A possible example is in federally sponsored bioresearch. If money from the Feds are used, the data needs to be made public. Why not software? The fact that some is bad could be an opportunity to fund it to make it better. I don't really buy the idea that only FOSS software can be bad, while all paid one is worth. The former can be held accountable for its quality but not the latter...
Seriously? Have you even seen the CVD throughput? Besides, looking at the system level, you will have to process massive amount of metal catalysts into sheets from solution. Again, as stated above, even if technically doable, the capex costs are largely prohibitive. There are much cheaper solutions/processes.
That's not how scalability works. You can sure parallelize the process, but at the end of the day you have to balance it with your capex. It's the opposite of electronics, if you wish, where scaling is done by shrinking.
There may be other ways to do it at scale. There are other carbon-based additives that can be added for a fraction of the cost of cement itself.
In principle you are correct. In practice, from both a cost and feasibility point of view this makes zero sense in the context of the scale at play. Concrete is (by far) the most abundant synthetic material ever made: therefore, any, I mean any, material that is added would need to be cost competitive at the scale not of a few cm per minute, but tons per hour. None of the current processes actually are cost effective as they claim to be. In other words those folks in the paper show do due diligence before venturing into claims they cannot support.
The real question is: when two identically trained systems compete against each other, what are the underlying mechanisms of competition leading to one winning?
Well, this is what goes on Amazon; G4 at 149.99. Not sure if they will bump it to 199.99, but for now the price seems to be the same: https://www.amazon.com/Moto-4t...
Let's summarize: the ad-free version of the G4-play goes for 149USD (99USD, Prime ad version). Comes with 16GB RAM, 8MP camera and a Qualcomm 410. However, the base version of the G4 goes for the same prive on amazon (either version) and comes with the same 16GB RAM, better 13MP camera and a Qualcomm 627. Can anybody explain to me what's Amazon/Lenovo's thinking?
I fail to understand the last comment in the post. How in the world going to a fully proprietary interface shows leadership into finding "something better"? If we go by that reasoning, every manufacturer will go with their own interface, and so there will be chaos. I personally don't want to end up with the hardware equivalent of the mess that is the myriad of proprietary messaging protocols of today. You want leadership to truly do something better? Come up with a standard port and work with others to implement it. The fact that this is detrimental to Apple's business strategy is irrelevant, but at least let's be honest in understanding that there is ZERO innovation on Apple's move, and it is not done to do things better. (Besides, Motorola was first in doing that earlier this year).
Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request. Either the server is overloaded or there is an error in the application.
And yet, this misses the point. NOx emissions are only PART of the story. Particulate matters, and under driving conditions we constantly endure (stop-and-go), particulate is produced massively, with very small particle size. That, along with NOx, creates the massive smog in Europe and respiratory conditions. NOx may break down and all, but soot doesn't. One can justify, pointlessly IMHO, that diesel is still worth, but in all reality, particulate will kill it.
Less is still not "nothing". It's in fact significant compared to gas engines, mostly under transients (stop-and-go, etc), where the load and combustion is not ideal. You need some really fancy electronic control and post-combustion processes to keep up with the production of soot.... The fact that combustion has become more "optimized" smaller particulate can actually become more harmful.
That's not how urea works. Urea is used uniquely to reduce NOx by reacting to produce H2O and N2. They have zero effects on particulate matter. Particulate matter is a direct byproduct of incomplete combustion (any combustion) that takes place regardless of post-combustion treatments (like urea injection). The only "solution" in used for particulate is simply a trap, which blocks all but the smaller particles. When the filter is saturated, extra diesel fuel is injected in it and additional high temperature combustion within the filter breaks down the particulate to fine stuff. The fine stuff that now seems to be the problem. Bottom line: industry tried to mitigate an intrinsic problem of diesel cars and by doing so they created new problems. The only real solution is mve past diesel. Heck even old style gas engine are better, mostly when coupled with e-motors (as in hybrids).
Your comments highlight the crux of the problem. Back in the day, inefficient (read truck like) diesel were shooting out black smoke. That particulate is large in size (10 or 100 of microns) that you actually "see". Improvements in efficiencies (both in combustion and trapping) made modern "clean engines" reduced the size of particulate to few microns. Those are much more difficult to see. Yet they are far more dangerous. Large particulate is trapped in your upper respiratory tract, the fine stuff gets deep in your lungs, often bioaccumulaating like abspestos does. You know how the stoey goes. Not because you don't see it it means it's not there...
Next time stick a paper towel on the exhaust of your cold diesel and leave it there for a few minutes. Look at the color. Now you have somerhing to "see".
Moto E 2015 uses the same processor (snapdragon 410) and RAM of the 2015 Moto G, other than the smaller res screen. Moto G is is getting the update. This is just plain lame from Motorola.
Sure it's old but an excellent upgrade over yours. Relatively fast, high quality screen, while no longer in production, you can find fantastic deals on Amazon. I still use mine and have no plans on changing it.
This changes absolutely nothing. We are not talking about core Android, but Google specific apps. These are already only and uniquely updated by the play store, even if they come preinstalled. These apps are not in AOSP. The change will make them optional to install. That's it. All of Android's security issues remains just the same.
What's wrong with having placebo? Nothing, as long as they are labelled as such. Labeling them as something that might sound like it works although it's only placebo, is misleading marketing and advertising. It's like I see you a car with no breaks, but I will tell of its secret powers of stopping itself. You can believe in it if you want, but it is a fact of life that I sold you a lie. Same for homeopathy.
Slashdot Mirror
A possible example is in federally sponsored bioresearch. If money from the Feds are used, the data needs to be made public. Why not software? The fact that some is bad could be an opportunity to fund it to make it better. I don't really buy the idea that only FOSS software can be bad, while all paid one is worth. The former can be held accountable for its quality but not the latter...
Seriously? Have you even seen the CVD throughput? Besides, looking at the system level, you will have to process massive amount of metal catalysts into sheets from solution. Again, as stated above, even if technically doable, the capex costs are largely prohibitive. There are much cheaper solutions/processes.
That's not how scalability works. You can sure parallelize the process, but at the end of the day you have to balance it with your capex. It's the opposite of electronics, if you wish, where scaling is done by shrinking. There may be other ways to do it at scale. There are other carbon-based additives that can be added for a fraction of the cost of cement itself.
In principle you are correct. In practice, from both a cost and feasibility point of view this makes zero sense in the context of the scale at play. Concrete is (by far) the most abundant synthetic material ever made: therefore, any, I mean any, material that is added would need to be cost competitive at the scale not of a few cm per minute, but tons per hour. None of the current processes actually are cost effective as they claim to be. In other words those folks in the paper show do due diligence before venturing into claims they cannot support.
One cannot post images of public places in Germany for privacy reasons. Yet it's perfectly fine to collect fingerprints. Weird.
The real question is: when two identically trained systems compete against each other, what are the underlying mechanisms of competition leading to one winning?
Well, this is what goes on Amazon; G4 at 149.99. Not sure if they will bump it to 199.99, but for now the price seems to be the same: https://www.amazon.com/Moto-4t...
You are correct, sorry for the confusion. I meant to say 16GB Flash.... both come with 2 GB RAM.
Let's summarize: the ad-free version of the G4-play goes for 149USD (99USD, Prime ad version). Comes with 16GB RAM, 8MP camera and a Qualcomm 410. However, the base version of the G4 goes for the same prive on amazon (either version) and comes with the same 16GB RAM, better 13MP camera and a Qualcomm 627. Can anybody explain to me what's Amazon/Lenovo's thinking?
I fail to understand the last comment in the post. How in the world going to a fully proprietary interface shows leadership into finding "something better"? If we go by that reasoning, every manufacturer will go with their own interface, and so there will be chaos. I personally don't want to end up with the hardware equivalent of the mess that is the myriad of proprietary messaging protocols of today. You want leadership to truly do something better? Come up with a standard port and work with others to implement it. The fact that this is detrimental to Apple's business strategy is irrelevant, but at least let's be honest in understanding that there is ZERO innovation on Apple's move, and it is not done to do things better. (Besides, Motorola was first in doing that earlier this year).
Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request. Either the server is overloaded or there is an error in the application.
sudo port install git
Not that complicated.
And yet, this misses the point. NOx emissions are only PART of the story. Particulate matters, and under driving conditions we constantly endure (stop-and-go), particulate is produced massively, with very small particle size. That, along with NOx, creates the massive smog in Europe and respiratory conditions. NOx may break down and all, but soot doesn't. One can justify, pointlessly IMHO, that diesel is still worth, but in all reality, particulate will kill it.
Less is still not "nothing". It's in fact significant compared to gas engines, mostly under transients (stop-and-go, etc), where the load and combustion is not ideal. You need some really fancy electronic control and post-combustion processes to keep up with the production of soot.... The fact that combustion has become more "optimized" smaller particulate can actually become more harmful.
That's not how urea works. Urea is used uniquely to reduce NOx by reacting to produce H2O and N2. They have zero effects on particulate matter. Particulate matter is a direct byproduct of incomplete combustion (any combustion) that takes place regardless of post-combustion treatments (like urea injection). The only "solution" in used for particulate is simply a trap, which blocks all but the smaller particles. When the filter is saturated, extra diesel fuel is injected in it and additional high temperature combustion within the filter breaks down the particulate to fine stuff. The fine stuff that now seems to be the problem. Bottom line: industry tried to mitigate an intrinsic problem of diesel cars and by doing so they created new problems. The only real solution is mve past diesel. Heck even old style gas engine are better, mostly when coupled with e-motors (as in hybrids).
Your comments highlight the crux of the problem. Back in the day, inefficient (read truck like) diesel were shooting out black smoke. That particulate is large in size (10 or 100 of microns) that you actually "see". Improvements in efficiencies (both in combustion and trapping) made modern "clean engines" reduced the size of particulate to few microns. Those are much more difficult to see. Yet they are far more dangerous. Large particulate is trapped in your upper respiratory tract, the fine stuff gets deep in your lungs, often bioaccumulaating like abspestos does. You know how the stoey goes. Not because you don't see it it means it's not there... Next time stick a paper towel on the exhaust of your cold diesel and leave it there for a few minutes. Look at the color. Now you have somerhing to "see".
Here's a list of what is available from the OBD-II port:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OBD-II_PIDs#Standard_PIDs
Yes, it is. Plenty of aftermarket products do just that and more.
Anybody can get that kind of info by just plugging into the standard OBD-II port. Several aftermarket solutions provide that.
Here: http://recode.net/2015/10/06/g...
Moto E 2015 uses the same processor (snapdragon 410) and RAM of the 2015 Moto G, other than the smaller res screen. Moto G is is getting the update. This is just plain lame from Motorola.
Moto E 2015 uses the same processor (snapdragon 410) and RAM of the 2015 Moto G, which is getting the update. This is just plain lame from Motorola.
Sure it's old but an excellent upgrade over yours. Relatively fast, high quality screen, while no longer in production, you can find fantastic deals on Amazon. I still use mine and have no plans on changing it.
This changes absolutely nothing. We are not talking about core Android, but Google specific apps. These are already only and uniquely updated by the play store, even if they come preinstalled. These apps are not in AOSP. The change will make them optional to install. That's it. All of Android's security issues remains just the same.
What's wrong with having placebo? Nothing, as long as they are labelled as such. Labeling them as something that might sound like it works although it's only placebo, is misleading marketing and advertising. It's like I see you a car with no breaks, but I will tell of its secret powers of stopping itself. You can believe in it if you want, but it is a fact of life that I sold you a lie. Same for homeopathy.