Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
No, you didn't get a "nothing to see here". You actually got an answer. By design, if a water-moderated reactor loses its cooling, it also loses moderation of the neutrons. Fast neutrons don't work as well, so the reaction rate would slow. The residual heat would still have melted the fuel rods and it would be a big mess to clean up, but nobody would have died.
I know it is not the answer you want, but there you have it. It would not have been a Chernobyl-type accident. The Chernobyl reactor had a positive-void coefficient, which means that the reaction rate would go up if cooling was lost. Davis-Besse has negative-void coefficient. The reaction rate will go down if coolant is lost.
Thunderbolt is not exclusive to Apple. They are just the first mover on it. They also have a large market (video and audio editing) that will eat this up. For that group, USB3 is basically a non-starter. The implementations are still buggy, and the throughput isn't as good.
Also, because Thunderbolt basically tunnels PCIe for communication, devices that use it just need a Thunderbolt adaptor chip coupled with a PCIe chip to convert to any protocol you like. You don't need a new ASIC, you just buy the Thunderbolt one from Intel and then use any PCIe chip you like. Thunderbolt is basically external PCIe. In fact, Sonnet has announced a PCIe expansion chassis using Thunderbolt.
They promised to give up the one thing that Verizon has held out on all this time, Verizon branding all over the phone.
It will be verizon free, free of all the extra apps and crap they want installed on the system. It will remain an Apple device, exactly what Apple has always wanted and only AT&T would agree to.
It hasn't been an exclusive agreement or Apple's will that kept the phone on AT&T, it's Verizon's vanity and need for control over a device that is yours to use. With LTE coming up, they didn't want to miss out on an iDevice for another generation of wireless data.
If that were true, we've have seen the iPhone on T-Mobile or Sprint by now. This was AT&T's exclusivity expiring. AT&T knew it was coming. That is why AT&T was so generous with people upgrading from the 3GS to the 4, even though it had only been a year. It let them lock people into contracts through 2012, knowing that the Verizon version was coming in just a few months.
You'd have to be an idiot to think that APPL is genuinely worth about double what MSFT is.
Why? They have similar revenue, but Apple makes a much higher profit. Don't get me wrong, Microsoft still makes boatloads of money off of Windows and Office, but the compitition for them is Linux and OpenOffice/GoogleDocs. They will be constantly competing against free, which will keep squeezing their margins and therefore their revenue and their profit. Apple is in a position where they make hardware that allows them to charge a premium. Apple on the other hand, keeps very close to the leading edge and has a reputation for quality. They've seamlessly moved from product category to product category and find the most profitable niche. They've still got a lot of growth potential, even just by starting to manufacture a Verizon iPhone. In the last ten years, they've managed to enter and dominate the market for portable music players, smartphones, smart-not-a-phones, and tablets.
Because, believe it or not, Apple came in at a price point that nobody could match without Apple's sales volume.
So Apple sell a netbook with no keyboard and an ARM CPU for twice the price of a netbook and no-one can compete with it on price?
Perhaps you're right, but that seems... odd.
Calling the iPad a netbook with no keyboard it a bit of a stretch. Even if you don't like Apple, you'd be hard pressed to find a netbook with an IPS LCD display, for example. Also, I don't know of any netbooks that have a touchscreen, which more than makes up (costwise) for the lack of a keyboard.
Anyway, If anyone could make a 10" iPad competitor at $500 or less, they'd have done so by now. That everyone who is trying is coming in at half the screen size should be confirmation. There were stories when the iPad was announced that it was going to $800-$1000. Everyone was preparing tablet competitors to go up against that price range. When the iPad came out at $500, it submarined everyone else's plans. It killed the HP Slate, for instance.
the second is the ability to update apps to new versions with one click.
Well, you can't get all your apps up to date at one time with Sparkle. I have a lot of apps that I only use occasionally. Every time I run one of them, I have t update it. Sometimes I even find an app that won't run because it needs updating for compatibility with whichever version of MacOS X I'm on now.
It would be nice to have a centralized system for updating third-party apps. This isn't perfect, but it is a step in the right direction
According to engadget it's going to cost 2.5 million. At $26 per ton that's 96,153 tons of recyclables before the new bins are paid off.
According to the article they picked up 5,800 tons of recyclables last year. Assuming that's the average for the recycling to pay off the new bins it's going to take 16 years.
Actually, your numbers are off. The city gets paid $26/ton for recyclables, but if those same recyclables go to the landfill, it costs $30/ton. So the city nets $56/ton from recyclables.
Also, I live in Cleveland. The recycling rate here is really pitiful. I think it is around 3% last I heard. Most of the city doesn't have curbside recycling pickup (aside from a few pilot areas). You have to haul your recyclables to a drop off. If this system gives us curbside pickup and some enforcement, it is easy to expect the rate would at least quadruple. Combine that with the $56/ton savings and it is paid for in two years.
The thief, Brian Hogan, was asked by his friends to return the phone, because the loss would likely destroy the career of Gray Powell. His answer: "Sucks for him. He lost his phone. Shouldn't have lost his phone." So to Brian Hogan I would say "Sucks for you. You stole the phone. Shouldn't have stolen the phone".
Can I get an "Amen" brothers?
Would you be this vehement if it weren't an Apple prototype?
I certainly would. Whether it was stolen from Palm, Google, or Nokia. The circumstances were still a criminal act regardless of who it was stolen from.
With the iPhone, there is actually a benefit to having that signature. It explains why your reply is so short and why you might have some really strange word substitutions due to the iPhone autocorrect. I changed mine to "Sent from my iPhone (in case you are wondering why this email is so short and full of typos)."