Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:This doesn't seem very extreme. (Score 1) 120

To a large extent, it's the small car vs large car problem.
Drag depends mostly on the frontal area.
Working out Cd*area for both cars. looks reasonable.
This gives Cd*area (ft^2) for the Leaf as 7, gives the Teslas as 6.1.

The Tesla is - despite being a lot heavier and longer - not bigger in frontal area than the Leaf.
The Tesla is also marginally lower in absolute drag - making it 10% better in total drag or so.

This would lead to the conclusion that the 3.5* battery should give about 4* the range.
But, weight does matter a bit - there is extra drag in the tyres, which knock it back to 3.5*

Comment: Re:putting OP's bullshit into context (Score 1) 132

by queazocotal (#47533761) Attached to: SLS Project Coming Up $400 Million Short

' when it will cost billions of dollars every time it flies, due to the high development costs, low flight rate, and standing army and facilities required to launch it.'
This is as I understand it a vile calumny on the SLS program.
Most realistic estimates say it's only going to cost one billion per launch, not several.

Comment: Re:This doesn't seem very extreme. (Score 1) 120

Utter bullshit. - and several other sources I find say Australia is paying $(us).30/kWh or so.

That's one and a half kWh.

Or, 80 times more efficient than the Tesla. (which has an 80kWh battery pack, and doesn't quite make the range at 66mph)

If it's a skinny tyred wholly aerodynamic very small bicycle I might believe that - otherwise - LOL.

Comment: This doesn't seem very extreme. (Score 2) 120

While perhaps to be taken with a pinch of salt - - with the larger battery - at 65MPH claims to get 261 miles.
To get a Tesla to 350 miles needs an extra 30kWh of battery - about 120kg at the same performance as the existing battery.
This will easily fit in the trunk.

Comment: Re:Why not permanent? (Score 4, Informative) 136

by queazocotal (#47529449) Attached to: Will Your Next Car Be Covered In Morphing Dimples?

I'm unsure - but suspect that if they were there permanently - with the profile done right, stamped out of the steel - they may improve stiffness, and reduce weight.
Stamping such a pattern would be 'interesting', and prone to lots of wear in the dies though.
For composite, in principle, it could almost be free.

Comment: Re:Does it have Cold resistance level 2 (Score 5, Insightful) 167

by queazocotal (#47521363) Attached to: Ebola Outbreak Continues To Expand

It's a virus, so has pretty good antibiotic resistance.

To follow on from the other comment.
You're faced with people who you've never seen, look quite different than you, and turn up in suits that cover their entire body.
This happens shortly after, or even before the community notices an issue - as they are surveying populations nearby.
Then people start dying, and these people who don't speak your language want to take the bodies of your loved ones, and desecrate them.

Add to this that education in these places is basically non-existant in many cases.
It's no wonder that people can come to the conclusion that the health workers are causing the disease.

Especially given the centuries long history of exploitation. Fake vaccination programs by the CIA to fine OBL haven't helped either.

Comment: Re:Getting good use out of commercial launch tests (Score 5, Informative) 49

by queazocotal (#47516369) Attached to: SpaceX Releases Video of Falcon Rocket's Splashdown

'some middle manager will whine endlessly about this sort of experimentation.'

And will be sacked by the board.
Around 60% of the total cost of the rocket is the first stage.
The aim is to have this reusable in a few hours turnaround time.
If this works, savings per launch are tens of millions of dollars, even if it only works half the time.
If the second stage can be made reusable as well, going from $60M price to launch 10 tons to LEO to half of that _and_ making more profit per launch is quite possible.

Comment: Re:Slashvertisement? (Score 1) 92

A USB3 port, if you plug a USB3 hub into it, and 2 USB2 devices into it will go just as fast, and no faster than a USB2 hub.
Because that's what it is.
There are no transaction translators at all.
There are none even specced in the spec as optional, for high-end vendors to aspire to.

Comment: Re:"advertising is what powers the internet" (Score 1) 394

by queazocotal (#47493581) Attached to: Dealing With 'Advertising Pollution'

'Network effects are powerful. And the internet was the biggest network out there.'

I'm talking of pre 1992 or so, when it became possible to connect commercially to the internet - and shortly after.
Before this time was a window, when this wasn't quite true.
In terms of connected users, prodigy, compuserv, et al had more active accounts (AIUI) than the limited educational/military internet.

They failed, and became irrelevant as the internet grew rapidly past their number of users.

If they had arranged internetworking between them - in some form, so people could email and chat - the network effect may have been on the other foot.

Starting out with 'would have lost out to the internet' is the wrong way to think about this - because initially they were competing with something that was very, very much smaller and more limited compared to what the internet was even in 1995.

Comment: Re:"advertising is what powers the internet" (Score 1) 394

by queazocotal (#47493047) Attached to: Dealing With 'Advertising Pollution'

AOL/compuserv/prodigy were ISPs.
But, before this, they were their own thing that were not connected to the internet.
They added limited access to the internet, and then eventually became 'pure play' internet providers, with their own content being stubs.

There were features like messaging, various online services _before_ they connected to the internet.

Comment: Re:"advertising is what powers the internet" (Score 4, Interesting) 394

by queazocotal (#47490947) Attached to: Dealing With 'Advertising Pollution'

No, it really wasn't.
The internet was invented to be an interesting communication protocol.
Later on, commercial entities and the general public got connected to it.
For a _long_ time, it was .edu (as latter became) only.

Imagining that the internet was destined to win, and there were no alternatives is revisionist history.

The internet very nearly didn't win, avoiding being relegated to a communications experiment that died likely sometime around 2000. - as an example of a competing service that lasted a long time, in the face of growing internet.
Aol, compuserv, and all of the other services didn't quite get joined up fast enough to make the internet irrelevant.

It was quite possible that this could have happened.
They decided that it was in their commercial interests to isolate their services, so that you couldn't email people on different networks.
This (amongst other similar issues) ended up killing them as other than ISPs when the internet took over this function.

If, for example, AOL, compuserv, Prodigy et al had gotten together and made it possible to email other services members, a prime reason for the explosion of the internet would have gone away.

Similarly, minitel could be a model of what the 'internet' might have looked like if the internet had not won.
It would be very, very different.

Network effects are _powerful_.

Comment: Re:srm -v -z (Score 2) 91

This is not required. is relevant.
This actually investigates the physics behind overwriting - in short - once is quite enough today.

There are concerns about reallocated space on hard disks - but 99.99% of the data has gone
away, and recovering the rest is at best expensive.

"Success covers a multitude of blunders." -- George Bernard Shaw