That article talks about energy payback, not $ payback. That is, how long it takes for the panel to produce the energy required to manufacture it. Typically the energy payback time is much shorter than the $ payback time.
Or maybe he drove the ethanol leg uphill. Or upwind. Or on a day with a different ambient temperature. So many error bars to add to his numbers, I'm not convinced what he saw on a single trial would hold up in a proper controlled experiment.
Yes, ethanol doesn't have the same energy density as gasoline. But miles per gallon is not the correct comparison. Miles per dollar is what really matters. Or maybe miles per pound of CO2 released. Miles per gallon is a useless measure to compare disparate fuels (unless you really are range limited).
randall77 writes: From Groklaw: Paul Allen's patent infringement complaint against the world and its dog has been dismissed.
Google said the complaint was too vague to meet the standard under Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) and Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). Then, after Interval Licensing brought up the lower patent form standard it thought should apply instead, AOL jumped in saying the complaint was too vague under even that standard, and the court agreed.
But large isn't the factor that matters - you can always change a secondary mirror to make the image as large or as small as you want.
If by "fantastic light buckets" you mean they are very sensitive, that could be a reason.
> One tip: Use text instead of voice
Wait a minute, did I just hear the cellular providers admit that text uses less resources than voice? When is that insight going to make it to the pricing on my calling plan?
The purpose of the project has always been to provide software that can be used to
losslessly remove Digital Rights Management (DRM) protection from music purchased through iTunes,
so that the buyer may exercise their right of fair use and play the music on
non-Apple devices (Hear Your Music aNywhere).
The software has gone through many incarnations. The original hymn has been succeeded by JHymn, QTFairUse6,
MyFairTunes, and others. Regardless of the program, the emphasis has always been squarely on fair use — not piracy. Any discussions of piracy have been strongly and actively discouraged on the site's forums.
For years now, Apple has been content to mostly ignore the Hymn Project.
At worst, they would introduce subtle changes to new versions of iTunes that would break the Hymn software.
Nobody really knows if this was done intentionally, but it was usually just a matter of time before a
new solution was found. This seemed like a reasonable approach for Apple to take. After all, why should they care? The DRM was only in place to placate the record companies.
Apple CEO Steve Jobs has even expressed his opinion that all music should be free of DRM.
Well, now things have changed. Recently, a new program called Requiem was announced that appears
to be a complete crack of the iTunes DRM scheme. Previous programs had relied on various forms of
trickery or memory hooks to access the unencrypted audio data — none had ever completely cracked
the encryption algorithms.
Requiem seems to have been the last straw. Earlier this week, the ISP hosting the site
received a Cease and Desist
order from Apple Legal, demanding that all downloads be removed from the site,
and that the site post no links to any programs that could remove DRM from Apple music or video.
Reportedly, similar C & D orders were also sent to at least one of the project's developers, and to another
ISP where Reqiuem had been hosted. Ironically, Requiem was never actually hosted on the Hymn site — merely mentioned and linked to in one of the forums.
Nevertheless, the Hymn Project has now come into the crosshairs of Apple's lawyers and,
lacking legal resources, has seen no choice but to comply with the order.