While your post is fairly accurate, you can easily convert a gasoline hybrid to run ethonal for right around ~$75USD. I admit, not as flexible as an electric vehicle, but in a productive agricultural area you can get ethanol from corn, sugar cane, hemp, or best of all, thatch weeds (see Google Video presentation for more info on the weeds as a source). YMMV.
Not all companies don't give a shit about people. The company I own treats it's employees well, respects it's clients, and doesn't feel profit is the end-all-be-all goal (although, we can afford to behave in this manner, as I'm the majority shareholder). A wise man once said, "Profitability is like oxygen. You need it to survive, but it's not the purpose of life."
Please make sure not to paint with such a broad stroke in the future. Some of us are actually trying to make a difference, no matter how few and far between we are.
Actually, I would argue that in some rare cases that white-collar criminals are more dangerous then someone who murdered one person.
Someone who wipes out the life savings of thousands upon thousands of people for example. I understand living in poverty means you still have your life, but only barely (i.e. being homeless, foodless, etc).
How can I go about finding these gold theaters? I would happily pay the premium to enjoy what you've described. In the words of Homer Simpon, "I'm intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter."
I believe if you're referring to the Kennedy expressway in Chicago, you're also referring to the building Lasalle Bank has painted frequently (which currently has a large mural of Chicago Marathon runners breaking through a brick wall). The painting/mural work is fantastic, but I think a poor location choice.
It doesn't matter how solid of a product Microsoft makes (latest versions of Exchange, Windows 2000/2003 Server, etc), people still whine that it:
a) costs money
b) doesn't make their toast (lack-of-feature-x-whine)
c) doesn't allow them to look at the source
Myself? I love Server 2003. It's solid. Very solid. It's competes for uptime against my Fedora Core DNS servers, and has no problem doing so. I'm absolutely looking forward to Exchange 2007 w/Unified Messaging. I think Microsoft overreaches sometimes, but some of their products are pretty damn good. Why can't IT folk simply use the best tool for the job? Sigh.
I'm intrigued by your ideas, would like to subscribe to your newsletter =) Seriously though, government (not just the judicial branch) would function much more smoothly if people simply applied common sense to everyday problems.
I'd like to point out that all their client would be able to prove is that you had that one packet on your computer, and not the whole file =) Download the whole file, and then you can prove the whole file was there. Technically, I can seed a whole sea of leachers in a swarm with just that one packet, with other seeders in the swarm dishing out the rest of the file.
I think the problem is that not all smart people go to school. I wasn't able to go to college due to some family problems. Instead, I started at 17 as an intern at a web development shop doing their help desk support, then was the first employee of a start-up web hosting shop. Today, I run the hosting division for an extremely large technology consulting company. Throughout my career, my employers took a chance based on me not having a formal education (but still knowing the material and learning quickly).
Google would look at that and say, "Oh! No school! Not Google material!".
We use the Spamhaus SBL/XBL to filter incoming mail, why not use the XBL list [http://www.spamhaus.org/xbl/index.lasso] to filter traffic at the web server/content switch/firewall level?
"The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam engines, and other types of trojan-horse exploits."
In the event they don't fit smoothly, most facilities keep on hand a sufficient amount of liquid medium to quench the core. No power generation method is perfect (as several people have outlined in this thread), but nuclear is arguably the safest and cleanest. And technical issues can be overcome via engineering.
You are indeed correct Sir. This is called a SCRAM. In the event of a catastrophic failure, electric motors release rods into the reactor to completely shutdown the fission reaction. In the US, I believe this is mandatory to have a commercial reactor in production.
"In modern nuclear power plants, the control rods are lifted by electric motors against both their own weight and a powerful spring. A SCRAM rapidly (less than four seconds, by test) releases the control rods from those motors and allows their weight and the spring to drive them into the reactor core, thus halting the nuclear reaction as rapidly as possible."
Also, most people are ill-informed as to why Chernobyl occured:
"A positive void coefficient means that the thermal power output increases as the void content inside the reactor increases due to increased boiling or loss of liquid moderator or coolant. If the void coefficient is large enough and control systems do not respond quickly enough, this can form a positive feedback loop which can quickly boil all the coolant in the reactor. This happened in the Chernobyl accident."
It's illegal to build positive void coefficient reactors in the US for this reason. Negative coefficient reactors won't have runaway reactions.
Fair enough with regards to carbon emissions. I could split hairs and mention the power needed to compress the hydrogen and load it on to the Shuttle, the large amount of diesel fuel used to move the Shuttle on to the pad (as well as that used by the ships used to drag the SRBs back to land from open water), as well as all the other energy used in processing a Shuttle for launch. I won't split hairs though =)
I do have one point though. You're assuming that launces with this device would be as infrequent as they are now. I highly doubt that. The easier you can get to space, the more you're going to go there. Think about the increase in international travel after the jetliner was introduced.
Energy effiencieny is just as important as how clean the energy source is. You also have to look at the system as a whole, and not write anything off as an externality (Economics majors can cheat, engineers don't get to).
1) Mechanical devices are designed all the time to withstand 2000Gs. Most probes with nuclear payloads for power use RTGs, which have no moving parts.
2) Anything that can get us into space without a propellant you need to carry is a good thing. You don't dump tons and tons of carbon into the atmosphere each time you launch, and you can shoot heavier things into orbit, as you're not dragging dead weight (remember that propellant and oxidizer?) with you.
3) These accelarators use electricity for fuel, which can be derived from nuclear power plants or renewable sources (wind/solar). Don't discount the importance of that.
1) Do you simply recondition the equipment and donate it to others, or do you physically break down non-working equipment in an environmentally friendly manner?
2) Is all demanufacturing done locally? Or is some/all of it sent overseas?
Please take these as just curious questions, and in no way a negative light.
There is no significant atmosphere on Mars (as there is on Earth). Researchers postulate that the core of Mars shutdown at some point in the distant past, and when that occured there was no magnetic field to protect the atmosphere from being blown away by the solar wind.
Slashdot Mirror
Citibank says, "Been there, done that."
While your post is fairly accurate, you can easily convert a gasoline hybrid to run ethonal for right around ~$75USD. I admit, not as flexible as an electric vehicle, but in a productive agricultural area you can get ethanol from corn, sugar cane, hemp, or best of all, thatch weeds (see Google Video presentation for more info on the weeds as a source). YMMV.
Beware of Texas friend. Once you walk into the road, you're fair game. Interesting right-of-way laws there.
Not all companies don't give a shit about people. The company I own treats it's employees well, respects it's clients, and doesn't feel profit is the end-all-be-all goal (although, we can afford to behave in this manner, as I'm the majority shareholder). A wise man once said, "Profitability is like oxygen. You need it to survive, but it's not the purpose of life."
Please make sure not to paint with such a broad stroke in the future. Some of us are actually trying to make a difference, no matter how few and far between we are.
Someone who wipes out the life savings of thousands upon thousands of people for example. I understand living in poverty means you still have your life, but only barely (i.e. being homeless, foodless, etc).
How can I go about finding these gold theaters? I would happily pay the premium to enjoy what you've described. In the words of Homer Simpon, "I'm intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter."
I believe if you're referring to the Kennedy expressway in Chicago, you're also referring to the building Lasalle Bank has painted frequently (which currently has a large mural of Chicago Marathon runners breaking through a brick wall). The painting/mural work is fantastic, but I think a poor location choice.
It doesn't matter how solid of a product Microsoft makes (latest versions of Exchange, Windows 2000/2003 Server, etc), people still whine that it:
a) costs money b) doesn't make their toast (lack-of-feature-x-whine) c) doesn't allow them to look at the source
Myself? I love Server 2003. It's solid. Very solid. It's competes for uptime against my Fedora Core DNS servers, and has no problem doing so. I'm absolutely looking forward to Exchange 2007 w/Unified Messaging. I think Microsoft overreaches sometimes, but some of their products are pretty damn good. Why can't IT folk simply use the best tool for the job? Sigh.
Correlation does not imply causation.
It's things like this that keep me contributing to the EFF. Thank you for your efforts.
I'm intrigued by your ideas, would like to subscribe to your newsletter =) Seriously though, government (not just the judicial branch) would function much more smoothly if people simply applied common sense to everyday problems.
I'd like to point out that all their client would be able to prove is that you had that one packet on your computer, and not the whole file =) Download the whole file, and then you can prove the whole file was there. Technically, I can seed a whole sea of leachers in a swarm with just that one packet, with other seeders in the swarm dishing out the rest of the file.
Google would look at that and say, "Oh! No school! Not Google material!".
spamhaus.co.uk baby!
"The Spamhaus Exploits Block List (XBL) is a realtime database of IP addresses of illegal 3rd party exploits, including open proxies (HTTP, socks, AnalogX, wingate, etc), worms/viruses with built-in spam engines, and other types of trojan-horse exploits."
I believe the limit for reporting income is $600 on a 1099.
In the event they don't fit smoothly, most facilities keep on hand a sufficient amount of liquid medium to quench the core. No power generation method is perfect (as several people have outlined in this thread), but nuclear is arguably the safest and cleanest. And technical issues can be overcome via engineering.
From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCRAM
"In modern nuclear power plants, the control rods are lifted by electric motors against both their own weight and a powerful spring. A SCRAM rapidly (less than four seconds, by test) releases the control rods from those motors and allows their weight and the spring to drive them into the reactor core, thus halting the nuclear reaction as rapidly as possible."
Also, most people are ill-informed as to why Chernobyl occured:
From Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Void_coefficient
"A positive void coefficient means that the thermal power output increases as the void content inside the reactor increases due to increased boiling or loss of liquid moderator or coolant. If the void coefficient is large enough and control systems do not respond quickly enough, this can form a positive feedback loop which can quickly boil all the coolant in the reactor. This happened in the Chernobyl accident."
It's illegal to build positive void coefficient reactors in the US for this reason. Negative coefficient reactors won't have runaway reactions.
I read the petition. I said I'd be willing to donate the $300 and have ALL 3 computers go to the 3rd world.
How about paying $300, and donating 3 with some sort of tax credit/deduction available (is the org a 501(c)(3)?) ? I'd be up for that.
I do have one point though. You're assuming that launces with this device would be as infrequent as they are now. I highly doubt that. The easier you can get to space, the more you're going to go there. Think about the increase in international travel after the jetliner was introduced.
Energy effiencieny is just as important as how clean the energy source is. You also have to look at the system as a whole, and not write anything off as an externality (Economics majors can cheat, engineers don't get to).
1) Mechanical devices are designed all the time to withstand 2000Gs. Most probes with nuclear payloads for power use RTGs, which have no moving parts.
2) Anything that can get us into space without a propellant you need to carry is a good thing. You don't dump tons and tons of carbon into the atmosphere each time you launch, and you can shoot heavier things into orbit, as you're not dragging dead weight (remember that propellant and oxidizer?) with you.
3) These accelarators use electricity for fuel, which can be derived from nuclear power plants or renewable sources (wind/solar). Don't discount the importance of that.
You must be new here.
1) Do you simply recondition the equipment and donate it to others, or do you physically break down non-working equipment in an environmentally friendly manner?
2) Is all demanufacturing done locally? Or is some/all of it sent overseas?
Please take these as just curious questions, and in no way a negative light.
-b
There is no significant atmosphere on Mars (as there is on Earth). Researchers postulate that the core of Mars shutdown at some point in the distant past, and when that occured there was no magnetic field to protect the atmosphere from being blown away by the solar wind.