Yes, "very pure" and "hyper pure" are semantically the same. Don't whine at me because I used a prefix where you used an adjective. That's the most pedantic useless complaint I've heard.

You doofus.

Because it's 101 and not 201?

Oh yes, let's time travel to this specific historical event and objectively test what happened.

I seem to recall that's havard's policy, more or less.

I'm glad you made up my mind for me, because I was pretty sure you're an idiot decrying new technology for imagined reasons, using a facile justification, then declaring yourself the victor in an internet debate.

Good job on catching that typo, though. My credibility is ruined now.

This is not the thread to engage me this point. Go back to the one where you made the stupid simplistic statement that didn't adequately reflect reality, and defend what you actually said.

What I'm saying is that these guys go "Supply/demand the end" without consider how those factors are considered. It's far too simplistic and it's like the a sphere of uniform density in a frictionless vacuum is to physics, in that it helps you understand the concepts, but applying it so simplistically is going to get you bad results.

They do require power for flight, though. The power is wind energy.

Please.

The intellectually hard work of software isn't the idea. It's almost entirely within the coding.

Do you remember the party where you said

You still need very pure water or you poison the process

This was entirely wrong, and declaring I that "lose" because I correctly identified how the real world does things doesn't have any bearing on me calling you on outright bullshit.

And you'll forgive me if I'm not concerned with your opinions of my posting.

If I had to guess, it's a sign of outdated software, and a bureaucratically enforced software standardization.

h20565 being a server host's identity, www2 being a subnet for their "second generation" website makeover done sometime in the 90s or early 2000s, and the stuff at the end being some sort of session tracking based navigational nightmare.

The existence of measurable standards is not the same as hyper-purity, you doofus

Okay, sure. There's this thing, you'll learn about if you ever got exposed to the most basic of engineering principles. They're called "Tolerances" where variation in inputs to the process are expected to be within certain bounds. These bounds do not demand perfect ingredients. I mean, you get microscropic tolerances in processes like making microchips, and have clean rooms. But these are the exceptions.

You'll find, for example, that the quality of wood boards varies greatly, and yet we build buildings out of them with astonishing regularity.

Power plant boilers only have coarse filters on local water supplies, as an example dealing with water.

You have no idea what you're talking about.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about
You are a crazy.

Why is it always "econ 101" with you guys? Reducing things to the basics is a great way to engage in reductionistic dismissal of reality. Simple economic policy to place externality costs onto energy producers could radically change what defines "the cheapest".

...

Okay, making up universal principles of industry was not a direction I expected this to go.

You're crazy.