally would like to see cities building huge composting depots where you can dump your organic waste and they can sell/give the nutrients released (compost) to farmers who can turn those resources into a useful product (food) using an abundant natural energy source (the sun).
What is society coming to when people are too lazy to take their scraps outside to compost them?
lowercase v shitstain.
no wonder you're not good at math - you're fucking stupid!
If one is referring to the person a lower case v is appropriate. However, when referring to the architecture, as I was, a capital V is standard. Either way ending with 2 'n's is correct.
If you wish to insult me please don't resort to petty insults and hiding behind anonymity. Oh and please get your facts straight as well.
Well, I have learned my lesson. I made a JOKE at the expense of Apple and I get modded down to an incredible degree (as "flamebait" or "troll") yet badly researched mac bigotry with lines like "if it wasn't for companies like Apple, there would be NO innovation in the computing world." gets modded up. It seems one can say anything as long as it's pro-Mac. The Mac bigots have spoken.
It's Von NEUMANNactually (I am glad I payed attention in my Operating Systems and Assembly Language classes). Ok yes they are more than Kernals, so is Linux these days. Windows and OSX (and Linux) are Kernals that come packages with a lot of extra software. In that way Windows and MacOSX are no different than linux except in that you can update the kernal in Linux but not in Windows (no idea about OSX sorry).
All operating systems consist of a Kernal and it's support software. Depending on the design more or less of the core of the system is directly controlled by the Kernal. The Kernal of windows is just not transparent to the user.
The only reason there's PC cases in colors other than beige is because Apple created the iMac. The only reason there's a Windows "XP" is because there was a Mac OS "X".
Personally, I attribute the change in the appearance of PCs to two things, the case modding community (a lot of new PC cases look a lot like case mods to me) and the computer music people (the first non beige PC was stage black and came out before the IMac). XP, to my understanding, occured because they were porting the home version of windows to the NT shell rather than leaving it as a pretty front end tacked onto MSDos. I am not saying that Apple are not innovative, I am saying that they are not gods who drive the entire innovation in the industry.
A mac is a device using a Von Neumann architecture and a RISC chip. A PC is a similar device using a slightly different architecture and an X86 series chip. Windows and Mac OSX are kernals just like linux. Don't go splitting hairs with me.
well, I'm not a troll, and as far as I know Apple did steal from xerox. The only debate I have ever seen on the issue is on exactly how much of the Apple Mac OS was invented by Xerox PARC. Not that I care. Hell they are all Von Neumann machines anyway. A computer is a computer is a computer.
I'm no Mac bigot. In fact I don't care what OS people use but I must say that Macs do have benefits over PCs, ease of use and lack of spyware for a start. However, PCs have benefits over macs as well. And SHOCK HORROR macs and pcs have advantages over linux while linux has advantages over both.
My favorite computer is my PS2 and my second favorite is my Cheap-n-crappy DVD player.
At least this innovation wasn't stolen from Xerox first.
Google is giving me server errors when I try to search. Co-incidence or did /. strike again? Is this a job for Mulder and Scully?
see, nwo I can't even tpye. I'm blnid I'm blund
Just the thing to make my Computer Sciecne induced eye problema worse!
I'm not a misunderstood savant. I am a garden variety genius like most people.
Hashing data stores. When you build a hash table to sort and store large data sets it is usually best to use a large prime number in the hash function.
The OP is talking about an Application Service Provider, so your answer is off-topic.
Nope, I don't think they are. You will also find that most other people who replied are thinking the same thing I am.
Is it possible YOU are wrong? It is my job to assume *I* am wrong so that I can get it right eventually.