Actually, as concrete can be made waterproof, you could just design the sewer pipes as part of the structure, only the inbound pressurized pipes would need to be something else.
Uh, no. Concrete cracks and is porous. It would never be a good idea to use your walls to carry waste waster, not to mention codes not allowing it. I know concrete sewers exist, but those aren't inside your walls when they leak. What if you want to remodel and need to make changes to the plumbing layout? And how are you going to do repairs? In high rises it is not uncommon to have some piping (actual plastic or metal pipes) cast into the concrete floors, but it is a huge pain when those embedded pipes fail, as all things do, eventually.
Modern LCD/LED displays are bad in very bright light (like direct sunlight) and very good everywhere else.
Direct sunlight is unnecessary, in my experience. My laptop is almost unusable outdoors on a mostly cloudy day even when in the shade on my deck at the north side of my house.
Having had to design changes to existing building systems that had lots of unused piping, ductwork, etc., I would say it's well worth the cost to get rid of obsolete work, rather than dealing with confusion figuring out what is active and what is necessary, or trying to snake new services through the existing congestion unnecessarily. It is relatively inexpensive to remove accessible items at the time they are made obsolete; the problems occur later when no one remembers what a particular item is for or whether it is still active.
I would just add to that that even Type II should not carry a stigma of it being the sufferer's fault. My mom was diagnosed with type II diabetes in her 60's in spite of a very active and healthy lifestyle. Fortunately she was able to keep her blood sugar levels down through diet alone. Many people develop Type II diabetes as they age in spite of healthy living.
From TFA, Flickr was chosen because someone else had gathered Flickr data to claim that camera phones were taking over from dedicated digital cameras. The author's interpretation of that same data was that, if relevant, it showed the opposite.
. . . aluminium used in a non-load bearing rib in the wing, used to maintain the wings aerodynamic shape.
I don't know any details of the particular design or the cracks in question, but all ribs in a wing are load bearing. It could be meant that the ribs are not part of the main structure transferring load along the wing to the fuselage, but then they would still be transferring local stresses to that structure, though not as critical to the integrity of the aircraft.
However, cracks are not necessarily a danger: airplane structures tend to be highly redundant and rarely free of cracks. The issue is how fast the cracks grow, and how often they should be inspected and repaired, which is complicated by having a new airframe for which they have limited experience.
Your math is interesting, but it misses one important point. Your used SUV will probably need to be replaced well before the new, efficient car. If your really going to do the comparison, you would need to determine how far into the future to set your crystal ball and estimate the present values based on the lifetimes of the cars, salvage values, and replacement costs. Also, a used car would typically have little or no warranty and greater maintenance costs.
Even after all that, YMMV, so to speak.
Of course it is entirely ridiculous to think that car buyers would want to go through all of that mumbo-jumbo when their main focus is on getting the features, styling, performance, handling, comfort, etc. that they want for the price they can afford.
The resistance of interconnects grows polynomially, not exponentially, as they decrease in size.
I'm not sure if they used the term exponentially correctly or not, but they did not say that a wire's resistance grows as wires get thinner (that wouldn't exactly be news, even for Slashdot), but that a wire's resistivity increases as (very thin) wires get thinner.
A law in this usage of the word is neither a guideline nor a legality; it is an observed fact that is assumed to be true, like the 1st law of thermodynamics.
I've tried turning those off, but they seem to automatically come back on, and don't turn off until I manually turn them off.
What a pain. My old feature phone used to last several days without a charge. My new smart phone, around 12 hours.
I get it on my desktop at work, but not my laptop at home.
Though it does not require me to perform an extra click, it still annoys me, because for some reason it is always already dropped down.
too few is not "relative" it's a deterministic requirement straight out of the ADA. the law is the same everywherein the US, and a business would have to be run by knuckleheads to get caught with their pants down on it.
Both true and wrong at the same time. I haven't read ADA, but most laws don't include indemnification in them. That means that if you do something solely to conform to regulations, that doesn't mean you can't be successfully sued anyway.
From what I remember from a professional liability insurance seminar several years ago, parent is correct. Not following the ADAAG would easily get you in trouble, but following them would not necessarily be sufficient to keep you out of court, nor would it ensure that you prevail in a lawsuit.
From the Justice Department publications "2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design":
35.151 New construction and alterations.
(a) Design and construction.
(1) Each facility or part of a facility constructed by, on behalf of, or for the use of a public
entity shall be designed and constructed in such manner that the facility or part of
the facility is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities, if the
construction was commenced after January 26, 1992.
And:
The 2010 Standards set minimum requirements – both scoping and technical – for newly designed and constructed or altered State and local government facilities, public accommodations, and commercial facilities to be readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.
What does spending have to do with it? Handicap parking spaces are more often in free parking lots at shopping malls and office buildings. Street parking rarely, if ever, has reserved accessible spaces. Pay parking lots have essentially the same issues as free parking lots.
In reality, you heat up the outside more than you cool down the inside.
If that's what you meant, then I misunderstood you. My point was that decent air conditioners consume much less than 1 unit of energy for every unit of energy they move from the cool space to the warm space, making them much more efficient than the straight conversion of energy to heat.
Like it or not, setting standards of construction, including efficiency standards, is the main reason for building codes.
Building codes exist so that you don't need to hire an engineer to design and analyze your house.
On the contrary, in most cases building codes require you (the builder, that is) to hire engineers, or at least an architect. They usually explicitly disallow construction permits without a licensed architect's stamp on the drawings, and will often require the stamp of an electrical engineer and a mechanical engineer even for a simple house. Requirements about soil properties, earthquakes, hurricanes, or anything beyond a simple house will usually require a structural engineer's stamp, as well.
If you follow the codes you should be able to build a decent house cheaply.
Building codes (to the extent they are about houses) are far from sufficient to enable you to know how to build a decent house, let alone how to do it cheaply.
As for the ill-mannered heathens, I wait until a movie has been out for 2+ weeks, then go on an off night.
I've found if I wait 2+ weeks to see a movie, it's no longer playing at any theaters near my house. Since I'm not constantly scouring the reviews and theater timetables, that is probably the main reason I seldom go to the theater.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, no. Concrete cracks and is porous. It would never be a good idea to use your walls to carry waste waster, not to mention codes not allowing it. I know concrete sewers exist, but those aren't inside your walls when they leak. What if you want to remodel and need to make changes to the plumbing layout? And how are you going to do repairs? In high rises it is not uncommon to have some piping (actual plastic or metal pipes) cast into the concrete floors, but it is a huge pain when those embedded pipes fail, as all things do, eventually.
Not to mention the excavation, foundation, utiliies, landscaping, etc.
Please read about ring species and other issues about speciation to see how the simple concept you posted does not remove the fuzziness that GP noted.
Direct sunlight is unnecessary, in my experience. My laptop is almost unusable outdoors on a mostly cloudy day even when in the shade on my deck at the north side of my house.
Having had to design changes to existing building systems that had lots of unused piping, ductwork, etc., I would say it's well worth the cost to get rid of obsolete work, rather than dealing with confusion figuring out what is active and what is necessary, or trying to snake new services through the existing congestion unnecessarily. It is relatively inexpensive to remove accessible items at the time they are made obsolete; the problems occur later when no one remembers what a particular item is for or whether it is still active.
I would just add to that that even Type II should not carry a stigma of it being the sufferer's fault. My mom was diagnosed with type II diabetes in her 60's in spite of a very active and healthy lifestyle. Fortunately she was able to keep her blood sugar levels down through diet alone. Many people develop Type II diabetes as they age in spite of healthy living.
I've read that the brain's wiring scheme gets completed around age 24.
It's all downhill from there.
From TFA, Flickr was chosen because someone else had gathered Flickr data to claim that camera phones were taking over from dedicated digital cameras. The author's interpretation of that same data was that, if relevant, it showed the opposite.
I don't know any details of the particular design or the cracks in question, but all ribs in a wing are load bearing. It could be meant that the ribs are not part of the main structure transferring load along the wing to the fuselage, but then they would still be transferring local stresses to that structure, though not as critical to the integrity of the aircraft.
However, cracks are not necessarily a danger: airplane structures tend to be highly redundant and rarely free of cracks. The issue is how fast the cracks grow, and how often they should be inspected and repaired, which is complicated by having a new airframe for which they have limited experience.
Using a factor of safety is not over-engineering - it is an admission that the design can't account for absolutely everything.
IRRC, the calculations are based on dynanometer measurements, so the numbers on the sticker are based on both measurements and calculations.
I assume he seriously mis-typed "like to tinker" and maybe let an ignorant automatic spelling correction turn his typos into random words.
Your math is interesting, but it misses one important point. Your used SUV will probably need to be replaced well before the new, efficient car. If your really going to do the comparison, you would need to determine how far into the future to set your crystal ball and estimate the present values based on the lifetimes of the cars, salvage values, and replacement costs. Also, a used car would typically have little or no warranty and greater maintenance costs.
Even after all that, YMMV, so to speak.
Of course it is entirely ridiculous to think that car buyers would want to go through all of that mumbo-jumbo when their main focus is on getting the features, styling, performance, handling, comfort, etc. that they want for the price they can afford.
I'm not sure if they used the term exponentially correctly or not, but they did not say that a wire's resistance grows as wires get thinner (that wouldn't exactly be news, even for Slashdot), but that a wire's resistivity increases as (very thin) wires get thinner.
A law in this usage of the word is neither a guideline nor a legality; it is an observed fact that is assumed to be true, like the 1st law of thermodynamics.
Mine doesn't, so I quit leaving the charger plugged in.
I've tried turning those off, but they seem to automatically come back on, and don't turn off until I manually turn them off.
What a pain. My old feature phone used to last several days without a charge. My new smart phone, around 12 hours.
I get it on my desktop at work, but not my laptop at home.
Though it does not require me to perform an extra click, it still annoys me, because for some reason it is always already dropped down.
Both true and wrong at the same time. I haven't read ADA, but most laws don't include indemnification in them. That means that if you do something solely to conform to regulations, that doesn't mean you can't be successfully sued anyway.
From what I remember from a professional liability insurance seminar several years ago, parent is correct. Not following the ADAAG would easily get you in trouble, but following them would not necessarily be sufficient to keep you out of court, nor would it ensure that you prevail in a lawsuit.
From the Justice Department publications "2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design" :
And :
[emphasis added]
What does spending have to do with it? Handicap parking spaces are more often in free parking lots at shopping malls and office buildings. Street parking rarely, if ever, has reserved accessible spaces. Pay parking lots have essentially the same issues as free parking lots.
If that's what you meant, then I misunderstood you. My point was that decent air conditioners consume much less than 1 unit of energy for every unit of energy they move from the cool space to the warm space, making them much more efficient than the straight conversion of energy to heat.
Which is probably why they are not banned outright.
Like it or not, setting standards of construction, including efficiency standards, is the main reason for building codes.
On the contrary, in most cases building codes require you (the builder, that is) to hire engineers, or at least an architect. They usually explicitly disallow construction permits without a licensed architect's stamp on the drawings, and will often require the stamp of an electrical engineer and a mechanical engineer even for a simple house. Requirements about soil properties, earthquakes, hurricanes, or anything beyond a simple house will usually require a structural engineer's stamp, as well.
Building codes (to the extent they are about houses) are far from sufficient to enable you to know how to build a decent house, let alone how to do it cheaply.
Too late, it's already being done, in most localities in the US, anyway.
I've found if I wait 2+ weeks to see a movie, it's no longer playing at any theaters near my house. Since I'm not constantly scouring the reviews and theater timetables, that is probably the main reason I seldom go to the theater.