You can get round these problems by sticking it to chains of carbon.

I've even heard rumors that some of this stuff is actually available by drilling into Earth's surface!

Nitrogen is not normally a component in diesel fuel.

Did I miss something? For the combustion of diesel fuel, you need air, and air is composed of 78% nitrogen.

But ... the administration says that slightly reducing the rate at which we add on trillions more in debt is a proud accomplishment. So, this has to be similar.

All well and good, but doesn't exactly solve the problem of greenhouse gas emissions.

The most interesting application of things like this is if they can take advantage of spikes of excess energy availability-- essentially making them a battery.

I get it. It's just too much trouble for you to choose between multiple ways of saying something in order to be succinct instead of vague. People who don't value clarity never realize that they people they're talking to - every time that happens - value that communication (and the person attempting it) less and less over time.

What's so hard to understand? This forum is full of people correcting others' poor use of communication when talking about everything from natural selection to global warming to employment demographics. Someone makes a sloppy choice of phrase, and the simple thing they're trying to convey turns into a four-step back and forth during which everyone from trolls to the merely dim decide to screw up the thread or just rant because the OP couldn't trouble themselves to just speak clearly in the first place.

This particular lapse in clarity, which comes up regularly in lazy science and technology reporting, isn't the point. The larger point is the grinding erosion in careful communication, and the erosion in clear and critical thinking of which that is an indicator. You think this is about ego? It's about understanding the power and value of properly nuanced communication, especially in the shortened format that venues like this tend to encourage.

I need to learn English? What you're really saying is, I need to forget English, because it's just too much trouble to quickly sort through the differences found in several ways to say the same thing, each of which contributes to a more quickly digested communication of different ideas. You're cranky because I'm not a fan of lazy thinking, and the fact that you think "learning English" means forgetting how to distinguish between different words is exactly the larger problem I'm pointing out.

Interesting assessment. Given that MS, Yahoo, and Myspace all were shown to be colossal laggards when it came to adapting to new markets and instead spent their lives milking a cash cow till nothing was left I would say quite the opposite.

That is in a great part Google's strategy and has been since its birth. Yes it was a search engine at heart but they have always been the type of company which allows employees the flexibility to develop their own projects. The side effect of that is they may dump projects what appears to be randomly and change things often, but the major upside is that it is precisely this model that makes them flexible and adaptable.

I love watching people say Google is on its way down, by all accounts it the only logical way of justifying that statement is that they are currently further up than they've ever been.

"Searching and reading are left as an exercise for the extremely fucking lazy student."

What's the matter? You too fucking stupid to Google for yourself?

No, no constraints in that sense. Just the larger constraints introduced by the fact that the purpose of saying anything at all, in that context, is to communicate something meaningful about A's size. And by choosing the "ten times more" construction, part of what you're communicating is the fact that B, the thing to which you're comparing A, is by implication already considered small. That format (rather than saying, "A is a tenth B's size") is a choice of words that communicates the understand that B is small, and A is even more small. The phrase "ten times smaller" is using the word "smaller" in the sense of "more small."

The words "ten times" is a multiplier. It's used, in a comparison, to say that one value is LARGER than another. In this usage, the smallness of A is ten times larger than the smallness of B. Trotting out that multiplier is a deliberate choice made to focus on smallness in both A and B, with A having ten times more of it. That doesn't describe the size of B, but it communicates that notion that B is already - in the scheme of things - considered small, and A more so.

It's a shame that your own literacy is so limited, and that your own ability to parse the differences between words is disabled by a lack of vocabulary breadth. That's got to be frustrating. Or maybe not, since perhaps ignorance is bliss in some way, right?

Saying that something is "ten times smaller" is like saying "ten times more small." The phrase "ten times" is a multiplier. It means that you're describing an aspect of something, and saying that there is ten times as much of that aspect. In that usage, the aspect you're describing and comparing is the smallness.

By choosing that construction ("A is ten times smaller than B"), you're deliberately focusing on B's size, and implying that the smallness of B is the thing that's being multiplied ... that B's smallness is important in what you're communicating, and that it's of note because A's size is even more so (small, that is). If we're not trying to convey B's smallness as part of the concept being communicated (perhaps B isn't really thought of as small at all, in the scheme of things), a different construction makes more sense. Makes for better communication: "A is tenth of B's size." We're still describing the relationship, but doing so without including words that suggest B's size is already considered small.

That you don't have the cognitive and communication skills to understand the difference, or that you DO, and prefer to have communication dumbed down and muddied, and require more back and forth to clarify what you mean, says a lot about you. Which is unfortunate. That you think you have to insult someone else in order to feel better about it is just kind of pathetic, really.

Don't know why you think it's God's domain. The article doesn't pretend that they are alive. It's not any different than the G.I. Joe dolls or even the merchandise Hollywood puts out resembling movie characters.

how about another corrupt obamacare law passed where obamacare not about you but his buddies at high places at microsoft or google and passes a law where everyone must buy windows 10, or sign up for google+ else they get to pay a fucking tax penalty.. fuck that retard including his vice president biden and the rest of his gang

the only problem with google+ for me is that it absolutely craaaaawls on an HP Mini 210 netbook.. javascript feces pouring down drenching this little wonder.. even facebook and twitter i only use the mobile site versions, as the main sites also drench this little thing with their elephant poop mixed with glue javascript feces that bogs everything down.. why oh why does one need a quad core supercomputer guzzling gazillions of watts to read fucking text, or view images and video on a stupid webpage? I'm glad they are failing.. they should learn their lesson.. to everything there are consequences, such as malicious coding, because ultimately the customer is always king, even if you like to believe it differently temporarily.. people can walk away even from computers whatsoever, after they feel too much shit taste from arrogant bitches like microsoft fucking with them constantly

You are incorrect. At the time of the Amiga, the Apple II, the Commodore 64, and other such machines, only the IBM PC was a "Personal Computer." It was a brand, not a generic term. The "generic" term was "micro computer".

PC only became a generic term when there was a flood of PC-compatible machines from other vendors on the market. And in response to the genericization of that brand, IBM tried to rebrand their next iteration of machines "Personal System/2", or PS/2, and this time lock things down to prevent competition.

You kids really need to read some old Byte magazines from the period before you go opening your bullshit-spewing mouths.

For the same reason that people walk around wearing Che Guevara t-shirts while buying $5 cups of coffee.