Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Cooling towers (Score 1) 118

Air conditioning. You have a heat pump that removes heat from the occupied space and that removed heat is taken away by the water. The cooling tower then cool that water.

The alternative is to remove the rejected heat directly using air. That's what "in-window" air conditioners use, as well as many smaller AC units. In large buildings, however, it's often very difficult to cool the machines directly with air.

Comment Re:That's what Nokia, Moto, and Microsoft said (Score 1) 535

Except that a smartphone is not significantly removed from any other computing device. Apple had been in the electronic engineering business - including portable devices - for decades before the iPhone. All they had to do was take a PDA and a cell phone and stuff them into the same case.

A car is something entirely different. They have no prior experience with the engineering non understanding of the regulatory frameworks. They have no established supply chains to provide the materials and parts. They will have to throw money at the problem to get the required talent and climb that learning curve.

And it will probably end up an overpriced but pretty-looking lump of shit just like everything else Apple makes.

Comment Re:23% of the company (Score 1) 471

Race car engines are designed to run they way they do all the time, but they also suffer so much wear and tear in doing so that they are rebuilt or replaced for every event.

The most reliable and long-lasting engines run slow and steady; That's merely a fact that no amount of additional engineering can really change. Someone, somewhere, determined that a few hundred or thousand hours of service life lost out of tens of thousands was worth the trade. All engineering is compromise, after all.

Comment Re:Grants? That is your worry? (Score 1) 286

Well how do you know what regulations to repeal if you don't know which ones are affecting the situation? Do you trust the politicians to repeal the correct regulations?

I mean, SURELY nobody would rally to repeal regulations without understanding at least that much about the situation, right? Right?!

Comment Safest it's ever been (Score 4, Interesting) 82

"The fact that we have brains hasn't made the world any safer"

Now, I understand that life isn't a zero-sum game, and I don't want to belittle any of the truly horrible things that are happening in the world right now... but on the whole, the world is a safer place than it's been in probably any point in humanity's history.

Violence is down.

People are, on average, living longer, healthier lives.

Poverty is declining, if only slightly.

And so on... never been a better time than right now.

Comment Re:What does Science have to say about this? (Score 5, Insightful) 588

I disagree. There is no reason at all to show lights if what you are really testing is sensitivity to radio signals.

There's no parlor tricks here. The lights are the placebo in a placebo-controlled study.

If you want to determine if a medicine is really the cause of the effect on patient's health - positive or negative - then you use a placebo to rule out the possibility that swallowing a huge pill or getting an injection itself is causing some psychological effect. You have the real medicine (lights+signal), fake medicine (lights + no signal), control group (no lights + no signal), and sometimes an alternative treatment (no lights + signal).

There is a known (or at least claimed) correlation between WiFi signals and reported illness. The test is designed to isolate the effects of perceivable stimulus (lights on the device) with the supposed cause of the illness (the invisible WiFi signals). Intuitively we all "know" that WiFi signals do not cause any physiological effects. But something is apparently effecting these people, and the test is aimed at figuring out what that something is.

Comment Re:Wise move? (Score 1) 59

I think the point is that if a hobbyist paying retail prices for the parts can put one together for $5k

You can build an EVSE for well under $100. The problem is you need certified parts, materials, construction methods and quality controls to maintain certification; certs are not a one-time cost and it balloons the costs all the way up the supply chain.

Yeah, 640k will be enough for everyone... (never say never).

I'm pretty confident that a typical home will never have a 480V/3Ph electrical service at 400+ amps. Not only is that amount of power completely unnecessary and cost-prohibitive, but that type of power isn't even available in most suburban residential areas. Plus it's a safety hazard in its own right.

Comment Re:Suckers (Score 1) 59

The only thing that might make more money is if having an EV charger would somehow decrease vacancy..

You're assuming that a house for rent - and remember these are explicitly houses, not just rooms - is always occupied with a renter. There is no reason to think that is the case. You generally don't rent a house for a single night so the concept of "vacancy" is a little different here.

You're also assuming that someone who has had an EVSE installed would not increase the asking price, since their offering is now more valuable to a certain demographic.

In short, there is absolutely no reason to think increasing the value and appeal of their offering will NOT increase their profits; that's what every business strives to do.

In Nature there are neither rewards nor punishments, there are consequences. -- R.G. Ingersoll