One of the main problems with batteries in general is their tendency to become discharged without use.
Would it be possible to store one of these fuel cells for an extende period (months) without losing the "charge"? I haven't really read much about this particular property of fuel cells. In fact, I can't remember seeing it discussed.
If you plan to use the Lindows example, then you can't leave out the settlement they got from MS.
Why did you leave that out? Could it be that the example you gave directly contradicts the point you tried to make?
"If a big company like Lindows could not fight off M$"
How can you possibly misrepresent facts like this? Lindows DID fight off MS, they still exist. They were compensated for changing their name, and by most accounts came out way ahead in the deal (except for that stupid name, Linspire yugh).
Please educate yourself before you make obviously false claims.
So how would you respond when I claim the only reason you feel the way you do is because your abusive, intolerant, and prejudiced parents indoctrinated you. What if I claimed your position is not yours, but is actually just propaganda that has been fed to you since you were born.
By the way, I don't believe any of those things.
The point, however, is that there is not a sinlge point of irrefutable fact anywhere in your post, only your (rather strongly voiced) opinion. Changing the perspective just a little makes it clear that there is mor to this than you make it appear.
Now, a few things. This
"I'm of the firm belief that people simply shouldn't be allowed to do this."
is a strange statement. You seem to be suggesting that parents should somehow be regulated in how they teach religion. I would be happy to hear how you would regulate this (inevtably, it will involve some type of illegal government intervention).
Also this
"The tradgedy here, is that when a child is indoctrinated in this way, it is more or less permanent."
is just patently false. There are time for hyperbole, and this isn't one of them. You know very well that many cildren grow up in religious homes, only to develop their own opinions as adults. Please don;t try to make it appear otherwise, that would be intellectually dishonest.
I love when people post, and try to seem reasonable and intelligent, but then do things like this.
"Now why does this OS problem get blamed on the admin?"
Well, let's see... WAIT!!! You answered your own question!
"its a known bug in the OS. So well known that a maintenance procedure has been implemented to keep the bug from showing itself by rebooting the comptuer system every 30 days."
How would the US feel if China or the EU could turn off www.whitehouse.gov by passing a law ?"
What does that have to do with the internet? That's a broken government thing, not a broken internet thing.
And if you think that fixing the internet by involving MORE governments is a good idea, especially when those governments will keep the internet "broken" and be able to "shut off www.whatevertheywant.com" in EXACTLY THE SAME MANNER AS THE US CAN NOW, then I can't really see how it's been fixed.
And the best part? Censorship is codified into the standards for the UN's version of the internet. How come you never bother to bring that up?
All the debate in the world won't change the single most important underlying fact, the US in the form of ICANN currently controls a tremendously valuable resource that they do not want to give up.
If they plan to debate, it should be on what kind of compensation they plan to offer in exchange for a piece.
It doesn't matter how extensively you seem to research your points, gross exaggeration and hiding behind the AC ruin any credibility you might have had.
"Overthrow and murder of Salvador Allende"
From wikipedia
"Shortly afterwards, Allende was dead, having shot himself with a machine gun, most probably the gun that bore a golden plate with the words "To my good friend Salvador Allende from Fidel Castro" engraved on it."
Care to provide some evidence of this so called "murder"? (and yes, I'm aware of the background)
See, if you ever wonder why people ignore the so called evil of the US government, it's because of people like you. After hearing so many similar lies from individuals like yourself, is it any wonder we stop listening?
Perhaps if you adopted the policy of not making incredible, unsubstantiated, unprovable, and most likely false claims, then your points would be taken seriously.
I think it's even MORE likely that the CIA called the president of the company and said "hey, do exactly what we want, or we'll screw you AND the Soviets"
"But everytime we talk about how capitalism beat communism because it is inherently better, we should remember all of these incidents which were expressly designed to choke out the Soviet State."
No, we shouldn't remember them, because the game was being played on both sides.
Please stop making it appear as though this was unique to the US. You know very well the Soviets did far worse, and are only let off because their system failed, and they were forgotten.
"The simple root of the problem on Yorktown was that politics were played in the assigning of the contract -- there was not a discussion of engineers, it was just a very small group of people pitching for it," said an engineer close to the project, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
In a statement issued this week on why NT was chosen over Unix, the Navy said that while Windows NT was specified in the Statement of Work as the operating system for the workstations in question, other components of a coming upgrade will primarily utilize Unix-based systems.
"They rushed this stuff on the ship, there was no real prototype, and then they tried to make things work as they went along," the source said. "I don't think that Unix or NT were ever really evaluated -- it was just somebody thinking this was good, with no knowledge."
The article is very clear. It makes the case that this was a poor job of designing and implementing the system. The software just happened to be NT.
Ok, so if the machine is known to have the issue, and isn't fixed, that's not MS's fault it's the admin's.
And if you disagree, take it up with the dozens of individuals who made exactly the same argument when discussing the "new" Linux worm earlier today. But post it in that thread, just to see what happens.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the main problems with batteries in general is their tendency to become discharged without use.
Would it be possible to store one of these fuel cells for an extende period (months) without losing the "charge"? I haven't really read much about this particular property of fuel cells. In fact, I can't remember seeing it discussed.
Any ideas?
That's just what they want you to think.
"They'll probably use ethanol or simular"
Ok, it's possible that this is a typo, and if so I apologize in advance.
It is similar. No "u", similar.
I bring it up because this is the most common way to mangle this word. Again if it was a typo, nevermind, but if not...
DON'T EVER SAY "SIM-U-LAR" AGAIN.
Does anyone really believe that phones won't be a catch all device soon, regardless of what Apple does?
Phones continue to add features, and consumers seem to want this feature. I doubt Apple can stop it regardless of what they do.
If you plan to use the Lindows example, then you can't leave out the settlement they got from MS.
Why did you leave that out? Could it be that the example you gave directly contradicts the point you tried to make?
"If a big company like Lindows could not fight off M$"
How can you possibly misrepresent facts like this? Lindows DID fight off MS, they still exist. They were compensated for changing their name, and by most accounts came out way ahead in the deal (except for that stupid name, Linspire yugh).
Please educate yourself before you make obviously false claims.
Give me the exact procss MS could use to bankrupt someone in this case.
They don't own the trademark. If they take him to court, what would they claim? Especially when you consider they could be penalized if they lost.
There are many cases where this particular meme applies. This is not one of them.
If you are gullible, don't do your homework, and don't hire an attorney when dealing with Microsoft, they'll screw you.
In other news, if you cover yourself in ground beef and swim with sharks, you may get bitten.
"He expected that Microsoft was acting in good faith..."
ROFL
So how would you respond when I claim the only reason you feel the way you do is because your abusive, intolerant, and prejudiced parents indoctrinated you. What if I claimed your position is not yours, but is actually just propaganda that has been fed to you since you were born.
By the way, I don't believe any of those things.
The point, however, is that there is not a sinlge point of irrefutable fact anywhere in your post, only your (rather strongly voiced) opinion. Changing the perspective just a little makes it clear that there is mor to this than you make it appear.
Now, a few things. This
"I'm of the firm belief that people simply shouldn't be allowed to do this."
is a strange statement. You seem to be suggesting that parents should somehow be regulated in how they teach religion. I would be happy to hear how you would regulate this (inevtably, it will involve some type of illegal government intervention).
Also this
"The tradgedy here, is that when a child is indoctrinated in this way, it is more or less permanent."
is just patently false. There are time for hyperbole, and this isn't one of them. You know very well that many cildren grow up in religious homes, only to develop their own opinions as adults. Please don;t try to make it appear otherwise, that would be intellectually dishonest.
Do me a favor, look up Bob Jones University, then come back and tell us how retarded we are.
PS, after looking it up, you're going to feel like a colossal ass.
I love when people post, and try to seem reasonable and intelligent, but then do things like this.
"Now why does this OS problem get blamed on the admin?"
Well, let's see... WAIT!!! You answered your own question!
"its a known bug in the OS. So well known that a maintenance procedure has been implemented to keep the bug from showing itself by rebooting the comptuer system every 30 days."
That's why.
God you made that easy.
"If the DNS hiearchy is so "free and open", how come the Bush administration blocked creation of the .xxx TLD? Since when is that not censorship?"
.xxx is still available.
Since every bit of content that would have been available on a
You need to look up censorship, because you cleary have an incorrect idea as to the meaning of the word.
"Well - it is broke.
How would the US feel if China or the EU could turn off www.whitehouse.gov by passing a law ?"
What does that have to do with the internet? That's a broken government thing, not a broken internet thing.
And if you think that fixing the internet by involving MORE governments is a good idea, especially when those governments will keep the internet "broken" and be able to "shut off www.whatevertheywant.com" in EXACTLY THE SAME MANNER AS THE US CAN NOW, then I can't really see how it's been fixed.
And the best part? Censorship is codified into the standards for the UN's version of the internet. How come you never bother to bring that up?
But what happens when their "stand" fails and they look like fools?
Does anyone honestly think big businesses will allow such a valuable resource as the internet to be bungled by governments?
How is this insightful? The ITU existed BEFORE the UN was even an idea.
If the ITU is a success, it is in spite of the UN, not because of it.
All the debate in the world won't change the single most important underlying fact, the US in the form of ICANN currently controls a tremendously valuable resource that they do not want to give up.
If they plan to debate, it should be on what kind of compensation they plan to offer in exchange for a piece.
It doesn't matter how extensively you seem to research your points, gross exaggeration and hiding behind the AC ruin any credibility you might have had.
"Overthrow and murder of Salvador Allende"
From wikipedia
"Shortly afterwards, Allende was dead, having shot himself with a machine gun, most probably the gun that bore a golden plate with the words "To my good friend Salvador Allende from Fidel Castro" engraved on it."
Care to provide some evidence of this so called "murder"? (and yes, I'm aware of the background)
See, if you ever wonder why people ignore the so called evil of the US government, it's because of people like you. After hearing so many similar lies from individuals like yourself, is it any wonder we stop listening?
Perhaps if you adopted the policy of not making incredible, unsubstantiated, unprovable, and most likely false claims, then your points would be taken seriously.
I think it's even MORE likely that the CIA called the president of the company and said "hey, do exactly what we want, or we'll screw you AND the Soviets"
"If you cause anything to blow up in a public place with the intent to injure or kill people, it sure as hell is terrorism.
Idiot"
At least you signed your name, that's better than most AC's.
"But everytime we talk about how capitalism beat communism because it is inherently better, we should remember all of these incidents which were expressly designed to choke out the Soviet State."
No, we shouldn't remember them, because the game was being played on both sides.
Please stop making it appear as though this was unique to the US. You know very well the Soviets did far worse, and are only let off because their system failed, and they were forgotten.
Do it now, then you'll understand.
"The simple root of the problem on Yorktown was that politics were played in the assigning of the contract -- there was not a discussion of engineers, it was just a very small group of people pitching for it," said an engineer close to the project, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
In a statement issued this week on why NT was chosen over Unix, the Navy said that while Windows NT was specified in the Statement of Work as the operating system for the workstations in question, other components of a coming upgrade will primarily utilize Unix-based systems.
"They rushed this stuff on the ship, there was no real prototype, and then they tried to make things work as they went along," the source said. "I don't think that Unix or NT were ever really evaluated -- it was just somebody thinking this was good, with no knowledge."
The article is very clear. It makes the case that this was a poor job of designing and implementing the system. The software just happened to be NT.
"I've never seen an "enviro-nut" bring that up, though."
That's because you did research, which is nearly as offensive to the enviro crowd as a bar of Irish Spring.
Ok, so if the machine is known to have the issue, and isn't fixed, that's not MS's fault it's the admin's.
And if you disagree, take it up with the dozens of individuals who made exactly the same argument when discussing the "new" Linux worm earlier today. But post it in that thread, just to see what happens.
"And it's all... horseshit."
So is your post. At least if we hold you both to the same standard.
He provides no evidence, and expects us to take him at his word.
You do exactly the same, then throw in a claim of expertise (which is my favorite of all fallacies).
Without evidence, it's just another case of dueling crackpots.
I'm confused, first you said this
"This design isn't new. It's bunk. As he describes it, it's a Savonius windmill, which is nothing if not inefficient."
Then you said this
"VAWTs (Vertical Axis Wind Turbines) are the eggbeater contraptions that are rare but seem to be more efficient"
Well?