Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:As much as I hate Apple (Score 1) 177

by Bogtha (#47805621) Attached to: Apple Said To Team With Visa, MasterCard On iPhone Wallet

That's not right at all. I've had that article pointed out to me before. The author is clueless.

iPhone sales are highly seasonal. A new iPhone gets released towards the end of the year, there's a big spike in sales, which tails off throughout the following year until the next iPhone is released, when the cycle starts again.

What articles like that do is point to the spike at the end of the year, when new iPhones are out and holiday sales are boosting the numbers as well, then point to the following three quarters which are naturally lower (including immediately before a new iPhone is released), and say that sales are "tapering off".

It makes no sense to do that. You aren't comparing like to like. You're comparing the most profitable time of year to the least profitable time of year. Of course sales are going to be lower if you look at it that way - it's true of any product that's seasonal. Would you assume that a suncream company is failing because you looked at their sales in winter and realised that they were selling a fraction of what they do in the summer?

The only sensible way to evaluate sales for seasonal products is to compare year-over-year sales. You compare this year's busy period to last year's busy period. You compare this year's quiet period to last year's quiet period. When you look at the iPhone sales like that - i.e. in the only way that makes sense - sales have never fallen. They have grown every year.

Comment: Re:Flywheel spin and political spin (Score 1) 174

by evilviper (#47805511) Attached to: Power Grids: The Huge Battery Market You Never Knew Existed

You're correct, I was just using overly-simple wording trying to make sure my point got across. I often find it necessary to do so, here.

It would have been rather wordy to write it more pedantically... something about "adjusting combustion to increase/decrease the steam output to a turbine", and might have confused or detracted from the point I was trying to make.

Comment: Re:flywheel (Score 1) 174

by evilviper (#47805395) Attached to: Power Grids: The Huge Battery Market You Never Knew Existed

Look up the efficiencies of electric motors and water turbines. They are nowhere near 100%.

Of course I never said either was 100% efficient. Why you're wasting my time with volumes of mindless drivel, I may never understand.

Notice that it is in New York State so evaporation would be minimal.

New York State doesn't have any evaporation? I guess that must mean they don't ever get any rain, then. It takes a twisted mind to throw around accusations at others when you're completely ignorant of the topic.

The only link I can find that mentions efficiency of pumped storage is this one and it is a summary of all US pumped hydro storage.

And how does that, in your twisted mind, make the 87% figure less relevant? How is it that you're now just ignoring it, since it doesn't agree with you, and firing off a bunch more anecdotal numbers?

Don't you think that if evaporative losses were a big factor and easily remedied that these installations would not have done it by now?

Nope, there are innumerable reasons not to do so. Even 70% efficiency is pretty good with cheap electricity, and it's not a trivial effort to combat the evaporation, nor would it be popular with residents, and free of environmental consequences.

Helms Pumped Storage Plant is a power station that uses Helms Creek canyon for off-river water storage. It never was a conventional dam.

No? Everyone else in the world seems to think Courtright Dam and Wishon Dam are... wait for it... dams.

Comment: Re:Just wait a little (Score 2) 152

by Bert64 (#47805091) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Linux-Friendly Desktop x86 Motherboard Manufacturers?

At least with Windows I can guarantee a driver exists somewhere;

No, you can't...
Support for legacy hardware is often very poor with windows... the driver model has changed a few times, and each time cuts off some older hardware.
Then there is the issue that most drivers come as binaries, so while a piece of hardware may have 32bit drivers it may not have 64bit ones, and is even less likely to have arm drivers.
Then there are niche devices that were never intended to be used with windows, sun ethernet cards for instance that were intended to be used on sparc servers actually run just fine in x86 systems on linux but windows has no drivers for them.

I have an old usb scanner here, current versions of ubuntu detect it out of the box but you need to install drivers on windows or macos, only the windows drivers are only for 32bit xp and the mac drivers are only for powerpc.

Comment: Re:Sucks but... (Score 1) 152

by Bert64 (#47805055) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Linux-Friendly Desktop x86 Motherboard Manufacturers?

Who is using COTS desktop boards on servers? Traditionally, Intel desktop cpu lines do not support ECC memory. And you talk like there is no option for servers besides Linux.

Far too many people are doing exactly this...
Smaller companies often have old desktops running as their "servers", no raid (or using the crappy bios fakeraid), no backups, no redundancy etc. Lots of cheaper servers are also based on desktop boards, and lots of budget hosting companies use such systems.

Comment: Intel or "server/workstation" boards (Score 1) 152

by Bert64 (#47805029) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Linux-Friendly Desktop x86 Motherboard Manufacturers?

I would generally go for Intel boards as Intel stuff is generally well supported by Linux...
Otherwise i would go for higher end boards aimed at servers or highend workstations - while manufacturers of cheap desktops generally ignore Linux, manufacturers of servers definitely can't and will ensure their boards contain appropriate components.

Comment: Re:What will it take to abate your fear? (Score 1) 217

by SuperKendall (#47805027) Attached to: Study: Antarctic Sea-Level Rising Faster Than Global Rate

No one (at least not anyone I know) denies that climate change through non-anthropogenic processes exists.

You are in essence though. You are claiming that natural change is nonexistent next to anthropogenic change. You (and others like you) deny constantly that natural processes account for one iota of change, or else you would mention it with any talk about climate change.

Through omission, you damn yourself.

Regardless of what the mixtures of components are, we already know now that there is no runaway warming process so the reason to fear change the way you do. We know from recent decades that CO2 levels from human emissions has basically zero effect on increases in temperature (as temperature increases have either failed to materialize or been swallowed by other climate processes even as CO2 emissions continue to rise).

So again, why do you fear? What will it take to abate the unreadable and utterly un-scientific fear of a natural process?

Instead lets fight ACTUAL pollution, lets make sane choices that are truly better for the environment and not someones pocketbook or serve to increase government power over the plebes.

Comment: Re:Not a slow lane, a fast lane (Score 1) 61

The mistake you make is in assuming that without the $14.95 option you'd have any faster speeds. Wrong; you'd have the option to use the hotels entertainment system to get movies instead. Is the option for a faster internet connection you must pay a small amount for ($14.95 being nothing compared to the nightly rate) truly worse than that awful fate?

You aren't grasping the reality that you cannot let everyone have video streaming quality internet for the a low price.

Comment: Re:flywheel (Score 1) 174

by evilviper (#47804933) Attached to: Power Grids: The Huge Battery Market You Never Knew Existed

Most of your sources that just state total losses and don't bother to separate out the evaporative losses, don't lend ANY support to your assertion at all.

Some you are using out of context... "something like 90%", "assumed" and "small amount" are obviously not meant as rigorous and exact figures, yet you try to use them as such.

Yelling without up backing you statement with references just weakens your case.

You never asked, nor even argued with my statement... You just acted like it didn't exist and then quoted more nonsense that doesn't speak to the issue either way...

How would you feel about a source for 87% real-world efficiency?

And as for conversions of dams to pumped storage, the first one that comes up:

Comment: Re: Flywheel spin and political spin (Score 1) 174

by evilviper (#47804679) Attached to: Power Grids: The Huge Battery Market You Never Knew Existed

Try this one:

The main disadvantages of flywheels are the high-cost and the relatively high standing losses. Self-discharge rates for complete flywheel systems are high, with minimum rate of 20% of the stored capacity per hour. These high rates have the effect of deteriorating energy efficiency when cycling is not continuous, for example when energy is stored for a period between charge and discharge. Such high discharge rates reinforce the notion that flywheels are not an adequate device for long-term energy storage but only to provide reliable standby power.

Ref: Overview of current and future energy storage technologies for electric power applications (2008)
Ioannis Hadjipaschalis, Andreas Poullikkas, Venizelos Efthimiou

Comment: Re: Flywheel spin and political spin (Score 1) 174

by evilviper (#47804587) Attached to: Power Grids: The Huge Battery Market You Never Knew Existed

However, I've seen several local substation proposals for storing energy using banks of flywheels, and even more for rail.

Anybody can "propose" any ridiculous thing they want. It's a common trick for companies to say they're "working on" something that's going to be better than everything else out there. That's where the term "vaporware" comes in.

Point me to one single flywheel that can store energy without massive losses over the course of one day (on earth, not in space). All existing units are "for minute-to-minute fluctuations" and NOT longer-term energy storage.

Comment: Re:flywheel (Score 1) 174

by evilviper (#47804543) Attached to: Power Grids: The Huge Battery Market You Never Knew Existed

Even if you added another dam to catch the water it would decrease the efficiency of the original dam as the drop would be decreased.

Unless you dig a nice big hole at the bottom that can hold a day's worth of water. Then there's no loss of head pressure and plenty of water available to be pumped.

It's not like I imagined any of this. Dams ARE converted to pumped-storage.

at least 10% of the electricity is lost due to converting the electricity into potential energy and back again.

That's just a little bit high, but still a tiny fraction of the 35% losses previously stated, and much better than any battery technology plus AC-DC-AC conversion that exists today.

Comment: Re:citation needed (Score 1) 226

citation needed ...
because the broken window fallacy still holds


Using the Obama administration's own numbers, a couple years back, for how much they spent for each job "created or saved", and taking the US median income at the time for the cost->jobs destroyed estimator, I got about a 5:1 ratio. Five destroyed for each "created or saved".

Or more: Thats what would happen if they got the money by taxation. The other options are still worse.

The problem is that the VALUE for the government spending comes out of the economy somewhere else:
  - If they tax it, they just suck it out directly.
  - If they borrow it, it competes for investment money and real job creators don't get to create real jobs and/or have to close or downsize when their funding dries up. (This has an additional multiplier: They have to pay it back, with interest. So it kills still more jobs later.)
  - If they print it, it devalues the other currency. The same number of dollars are spent, but less value is spent. Less jobs are funded as a result.

Unfortunately, the anonymous flaimng lefties only see the obvious jobs "created or saved" and not the "invisible men" laid off or not hired as a result.

Comment: Re:Parallel "Nothing Wrong" case in VA (Score 1) 389

Except that in VA you are only allowed to shoot if you life is threatened, and not for the sake of protecting property. In no way did his daughter threaten his life.

That would matter if he shot someone in the back while fleeing with a TV, car, etc., or perhaps rigged-up a gun to his door to automatically fire (man-trap) or something. But when someone is breaking into your home, in proximity to you and your family, you have every right to assume they are armed and dangerous, and can shoot at-will. You are under no obligation to turn on the lights and visually confirm they are armed, or wait until they try to rush you, putting your life at serious risk, to confirm beyond a doubt that they are a danger.

You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers.