Comment Not too subtle! (Score 2) 174
And the fools days is upon us again. Well done slashdot, and happy Birthday to the Royal Canadian Air Force
And the fools days is upon us again. Well done slashdot, and happy Birthday to the Royal Canadian Air Force
I hear you.
I see it as an evolutionary process, the hydrogen powered ICE (Internal Combustable Engine) while not that efficient, may well prove to be better than a gasoline powered unit. If we can keep costs down, and then when the next generation of technology is ready to do it cheaply, then slide it in. You will always have early adopters ready to spend big money right away in order to be more green, or perhaps burn less gas. But like the chevy volt, who can affort to pay the full cost of new technology?
If we are using excess energy to produce Hydrogen gas, why not burn it initially in an ICE even if it is not the most efficient use possible? Compared to what we have now, it's found power. We can start using it right away, and then get extra capacity later on by increasing efficiency, either by better production techniques or more efficient engine systems, or both. If we start producing Hydrogen with our spare power, I think there would be room to try several things to see what we can come up with.
"Would you really want to drive a minivan that seats two people just to have a cheap fuel cell?"
I drive such a minivan, it's called a bike.
Why bother with a fuel cell? use an Internal Combustion Engine
powered by hydrogen?
Updates for Nexus phones are independent of the carriers.
A Seattle bar has issued a preemptive ban of Google Glass to preserve the privacy of its tipplers. The 5 Point Cafe in Seattle announced plans to suppress the futuristic devices on its Facebook page this week, and didn't mince words. "The 5 Point is the first Seattle business to ban in advance Google Glasses," the bar wrote. "And ass kickings will be encouraged for violators."
Apparently, It is a self described Dive Bar and they already do ban recording and pictures. I'm pretty sure this will come as no surprise, even Steve Mann has had issues with acceptance by the general public.
Do you think this technology will become so mainstream that people will give up trying to protect their privacy?
If you try to highlight the text to cut and paste it, you are presented with a pop-up request to purchase a licence if you plan to post the article to a website, intranet or a blog. The fee would be $150.
He points out that even if you are highlighting a 3rd party quote inside an article a pop-up asking if you want a license will appear. I have tried highlighting Associated Press, or Canadian Press articles and this does not appear. But try it on any of the Post's articles or commentary it will. Even if it happens to be a 3rd party quote.
The Copyright service provider is iCopyright. This appears to be a US company, and as Mr Geist points out it might be contrary to Canadian Copyright Law's fair use provisions.
Many Canadian Newspaper sites are moving to pay to view models, The Globe and Mail and Sun Papers included. Since it is harder to make money publishing the news, is this the way of the future? I hope not.
Wow.
According to the timeline, Africa went bankrupt in 1985!
Fact checking at its best
The proper course of action would have been for them to line up equally (apparently) qualified academicians on their side of the argument and let the book-buying institutions decide for themselves. It would seem that both sides of the argument were already being hashed out on the blog, and now arrives The Streisand Effect in spades!
It would appear that this company's reputation is already well pretty. well established
The nicest thing I have seen so far are the comments that say it is just one step above a vanity press.
The biggest difference between time and space is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst