Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Note: You can take 10% off all Slashdot Deals with coupon code "slashdot10off." ×

Comment Re:The oceans have radically changed before ... (Score 1) 417

TL;DR

But my recommendation is to not just google for stuff which agrees with your opinion. You will always find some "arguments". Numbers how electricity is produced in Germany can be found here:
http://www.ag-energiebilanzen....

From that it is very clear that shutting down some nuclear plants did not cause any increase in coal consumption in Germany. I know a lot of pundits claim just that. They are wrong.

Comment Re:Ubuntu does not support hibernate (Score 1) 378

I tend to agree, although I would put the time point later when Microsoft screwed up with Windows Vista and the UI of Windows 7. Just before that time, we had polished and stable Linux distributions which were almost perfect. But then Ubuntu/Gnome/... all screwed up too by giving up all the stability and polishment for rewriting everything related to user interfaces. Since then, I never had a stable and feature-complete Linux desktop which worked well for me. It is just sad.

Comment Re:The oceans have radically changed before ... (Score 1) 417

"Environmentalists" fighting tooth and nail to dismantle carbon-free nuclear generation, and insisting that we can decarbonize with renewables alone will doom the oceans if they have their way

Ah, the "only nuclear can safe us" myth. When looking at this without ideology, one quickly learns that nuclear is simply too expensive. As such, it is not a solution to any problem - investing in nuclear makes the situation worse by wasting resources.

No, you are operating under the myth that we have the time to wait for renewables like solar and wind. We don't, decades of science and engineering are ahead of us.

Renewables are already today more cost effective than nuclear. There is no engineering needed. More engineering will only make it better.

Even then the ability to manufacture sufficient battery (or alternative) storage is unknown.

This is another myth. Renewables can easily be expanded by a significant amount without additional storage. In fact, Germany has a bit of pumped storage which are currently under-utlized today because renewables fit better to the demand curve.

We need nuclear as a bridge. The cost of nuclear is not an issue since we don't have the time.

Ofcourse it is an issue: It prevents us from deploying other more cost effective options.

We need to take coal offline immediately.

Yes, we need to take coal offline quickly.

However the shift to renewables combined with a shift away from nuclear is causing more coal to go online as a backup to renewables (i.e. no batteries or alternatives to store power in). Natural gas too which is admittedly not as bad as coal.

At least for Germany, this is another myth. There was - unfortunately - a shift from gas to coal, but this is a different matter. I also agree that it would have been better to remove old coal plants instead of nuclear plants. But that Germany has added coal because of the shift away from nuclear and as backup for renewables is simply not true.

Comment Re:With those figures ? (Score 2) 131

Libraries of big universities could simply provide the infrastructure to publish (online only) journals. There is not much needed as most of the work is already done by volunteers (reviewers / editors) so this could be really cheap.

The problem is the huge momentum to publish in traditional journals with big impact factor. Young researchers have few options to publish is lesser known journals because this would hurt their careers and most older researchers do not seem to care to much. The problem is that there is no direct incentive because the cost of the libraries to for the subscriptions is shared by all researchers of a university or paid by the tax payer.

The most effective solution is simply for the funding sources to require open access.

Comment Re:The oceans have radically changed before ... (Score 1) 417

Ah, the "only nuclear can safe us" myth. When looking at this without ideology, one quickly learns that nuclear is simply too expensive. As such, it is not a solution to any problem - investing in nuclear makes the situation worse by wasting resources.

But at least, I think that keeping our nuclear plants (it doesn't mean going all-nuclear) is better than investing in coal...

This is certainly true, (although at some point in time nuclear plants get so expensive to maintain that it is not worth any more - the total amount of energy nuclear will provide is negligible in the overall scheme of things).

We often use Germany as an example for "green" power because they do plenty of wind and solar but shutting down the nukes and replacing them with new generation coal plants is probably not the best for our planet.

Germany added so much renewables that the loss of nuclear plants was easily compensated for (from 2010-2014 about 55 TWh (for a year) increase in renewables vs ca 45 TWh reduction in nuclear). Coal was not needed as a replacement for nuclear - which you can also see by the fact that the use of gas went down at the same time by 30 TWh, The planned coal plants were mostly planned a long time ago, and were often replacements for older less efficient plants. But I agree that it would have been better to keep the nuclear plants running longer and shut down coal plants instead - which will also happen - just later.

Comment Re:The oceans have radically changed before ... (Score 3, Insightful) 417

"Environmentalists" fighting tooth and nail to dismantle carbon-free nuclear generation, and insisting that we can decarbonize with renewables alone will doom the oceans if they have their way

Ah, the "only nuclear can safe us" myth. When looking at this without ideology, one quickly learns that nuclear is simply too expensive. As such, it is not a solution to any problem - investing in nuclear makes the situation worse by wasting resources.

Comment Re:Stuff (Score 1) 128

The proof may show that the implementation performs a certain function according to a certain specification. Knowing this rules out a lot of bugs in the implementation. E.g. a sorting function can be shown to return a correctly sorted list. Once you have a formal proof of this property you do not need to worry about any pesky implementation details of this sorting function anymore. The actual implementation could really complicated because it is highly optimized and has many special cases which may make it difficult to ensure correctness only with testing. Design reviews do not help here.

Comment Re:Microsoft (Score 2) 200

When the Windows Phone decision was done, the smart phone unit was worth much more than what they later got from Microsoft. So no, this explanation does not make any sense.

Nokia clearly had some problems, but it was nowhere that bad. First, Symbian was not as bad as people claim. Second, when Elop announced the switch and accidentally killed Symbian at the same time (by declaring it obsolete), the smartphone unit was still highly profitable and selling more phones than everybody else and even growing faster in absolute numbers than everybody else - with Symbian phones (people seem to believe that it was already collapsing - this is not true). Finally, there was a perfectly fine strategy to transition developers from Symbian to Meego using Qt as a common platform. And Meego was ready at that time as the excellent N9 showed which was released only a few months later. This was a strategy which made perfect sense at that time. Keep in mind Nokia was the clear market leader at that time - Android was nowhere as big as it is now.

In contrast, switching to a Windows which was already failing on the market (Microsoft had 15% market share with Windows Mobile but at that time maybe 3%), a system which was controlled by Microsoft and allowed almost no differentiating by Nokia itself. It also alienated all existing developers, the sales channels, the carriers, and their own employees. The decision was pure madness. Of course, this was entirely to be expected from Elop:
http://mobile.slashdot.org/com...

Comment Re:Shell, yes. But with caveats; contrast Sailfish (Score 2) 118

IMHO the biggest strategic blunder of all this mobile Linux distributions is that they break compatibility with standard X11 / Linux. Why be incompatible?

I know for Sailfish the reason was that they could get access to Android drivers more easily by using Wayland instead of X11, but for me it meant that I completely lost interest in Sailfish at this point. Maybe XWayland will run someday... or does it already?

I also still believe that the networking of X11 would be really great if exploited properly - especially for a mobile device: Why can't I move the window of the address book app from my smartphone to my desktop, cut & paste some numbers from another application on my desktop, etc...

Comment Re:Pollinators (Score 5, Informative) 225

This has been considered. From the article:

"In addition to land-use changes, we investigated whether pesticide use affected shifts in thermal and latitudinal range limits among bumblebees. Spatially detailed, annual pesticide measurements, including neonicotinoid insecticides, were available for the United States after 1991. Neither total pesticide nor neonicotinoid applications there relate to observed shifts in bumblebee speciesâ(TM) historical ranges or thermal limits (table S1). Neonicotinoid effects known from individual and colony levels certainly contribute to pollinator declines and could degrade local pollination services. Neonicotinoid effects on bumblebees have been demonstrated experimentally using field-realistic treatments (20). These locally important effects do not âoescale upâ to explain cross-continental shifts along bumblebee speciesâ(TM) thermal or latitudinal limits. The timing of climate changeâ"related shifts among bumblebee species underscores this observation: Range losses from speciesâ(TM) southern limits and failures to track warming conditions began before widespread use of neonicotinoid pesticides (figs. S2 and S3). "

http://www.sciencemag.org/cont...

Comment Re:Wow ... (Score 1) 249

Not that Nokia didn't have problems, but Symbian was growing profitable in 2010 and faster (in absolute numbers) than the competition. While Meego was delayed, it was finally ready in 2011. So there was absolutely no reason to commit suicide with Windows Phone.

If there were doubts that Meego could be successful, the obvious thing to do would have been to additionally produce some Android phones.

The road to ruin is always in good repair, and the travellers pay the expense of it. -- Josh Billings

Working...