It is high, but not out of the range of reality. Converting to units that I understand, I get 9 gallons of fuel per acre, assuming that he's talking about CO2, rather than carbon. That's got to be the total emissions per acre, rather than just for one or two operations, like discing his fields. And maybe his fuel calculation includes the fertilization that he's not doing anymore??? He is using a sizable machine, though. Maybe the number accounts for his total fuel consumption for a year's production.
It's been years since I worked on farms as a boy, and my memory has never been as good as the farmers that I worked for, so I spent some time with google after I wrote the preceding paragraph. The University of Iowa suggests that corn, a particularly fuel-intensive crop shouldn't need more than 5-6 gallons of fuel per acre. Also look to the University of Illinois for a shorter discussion.
I just can't get to 9 gal/ac, but maybe the farmer had an extra can of Fosters that day, or maybe he just wants to feel good about what he's doing.
(I used, 2.23 lb/kilo, 2.47 ac/ha, 22 lb CO2/gal diesel. Let me know if I've screwed up somewhere. 1.1 kg/ha, as suggested below, is low by more than two orders of magnitude, by the way.)/p>
Really? The Razr is commonly touted as Motorola's last great success. I knew several people who bought, and were happy with, the Razr, including my wife. I considered one, but decided that I'd rather keep the LG that randomly stops working. (I'm not a big fan of ubiquitous communication.)
To respond to your point more directly, Motorola are not competing by themselves. they're using a form factor that is proven (see Nokia devices for several examples.) Motorola are using an OS that has already seen modest success; an OS sharpened by a company (google) who strive for ubiquity. The Droid also has some components that the iPhone is missing.
As long as their implementation is sound, I see no reason why Verizon, Motorola and Google shouldn't enjoy profits from the Droid. They are entering an established market; each is an experienced competitor; and there are lots of us who have been shut out of the iPhone market because we are Verizon customers. (I've heard complaints, but frankly, I've had nothing but positive experience with the company.) Further, Verizon seems to be marketing this harder than Motorola or Google. I have modest respect for Verizon, and find it difficult to believe that they would allow Motorola to sully their name.
I believe that this phone will enjoy moderate success. It doesn't have the cachet of Apple, but it's entering a market with a good deal of potential. Besides, Motorola is getting hungry: They played a big part in defining the cell phone market, and they nearly died by failing to follow through with their earlier success. Motorola has lots to lose, and I think that they really want to get it right.
All that aside, I figure that it's an open platform. If Motorola really gets it wrong, within 3 months, I'll be able to update it with a more friendly platform. I've already told my wife that she's getting one, and finally, after 7 years with the same phone, I intend to buy a new phone.
Maybe you hate Motorola phones, but I'm really looking forward to the Droid. I hope that it lives up to my expectations.
Few users understand templates, or use them properly, and fewer yet can create new styles fluently.
I can't speak to the rest of your diat . ..erm. . . comment, but I can say that even if you spend the time to understand Word templates, the "shit still breaks." I disliked Word when I formatted every paragraph individually. I hate Word after dealing with Styles and Templates.
If you reduce the temperature between the phases of the cycle, then the efficiency will go down. (In the ubiquitous Wikipedia article, that would be the difference between Th and Tc. In the case of every heat engine, some of that heat is going to necessarily go to waste. Your car has a big radiator out front to handle this waste heat. (Just for giggles, here's another Wikipedia article about the Otto cycle.)
The little doodads they suggest in the article use heat that would have just gone away to the environment anyhow. The trouble with peltiers is that they have (or at least used to) have a fairly high $/watt up-front cost. The little buggers, in my opinion, are too expensive to bother.
Now for my question: Did the folks who made the silly devices find out how much energy is invested into building the peltier units and compare that to the electricity (or fuel) saved?
html is how I've always done it. I'm sure that someone fellow who looks down on mere mortals with disdain will explain that I'm doing it all wrong, though.
And was re-offered his position after many people including Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP, spoke harshly of mayor Williams "acceptance" of Howard's resignation. Too bad that it went as far as it did, though. Ignorance always has a cost.
Indeed. The CRA was only a small part of the problem. More than a decade of very low interest rates encouraged irresponsible activity on every end of the problem. There was just too much money available, so it was inevitable that people would find some way to make use of it.
Freddie and Fannie, though were part of the problem rather than the witless bystanders that you suggest. With those two there was an implicit guarantee that they would be bailed if there were problems with their assets. This implicit guarantee further encouraged lenders to take risks.
I won't ignore the predatory practices of some lenders, though. I hope, but doubt, that most of the people who were defrauded are able to recover damages.
You seem to give a pass to "poor minorities" (I promise that it wasn't just minorities.) who made bad decisions. (Speaking as a middle-class minority who used to poor.) Why? You clearly feel free to pass moral judgment on companies you think acted irresponsibly. It looks, from my end, like your problem is less with the behaviour than it is with private companies.
Personally, I'm still renting, trying my best to save enough for a sizable down-payment while raising two kids. I'm frankly angry that so much has been thrown at irresponsible companies and that it looks like so much more will be thrown at irresponsible people. It pisses me off to know that some of the money that I work so hard for is going to people and companies who have fucked up so royally.
In reviewing this, I've noticed that I produced a poorly organized rant, rather than any coherent commentary on the above statements. Sorry to subject the reader to this.
I recently went to an ITE luncheon at which the LAPD presented a (surprisingly thorough) study of various red light camera countermeasures on the market. If they were telling the truth in their presentation, then not one of those products works worth a hoot. They had better results with clear acrylic paint than with covers or the specialty paint.
It's probably worth noting that the cameras in question were fairly new.
Mr Talmage explains that if they modify an existing aircraft as proposed in the AIAA paper, the escape cabin can be demonstrated in eight months and the rocket flight demonstrated within the next few months.
eh? Where in hell does the sulfur come from? The materials involved in the described reaction: Baking Soda (NaOH), water (H20), Aluminum (Al), and Silver Oxide (Ag2O?). There's no Sulfur anywhere in there. And I've never smelled H2S when I've done this.
I used google's translation service to translate your post first to Chinese, then back to English and came up with:
This is quite ridiculous, but no server error I found that the Chinese translation (traditional and simplified Chinese), to work better than the general language. I would like to find an interesting misinterpretation, but I systran translation work perfect. The worst I can find my original subject line, "It was quite funny," yes, "This is quite ridiculous."
The situation is serious, with longer or more complex sentences and turns of phrase, but I am surprised at the complexity of modern machine translation. This story is really fun to make, regardless of the server is running on the translator, translator or owners of Internet cafes rather than their own.
I think the interesting Indian Chinese English, it is often printed in the same font. Check to see many of the markers, direction or 'made in China' label, you lay some of the products; opportunities is that they are the same as the old-fashioned in a serif font. No one can tell us the story behind this common English 'character, I get, so often?
I have this impression of China that everything there is done as cheaply as possible without regard to safety or double checking, etc.
Don't I wish. I'm a consultant to the architects working on a large new building in Shanghai. I can't go into much depth, but there are definitely details over which city officials have strong concerns.
Try to tell city officials, for example, that a subterranean parking garage doesn't need fire doors throughout, with *surprisingly* strong doors at the bottom level. . .
I'll assume that this means that no certificate lasts 5 years.
Based on what I've read below, though, it sounds like the only substantive difference between CACert short-term certificates and GoDaddy certificates is the $15 that you have to pay to GoDaddy.
Thanks for your explanation and opinion. I think I'll shut up now and go start reading at Wikipedia and see where that leads.
How does this compare to other authorities like Verisign? How frequently does Verisign revoke a certificate? If it's not very often, should they be revoking more than they do?
Can't you get a short-lived certificate from CACert? Could what you point out be the expiration of those shourt-lived certificates?
I thought that they have multiple levels of trust, some levels of which include having trusted people confirm your identification.
I don't know much about this stuff, so I'm not trying to be snarky, just asking.
I frequently travel for work and occasionally buy a game, so I sent an e-mail to LGPs' sales address asking how long their copy protection scheme can go between internet connections. If I receive an answer, I'll reply here.
From the article,
For those with limited Internet access, the copy-protection scheme "makes allowances if you have no [Internet] connection, but after a while you must have a [Internet] connection once in a while to allow the game to keep playing."
So they already thought of your problem.
Slashdot Mirror
It is high, but not out of the range of reality. Converting to units that I understand, I get 9 gallons of fuel per acre, assuming that he's talking about CO2, rather than carbon. That's got to be the total emissions per acre, rather than just for one or two operations, like discing his fields. And maybe his fuel calculation includes the fertilization that he's not doing anymore??? He is using a sizable machine, though. Maybe the number accounts for his total fuel consumption for a year's production.
It's been years since I worked on farms as a boy, and my memory has never been as good as the farmers that I worked for, so I spent some time with google after I wrote the preceding paragraph. The University of Iowa suggests that corn, a particularly fuel-intensive crop shouldn't need more than 5-6 gallons of fuel per acre. Also look to the University of Illinois for a shorter discussion.
I just can't get to 9 gal/ac, but maybe the farmer had an extra can of Fosters that day, or maybe he just wants to feel good about what he's doing.
(I used, 2.23 lb/kilo, 2.47 ac/ha, 22 lb CO2/gal diesel. Let me know if I've screwed up somewhere. 1.1 kg/ha, as suggested below, is low by more than two orders of magnitude, by the way.)/p>
The Razr was a disaster.
Really? The Razr is commonly touted as Motorola's last great success. I knew several people who bought, and were happy with, the Razr, including my wife. I considered one, but decided that I'd rather keep the LG that randomly stops working. (I'm not a big fan of ubiquitous communication.)
To respond to your point more directly, Motorola are not competing by themselves. they're using a form factor that is proven (see Nokia devices for several examples.) Motorola are using an OS that has already seen modest success; an OS sharpened by a company (google) who strive for ubiquity. The Droid also has some components that the iPhone is missing.
As long as their implementation is sound, I see no reason why Verizon, Motorola and Google shouldn't enjoy profits from the Droid. They are entering an established market; each is an experienced competitor; and there are lots of us who have been shut out of the iPhone market because we are Verizon customers. (I've heard complaints, but frankly, I've had nothing but positive experience with the company.) Further, Verizon seems to be marketing this harder than Motorola or Google. I have modest respect for Verizon, and find it difficult to believe that they would allow Motorola to sully their name.
I believe that this phone will enjoy moderate success. It doesn't have the cachet of Apple, but it's entering a market with a good deal of potential. Besides, Motorola is getting hungry: They played a big part in defining the cell phone market, and they nearly died by failing to follow through with their earlier success. Motorola has lots to lose, and I think that they really want to get it right.
All that aside, I figure that it's an open platform. If Motorola really gets it wrong, within 3 months, I'll be able to update it with a more friendly platform. I've already told my wife that she's getting one, and finally, after 7 years with the same phone, I intend to buy a new phone.
Maybe you hate Motorola phones, but I'm really looking forward to the Droid. I hope that it lives up to my expectations.
Don't kid too much! Can it run Windows XP under Windows 7? Nope.
Few users understand templates, or use them properly, and fewer yet can create new styles fluently.
I can't speak to the rest of your diat . . .erm. . . comment, but I can say that even if you spend the time to understand Word templates, the "shit still breaks." I disliked Word when I formatted every paragraph individually. I hate Word after dealing with Styles and Templates.
grass? What's that? Oh, you mean that green stuff? You have that where you work? I'm jealous!
If you reduce the temperature between the phases of the cycle, then the efficiency will go down. (In the ubiquitous Wikipedia article, that would be the difference between Th and Tc. In the case of every heat engine, some of that heat is going to necessarily go to waste. Your car has a big radiator out front to handle this waste heat. (Just for giggles, here's another Wikipedia article about the Otto cycle.)
The little doodads they suggest in the article use heat that would have just gone away to the environment anyhow. The trouble with peltiers is that they have (or at least used to) have a fairly high $/watt up-front cost. The little buggers, in my opinion, are too expensive to bother.
Now for my question: Did the folks who made the silly devices find out how much energy is invested into building the peltier units and compare that to the electricity (or fuel) saved?
- PDFedit/Inkspot
The mighty google has failed me. What is Inkspot?
Isn't everybody griping that the loans have stopped despite the massive cash layout?
Seriously, do you have anything better to do than whinge?
For anybody who, like me, hasn't seen whinge used elsewhere, Dictionary.com defines it:
whinge [hwinj, winj] -verb (used without object), whinged, whing -ing. British and Australian Informal. to complain; whine.
html is how I've always done it. I'm sure that someone fellow who looks down on mere mortals with disdain will explain that I'm doing it all wrong, though.
And was re-offered his position after many people including Julian Bond, chairman of the NAACP, spoke harshly of mayor Williams "acceptance" of Howard's resignation. Too bad that it went as far as it did, though. Ignorance always has a cost.
Indeed. The CRA was only a small part of the problem. More than a decade of very low interest rates encouraged irresponsible activity on every end of the problem. There was just too much money available, so it was inevitable that people would find some way to make use of it.
Freddie and Fannie, though were part of the problem rather than the witless bystanders that you suggest. With those two there was an implicit guarantee that they would be bailed if there were problems with their assets. This implicit guarantee further encouraged lenders to take risks.
I won't ignore the predatory practices of some lenders, though. I hope, but doubt, that most of the people who were defrauded are able to recover damages.
You seem to give a pass to "poor minorities" (I promise that it wasn't just minorities.) who made bad decisions. (Speaking as a middle-class minority who used to poor.) Why? You clearly feel free to pass moral judgment on companies you think acted irresponsibly. It looks, from my end, like your problem is less with the behaviour than it is with private companies.
Personally, I'm still renting, trying my best to save enough for a sizable down-payment while raising two kids. I'm frankly angry that so much has been thrown at irresponsible companies and that it looks like so much more will be thrown at irresponsible people. It pisses me off to know that some of the money that I work so hard for is going to people and companies who have fucked up so royally.
In reviewing this, I've noticed that I produced a poorly organized rant, rather than any coherent commentary on the above statements. Sorry to subject the reader to this.
I recently went to an ITE luncheon at which the LAPD presented a (surprisingly thorough) study of various red light camera countermeasures on the market. If they were telling the truth in their presentation, then not one of those products works worth a hoot. They had better results with clear acrylic paint than with covers or the specialty paint.
It's probably worth noting that the cameras in question were fairly new.
What next, a breathalyser for paedophiles?
Yep.
Mr Talmage explains that if they modify an existing aircraft as proposed in the AIAA paper, the escape cabin can be demonstrated in eight months and the rocket flight demonstrated within the next few months.
For big stuff: McMaster-Carr
For little stuff: Small Parts, Inc.
For custom stuff, use a local machine shop or emachineshop.
good luck.
Your link reminded me of another that I saw a few weeks ago here. For extra laughs, view the page source.
eh? Where in hell does the sulfur come from? The materials involved in the described reaction: Baking Soda (NaOH), water (H20), Aluminum (Al), and Silver Oxide (Ag2O?). There's no Sulfur anywhere in there. And I've never smelled H2S when I've done this.
This is quite ridiculous, but no server error I found that the Chinese translation (traditional and simplified Chinese), to work better than the general language. I would like to find an interesting misinterpretation, but I systran translation work perfect. The worst I can find my original subject line, "It was quite funny," yes, "This is quite ridiculous." The situation is serious, with longer or more complex sentences and turns of phrase, but I am surprised at the complexity of modern machine translation. This story is really fun to make, regardless of the server is running on the translator, translator or owners of Internet cafes rather than their own. I think the interesting Indian Chinese English, it is often printed in the same font. Check to see many of the markers, direction or 'made in China' label, you lay some of the products; opportunities is that they are the same as the old-fashioned in a serif font. No one can tell us the story behind this common English 'character, I get, so often?
Â
I have this impression of China that everything there is done as cheaply as possible without regard to safety or double checking, etc.
Don't I wish. I'm a consultant to the architects working on a large new building in Shanghai. I can't go into much depth, but there are definitely details over which city officials have strong concerns.
Try to tell city officials, for example, that a subterranean parking garage doesn't need fire doors throughout, with *surprisingly* strong doors at the bottom level. . .
It was towed there with this, of course.
I know you edited that sentence below, but you might consider nuking it from orbit, instead. It really is quite an awkward sentence.
It had to expire by now
I'll assume that this means that no certificate lasts 5 years. Based on what I've read below, though, it sounds like the only substantive difference between CACert short-term certificates and GoDaddy certificates is the $15 that you have to pay to GoDaddy.
Thanks for your explanation and opinion. I think I'll shut up now and go start reading at Wikipedia and see where that leads.
How does this compare to other authorities like Verisign? How frequently does Verisign revoke a certificate? If it's not very often, should they be revoking more than they do?
Can't you get a short-lived certificate from CACert? Could what you point out be the expiration of those shourt-lived certificates? I thought that they have multiple levels of trust, some levels of which include having trusted people confirm your identification.
I don't know much about this stuff, so I'm not trying to be snarky, just asking.
I'll answer each question in turn: I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I read LGPs' supplemental press release at http://www.linuxgamepublishing.com/press_releases/200806241.txt but found it no more informative than the original article.
I frequently travel for work and occasionally buy a game, so I sent an e-mail to LGPs' sales address asking how long their copy protection scheme can go between internet connections. If I receive an answer, I'll reply here.