The mainstream press should also be more critical in situations like this. The public should know that a blowhard's comments don't compare to scientific data. If anyone still disagrees, there is more than enough data presented in the movie "An Inconvenient Truth".
1. That CEO can ask you to eat dirt for a million dollars -- he would never give you that much money, but he has more than that much influence over you. Does that feel like less for you yet?
Money is relative -- it depends on who has how much. It's a measure of power over other people. (So is a good education that allows you to make money).
Who picks your fruit? Who did manual labor to manufacture all your things in china? -- people with less money and education.
When rich people get a lot more money like this:
- they can use it to make more money easily (investments), which makes your money worth less (money is relative)
- the money is not going to you
- they get to do almost whatever they want (O.J simpson, lobby/pay Congress, etc.).
2. Who said we need perfect equality, but less inequality suggests working with the ceo, not just for him.
Besides, where's the progress you're referring to? The $53 million bonus is only progress for the CEO to do the CEO's bidding. By progress, do you mean the progress where he could make more people do more things for him?
3. Correlations don't prove cause-effect relations.
No, but correlations are pretty significant.
4. Good things? Another mansion for the CEO? Oh, people get to build his mansion, wow.
Inequality does matter.
Hard work can get you far, but many children in the US still live and die in poverty, which doesn't sound like they had much of an opportunity to work hard. More money to the rich is only helping the rich get richer.
"If all the cars and light trucks in the nation switched from oil to electrons, idle capacity in the existing electric power system could generate most of the electricity consumed by plug-in hybrid electric vehicles."
"off-peak electricity production and transmission capacity could fuel 84 percent of these 198 million vehicles if they were plug-in hybrid electrics."
"that's taking the full capacity of a 25kV feeder line for those 60 seconds....you don't have that kind of electric feed going into a house, so you're back to charging during peak power usage times. Oops."
Wrong, I wouldn't need to charge in 60 seconds at my house. If I want to charge in 60 seconds, a fuel station with more power would work fine. In any case, I'd only need that for long trips -- letting it charge overnight at home is more than fine with me.
"Plus they have a serious heat issue when charging batteries that fast."
I didn't say a 60 second solution was available yet, but there was a working 10 minute solution in 1998.
"I don't want my car to melt when I charge it." Nice image -- I don't want my car to blow up in to a big fireball when I put gas in it, either.
You would get paid to take nuclear waste because it's not wanted. Nuclear waste disposal is a cost and problem with some risks that require money for research and maintenance. That is just one of the three problems I mentioned (others are safety checks and exporting).
Solar power is still more expensive, but it has the least side effects. If research could make solar panel production cheaper, there are many suitable flat surfaces in this world (rooftops, parking lots, etc.)
I heard a few weeks ago that the Yucca Mountain solution was in question -- i.e. it wasn't wanted there. This is second hand, so I apologize for not having a reference.
It's seems to be extra trouble, money, and risk to me, but I admit we are getting power from nuclear energy right now, and I don't know of any major reported problems in recent years.
I don't know how temperature affects battery capacity for various types of batteries, but at least with an electric car, the heater turns on hot right away. I hate waiting in the freezing Chicago cold for the gas engine to warm up.
"Second, the electric grid is not capable of supplying the energy needed..."
Like you mentioned, nighttime charging from the grid is off-peak. If you have solar power, you can use "net metering".
"(Personally, I like nuclear power.)"
Although I'm not an expert, do you know how much nuclear waste results from nuclear reactors and research? There isn't a place to put it right now. Do you want it in your backyard?
Do you know how much extra effort is needed for safety checks on nuclear reactors? Can we export nuclear power plant techonology without spending extra effort to secure it and worrying about it later? How about more research into solar and wind sources?
"Can you imagine the power draw for a 10-level parking garage?"
Can you imagine how much gas and money are wasted and pollution is emmitted by all the gas cars in a 10-level parking garage? Real numbers would be more useful here.
And yes, even coal power plants are more efficient and produce fewer emissions than gas powered cars.
But with only one wall, you can't walk around and look at an object or visualization the way you would walk around a pillar. You can't lean over things and look at them from directly above or below. With a six-sided CAVE, you can. Being able to naturally move around 3D data has helped researchers discover new things in the same data they've looked at before with other methods.
Also, although the article's picture shows three visible screens, when you're in the C6, you don't see them as separate screens. It's not as if a few extra "walls" were added, it's as if you are surrounded by your environment.
#1 -
Yes, though head-tracking is typically only done for 1 user, there are ways to set it up with multiple head-tracks and render/shutter multiple times per application-frame. Further, the difference between tracked/non-tracked users is really only an issue for objects that are near the 'screen' or would be 'inside' the walls. Large-scale or large-distance viewing is not affected since the binocular disparity is so small.
I agree, although when giving a demo in the C6 (with a single tracked head), you have to warn the occasional person who starts to look around behind you, since they'll get reversed stereo. I wonder how many people can be multi-tracked these days. If I remember right, the glasses' shutter speed and projector brightness were the main problems a few years ago when Kris had two views working.
Since Nader has so little to gain in Ohio, maybe he actually cares about the people and whether their votes are counted fairly.
And since you believe 9,000+ out of 14,000+ Ohio signatures were invalid, you may at least want to read the other side of the story.
Slashdot Mirror
Someone should tell the car companies about this global warming "theory".
"Chrysler questions climate change"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6247371.stm
The mainstream press should also be more critical in situations like this. The public should know that a blowhard's comments don't compare to scientific data. If anyone still disagrees, there is more than enough data presented in the movie "An Inconvenient Truth".
1. That CEO can ask you to eat dirt for a million dollars -- he would never give you that much money, but he has more than that much influence over you. Does that feel like less for you yet?
Money is relative -- it depends on who has how much. It's a measure of power over other people. (So is a good education that allows you to make money).
Who picks your fruit? Who did manual labor to manufacture all your things in china? -- people with less money and education.
When rich people get a lot more money like this:
- they can use it to make more money easily (investments), which makes your money worth less (money is relative)
- the money is not going to you
- they get to do almost whatever they want (O.J simpson, lobby/pay Congress, etc.).
2. Who said we need perfect equality, but less inequality suggests working with the ceo, not just for him.
Besides, where's the progress you're referring to? The $53 million bonus is only progress for the CEO to do the CEO's bidding. By progress, do you mean the progress where he could make more people do more things for him?
3. Correlations don't prove cause-effect relations.
No, but correlations are pretty significant.
4. Good things? Another mansion for the CEO? Oh, people get to build his mansion, wow.
Inequality does matter.
Hard work can get you far, but many children in the US still live and die in poverty, which doesn't sound like they had much of an opportunity to work hard. More money to the rich is only helping the rich get richer.
How about some real numbers?
This will guarantee year-round brownouts, blackouts, and other power problems.
The Department of Energy disagrees with you:
http://www.pnl.gov/news/release.asp?id=204
"If all the cars and light trucks in the nation switched from oil to electrons, idle capacity in the existing electric power system could generate most of the electricity consumed by plug-in hybrid electric vehicles."
"off-peak electricity production and transmission capacity could fuel 84 percent of these 198 million vehicles if they were plug-in hybrid electrics."
"that's taking the full capacity of a 25kV feeder line for those 60 seconds....you don't have that kind of electric feed going into a house, so you're back to charging during peak power usage times. Oops."
Wrong, I wouldn't need to charge in 60 seconds at my house. If I want to charge in 60 seconds, a fuel station with more power would work fine. In any case, I'd only need that for long trips -- letting it charge overnight at home is more than fine with me.
"Plus they have a serious heat issue when charging batteries that fast."
I didn't say a 60 second solution was available yet, but there was a working 10 minute solution in 1998.
"I don't want my car to melt when I charge it."
Nice image -- I don't want my car to blow up in to a big fireball when I put gas in it, either.
You would get paid to take nuclear waste because it's not wanted. Nuclear waste disposal is a cost and problem with some risks that require money for research and maintenance. That is just one of the three problems I mentioned (others are safety checks and exporting).
Solar power is still more expensive, but it has the least side effects. If research could make solar panel production cheaper, there are many suitable flat surfaces in this world (rooftops, parking lots, etc.)
I heard a few weeks ago that the Yucca Mountain solution was in question -- i.e. it wasn't wanted there. This is second hand, so I apologize for not having a reference. It's seems to be extra trouble, money, and risk to me, but I admit we are getting power from nuclear energy right now, and I don't know of any major reported problems in recent years.
I don't know how temperature affects battery capacity for various types of batteries, but at least with an electric car, the heater turns on hot right away. I hate waiting in the freezing Chicago cold for the gas engine to warm up.
v e/messages/78985
In extreme cold, it looks like electric engines are more feasible than gas engines. Here's an electric car expert doing electric vehicle training in the arctic for an oil company:
http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/ev-list-archi
"First, recharging takes hours."
i cle#Charging
No, there is fast charging. Wikipedia mentions research into 60 second charging and references General Motors 1998 technology that took 10 minutes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_veh
"Second, the electric grid is not capable of supplying the energy needed..."
Like you mentioned, nighttime charging from the grid is off-peak. If you have solar power, you can use "net metering".
"(Personally, I like nuclear power.)"
Although I'm not an expert, do you know how much nuclear waste results from nuclear reactors and research? There isn't a place to put it right now. Do you want it in your backyard?
Do you know how much extra effort is needed for safety checks on nuclear reactors? Can we export nuclear power plant techonology without spending extra effort to secure it and worrying about it later?
How about more research into solar and wind sources?
"Can you imagine the power draw for a 10-level parking garage?"
Can you imagine how much gas and money are wasted and pollution is emmitted by all the gas cars in a 10-level parking garage? Real numbers would be more useful here.
And yes, even coal power plants are more efficient and produce fewer emissions than gas powered cars.
But with only one wall, you can't walk around and look at an object or visualization the way you would walk around a pillar. You can't lean over things and look at them from directly above or below. With a six-sided CAVE, you can. Being able to naturally move around 3D data has helped researchers discover new things in the same data they've looked at before with other methods.
Also, although the article's picture shows three visible screens, when you're in the C6, you don't see them as separate screens. It's not as if a few extra "walls" were added, it's as if you are surrounded by your environment.
#1 - Yes, though head-tracking is typically only done for 1 user, there are ways to set it up with multiple head-tracks and render/shutter multiple times per application-frame. Further, the difference between tracked/non-tracked users is really only an issue for objects that are near the 'screen' or would be 'inside' the walls. Large-scale or large-distance viewing is not affected since the binocular disparity is so small.
I agree, although when giving a demo in the C6 (with a single tracked head), you have to warn the occasional person who starts to look around behind you, since they'll get reversed stereo. I wonder how many people can be multi-tracked these days. If I remember right, the glasses' shutter speed and projector brightness were the main problems a few years ago when Kris had two views working.
Since Nader has so little to gain in Ohio, maybe he actually cares about the people and whether their votes are counted fairly.
And since you believe 9,000+ out of 14,000+ Ohio signatures were invalid, you may at least want to read the other side of the story.