Comment Re:Real Test with a Hydrogen BMW (Score 1) 247
I believe there have been good results with a type of "honeycomb" fuel tank that seems to greatly reduce evaporation lost. It's been a while since I looked at it, though.
I believe there have been good results with a type of "honeycomb" fuel tank that seems to greatly reduce evaporation lost. It's been a while since I looked at it, though.
If I see one more comment by people saying that "hydrogen is dirty because the most common way to make it uses fossil fuels", I'm gonna puke.
Here you go:
1. Build a big pipeline from California to Arizona to carry seawater to AZ.
2. Build vast fields of low-maintenence Stirling engines (I believe Motorola has one that generates 1.5 megawatts on
3. Use the electricity to split the seawater into hydrogen and oxygen.
4. The hydrgen is then a storage medium. Use in fuel cells to power electric cars, or use compressed for hydrogen internal combustion engines, or ship it to power plants to burn for grid electricity.
Some calculations regarding volume of water required, land area required using maximum efficency stirling engines, and the like would be required , but I know 20 years ago a lot of very smart scientiss thought it was doable.
Every government on the planet is calling for Wikileaks to shut down. It seems like they are twisting the legal system, and that we are being governed by immoral, corrupt bastards who will break any law, twist any fact, in their effort to smear anyone who dares speak the truth.
Under that standard, and under the belief that Tom Jefferson said that a corrupt government has no authority, I see that Wikileaks has no option but to use any and all means to defend itself. The governments will piss on their own laws and due process to crush Wikileaks; therefore Wikileaks is perfectly justified in trying to destroy the governments' credibility by publishing every bit of damaging info that they can.
Anyone who thinks that any truly dangerous information that Wikileaks has isn't already in the hands of our enemies is living in a dream world. Wikileaks' greatest "crime" is revealing that the massive security appartus of the state has no idea what the hell it is doing and is useless against anyone with a brain. It's a money & freedom consuming monster that does more harm than good to the society it purports to protect.
God Bless America, then.
You're luckier than I was, then.
Caprica wasn't bad. Wasn't the best thing on TV, but wasn't bad. But, much like BSG, SyFY didn't know what to do with it and tried to milk it for all it was worth and killed it in the process.
Stupid, stupid stunts like calling NINE SHOWS a "season" and postponing new shows for almost a YEAR. Who can follow a complicated story arc after that?
And horrible, horrible publicity. In 1978, many people enjoyed the Cylon ride at Universal Studios. Although there were a few billboards and a window painting in Hollywood during BSG 2003's last season, and the Vanity Fair spread was a nice touch, often it seemed that BSG was the bastard child of Universal. Even though BSG was owned by Universal, there was NO promotion of BSG when I went to Universal Studios during season 4! A golden opportunity to promote a show in a venue that people from all over the country visit, and there was NOTHING for BSG except in a privately owned comic store on the Citywalk. Lousy, lousy promotion. Yet disposable crap like the "Mutant Shark of the Week" or whatever is everywhere.
It is obvious that SyFy has no clue whatsoever what to do when it somehow stumbles on decent programming. Even as the critics were raving about BSG being "the best thing on TV" Universal/SciFi did not know how to pitch it, nor did they seem to want to try.
0 Comments when I hit reply, and the site is already down.
Why do I suspect that somewhere in "upstate New York" there's a DSL modem sitting on a static IP that just got reduced to a molten pile of slag?
I still run Linux on my servers. But I don't have time to spend half a day installing software anymore where I must resolve dependancy hell or stuff like that. People tell me, "oh, xyz fixes that". Every time I try to track down "xyz", it's never quite there.
Apache, Postfix, solid stuff that's been around forever, yeah. Desktop apps, nah. Too much of a pain to deal with. All my laptops used to be set to dual-boot; not anymore. Windows is stable enough and I don't have to spend 12 hours figuring out how to install stuff and getting flamed if I dare to ask a question or hear "write it youself!"
...website about this, I'd say it's a safe bet that Oracle could not care less.
There are companies that only care about making money and nothing else.
And then there are companies that actually go out of their way to be assholes. Oracle is the later, and I wish the dev team well even as I cry at their choice of a new name.
Facebook isn't slow. It serves up error messages rather quickly.
Funny. I hear all the time that LINUX is much more powerful than Windows but it's a real bitch to learn.
Actually, the LOGS of who voted - not what they voted for - ARE public record. I can tell which elections you voted in; it's public record that you voted - just not who you voted FOR.
A vote is a decision. A petition signature is a public, open attempt to submit an issue to the voters.
Petition signatures need to be public. The number one electoral fraud in this country is falsification of petiition signatures. Hotly contested races will hire outside firms to verify petition signatures on a routine basis, and this is necessary in any adversarial system.
Usually only a small number - 1-5% of registered voters - is required to put a measure or candidate on the ballot, which then leads to a secret vote.
Democracy has risks. If there's any issue that can't muster between one and five percent of people willing to take a public stand on an issue than we're already doomed.
Also, signing a petition is NOT necessarily an endorsement of an issue or candidate. It is merely a declaration that a person feels an issue is worthy of a vote. It usually - but not always - indicates a signer supports an issue. I have signed petitions for candidates who I did not support simply because the candidate I DID support was already on the ballot but I thought the opposing candidate had a right to be heard.
Yes. Hitler at least professed to be a leftist, rising to office on a socialist platform. And, like may tyrants who originally pose as either leftists OR rightists, he instead revealed himself as not being loyal to any actual politcal belief system, but rather to power as its own end. Still, considering he entered politics as a socialist, he gets placed on the left. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter - his actual "governing" process was neither socialist nor capitalist, but rather a homicidal pursuit of power, but my initial post was meant simply to take issue with the concept of Hitler as being either "conservative" or "benevolent" as the OP had suggested. Say what you will about Hitler, he wasn't conservative. Wasn't liberal, either, although he masqueraded as one to get elected.
Where there's a will, there's a relative.