According to NASA it will still last just three years.
"The instrument utilizes a multi-stage cooling system that will maintain the ultra-low temperature of the calorimeter array for more than 3 years in space."
One guy tried to run along three sides of a square and realized he wouldn't make it. He turned back to the second corner from where he started, but that was occupied by some other guy who had come running after him. It looked like both of them were out of the game, but due to an obscure ruling he had the option of moving to the first corner.
I know nothing about baseball either, but I think that's the main idea.
IMO, the current value of a bitcoin has nothing to do with the cost to produce it or it would be in the $10-20 range, and that would still be a profit for the majority of people that mined them.
Plugging in the numbers, the 7750, which is the most energy efficient of the GPUs listed, needs a $25 price to break even if the hardware is free. That assumes a $0.15/kWh energy price, so if the majority has electricity in the 7-12 cents/kWh range you might be right.
I just checked a comparison of mining hardware and a mining profitability calculator. In essence, with the current prices ($120 last checked), GPUs are no longer profitable but a dedicated ASIC will pay itself back in less than a year even at $3/bitcoin.
Incidentally, I just realized how space based solar power could transfer the energy down to Earth. Just mine bitcoins in space, transfer them down and buy the electricity here.
Bitcoins in a rational market would cost only as much as they cost to make with perhaps a small premium.
They are probably mined as much as is economical to do. The main sign that this is happening is that mining without the latest generation of GPU is uneconomical. Any short term speculation that drives the price higher just makes it a better deal to mine more.
At the other end it's easy to imagine a situation where bitcoins aren't useful enough to be worth mining and the price drops below the cost to make them. As long as they're convenient for illegal transactions this won't happen.
I was going to just mod you up, but I had to personally commend you on being the first Slashdot troll ever to post in Dutch with a Canadian accent. Good job!
I'm not familiar with Aussie social security, but I assume you get some money if you have no other income. If you put the "new" minimum income at the same level and just adjust taxes to compensate, it wouldn't cost a cent.
Do realize that a minimum income isn't just randomly extra money that would need to be paid for with current taxes. You can always adjust the taxes to compensate.
We aren't the world, we aren't the children
We aren't the ones who make a brighter day
So lets stop giving
There's a choice we're making
We're saving our own lives
Ain't true we'll make a better day
Just you and me
I'd love to have something that could tell me the blood sugar level in real time. Alcohol level could be cool too, for getting that elusive perfect steadily rising drunkenness without blackouts or vomiting.
Animal porn and violent porn are already illegal in Finland. Violent porn is obviously not completely undefined but it may be a bit unclear. I found a blog in Finnish with some references to clarifications. Violent porn that is "playful" or shows explicit consent is legal.
Section 12 - Freedom of expression and right of access to information
Everyone has the freedom of expression. Freedom of expression entails the right to express, disseminate and receive
information, opinions and other communications without prior prevention by anyone. More detailed provisions on
the exercise of the freedom of expression are laid down by an Act. Provisions on restrictions relating to pictorial
programmes that are necessary for the protection of children may be laid down by an Act.
Documents and recordings in the possession of the authorities are public, unless their publication has for compelling
reasons been specifically restricted by an Act. Everyone has the right of access to public documents and recordings.
Looking at the current trends, not only has there been no statistically demonstratable temperature increase for the past 16 years, there is a decline over the last 5 years.
If you use only the last 16 years you can't reject the idea it's just short term noise, but there's obviously more data than that. Claiming the last 16 years is not enough to show there's warming in the same sentence as you claim the last five years is enough to show cooling is just absurd.
If you look at the data it's easy to see the amount of years have been cherrypicked to coincide with a peak in temps anyway.
There are probably hundreds of studies that try to estimate the climate sensitivity. Most get numbers between 2 and 4 degrees per doubling. This one got 1.9. So?
"But the right to delete data becomes far more controversial when it involves Fleischerâ(TM)s second category: âoeIf I post something, and someone else copies it and re-posts it on their own site, do I have the right to delete it?â Imagine a teenager regrets posting a picture of herself with a bottle of beer on her own site and after deleting it, later discovers that several of her friends have copied and reposted the picture on their own sites. If she asks them to take down the pictures, and her friends refuse or cannot be found, should Facebook be forced to delete the picture from her friendsâ(TM) albums without the ownersâ(TM) consent based solely on the teenagerâ(TM)s objection?"
If Universal posts the latest Spiderman movie and I re-post it, they can have it taken down. This is just normal copyright and that's not limited to big companies or rich people.
]
Finally, there is Fleischerâ(TM)s third category of takedown requests: âoeIf someone else posts something about me, do I have a right to delete it?â This, of course, raises the most serious concerns about free expression. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that states cannot pass laws restricting the media from disseminating truthful but embarrassing informationâ"such as the name of a rape victimâ"as long as the information was legally acquired.
The proposed European regulation, however, treats takedown requests for truthful information posted by others identically to takedown requests for photos Iâ(TM)ve posted myself that have then been copied by others: both are included in the definition of personal data as âoeany information relatingâ to me, regardless of its source. I can demand takedown and the burden, once again, is on the third party to prove that it falls within the exception for journalistic, artistic, or literary exception.
This one sucks and shouldn't be there. Obviously people should be able to talk about others even if it's not journalism or art.
Generally, I think the questions on what's ok and what's not have been solved in law long before the Internet existed. This is just about spelling out how hosters should deal with takedown notices etc.
Although I find it unlikely that the US really has anything that could navigate the black holes of the Maw and cut the distance that much, their denial has to make you wonder. Why would they need to point that out?
The LHC isn't that great for precision measurements of Higgs properties (mass, production cross section, branching ratios for decays). If there's a small deviation from the SM, the ILC could find what the LHC can't.
For supersymmetry, I'm not sure if the ILC could see anything at all given how high the masses have been pushed by the LHC already, but upping the energy from the current 8 TeV to 13 or 14 and adding 10-100 times the data can still give the LHC a chance to find SUSY.
Large extra dimensions was always a long shot. There's really no good case from theory for that showing up at current energies.
The ILC would be able to measure properties of the Higgs more accurately than the LHC, but before the LHC has ran at 13 or 14 TeV for a while we don't know if there's other interesting stuff to see.
If the LHC finds something new and the ILC has too low energy to produce it, it's wasted. Obviously those results would come long before the ILC is even close to finished, but it's important to keep options open until we know better. In addition there are other proposals for Higgs factories that would be cheaper to implement. Without new discoveries at the LHC the ILC may be pointless.
Slashdot Mirror
According to NASA it will still last just three years.
"The instrument utilizes a multi-stage cooling system that will maintain the ultra-low temperature of the calorimeter array for more than 3 years in space."
In Bend Her, Bender was transsexual. Bender is dishonest and a sexual deviant. QED.
One guy tried to run along three sides of a square and realized he wouldn't make it. He turned back to the second corner from where he started, but that was occupied by some other guy who had come running after him. It looked like both of them were out of the game, but due to an obscure ruling he had the option of moving to the first corner.
I know nothing about baseball either, but I think that's the main idea.
Would you want a screen that's in danger of being crushed by a dwarf?
Ok, I had the prices of electricity completely wrong. Apparently I pay around 9 US cents per kWh. I thought it was three times that.
IMO, the current value of a bitcoin has nothing to do with the cost to produce it or it would be in the $10-20 range, and that would still be a profit for the majority of people that mined them.
Plugging in the numbers, the 7750, which is the most energy efficient of the GPUs listed, needs a $25 price to break even if the hardware is free. That assumes a $0.15/kWh energy price, so if the majority has electricity in the 7-12 cents/kWh range you might be right.
I just checked a comparison of mining hardware and a mining profitability calculator. In essence, with the current prices ($120 last checked), GPUs are no longer profitable but a dedicated ASIC will pay itself back in less than a year even at $3/bitcoin.
Incidentally, I just realized how space based solar power could transfer the energy down to Earth. Just mine bitcoins in space, transfer them down and buy the electricity here.
Bitcoins in a rational market would cost only as much as they cost to make with perhaps a small premium.
They are probably mined as much as is economical to do. The main sign that this is happening is that mining without the latest generation of GPU is uneconomical. Any short term speculation that drives the price higher just makes it a better deal to mine more.
At the other end it's easy to imagine a situation where bitcoins aren't useful enough to be worth mining and the price drops below the cost to make them. As long as they're convenient for illegal transactions this won't happen.
I was going to just mod you up, but I had to personally commend you on being the first Slashdot troll ever to post in Dutch with a Canadian accent. Good job!
I'm not familiar with Aussie social security, but I assume you get some money if you have no other income. If you put the "new" minimum income at the same level and just adjust taxes to compensate, it wouldn't cost a cent.
Do realize that a minimum income isn't just randomly extra money that would need to be paid for with current taxes. You can always adjust the taxes to compensate.
We aren't the world, we aren't the children
We aren't the ones who make a brighter day
So lets stop giving
There's a choice we're making
We're saving our own lives
Ain't true we'll make a better day
Just you and me
I'd love to have something that could tell me the blood sugar level in real time. Alcohol level could be cool too, for getting that elusive perfect steadily rising drunkenness without blackouts or vomiting.
Honestly, this is not a bad idea. The sanctions can work if the population sees real effects of the governments actions.
And do you think the US will have high speed rail by 2033, let alone a man on Mars?
Thank you
In practice it's about restrictions on at what time of day you can show TV programs that have age limits. Dunno how widely it's possible to interpret.
Animal porn and violent porn are already illegal in Finland. Violent porn is obviously not completely undefined but it may be a bit unclear. I found a blog in Finnish with some references to clarifications. Violent porn that is "playful" or shows explicit consent is legal.
Section 12 - Freedom of expression and right of access to information
Everyone has the freedom of expression. Freedom of expression entails the right to express, disseminate and receive information, opinions and other communications without prior prevention by anyone. More detailed provisions on the exercise of the freedom of expression are laid down by an Act. Provisions on restrictions relating to pictorial programmes that are necessary for the protection of children may be laid down by an Act.
Documents and recordings in the possession of the authorities are public, unless their publication has for compelling reasons been specifically restricted by an Act. Everyone has the right of access to public documents and recordings.
Looking at the current trends, not only has there been no statistically demonstratable temperature increase for the past 16 years, there is a decline over the last 5 years.
If you use only the last 16 years you can't reject the idea it's just short term noise, but there's obviously more data than that. Claiming the last 16 years is not enough to show there's warming in the same sentence as you claim the last five years is enough to show cooling is just absurd.
If you look at the data it's easy to see the amount of years have been cherrypicked to coincide with a peak in temps anyway.
There are probably hundreds of studies that try to estimate the climate sensitivity. Most get numbers between 2 and 4 degrees per doubling. This one got 1.9. So?
"But the right to delete data becomes far more controversial when it involves Fleischerâ(TM)s second category: âoeIf I post something, and someone else copies it and re-posts it on their own site, do I have the right to delete it?â Imagine a teenager regrets posting a picture of herself with a bottle of beer on her own site and after deleting it, later discovers that several of her friends have copied and reposted the picture on their own sites. If she asks them to take down the pictures, and her friends refuse or cannot be found, should Facebook be forced to delete the picture from her friendsâ(TM) albums without the ownersâ(TM) consent based solely on the teenagerâ(TM)s objection?"
If Universal posts the latest Spiderman movie and I re-post it, they can have it taken down. This is just normal copyright and that's not limited to big companies or rich people.
] Finally, there is Fleischerâ(TM)s third category of takedown requests: âoeIf someone else posts something about me, do I have a right to delete it?â This, of course, raises the most serious concerns about free expression. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that states cannot pass laws restricting the media from disseminating truthful but embarrassing informationâ"such as the name of a rape victimâ"as long as the information was legally acquired.
The proposed European regulation, however, treats takedown requests for truthful information posted by others identically to takedown requests for photos Iâ(TM)ve posted myself that have then been copied by others: both are included in the definition of personal data as âoeany information relatingâ to me, regardless of its source. I can demand takedown and the burden, once again, is on the third party to prove that it falls within the exception for journalistic, artistic, or literary exception.
This one sucks and shouldn't be there. Obviously people should be able to talk about others even if it's not journalism or art.
Generally, I think the questions on what's ok and what's not have been solved in law long before the Internet existed. This is just about spelling out how hosters should deal with takedown notices etc.
Although I find it unlikely that the US really has anything that could navigate the black holes of the Maw and cut the distance that much, their denial has to make you wonder. Why would they need to point that out?
Found stories like
Are US evangelicals exporting anti-gay views?
"A new report reveals conservative American Christian groups behind efforts to criminalise homosexuality in Africa." and
What is Obama risking by backing gay unions?
"We ask if the US president should go a step further by offering constitutional protection for gay and lesbian couples."
Al Jazeera is far from conservative.
The LHC isn't that great for precision measurements of Higgs properties (mass, production cross section, branching ratios for decays). If there's a small deviation from the SM, the ILC could find what the LHC can't.
For supersymmetry, I'm not sure if the ILC could see anything at all given how high the masses have been pushed by the LHC already, but upping the energy from the current 8 TeV to 13 or 14 and adding 10-100 times the data can still give the LHC a chance to find SUSY.
Large extra dimensions was always a long shot. There's really no good case from theory for that showing up at current energies.
The ILC would be able to measure properties of the Higgs more accurately than the LHC, but before the LHC has ran at 13 or 14 TeV for a while we don't know if there's other interesting stuff to see.
If the LHC finds something new and the ILC has too low energy to produce it, it's wasted. Obviously those results would come long before the ILC is even close to finished, but it's important to keep options open until we know better. In addition there are other proposals for Higgs factories that would be cheaper to implement. Without new discoveries at the LHC the ILC may be pointless.