For those who fear self-driving cars, Musk said the autonomous Tesla could drive 90 percent of the time, but that in his opinion, a vehicle without a human in the cockpit isn't feasible yet.
FTFY.
It's only a matter of time before vision and human prediction algorithms become adept enough to completely replace human drivers. Far before that happens, I expect to see automated vehicle only (AVO) lanes with significantly higher speed limits.
What makes you think wing flapping is more efficient than a fixed wing and propeller? I'm genuinely curios. I would think the reason birds don't have propellers is that nature has never evolved a macroscopic freely rotating axel and motor (bacteria flagella are as close as nature had come).
My understanding is that patent cases are not tried by jury.
Also, the source of this whole patent problem is that they created a pro-patent court to hear all patent cases. So I don't see how more litigation is going to solve it. Revolutionary legislation is needed (which is practically an oxymoron).
Where's the evidence? All I see is a baseless claim, with completely false technical details. RF (radio frequency) cannot be used to detect fingerprints, unless they are on a metal robot with greater than one meter peak-to-peak separations.
If you really want to lose fat, supposedly strength training at ~80% your single rep maximum is the way to go. There's been some research that shows it's the most effective workout for weight loss. Depending on your current body type, you might add more muscle mass than you lose from fat, though.
And you're basing that on..... what? Maybe you're right, but I've never seen any evidence that suggests that this is true.
Sodas are bad for you because they contain ~32 grams of sugar per 12 oz can, AND people regularly drink several cans in one sitting. That much sugar is extremely bad for you. To learn why, watch this video.
You'd be surprised what kind of crap gets published in Science and Nature - and any other peer reviewed journal, for that matter. My favorite is lasers that don't actually lase. We see those all the time.
Tritium is fairly easily produced from neutron bombardment, with the neutrons being produced by the D-T fusion. It's only expensive now because there are no running fusion reactors. Also, D-D fusion is the next most viable reaction, not D-He3 or He3-He3 fusion.
There's no such thing as a fusion chain reaction. H-bombs are really just multi-stage fission bombs with a fusion catalyst. Weaponizing fusion directly is impossible.
Practical self driving cars are going to require either huge improvements in image processing, or (IMHO more likely) ubiquitous LIDAR, which is not possible with current LIDAR technology. Current LIDAR is too easy to jam, and unable to function if there are a few similar LIDAR systems nearby. However, it's actually pretty easy to make LIDAR functional for such applications. I'm just waiting for someone to figure it out (or maybe I'll patent the solution, since no one seems to have done so yet, at least in my cursory search).
Please provide a link to any reputable source claiming that Phil Jones admitted to falsifying data and deleting it to prevent peer review. I very seriously doubt that you can. I also very seriously doubt that you care, because you seem to have made up your mind already.
That's a horrible analogy. Please explain to me how I could drown in rights and personal freedom.
Unions and workers rights can make one company or nation less competitive with others, but at a social cost. From the corporation's perspective, if you will allow me to anthropomorphize, there is no balance to strike - all workers rights are a Bad Thing.
You're mistakenly equating HFCS with fructose. Fructose is half of sucrose (refined sugar) and approximately half of HFCS. Of course swapping sucrose for HFCS doesn't change anything - they're nearly identical. The problem is that we consume so much fructose. If we only consumed glucose (the other half of sucrose and HFCS), there would be far fewer problems. However, glucose is much less sweat.
What this reminds me of is the bullshit claims about global warming on Mars and Pluto. As it happens I knew enough physics to immediately see that as bullshit (Mars receives half as much sunlight as Earth and Pluto less that 1/1000)...
I realize this is off topic, but are you claiming that the greenhouse effect is not important in determining the surface temperature of a planet? Because the evidence is overwhelming that it is. It's actually fairly easy to estimate what the surface temperature of the Earth would be if our atmosphere did not act as a greenhouse, and it would be well below the freezing point of water, making life impossible (it's simply (energy in - energy out)/boltzman constant = surface temperature, where energy out is determined by the Stefanâ"Boltzmann law at a given temperature. The equation can be iteratively solved.). Also, without the runaway greenhouse effect, Venus would be much more temperate. Mars has less atomsphere than Venus or Earth, but it still has a significant atmosphere, and the greenhouse effect is still important. As for Pluto, I don't know enough about the planetoid to comment.
You're cynicism is valid in this case. This is just rehashing research from 20 years ago on negative differential resistance (NDR) two-terminal devices. CMOS won out because it scales much better. Graphene is a horrible material for traditional logic; it has no bandgap. Graphene switches have an on-off current ratio of ~3 (tiny and useless), whereas similar sized silicon-based MOSFETs have on-off current ratios of ~1000.
There is some interesting work on making a new kind of logic with graphene-based BiSFETs, but it's still not possible to actually fabricate them. In contrast, neuristors, which are another interesting form of nanoscale logic, have been fabricated by HP labs from Mott-insulator based memristors. If I had to put my money on a replacement for CMOS, it would be these neuristors. However, there are still huge engineering challenges that lay ahead. Nonetheless, the Mott-insulator based memristors are already being commercially developed for high density, solid-state memory, with the hopes of eventually replacing flash memory.
It discusses in detail why it is the high volumes of fructose contained in our foods and beverages (in the form of sugar or HFCS) which are causing obesity and related disorders. In small quantities, they are fine, but in large quantities they lead to disease.
Your point on the need for a benevolent and strong power is very interesting. I think you may be correct. Lucky, they do occur. Even if not always within the government, they can still produce enough strong power by rallying the general population to initiate change. They are certainly rare, though.
Campaign finance laws were completely undone by SCOTUS through the Super PAC loophole. There is effectively no campaign finance regulation at the moment. It's even worse than it was 50 years ago, because now you can contribute anonymously.
I think we are well poised to hit 5%, considering at the current growth rate solar PV should reach grid parity in the next 10-15 years. There's also significant financial incentive for utility companies to use solar to level out air-conditioning induced peak loads even before grid parity is reached.
As for quadrupling my income, I may have cheated. I'm currently an electrical engineering PhD candidate living on a research stipend, so I should have about 4x my income as soon as I graduate.
Depends on the prediction. Moore's law, although not strictly a prediction at first, was certainly worth the paper it was printed on.
Here's a prediction that will certainly be worth the (digital) paper it's printed on: Moore's law will die sometime in the next 22 years. Of course, most likely CMOS transistors will be replaced by a more efficient nanoscale switch by then (here's hoping, anyways).
Here's another (at least to me): In 22 years, I'll be making at least 4x the income I'm making now (even accounting for inflation).
And another: In 22 years, solar photovoltaics will be at least 5% of US power generation (solar is currently 0.11%).
Here's a prediction much farther out: In 1000 years, if civilization survives that long, either solar power or fusion will account for the majority of our power generation.
And another even farther out: In about 1 billion years, the Sun will have expanded enough that the Earth will be uninhabitable.
And those are just some of the things I'm at least 95% certain about.
My mother had to have a small strand of copper wire about 1 cm in length (or was it 1.78 cm?) surgically removed from her hand several years ago. Odds are incredibly low that this was the source, but it does make you wonder. I don't know if the strands are guaranteed to burn up upon reentry, as implied by the above poster. Perhaps they are.
Slashdot Mirror
For those who fear self-driving cars, Musk said the autonomous Tesla could drive 90 percent of the time, but that in his opinion, a vehicle without a human in the cockpit isn't feasible yet.
FTFY.
It's only a matter of time before vision and human prediction algorithms become adept enough to completely replace human drivers. Far before that happens, I expect to see automated vehicle only (AVO) lanes with significantly higher speed limits.
What makes you think wing flapping is more efficient than a fixed wing and propeller? I'm genuinely curios. I would think the reason birds don't have propellers is that nature has never evolved a macroscopic freely rotating axel and motor (bacteria flagella are as close as nature had come).
My understanding is that patent cases are not tried by jury.
Also, the source of this whole patent problem is that they created a pro-patent court to hear all patent cases. So I don't see how more litigation is going to solve it. Revolutionary legislation is needed (which is practically an oxymoron).
Where's the evidence? All I see is a baseless claim, with completely false technical details. RF (radio frequency) cannot be used to detect fingerprints, unless they are on a metal robot with greater than one meter peak-to-peak separations.
If you really want to lose fat, supposedly strength training at ~80% your single rep maximum is the way to go. There's been some research that shows it's the most effective workout for weight loss. Depending on your current body type, you might add more muscle mass than you lose from fat, though.
Also, cut out as much sugar (particularly fructose containing sugars) from your diet as possible.
And you're basing that on..... what? Maybe you're right, but I've never seen any evidence that suggests that this is true.
Sodas are bad for you because they contain ~32 grams of sugar per 12 oz can, AND people regularly drink several cans in one sitting. That much sugar is extremely bad for you. To learn why, watch this video.
You'd be surprised what kind of crap gets published in Science and Nature - and any other peer reviewed journal, for that matter. My favorite is lasers that don't actually lase. We see those all the time.
Tritium is fairly easily produced from neutron bombardment, with the neutrons being produced by the D-T fusion. It's only expensive now because there are no running fusion reactors. Also, D-D fusion is the next most viable reaction, not D-He3 or He3-He3 fusion.
There's no such thing as a fusion chain reaction. H-bombs are really just multi-stage fission bombs with a fusion catalyst. Weaponizing fusion directly is impossible.
Practical self driving cars are going to require either huge improvements in image processing, or (IMHO more likely) ubiquitous LIDAR, which is not possible with current LIDAR technology. Current LIDAR is too easy to jam, and unable to function if there are a few similar LIDAR systems nearby. However, it's actually pretty easy to make LIDAR functional for such applications. I'm just waiting for someone to figure it out (or maybe I'll patent the solution, since no one seems to have done so yet, at least in my cursory search).
Please provide a link to any reputable source claiming that Phil Jones admitted to falsifying data and deleting it to prevent peer review. I very seriously doubt that you can. I also very seriously doubt that you care, because you seem to have made up your mind already.
That's a horrible analogy. Please explain to me how I could drown in rights and personal freedom.
Unions and workers rights can make one company or nation less competitive with others, but at a social cost. From the corporation's perspective, if you will allow me to anthropomorphize, there is no balance to strike - all workers rights are a Bad Thing.
Ahh, never heard that argument before, so didn't know what you were taking about.
Carry on! Nothing to see here! ;-)
You're mistakenly equating HFCS with fructose. Fructose is half of sucrose (refined sugar) and approximately half of HFCS. Of course swapping sucrose for HFCS doesn't change anything - they're nearly identical. The problem is that we consume so much fructose. If we only consumed glucose (the other half of sucrose and HFCS), there would be far fewer problems. However, glucose is much less sweat.
What this reminds me of is the bullshit claims about global warming on Mars and Pluto. As it happens I knew enough physics to immediately see that as bullshit (Mars receives half as much sunlight as Earth and Pluto less that 1/1000)...
I realize this is off topic, but are you claiming that the greenhouse effect is not important in determining the surface temperature of a planet? Because the evidence is overwhelming that it is. It's actually fairly easy to estimate what the surface temperature of the Earth would be if our atmosphere did not act as a greenhouse, and it would be well below the freezing point of water, making life impossible (it's simply (energy in - energy out)/boltzman constant = surface temperature, where energy out is determined by the Stefanâ"Boltzmann law at a given temperature. The equation can be iteratively solved.). Also, without the runaway greenhouse effect, Venus would be much more temperate. Mars has less atomsphere than Venus or Earth, but it still has a significant atmosphere, and the greenhouse effect is still important. As for Pluto, I don't know enough about the planetoid to comment.
You're cynicism is valid in this case. This is just rehashing research from 20 years ago on negative differential resistance (NDR) two-terminal devices. CMOS won out because it scales much better. Graphene is a horrible material for traditional logic; it has no bandgap. Graphene switches have an on-off current ratio of ~3 (tiny and useless), whereas similar sized silicon-based MOSFETs have on-off current ratios of ~1000.
There is some interesting work on making a new kind of logic with graphene-based BiSFETs, but it's still not possible to actually fabricate them. In contrast, neuristors, which are another interesting form of nanoscale logic, have been fabricated by HP labs from Mott-insulator based memristors. If I had to put my money on a replacement for CMOS, it would be these neuristors. However, there are still huge engineering challenges that lay ahead. Nonetheless, the Mott-insulator based memristors are already being commercially developed for high density, solid-state memory, with the hopes of eventually replacing flash memory.
Your absolutely correct about sugar and HFCS being almost identical. The point is that both are unhealthy in large quantities. I'm going to keep posting this presentation, in the hopes that people actually watch it: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DdBnniua6-oM
It discusses in detail why it is the high volumes of fructose contained in our foods and beverages (in the form of sugar or HFCS) which are causing obesity and related disorders. In small quantities, they are fine, but in large quantities they lead to disease.
Set aside 90 minutes to watch this video: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM&desktop_uri=/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
I promise you won't regret it.
Your point on the need for a benevolent and strong power is very interesting. I think you may be correct. Lucky, they do occur. Even if not always within the government, they can still produce enough strong power by rallying the general population to initiate change. They are certainly rare, though.
Campaign finance laws were completely undone by SCOTUS through the Super PAC loophole. There is effectively no campaign finance regulation at the moment. It's even worse than it was 50 years ago, because now you can contribute anonymously.
I think we are well poised to hit 5%, considering at the current growth rate solar PV should reach grid parity in the next 10-15 years. There's also significant financial incentive for utility companies to use solar to level out air-conditioning induced peak loads even before grid parity is reached.
As for quadrupling my income, I may have cheated. I'm currently an electrical engineering PhD candidate living on a research stipend, so I should have about 4x my income as soon as I graduate.
Depends on the prediction. Moore's law, although not strictly a prediction at first, was certainly worth the paper it was printed on.
Here's a prediction that will certainly be worth the (digital) paper it's printed on: Moore's law will die sometime in the next 22 years. Of course, most likely CMOS transistors will be replaced by a more efficient nanoscale switch by then (here's hoping, anyways).
Here's another (at least to me): In 22 years, I'll be making at least 4x the income I'm making now (even accounting for inflation).
And another: In 22 years, solar photovoltaics will be at least 5% of US power generation (solar is currently 0.11%).
Here's a prediction much farther out: In 1000 years, if civilization survives that long, either solar power or fusion will account for the majority of our power generation.
And another even farther out: In about 1 billion years, the Sun will have expanded enough that the Earth will be uninhabitable.
And those are just some of the things I'm at least 95% certain about.
I currently work at a university, and must use the university health plan, or pay for another health plan entirely by myself. That's hardly a choice.
My mother had to have a small strand of copper wire about 1 cm in length (or was it 1.78 cm?) surgically removed from her hand several years ago. Odds are incredibly low that this was the source, but it does make you wonder. I don't know if the strands are guaranteed to burn up upon reentry, as implied by the above poster. Perhaps they are.
Pure hydrogen? At what pressure? Definitely not at atmospheric pressure.
The view.