Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Dimmable LEDs (Score 1) 212

by icebike (#47432221) Attached to: My most recent energy-saving bulbs last ...

Also, Lumens per watt can vary quite significantly from one to another.

Agreed. Not only in the actual usage, but also in the supposed "equivalence".

Get to know your Lumens boys and girls, because watts mean nothing anymore and we need
a new yard stick. As far as equivalence goes, 60 watts = 800ish Lumens, plus or minus any
fudge factor the manufacturer thinks they can get away with.

Oh, and years of life... Always calculated at 3 hours per day, or some silly very short period of time.
Still, I've got only a few more trips up the ladder because I don't expect any of the LEDs to fail in my remaining life time.

Comment: Re:Dimmable LEDs (Score 1) 212

by icebike (#47429351) Attached to: My most recent energy-saving bulbs last ...

Dimmable LED bulbs used to be more expensive. These days pretty much all the LED bulbs you see around are dimmable, even the low cost ones.

You often have to have to get newer dimmers for LEDs. Reading the fine print you find that comes with most bulbs.
Here is what Cree says (pdf).:
'Cree® LED bulbs are designed to be dimmed with standard incandescent type dimmers. They are also compatible with most Magnetic Low Voltage (MLV) and Electronic Low Voltage (ELV) dimmers. This list was generated from lab testing of samples and your results could vary."

The kicker is that "Standard" has a lot of different meanings, and many of the older dimmers re load dependent, and the LEDs draw so little power that older dimmers don't make much of a difference. My luck with dimming LEDs with old dimmer technology has not been good. Even new lamps, with supposedly modern dimmer tech seems to make little difference.

Comment: Re:1.8 million drivers will lose their job. (Score 1) 142

by icebike (#47391027) Attached to: Autonomous Trucking

We do have the train routes, railroads have been rail-banking surpluss rail lines for years because truck traffic
took all the loads. But in most cases the rail is still in place, and bringing it up to standards is cheaper
than rebuilding all of our freeways every 5 years just to keep truck drivers employed.

Comment: Re:1.8 million drivers will lose their job. (Score 1) 142

by icebike (#47389845) Attached to: Autonomous Trucking

Then when conditions are better, the automated trucks can form a train behind the automated snowplow

Here's a better Idea: Drive those trucks to a REAL TRAIN depot and get them off our roads.

The amount of long haul that is done by trucks in this country is ridiculous, dangerous, and unsustainable. Our roads are being beaten to dust by an industry that doesn't pay taxes at a rate anywhere near sufficient to cover the damage it causes.

We should be mandating rapid train routes for any transport distance greater than 500 miles, with computerized and mostly automated loading and unloading facilities instead of trying to smarten up every truck on the road.

Comment: Re:Did the editor know...this is Google/Android te (Score 1, Troll) 242

by icebike (#47362543) Attached to: Disappointed Woz Sells His "Worthless" Galaxy Gear Watch

>> Apple co-founder..."Galaxy Gear...worthless"

Hmmm...I read that as "Apple insider says Google device bad." And...you were expecting?

Wos has used and praised lots of different Android gear.

Still there is something fishy about the whole story.

Multi-billionaire takes the time to sell something on ebay? Really? REALLY?
Even having one of his "people" do that would never pay for itself.
Why would he not just flip it into the trash, or give it to some kid, or donate it
to some museum with a signed letter of gifting, which would quickly raise its worth by a factor of 10 or 100.

He says its worthless, and then proves it isn't, and pockets the money? Really?
The whole story seems unbelievable.

Comment: Re:Can an "atheist company" refuse too? (Score 1) 1317

by PCM2 (#47356593) Attached to: U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Religious Objections To Contraception

As for roads, most of them were made by private people and companies, long before government got involved.

I give him credit for not reminding you that he never even used the word "government." He said "society." You want rid of that, go live on some forgotten island in Indonesia and see how long you last. Until then, your attitude of "I've got mine, plus all the benefits society gives me as well, so fuck you, Jack" is not just selfish and stupid, it's completely morally bankrupt. You're a turd and you're really not worth anyone's breath.

Comment: Re:Key Point Missing (Score 2) 34

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#47234405) Attached to: Appeals Court Finds Scanning To Be Fair Use

The summary misses a key point. Yes they scan and store the entire book, but they are _NOT_ making the entire book available to everyone. For the most part they are just making it searchable.

Agreed that it's not in the summary, but as you correctly note, it's just a "summary". Anyone who reads the underlying blog post will read this among the facts on which the court based its opinion: "The public was allowed to search by keyword. The search results showed only the page numbers for the search term and the number of times it appeared; none of the text was visible."

So those readers who RTFA will be in the know.

+ - Appeals Court finds scanning to be fair use in Authors Guild v Hathitrust

Submitted by NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer (912032) writes "In Authors Guild v Hathitrust, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has found that scanning whole books and making them searchable for research use is a fair use. In reaching its conclusion, the 3-judge panel reasoned, in its 34-page opinion (PDF), that the creation of a searchable, full text database is a "quintessentially transformative use", that it was "reasonably necessary" to make use of the entire works, that maintaining maintain 4 copies of the database was reasonably necessary as well, and that the research library did not impair the market for the originals. Needless to say, this ruling augurs well for Google in Authors Guild v. Google, which likewise involves full text scanning of whole books for research."

Comment: Re:Good bye source compatibility (Score 1) 636

by PCM2 (#47151743) Attached to: Apple Announces New Programming Language Called Swift

Good bye source compatibility. We hardly knew ye.
First Windows, and now OSX. I am still maintaining applications that are built crossplatform (Windows/Mac/Linux, with unified GUI look) but it's getting harder every year and, by the looks of it, will be impossible soon.

That's a kinda silly thing to say. Anytime a problem comes up like this, it creates an opportunity for vendors. In the game development world, you have toolkits like Unity. Xamarin is already helping developers port C# code to OS X. And there are and will be lots of other solutions.

And Apple isn't even abandoning support for Objective-C. Nobody is being forced to code in Swift.

Comment: Re:No Way! (Score 1) 261

by icebike (#47124665) Attached to: Curved TVs Nothing But a Gimmick

Nonsense. Curved TV's ensure you see a square picture if you are sitting exactly dead centre. That is a tangible difference.

I've never actually seen anyone watch anything in 3d in their home.

Why would I want a square picture of what is broadcast in a decidedly un-square format? You've substituted your so-called square view for glare from many angles. And you've further reduced the acceptable viewing angle.

As for not having seen anyone watching 3D in their home, I suspect you aren't
invited into those homes that have a 3D telly. That hardly is a standard by which to judge.

My neighbor down the street does, and he subscribes to Comcast 3D service.
It does work. Its nice. Not all that much of an improvement, if you ask me, just a novelty.

Is it a fad? Sure.

But just because your small outlook on the world doesn't include something, its no in indication that something doesn't exits, or that it doesn't work.

If you had better tools, you could more effectively demonstrate your total incompetence.

Working...