Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Makes sense (Score 1) 74

"Cite YOUR fucking sources for your claims that you should cite sources for your own knowledge when used in every day scenarios."

Every fucking customer I deal with demands to know how I know this or that to come to how I repaired or designed their PCB.

Any customer that isn't asking you to prove your shit is an idiot and is a major cause of why we get tons of hacks that claim they know shit but don't.

Comment Re:They already have that info (Score 1) 144

"Kids are just not ready for some adult stuff until older. And that's the real fight here, some people think it should be OK to expose truly under-age kids to any degree of sexually related material."

Since the 60s a huge chunk of us, as children, got our experience to porno via magazines, usually under parents beds or in their drawers.

How many of us turned out fucked up? I'll wait while you make the count.

Comment Re:Healthcare should not be a profit center (Score -1) 237

BS, bull shit, there is no such thing as a 'human right' to any good, service, attention of any kind, including education, medical care, housing, food.

A human right is a protection against government (people in power) destroying you, taking your property away, taking your freedom and life away from you, that's what rights are.

As to privileges, such as health care, old age insurance, education, whatever, all of those things have to be provided and you are the one responsible for it.

Comment Re:requirement (Score -1) 93

The word corruption, the only thing it means is - tax payers money is stolen by people with access to it. In the private sector this is known as theft. Corruption exists because governments exist and governments take our money and then it is used for personal gain of people with access to it.

All the things FTC gets its hands into are not corruption (they often become corruption once FTC gets involved).

Comment Sympathetic (Score 2) 54

If you can't make useful predictions within the parameters of your model, you can't test the ideas. Ergo, the shut up and calculate side does have a good argument.

Previously, in physics, there has been a three-way dance between theorists who develop the mathematical description, theorists who develop the mechanical description, and practical physicists who carry out observations both to test the theories and to apply them in practical terms. This dance kept everything moving.

This may or may not be the correct way to approach quantum mechanics. The rules are very different in that domain.

On the other hand, it's easy to spot the hostility between the groups and it's obvious that the anticipated new physics isn't getting found. New models are rare and are struggling. The dance hasn't completely stopped, but it is definitely in trouble.

But, of course, that might equally be down to the increased competition, the need to publish trivial results quickly rather than do anything profound, and the greatly reduced investment in blue sky science.

I'm going to suggest it's a mix of stuff. We need a lot more funding, a lot less aggro, and we either need to get the mechanical description partner back on their feet or we need to find an alternative to them if that sort of description just doesn't work in this arena.

But I think the science dance needs three sides. I think we're going to find that the calculate lobby can't advance a whole lot further on their own, and that they cannot produce a theory of everything without some idea of what an everything is.

Comment Re:*Grabs popcorn* (Score 2) 54

inexpert observation:

There are realms where quantum mechanics doesn't work, but Einstein's GR does....sure, vice versa too but the point is Einstein made something amazing that endures with time. Gravity might NOT be a quantum phenomenon, and our Standard Model can't handle gravity neither can our quantum field theories that came later.

We had LIGO first detecting colliding black holes via gravity waves for not even 9 years yet.... a century after Einstein published GR. holy shit!

Comment Re:Ah yes, cheap batteries (Score 3, Informative) 100

Well, the Powerwall 1 was introduced back in April 2015 for a price of $3,000, which is $3,953 in 2024 dollars. The specs said a total of 6.4 kWh with a continuous and peak charge/discharge of 3.3 kW. The inverter was separate, because it was designed to be integrated into an existing solar setup.

The Powerwall 3 was introduced in September 2023 for $7,300 but includes an integrated solar inverter. The specs for it are double the total power at 13.5 kWh, with a continuous charge/discharge of 11.5 kW -- more than triple the original -- and a peak, 10 second draw of 30 kW, about 9 times the original.

So, we're talking more than 3x the device, plus a solar inverter, for less than double the price. Oh, and the original used nickel-manganese-cobalt batteries that were only rated for 5,000 cycles in the warranty. Battery chemistry is now Lithium-Ferrous (Iron)-Phosphate, which is more stable than the NMC and the warranty reflects that at 10-year, unlimited cycles. Oh, and the 3 is expandable with separate "DC packs". That's just batteries without the inverter.

As far as EV replacement batteries, there's a decent market for Nissan Leaf aftermarket batteries. The official, 24 kWh Nissan replacement is $5,500 + install. Third party depends on the current demand, but averaged half that when I last checked and there were even upgrade options (bigger batteries) if you wanted to pimp out your Leaf.

So... yes, batteries are getting substantially cheaper and while the end user may not be seeing the full 90% decrease, we're seeing quite a bit. That full cost decrease is for utility scale buyers.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Don't drop acid, take it pass-fail!" -- Bryan Michael Wendt

Working...