There was a joke about this I read from somewhere. In Silicon Valley, collaboration means working together to achieve. In Washington DC, collaboration means being shot for treason.
Make sure your company encourages the former.
> How can people be so ignorant of something that happened only a few years ago?
At some point it becomes: "Do not assume idiocy where maliciousness becomes the most logical explanation."
Then again, the people merely parroting incorrect talking points could be stupid. But it is most likely a conspiracy to rewrite the truth through excessive high volume. How else can you win if all your points were proven wrong anyways?
Sorry, forgot the link to the data, if anyone's actually even interested.
http://www.statista.com/statistics/221666/net-income-of-rim-since-2009/
Blackberry, net income 2009 - 2011
2009 - $1.893B
2010 - $2.457B
2011 - $3.411B! You call that circling the drain?
Mere net income quarterly or yearly does not give you the whole picture. Or else you'll be in the same situation with BlackBerry. You're right though. It's now actually called, "Circling the RIM."
You may get more mileage (pun intended!) by doing things that hybrid cars do today. Rather than take energy away from the power of the torque which you need, you could try and recapture the waste energy, such as heat and sound. Or as they do today, recapture energy during the breaking.
I don't know what the efficiencies are though...
If you watched Enterprise and--okay, okay! I know most people hate it but please, hear me out...
If you watched Star Trek Enterprise, they met an alien species who had holodeck-like technology in their era. But they didn't give them the technology or anything.
Even if you totally dismiss the Enterprise episodes, this is a plausible explanation. That Janeway and others could have used a holodeck made by a different species outside the Federation, and it wasn't until a few years later that the technology was traded to the Federation members and/or became widespread enough that anyone had easy access. Maybe she went to an alien theme park and had fun in one, but it wasn't like that species was going to hand out plans to the technology to just anyone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_safety
Just adding some more details here.
In general hydrogen is a much safer gas than typical automotive fuel such as gas or diesel. This is because hydrogen alone cannot combust and requires an oxygen source. Hydrogen storage is a bit safer too since it is lighter than air and floats up. You simply need to allow it to escape at the top and simple fanning lowers the hydrogen to oxygen mixture below the point of combustion easily. As opposed to gas which in vapor form still sits on the ground and requires much less oxygen to combust.
And as you said if a tank is punctured and then ignited, it will burn outside the tank; it will not explode the tank, since the pure hydrogen inside cannot combust. The flame outside however does burn at a very, very high temperature and is invisible since it gives off photons in the ultraviolet wavelength.
The problem with fuel cells however is the energy chain. Electrolysis is not a good way to create hydrogen because most countries, or at least the US cannot keep up with electricity demands (at least currently) should cars and other products be switched over. The primary way hydrogen is manufactured now, if my data is still current is through natural gas. And therefore this doesn't get us away from traditional carbon issues. The potential of hydrogen is possibly good intermediate storage, or at least another vector of energy research we can pursue.
As for those people who say 'Hindenburg,' the problem with that, should they actually read the link they should know that the hydrogen cannot burn by itself and requires another source of oxygen. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg_disaster#Fire.27s_initial_fuel One of the theories implicates the iron oxide in the paint, and another speculates on a leakage of oxygen into the blimp. Although, as we saw the Hindenburg burned bright red, we know it was not the hydrogen burning by itself since it doesn't burn in the visible color spectrum.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/24/energy-japan-mof-idUSL4N0AT00Y20130124
"Japan's LNG imports soared 11.2 percent to a record high of 87.31 million tonnes in 2012, driven by an increased need for fuel to generate electricity after the
nuclear sector was hit by the Fukushima crisis, government data showed on Thursday."
"Japan paid a record price for crude at $114.90 per barrel last year, compared with $108.65 in 2011."
This goes to what you were saying. There may be alternative energy sources for some countries, but for some, the only way to go is nuclear. Japan is indeed trying to restart most (they've restarted 2) of their reactors, despite the intense protest against doing so. But their fuel costs have caused them to go from a net exporter country to a net importer country. And now they are screwed.
Even if they're increasing LNG, they're still burning coal and oil. All of these pollute, and the dirtier they are, the more people they kill, more than thousands per year. Nuclear kills no one, probably because we are so paranoid about it.
In honor of the time before xkcd, but in the style of such:
5. Secretly sell short gold prior to the news of this really getting out.
6. Profit again!
7. Get arrested for benefiting from manipulating markets.
8. Go to jail and write a book.
9. Profit!
Ah, life is ever interesting...
You know, the more you cut the more you can cure. Eventually you can remove every brain disease if you cut out the entire brain. What an idea!
Also, I have this 100% weight loss program people should check out...
As some have stated already on here; with enough angles we can reconstruct the scene and understand it; i.e. thinking a gun was pointed at someone in one angle only to see it was not in another angle.
Well, let's take technology one step further; with multiple angles, can we develop something to auto construct a 3D representation of a scene and play it back? If you have 3 or more cameras it should be fairly accurate...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardik
Hardik
Facebook: "Is this your friend's real name?" Yes.
Facebook: "Is this REALLY your friend's real name?" Yes.
Facebook: "C'mon... " Yes.
Facebook: "Did he have a tough time in school?" Yes.
Civ 2 : England discovers Pottery?
I honestly think we underestimate our ancestors sometimes who should've been just as smart and tenacious as we are. They maybe appear primitive simply because we have the benefit of a long history of discoveries to build on. And where their technology branched off in ways we don't care about, there could be even more secrets to be had...
It could be because the majority of people interested in the stock believe that the deal isn't likely to go through, perhaps? But otherwise yes, I've seen the prices usually go right to the buyout price. If the deal should go through the price should instantly rise to that amount and the Bollinger Bands (which measure standard deviation) would immediately narrow.
Neutrinos have bad breadth.
