It's not just the individual cost, it's the collective cost on the environment and the over-taxing of an already strained electrical system.
For instance, if every household in America replaced one normal light bulb with a compact flourescent it would have the same environmental impact as taking 1 million cars off the road.
There are plenty of simple actions that in and of themselves don't matter. But when multiplied by the number of people involved can spiral out of control.
If one person goes to the beach and takes a few buckets of sand home for a sandbox, no big deal. If every single person that goes to the beach takes home a few buckets, there wouldn't be beaches.
The problem with every device using 90% more electricity than it should while "off" or in sleep mode is that every device in every household adds up to a LOT of consumption.
I've long since wanted to get a Kill A Watt Meter to check the power consumption of the equipment I have. At $35 it's a bargain.
With electricity prices skyrocketing I'm noticing which lights are on the most and replacing them with full spectrum compact flourescents that have a really nice, white light but use about 1/5 the juice.
I've read that many VCR's, DVD's, etc. use as much electricity when "off" as they do when in use, with the difference being as little as the amount of electricity used by the electric motors actually used to spin the DVD or move the tape.
That is just lazy design and very wasteful.
Some things like a Tivo of course need to remain "on" to record upcoming shows, but even then should be in a deep sleep until needed. However, that is not the case. They sit there, actively sucking down juice 24/7/365.
Alternators produce the electricity whether you use it or not. That's one of the reasons the Toyota Prius works, in addition to regenerative breaking.
So if the electricity is being produced anyway, why not use it to perform electrolysis on water to generate two parts hydrogen gas, one part oxygen gas, mix them together into browns gas and inject it into the intake manifold.
It works, plain and simple. And it produces a consistent, predictable, measurable increase in fuel efficiency.
California minimum wage laws don't apply in India! Even if the company hiring them is in California.
I don't like outsourcing anymore than you do, and it is the primary reason I boycott Walmart, but it is what it is.
I commend you for being passionate about it and trying to do something about it. But you won't change the nature of outsourcing. You can avoid it, boycott it, and discourage it, but personally I don't think you can change it.
Thomas L. Friedman hits the nail right on the head, and America needs a boot to the head if we're going to survive the new transition.
Otherwise we'll end up just like stage coaches or any other industry that failed to adapt and tried to hang on to old models.
I think there is a huge market for the semi-obscure show from the past.
I loved the Greatest American Hero as a kid, for the short time it was on, but you never see re-runs and I've only been able to find one episode online, and none for sale.
This would be a great way to distribute it, and I'd pay a buck an episode for reasonable quality (good enough to enjoy on something larger than a 2" x 2" screen).
There are plenty of others as well, like Fall Guy, Buck Rogers (re-runs), Hawaii Five-O, etc, etc.
"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity." Albert Einstein
I tend to agree with this poem:
We are all blind until we see That in the human plan Nothing is worth the making If it does not make the man
Why build these cities glorious If man unbuilded goes In vain we build these cities Unless the builder also grows.
And of course:
"To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society." Theodore Roosevelt
Our society is plagued with menaces, and I highly doubt that will change, except to increase. If it ever does change it will start at home with better parenting and at church (yeah, yeah, don't even start).
Actually, the design for one of the ribbons was so thin and wide that the wind resistance alone meant that it fell at about the speed of a cardboard box.
What really makes sense is an infrastructure that makes getting people and payloads in particular to and from space cheap and reliable, even ordinary. The only chance for that right now is a space elevator.
You have a 3% chance of death flying on a space shuttle. That's an incredibly poor record, and incredibly expensive.
I've always wanted to know if I can take a rackmount UPS and wire my circuit through it, just after the circuit breaker, so that the entire circuit and anything plugged into it is on the UPS.
I live outside of town and we get frequent surges, brownouts, and blackouts.
It would be nice if select circuits in my house we're unaffected by this.
With one of the whole-house natural gas generators that automatically switches on after 15 seconds of powerloss, you could go indefinitely on most circuits in your house. (Note: Relying on natural gas in an emergency is a bad idea).
So, what are the ramifications of wiring a rackmount UPS inline in a circuit, right into the house wiring?
If the rackmount UPS offers X protection and has 6 protected outlets, is the protection only X/6 at one given outlet (since the whole circuit would likely be running through one), or are the 6 outlets all joined inside anyway so that it wouldn't matter if the entire circuit ran through the single oulet?
Instead of iodine (which gives you the squirts after more than a few days) use chlorine powder (like they put in pools and jacuzzi's), as close to 100% pure chlorine as possible.
Don't use clorox, since all you need is the chlorine and you'll get all sorts of detergents, whiteners, etc, that will just serve to make you sick and uncomfortable.
The nice thing about chlorine is it kills everything, and if you leave the lid off for 24 hours it evaporates out, leaving you with clean water without the taste of chlorine.
I can think of at least one golfer and his family, a politician and his family, and a plane full of Greeks that all died when there wasn't ample time. In each case the plane just kept on cruising at altitude, was observed by escort planes that could do nothing, then ran out of gas and crashed.
So I don't think there is "ample" time, though maybe sufficient time under normal to optimal conditions (both pilots in their seat, everything goes according to plan, etc).
I agree the technology exists while the profit motive doesn't.
The autopilot was on, that's why the plane stayed in the air until it ran out of gas.
It entered a holding pattern after passing the intended destination airport, but left that holding pattern a few minutes before crashing, presumably when switched off by the still-conscious male flight attendant, who had a small craft pilots license.
I agree turning ON the autopilot would be bad, but if the plane is already on autopilot, as this was, it would have save the lives of these people. As it was they stayed at altitude, passed out, froze, then died.
Speaking of "robot controlled", I find it amazing that jets like the 747 don't have a way to detect a loss of cabin pressure and go to a lower altitude.
The plane that crashed in Greece flew on autopilot until it ran out of gas.
Had the autopilot detected the loss of cabin pressure and immediately dropped to the lowest safe altitude (10,000 if there aren't any mountains to run into, for instance), the pilots would have regained consciousness and 150+ people wouldn't have died (not to mention the loss of a very expensive piece of equipment).
The point is this: All data we have (and any data from millions of years ago is a guess, plain and simple) shows that left to it's own nature does change temperatures (in cycles), but does so slowly, and not 1 degree steady climb in a century.
The fact that this 1 degree rise and the continuing trend so closely correlate to the rise of the automobile and industrialization is even more suspicious and alarming.
This is it for me. It's late and I won't post again since it serves no purpose for either of us and amounts to nothing more than mental calisthenics.
"As can be seen in the graph to the left, pre-industrial levels (~280 ppmv) were similar to previous interglacials (times which were not considered an 'ice-age' - as now). The present, post-industrial atmospheric level of CO2 concentration is around 370ppmv, which on this graph would be off the scale."
I didn't say a 50% increase in CO2 would result in a 50% increase in temperature, only that it isn't reasonable to expect no increase when there has been an overwhelming correlation in the past.
As for the sediment in Japan, I don't see how DIRT containing 100 time more CO2 than our atmosphere has anything to do with how much CO2 was in the atmosphere back then, and certainly not a 1:1 correlation. 100 times higher correlation would throw everything else we know about climate out the window, as well as invalidating every other peice of historical data we've got, and then all bets are off. So personally the Japan sediment carries no weight for me.
One more thing, I find it very interesting that historically (using the graph you linked to), that CO2 levels so closely correlated to temperature throughout history.
Until now, of course, when they are 50% higher than ever before and don't even fit on that graph.
It's not like the CO2 level changes and their is an immediate change in temperature the same day. If CO2 levels go up by 50%, at least according to that graph, it doesn't seem reasonable to assume there will be no affect on temperature.
Actually, the graph you provided is in thousands of years, so that would be 450,000 years, not 450 years.
I can't comment on the Viking Church, I haven't read the article.
The real problem with permafrost melting is that the frozen ground in many of these places holds back massive amounts of greenhouse gasses, which are released when it melts, further speeding up the process.
We can argue the little details until we're blue in the face, and all we're left with is opinion. But taking everything as a whole and looking for trends, I think global warming poses an infinitely bigger threat than terrorism, in terms of it's ability to disrupt our way of life, and terminate our lives (gradually through things like cancer and food changes moreso than poof and the entire race is gone).
Then again, that is just my opinion. I'm entitled to it, and you are entitled to yours.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not just the individual cost, it's the collective cost on the environment and the over-taxing of an already strained electrical system.
For instance, if every household in America replaced one normal light bulb with a compact flourescent it would have the same environmental impact as taking 1 million cars off the road.
There are plenty of simple actions that in and of themselves don't matter. But when multiplied by the number of people involved can spiral out of control.
If one person goes to the beach and takes a few buckets of sand home for a sandbox, no big deal. If every single person that goes to the beach takes home a few buckets, there wouldn't be beaches.
The problem with every device using 90% more electricity than it should while "off" or in sleep mode is that every device in every household adds up to a LOT of consumption.
I've long since wanted to get a Kill A Watt Meter to check the power consumption of the equipment I have. At $35 it's a bargain.
With electricity prices skyrocketing I'm noticing which lights are on the most and replacing them with full spectrum compact flourescents that have a really nice, white light but use about 1/5 the juice.
I've read that many VCR's, DVD's, etc. use as much electricity when "off" as they do when in use, with the difference being as little as the amount of electricity used by the electric motors actually used to spin the DVD or move the tape.
That is just lazy design and very wasteful.
Some things like a Tivo of course need to remain "on" to record upcoming shows, but even then should be in a deep sleep until needed. However, that is not the case. They sit there, actively sucking down juice 24/7/365.
Alternators produce the electricity whether you use it or not. That's one of the reasons the Toyota Prius works, in addition to regenerative breaking.
So if the electricity is being produced anyway, why not use it to perform electrolysis on water to generate two parts hydrogen gas, one part oxygen gas, mix them together into browns gas and inject it into the intake manifold.
It works, plain and simple. And it produces a consistent, predictable, measurable increase in fuel efficiency.
That's the problem with BIG government:
No one pays attention to where the money is spent. They're too busy spending it themselves. At every level. In every branch. In every party.
The Bush clan just have it down to a science.
Let me assure you the analogy was entirely hypothetical... :}
The real difference is that P2P has a source, a bottleneck. You can shut down one group or one server and the problem goes away.
Usenet is almost as distributed as email, and just as old.
Shutting Usenet down will be like trying to catch a fart in the wind. You may get some of it, but you'll never get all of it, and it won't be easy.
Yeah, because Easynews and the hundreds of companies like them were shut down so fast for the exact same thing.
Oh, wait. They weren't.
You need to read "The World is Flat" by Thomas L. Friedman.
California minimum wage laws don't apply in India! Even if the company hiring them is in California.
I don't like outsourcing anymore than you do, and it is the primary reason I boycott Walmart, but it is what it is.
I commend you for being passionate about it and trying to do something about it. But you won't change the nature of outsourcing. You can avoid it, boycott it, and discourage it, but personally I don't think you can change it.
Thomas L. Friedman hits the nail right on the head, and America needs a boot to the head if we're going to survive the new transition.
Otherwise we'll end up just like stage coaches or any other industry that failed to adapt and tried to hang on to old models.
I think there is a huge market for the semi-obscure show from the past.
I loved the Greatest American Hero as a kid, for the short time it was on, but you never see re-runs and I've only been able to find one episode online, and none for sale.
This would be a great way to distribute it, and I'd pay a buck an episode for reasonable quality (good enough to enjoy on something larger than a 2" x 2" screen).
There are plenty of others as well, like Fall Guy, Buck Rogers (re-runs), Hawaii Five-O, etc, etc.
Spend an hour reviewing the average job applications at any small business, or especially a fast food chain.
It's hard not to lose hope in the future of humanity when faced with such evidence.
I'm half joking, but only half.
"It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity."
Albert Einstein
I tend to agree with this poem:
We are all blind until we see
That in the human plan
Nothing is worth the making
If it does not make the man
Why build these cities glorious
If man unbuilded goes
In vain we build these cities
Unless the builder also grows.
And of course:
"To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menace to society."
Theodore Roosevelt
Our society is plagued with menaces, and I highly doubt that will change, except to increase. If it ever does change it will start at home with better parenting and at church (yeah, yeah, don't even start).
The full color version of this would be great for wireless picture frames.
Use BlueTooth or whatever to load an image, and it doesn't need power to stay that way. A 9 volt battery could power it for a long time.
You could have a little button on the back to turn on the BlueTooth for 60 seconds, after which it turns off if it doesn't detect a transfer.
This would be a cool application!
Actually, the design for one of the ribbons was so thin and wide that the wind resistance alone meant that it fell at about the speed of a cardboard box.
See http://www.elevator2010.org/site/primer.html and http://www.liftport.com/faq2.php#science2 for starters, Google for more.
What really makes sense is an infrastructure that makes getting people and payloads in particular to and from space cheap and reliable, even ordinary. The only chance for that right now is a space elevator.
You have a 3% chance of death flying on a space shuttle. That's an incredibly poor record, and incredibly expensive.
I've always wanted to know if I can take a rackmount UPS and wire my circuit through it, just after the circuit breaker, so that the entire circuit and anything plugged into it is on the UPS.
I live outside of town and we get frequent surges, brownouts, and blackouts.
It would be nice if select circuits in my house we're unaffected by this.
With one of the whole-house natural gas generators that automatically switches on after 15 seconds of powerloss, you could go indefinitely on most circuits in your house. (Note: Relying on natural gas in an emergency is a bad idea).
So, what are the ramifications of wiring a rackmount UPS inline in a circuit, right into the house wiring?
If the rackmount UPS offers X protection and has 6 protected outlets, is the protection only X/6 at one given outlet (since the whole circuit would likely be running through one), or are the 6 outlets all joined inside anyway so that it wouldn't matter if the entire circuit ran through the single oulet?
Instead of iodine (which gives you the squirts after more than a few days) use chlorine powder (like they put in pools and jacuzzi's), as close to 100% pure chlorine as possible.
Don't use clorox, since all you need is the chlorine and you'll get all sorts of detergents, whiteners, etc, that will just serve to make you sick and uncomfortable.
The nice thing about chlorine is it kills everything, and if you leave the lid off for 24 hours it evaporates out, leaving you with clean water without the taste of chlorine.
Or to put it more clearly:
10 km/L
It flew to Athens, over Athens, past Athens, turned toward the sea and entered a holding pattern for an hour, then ran out of gas.
0 ,-5219231,00.html
The fire was a brush fire ignited by the crash. Planes and their contents are surprisingly flammable, even without excess fuel.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,128
I can think of at least one golfer and his family, a politician and his family, and a plane full of Greeks that all died when there wasn't ample time. In each case the plane just kept on cruising at altitude, was observed by escort planes that could do nothing, then ran out of gas and crashed.
So I don't think there is "ample" time, though maybe sufficient time under normal to optimal conditions (both pilots in their seat, everything goes according to plan, etc).
I agree the technology exists while the profit motive doesn't.
The autopilot was on, that's why the plane stayed in the air until it ran out of gas.
It entered a holding pattern after passing the intended destination airport, but left that holding pattern a few minutes before crashing, presumably when switched off by the still-conscious male flight attendant, who had a small craft pilots license.
I agree turning ON the autopilot would be bad, but if the plane is already on autopilot, as this was, it would have save the lives of these people. As it was they stayed at altitude, passed out, froze, then died.
Speaking of "robot controlled", I find it amazing that jets like the 747 don't have a way to detect a loss of cabin pressure and go to a lower altitude.
The plane that crashed in Greece flew on autopilot until it ran out of gas.
Had the autopilot detected the loss of cabin pressure and immediately dropped to the lowest safe altitude (10,000 if there aren't any mountains to run into, for instance), the pilots would have regained consciousness and 150+ people wouldn't have died (not to mention the loss of a very expensive piece of equipment).
The point is this: All data we have (and any data from millions of years ago is a guess, plain and simple) shows that left to it's own nature does change temperatures (in cycles), but does so slowly, and not 1 degree steady climb in a century.
The fact that this 1 degree rise and the continuing trend so closely correlate to the rise of the automobile and industrialization is even more suspicious and alarming.
This is it for me. It's late and I won't post again since it serves no purpose for either of us and amounts to nothing more than mental calisthenics.
From the text on the site of that graph:
"As can be seen in the graph to the left, pre-industrial levels (~280 ppmv) were similar to previous interglacials (times which were not considered an 'ice-age' - as now). The present, post-industrial atmospheric level of CO2 concentration is around 370ppmv, which on this graph would be off the scale."
I didn't say a 50% increase in CO2 would result in a 50% increase in temperature, only that it isn't reasonable to expect no increase when there has been an overwhelming correlation in the past.
As for the sediment in Japan, I don't see how DIRT containing 100 time more CO2 than our atmosphere has anything to do with how much CO2 was in the atmosphere back then, and certainly not a 1:1 correlation. 100 times higher correlation would throw everything else we know about climate out the window, as well as invalidating every other peice of historical data we've got, and then all bets are off. So personally the Japan sediment carries no weight for me.
One more thing, I find it very interesting that historically (using the graph you linked to), that CO2 levels so closely correlated to temperature throughout history.
Until now, of course, when they are 50% higher than ever before and don't even fit on that graph.
It's not like the CO2 level changes and their is an immediate change in temperature the same day. If CO2 levels go up by 50%, at least according to that graph, it doesn't seem reasonable to assume there will be no affect on temperature.
Actually, the graph you provided is in thousands of years, so that would be 450,000 years, not 450 years.
I can't comment on the Viking Church, I haven't read the article.
The real problem with permafrost melting is that the frozen ground in many of these places holds back massive amounts of greenhouse gasses, which are released when it melts, further speeding up the process.
We can argue the little details until we're blue in the face, and all we're left with is opinion. But taking everything as a whole and looking for trends, I think global warming poses an infinitely bigger threat than terrorism, in terms of it's ability to disrupt our way of life, and terminate our lives (gradually through things like cancer and food changes moreso than poof and the entire race is gone).
Then again, that is just my opinion. I'm entitled to it, and you are entitled to yours.