I've seen 'off brand' K-Cup brewers around, so I think this move is pretty much designed to sucker people into buying something that they recently patented, and can control for a few more years.
There is no cholesterol in coffee. Coffee does contain the molecule cafestol at about.06% by weight in each coffee bean, and cafestol has been correlated with increased 'bad' cholesterol, (but other positive health effects) and there has been no evidence that paper filters removes cafestol.
Also, Keurig coffee pods are hilariously expensive compared to other coffee. 8$ for 6 cups of coffee, or grind your own and get a gallon or two for the same price.
Yes, but on the other hand, some people may not want to go into a business meeting sporting pit stains. This (hilariously expensive) item fills a little niche, People with disposable income, and guilt about driving cars, but to fat and lazy to actually ride a bike enough to be in good enough shape to travel 20 miles without breaking a sweat. I'm sure he'll sell a million units.
And then spend an half an hour configuring Adium and looking for, installing and tweaking and a style pack that makes Adium not take up 2/3rds of the screen...
Don't get me wrong, I love Adium, but its default style pack is pretty hideous.
and do what? jettisoning the entire booster assembly, (liquid tank AND SRB's) at low altitude would have been just as bad. The shuttle has a glide ratio of about 1.5:1 while hypersonic, and only gets to around 4.5:1 at best conditions (low altitude, flaring for landing) for reference, a boing 747 has a ratio of about 12:1, a skilled wing suit pilot can get 2.5:1 and a flying squirrel gets 1.98:1. This means that if they suddenly where detached from the booster assembly anywhere below a few miles or so in altitude, and considering the fall time while re-orienting the craft to upright, diving to gain enough speed to prevent stall, trimming to a glide profile, and turn towards the airfield, there would simply not be enough feet between the ground and the shuttle to get it done.
Yes, the climate is changing, and evidence suggests it is following a warming trend. However, I *personally* do not fully attribute that change to anthropocentric causes. In light of these three statements, I am firmly opposed to knee-jerk high cost outcome-vague reactionary measures that serve to drastically affect the economic stability of the nation, or even the world. I am however, in favor of further study, while implementing 'gentle' changes, ie, more efficient power generation, reduction of emissions as quickly as is cost feasible, development of more efficient homes, tools, and machines to reduce our energy needs, etc.
The bizarre and potentially harmful ideas people are floating as serious solutions to global warming are absolutely terrifying. I have seen serious proposals ranging from genetically re-engineering cows and kangaroos(?) to produce less methane, to blanketing the seas with iron oxide to cause algae blooms to absorb carbon, to anchoring giant mylar bags of C02 to the ocean floor, to scattering reflective particles in the stratosphere to reflect sunlight back into space. These, along with a host of other ideas, are beyond insane. I don't claim that global warming is a complete farce, but ideas like this, in the off chance that we are actually *wrong* could do immense and possibly irreparable damage to the environment in their own ways.
Effectively, in terms of climate change 'repair' we need a planetary version of the Hippocratic oath. "First, Do No Harm." any corrective action we take simply must not put the planet at further risk down the road. However, that is not an excuse to do nothing, greater energy efficiency across the board, and cleaner energy production are a must, and a long term benefit to humanity, no mater the final result of 'climate change science'.
All that said, Planting more trees is about the most sound and reasonable activity we can take to help balance our planets climate. Macedonia probably should be the figurehead for this. http://www.reuters.com/article...
The main engines still provide a huge amount of thrust. Of course, this is all armchair quarterback back of the envelope stuff, but shutting down and staging off malfunctioning liquid external boosters makes the craft loose a lot of weight, you push to a decent altitude on the main shuttle engines and liquid fuel tank(orbit is obviously lost because you lost the boosters) stage off the main tank, roll, and glide to the nearest available runway. In theory. obviously, this was never a possibility, because we went the SRB route.
Of course one does wonder if a half assed patch that failed partway through would have been 'just enough' to get them through, where an unpacked space would be fatal. Hindsight armchair quarterbacking at its best.
Roughly speaking, the black areas on the leading edges and underside of the shuttle are one kind of special tile for heat, and the white ones are another tile, for less extreme heat.
No, the problem with solid boosters is "Turn it on, and pray to whatever deity you prefer that you didn't just fuck yourself, because you can't shut it off." And challenger is the perfect example. A good friend of mine was standing in a room full of NASA engineers watching that launch, watching the onboard cameras. They saw that O ring break, and by his description, it was producing what looked like the Jet of a cutting torch, aimed right at one of the structural pylons that holds the external booster to the external tank. He said everyone in that room knew the mission was over the second the pressed go. That jet cut through that pylon, and that caused the external booster to nose over into the big orange tank, which ruptured it, which caused the fuel to come out, which ignited, which exploded.
Now, had the external boosters been liquid fuel, and not SRB's they could have been shut down immediately, and the mission aborted, but because they where solid boosters, the could not be turned off. Also, staging them off early was not an option, because they would have accelerated past the shuttle, probably igniting the fuel tank in the process. Solid fuel rockets are a fucking nightmare, and belong in recreational models and fireworks only.
when it comes right down to it, there is about exactly *one* way to de-orbit the space shuttle. Just like the famous explanation, to steep, you burn up, to shallow, you bounce off. (and yes, you can bounce even coming in from orbit, not just from a lunar trajectory) And if you bounce, your obit becomes all sorts of unplanned, and you probably do not have the fuel left to fix it. You either will come back around the far side, and re-enter to steep and burn up, or your just stuck in space until you're freeze dried.
Or worse, they could have gotten Atlantis into orbit, only to discover they had TWO shuttles in orbit with deadly foam strikes. Or they could have blown up Atlantis on the pad because they crammed a month worth of work into 5 days, and a weeks worth of safety and inspection checks into a few hours. Hindsight always reveals a ton of 'what if's' but in all honestly, they took option that put the fewest number of lives at risk. They lost those lives, but the call had to be made.
Speaking of fiber, in my town (a small college town, less than 9,000 people) There have been unmarked utility trucks installing underground fiber all over town. No one I've talked to has any idea who they are or what its for. (I've not reached the point of caring enough to go ask city officials) They literally installed fiber all the way around the perimeter of an empty lot. Anyone else seen this sort of activity?
Reinventing the wheel is exactly what allows us to travel 80mph without even feeling it. The original wheel probably fell apart at about 5mph after 100 yards. Wow they're rubber, self-healing, last 4000 times longer. Whoever intended the phrase "you're reinventing the wheel" to be an insult was an idiot.
shapeways uses some other weird technique for their metal printing. Their website says that metal grains are deposited with a void filler, and comes out with the structure of wet sand, and then the whole thing is moved to a special oven and heated to fuse it. They say that if what you are making can't be sculpted from wet sand, then they won't be able to print it. Somehow, this seems like a far cry from laser sintering.
Not only did Adobe email me and send me a letter about the whole thing, they gave me a free year subscription to Experian's identity theft protection services.Makes me wonder just how much info they lost about me.
Yeah, he was a great teacher. He passed away a few years back, and his funeral was standing room only. A huge number of his students, current and former attended.
You think thats bad, I was in one class in college where all but myself and one other person scored below 60%. The teacher came in and says "Well, this is bad. Almost all of you scored below 60%. I was going to grade on a curve, but those two scored 98%, so that ruined that plan. So the rest of you need to start working a little harder in here."
In the comments of the OTHER article on the same site about this same subject (i guess its an earlier interview with the author) someone clearly and intelligently outlines the details of the injuries to the bodies, and explains the causes in context. Turns out, dying of falling off a cliff, combined with extreme cold exposure, can make you look pretty gnarly. http://failuremag.com/feature/... look for a post by user 'Dee' as I decline to repost the entire comment here.
Slashdot Mirror
I've seen 'off brand' K-Cup brewers around, so I think this move is pretty much designed to sucker people into buying something that they recently patented, and can control for a few more years.
There is no cholesterol in coffee. Coffee does contain the molecule cafestol at about .06% by weight in each coffee bean, and cafestol has been correlated with increased 'bad' cholesterol, (but other positive health effects) and there has been no evidence that paper filters removes cafestol.
Get out of here with your rational arguments! this is /.! we demand abuse, strawmen, and deliberate obtuseness!
I don't really care about antioxidants, one way or the other, but Your signature made me laugh out loud, so I just wanted to say thanks for that.
Also, Keurig coffee pods are hilariously expensive compared to other coffee. 8$ for 6 cups of coffee, or grind your own and get a gallon or two for the same price.
Yeah pretty much. Also, being fat makes the bike way to top heavy, and I fall over a lot.
Because all office buildings offer free showers at the door in case you biked there. Oh wait.
Yes, but on the other hand, some people may not want to go into a business meeting sporting pit stains. This (hilariously expensive) item fills a little niche, People with disposable income, and guilt about driving cars, but to fat and lazy to actually ride a bike enough to be in good enough shape to travel 20 miles without breaking a sweat. I'm sure he'll sell a million units.
And then spend an half an hour configuring Adium and looking for, installing and tweaking and a style pack that makes Adium not take up 2/3rds of the screen...
Don't get me wrong, I love Adium, but its default style pack is pretty hideous.
and do what? jettisoning the entire booster assembly, (liquid tank AND SRB's) at low altitude would have been just as bad. The shuttle has a glide ratio of about 1.5:1 while hypersonic, and only gets to around 4.5:1 at best conditions (low altitude, flaring for landing) for reference, a boing 747 has a ratio of about 12:1, a skilled wing suit pilot can get 2.5:1 and a flying squirrel gets 1.98:1. This means that if they suddenly where detached from the booster assembly anywhere below a few miles or so in altitude, and considering the fall time while re-orienting the craft to upright, diving to gain enough speed to prevent stall, trimming to a glide profile, and turn towards the airfield, there would simply not be enough feet between the ground and the shuttle to get it done.
Yes, the climate is changing, and evidence suggests it is following a warming trend. However, I *personally* do not fully attribute that change to anthropocentric causes. In light of these three statements, I am firmly opposed to knee-jerk high cost outcome-vague reactionary measures that serve to drastically affect the economic stability of the nation, or even the world. I am however, in favor of further study, while implementing 'gentle' changes, ie, more efficient power generation, reduction of emissions as quickly as is cost feasible, development of more efficient homes, tools, and machines to reduce our energy needs, etc. The bizarre and potentially harmful ideas people are floating as serious solutions to global warming are absolutely terrifying. I have seen serious proposals ranging from genetically re-engineering cows and kangaroos(?) to produce less methane, to blanketing the seas with iron oxide to cause algae blooms to absorb carbon, to anchoring giant mylar bags of C02 to the ocean floor, to scattering reflective particles in the stratosphere to reflect sunlight back into space. These, along with a host of other ideas, are beyond insane. I don't claim that global warming is a complete farce, but ideas like this, in the off chance that we are actually *wrong* could do immense and possibly irreparable damage to the environment in their own ways. Effectively, in terms of climate change 'repair' we need a planetary version of the Hippocratic oath. "First, Do No Harm." any corrective action we take simply must not put the planet at further risk down the road. However, that is not an excuse to do nothing, greater energy efficiency across the board, and cleaner energy production are a must, and a long term benefit to humanity, no mater the final result of 'climate change science'. All that said, Planting more trees is about the most sound and reasonable activity we can take to help balance our planets climate. Macedonia probably should be the figurehead for this. http://www.reuters.com/article...
The main engines still provide a huge amount of thrust. Of course, this is all armchair quarterback back of the envelope stuff, but shutting down and staging off malfunctioning liquid external boosters makes the craft loose a lot of weight, you push to a decent altitude on the main shuttle engines and liquid fuel tank(orbit is obviously lost because you lost the boosters) stage off the main tank, roll, and glide to the nearest available runway. In theory. obviously, this was never a possibility, because we went the SRB route.
Of course one does wonder if a half assed patch that failed partway through would have been 'just enough' to get them through, where an unpacked space would be fatal. Hindsight armchair quarterbacking at its best.
Roughly speaking, the black areas on the leading edges and underside of the shuttle are one kind of special tile for heat, and the white ones are another tile, for less extreme heat.
No, the problem with solid boosters is "Turn it on, and pray to whatever deity you prefer that you didn't just fuck yourself, because you can't shut it off." And challenger is the perfect example. A good friend of mine was standing in a room full of NASA engineers watching that launch, watching the onboard cameras. They saw that O ring break, and by his description, it was producing what looked like the Jet of a cutting torch, aimed right at one of the structural pylons that holds the external booster to the external tank. He said everyone in that room knew the mission was over the second the pressed go. That jet cut through that pylon, and that caused the external booster to nose over into the big orange tank, which ruptured it, which caused the fuel to come out, which ignited, which exploded. Now, had the external boosters been liquid fuel, and not SRB's they could have been shut down immediately, and the mission aborted, but because they where solid boosters, the could not be turned off. Also, staging them off early was not an option, because they would have accelerated past the shuttle, probably igniting the fuel tank in the process. Solid fuel rockets are a fucking nightmare, and belong in recreational models and fireworks only.
when it comes right down to it, there is about exactly *one* way to de-orbit the space shuttle. Just like the famous explanation, to steep, you burn up, to shallow, you bounce off. (and yes, you can bounce even coming in from orbit, not just from a lunar trajectory) And if you bounce, your obit becomes all sorts of unplanned, and you probably do not have the fuel left to fix it. You either will come back around the far side, and re-enter to steep and burn up, or your just stuck in space until you're freeze dried.
Or worse, they could have gotten Atlantis into orbit, only to discover they had TWO shuttles in orbit with deadly foam strikes. Or they could have blown up Atlantis on the pad because they crammed a month worth of work into 5 days, and a weeks worth of safety and inspection checks into a few hours. Hindsight always reveals a ton of 'what if's' but in all honestly, they took option that put the fewest number of lives at risk. They lost those lives, but the call had to be made.
Speaking of fiber, in my town (a small college town, less than 9,000 people) There have been unmarked utility trucks installing underground fiber all over town. No one I've talked to has any idea who they are or what its for. (I've not reached the point of caring enough to go ask city officials) They literally installed fiber all the way around the perimeter of an empty lot. Anyone else seen this sort of activity?
Reinventing the wheel is exactly what allows us to travel 80mph without even feeling it. The original wheel probably fell apart at about 5mph after 100 yards. Wow they're rubber, self-healing, last 4000 times longer. Whoever intended the phrase "you're reinventing the wheel" to be an insult was an idiot.
shapeways uses some other weird technique for their metal printing. Their website says that metal grains are deposited with a void filler, and comes out with the structure of wet sand, and then the whole thing is moved to a special oven and heated to fuse it. They say that if what you are making can't be sculpted from wet sand, then they won't be able to print it. Somehow, this seems like a far cry from laser sintering.
Not only did Adobe email me and send me a letter about the whole thing, they gave me a free year subscription to Experian's identity theft protection services.Makes me wonder just how much info they lost about me.
Yeah, he was a great teacher. He passed away a few years back, and his funeral was standing room only. A huge number of his students, current and former attended.
You think thats bad, I was in one class in college where all but myself and one other person scored below 60%. The teacher came in and says "Well, this is bad. Almost all of you scored below 60%. I was going to grade on a curve, but those two scored 98%, so that ruined that plan. So the rest of you need to start working a little harder in here."
Shush! don't give them any more ideas! The last thing we need is infrasonic terror rays controlled by the government!
In the comments of the OTHER article on the same site about this same subject (i guess its an earlier interview with the author) someone clearly and intelligently outlines the details of the injuries to the bodies, and explains the causes in context. Turns out, dying of falling off a cliff, combined with extreme cold exposure, can make you look pretty gnarly. http://failuremag.com/feature/... look for a post by user 'Dee' as I decline to repost the entire comment here.