The physics of power generation is against you. Quite simply its cheaper--a lot cheaper to have a minimum size generation plant which is well into the MW range, around 100MW or more IIRC. Its the reason power generation is centralized. Its cheaper. It really is that simple.
Its just not practical and you have the problem that you can still leak Na to a area where its not "dry". On top of that hot Na reacts with many more things than just water. It would be cheaper and easier to not use liquid sodium. Its why i like molten salt reactors and homogeneous reactors in general.
If you really want to see the "public" foaming at the mouth. Put the price of a gallon of gas up a few dollars. Sure we hate oil. We hate it soo much we burn as much of the stuff as we can, any chance we get.
I can pull all sorts of figures out of my ass too. However in the real world, someone need to actually pay the real costs, not fabricated ones. The classic trick with renewable is that it cost $X to install 1MW (peak) but then assume that it will produce 1MW over its lifetime. Fact is that a 1MW wind turbine in most locations will produce far less than 500kW and often less than 200kW. Since its v^3 for wind energy, almost all your energy for most sites is over a comparably few windy days.
Its not a conspiracy, renewables really do cost more at this stage.
Also sizing the local grid based on a "max gust output" looks like a real good way to make wind a lot more expensive than it already is. Remember even in the best case you have MWs of generators working at below their rated output most of the time anyway. Dito with the local grid.
Most journals require the data be made available at the time of the papers submission. For many fields there are public databases that can be used for free. Most universities provide more than enough storage and bandwidth that a torrent is not needed.
If the data and methods were released in such a way, there would be no need for FOIAs. But even though much of the raw data is available from many different places, there are a lot of "intermediate" steps that are left out. These steps are important. The intermediate results are important.
Reasonable scientists listen to data. Science is not about a poll result or a popularity contest. The most popular idea/opinion is not necessarily the correct one.
So... no nation wide (or even local) power failure... no medical systems failing, no traffic lights turning all green, no defense systems freaking out, no planes falling from the sky, no death and doom. Instead just a quirk in your system, that's probably already added to a long list of quirks and other bugs that's general a part of non trivial systems.
The media's version and hysteria of the Y2K that went on in 1999 didn't happen. Didn't even get close to happening, and never was going to happen.
A supermarket chain my friend worked on had a problems too, it kept tiring to order 20 tons of frozen chicken after 1/1/2000 on a reboot. But since the order never got authorized and since its not the first time the inventory system borked it up. Its was hardly cause for widespread hype, and predictions of doom coming true now is it.
The companies I was working for had these types of interdependent systems. They did in fact have full dummy test systems with duplicate data and duplicate hardware. The hardware was duplicated to the point of attempting to even have the same batch number for the memory etc. Over a duplicated network. I kid you not. I signed NDAs so i can't tell who however.
Of course nothing was running Access or windows or PCs (aka 2034 or whatever is the overflow date), and even back then the DATE data type in these databases was not susceptible either.
I mean what global bank would be stupid enough not to be running on decent hardware/software? Its not like we needed to use 2 digits for the year in Big Iron even ages before y2k.
Also if you don't recognize the hype of y2k, then well I guess you like entertainment via news. It was so ridiculous what they where claiming. Things that had no use of date, where going to suddenly call up the Russians and fire every nuke. It really was pretty stupid. Almost as bad as some 2012ers.
I was doing consulting work for a number of companies at the time, and i said don't bother with Y2K its all hype. I asked them how many times they have had a big crash and how bad was it *really*. A few companies didn't do anything and I got a massive bonus from them when nothing did happen.
Y2K was a farce. It always was. Hell people were asking "but we don't even know how to test for it?". What the hell, these are companies that have duplicate test hardware... Set the date to 1999 23:50 and wait 10 mins!
I do not want my fridge even theoretically accessible from the outside.
Addressable and accessible are not the same thing. While i agree that a fridge does not need to be networked, the hack of nat does not in fact remove accessibility to machines behind the nat. It only removes addressablity. NAT does not add security as "hole punching" demonstrates. Firewalls need to in place today, and they need to be in place in the future under IPv6 to control accessibility. The difference is we won't have nat to make configuration such PITA.
But for a fridge I think a AirGap firewall is what i will use. You can't beat the price, and its easy to configure.
Corporations would stock more expensive products (and hence more coin per item) in a heartbeat if it would sell. But the fact is its the normal person on the street that wants the ear phones at half the price over idealism. And stockholders are just about everyone too. When was the last time wanted your investments (401k whatever) interest rate be cut in favor of idealism?
Hell, i do it here at university... puts the students off thou, apparently they feel its less appropriate for the lecturer to grab a cat nap during the lecture than a student.
Any radio system can't be accurate to the nanosecond without position information relative to the transmitter, since light can only travel about 30 cm in that time. DCF77 is no exception.
When you get a License from MPEG-LA, you don't get an indemnity guarantee at all. In fact they even say that there could be patents covering it that they don't know about, and its between you and the patent holder. ie you get nothing but the listed patents...and nothing of what you have demaned and thats after paying cold hard cash.
Software patents in a patent system that defaults to "just grant it and let the courts sort it out", mean that there is no such thing as safe from patents for any software. You just need to have cash to be a target.
Have you read the terms of the license that MPEG-LA provides? Other than the 5million per year (subject to change later...if MPEG-LA feels like it) its the terms and conditions that you are forced to sign in order to get that license. Like say not permitted to allow third party redistribution rights at all.
Slashdot Mirror
The same can be said about solar and wind energy.
The physics of power generation is against you. Quite simply its cheaper--a lot cheaper to have a minimum size generation plant which is well into the MW range, around 100MW or more IIRC. Its the reason power generation is centralized. Its cheaper. It really is that simple.
Perhaps in the bright, distant future when everyone lives in prosperity...
If you told someone a 100 years ago about about the life style of the average western person today, they would say we live in that future right now.
Its just not practical and you have the problem that you can still leak Na to a area where its not "dry". On top of that hot Na reacts with many more things than just water. It would be cheaper and easier to not use liquid sodium. Its why i like molten salt reactors and homogeneous reactors in general.
Uranium *dissolved* in ground water is not the same as "just baking soda".
If you really want to see the "public" foaming at the mouth. Put the price of a gallon of gas up a few dollars. Sure we hate oil. We hate it soo much we burn as much of the stuff as we can, any chance we get.
I can pull all sorts of figures out of my ass too. However in the real world, someone need to actually pay the real costs, not fabricated ones. The classic trick with renewable is that it cost $X to install 1MW (peak) but then assume that it will produce 1MW over its lifetime. Fact is that a 1MW wind turbine in most locations will produce far less than 500kW and often less than 200kW. Since its v^3 for wind energy, almost all your energy for most sites is over a comparably few windy days.
Its not a conspiracy, renewables really do cost more at this stage.
Also sizing the local grid based on a "max gust output" looks like a real good way to make wind a lot more expensive than it already is. Remember even in the best case you have MWs of generators working at below their rated output most of the time anyway. Dito with the local grid.
The space shuttle and constellation for that matter has always been good money after bad. Well except for the good part.
Most journals require the data be made available at the time of the papers submission. For many fields there are public databases that can be used for free. Most universities provide more than enough storage and bandwidth that a torrent is not needed.
If the data and methods were released in such a way, there would be no need for FOIAs. But even though much of the raw data is available from many different places, there are a lot of "intermediate" steps that are left out. These steps are important. The intermediate results are important.
Reasonable scientists listen to data. Science is not about a poll result or a popularity contest. The most popular idea/opinion is not necessarily the correct one.
Better that the a veil of arbitrary secrecy.
So... no nation wide (or even local) power failure... no medical systems failing, no traffic lights turning all green, no defense systems freaking out, no planes falling from the sky, no death and doom. Instead just a quirk in your system, that's probably already added to a long list of quirks and other bugs that's general a part of non trivial systems.
The media's version and hysteria of the Y2K that went on in 1999 didn't happen. Didn't even get close to happening, and never was going to happen.
A supermarket chain my friend worked on had a problems too, it kept tiring to order 20 tons of frozen chicken after 1/1/2000 on a reboot. But since the order never got authorized and since its not the first time the inventory system borked it up. Its was hardly cause for widespread hype, and predictions of doom coming true now is it.
The companies I was working for had these types of interdependent systems. They did in fact have full dummy test systems with duplicate data and duplicate hardware. The hardware was duplicated to the point of attempting to even have the same batch number for the memory etc. Over a duplicated network. I kid you not. I signed NDAs so i can't tell who however.
Of course nothing was running Access or windows or PCs (aka 2034 or whatever is the overflow date), and even back then the DATE data type in these databases was not susceptible either.
I mean what global bank would be stupid enough not to be running on decent hardware/software? Its not like we needed to use 2 digits for the year in Big Iron even ages before y2k.
Also if you don't recognize the hype of y2k, then well I guess you like entertainment via news. It was so ridiculous what they where claiming. Things that had no use of date, where going to suddenly call up the Russians and fire every nuke. It really was pretty stupid. Almost as bad as some 2012ers.
I was doing consulting work for a number of companies at the time, and i said don't bother with Y2K its all hype. I asked them how many times they have had a big crash and how bad was it *really*. A few companies didn't do anything and I got a massive bonus from them when nothing did happen.
Y2K was a farce. It always was. Hell people were asking "but we don't even know how to test for it?". What the hell, these are companies that have duplicate test hardware... Set the date to 1999 23:50 and wait 10 mins!
I do not want my fridge even theoretically accessible from the outside.
Addressable and accessible are not the same thing. While i agree that a fridge does not need to be networked, the hack of nat does not in fact remove accessibility to machines behind the nat. It only removes addressablity. NAT does not add security as "hole punching" demonstrates. Firewalls need to in place today, and they need to be in place in the future under IPv6 to control accessibility. The difference is we won't have nat to make configuration such PITA.
But for a fridge I think a AirGap firewall is what i will use. You can't beat the price, and its easy to configure.
Iraqis also don't have a right to bear arms. Whats your point?
Corporations would stock more expensive products (and hence more coin per item) in a heartbeat if it would sell. But the fact is its the normal person on the street that wants the ear phones at half the price over idealism. And stockholders are just about everyone too. When was the last time wanted your investments (401k whatever) interest rate be cut in favor of idealism?
Hell, i do it here at university... puts the students off thou, apparently they feel its less appropriate for the lecturer to grab a cat nap during the lecture than a student.
And how exactly is the "right to bear arms" going to measure up against the US armed forces? How many Americans own tanks?
He who commands the loyalty of the army has the power to over throw government with force. The general populous does not.
Any radio system can't be accurate to the nanosecond without position information relative to the transmitter, since light can only travel about 30 cm in that time. DCF77 is no exception.
When you get a License from MPEG-LA, you don't get an indemnity guarantee at all. In fact they even say that there could be patents covering it that they don't know about, and its between you and the patent holder. ie you get nothing but the listed patents...and nothing of what you have demaned and thats after paying cold hard cash.
Software patents in a patent system that defaults to "just grant it and let the courts sort it out", mean that there is no such thing as safe from patents for any software. You just need to have cash to be a target.
Have you read the terms of the license that MPEG-LA provides? Other than the 5million per year (subject to change later...if MPEG-LA feels like it) its the terms and conditions that you are forced to sign in order to get that license. Like say not permitted to allow third party redistribution rights at all.
Try telling that to the judge and lawyers mr AC.
..users can be educated..
Users can never be educated. Ever.