Or to put it more simply
If there's a way in, you can get in.
707 posts • joined 24 May 2010
If there's a way in, you can get in.
For this to work the phone needs to be listening all the time...
Well that's a 50% improvement, better than most!
Rule 1 of being a politician, Lie.
You also have to compress and cool the hydrogen to put it in a usable form.
Efficiency is all of it, with current tech using electrolysis on water it takes roughly 35x the energy in to out for hydrogen fuel cell vs a battery which is roughly 1.5x.
This is why hydrogen is a stupid idea irrelevant of whether we could overcome all the other technical issues.
If the efficiency isn't there you need many more panels and turbines, the energy is 'free', but the equipment to convert it into something useable isn't.
If only this could be taught to Politicians and some managers.
There are now 50.
Or "Call trace started... Code in.... Code in".
The behavioural impact, kids of 3+ are easily influenced, what's to stop the scripts being choreographed into influencing certain behaviours and beliefs in a young child.
Buy [insert retail product]! Flashing away at you.
The issue is all the populated area they have to cover before getting there.
"Note that communication over an air-gap (as opposed to infecting) is an entirely different ball-game; but if one could infect a machine by physical access first, it kinda follows that any number of further physical accesses might be possible so all the OTA wizardry really does is just speed up the exfiltration process..."
Only requires one access rather than several, much lower risk of being detected.
One of the current theories that makes sense to me is Entropy.
"*Yes, yes, yes, I know. Fusions been 20 years away for 30 years now. But hey, eventually they'll be right about it being only 20 years off."
The first fusion reactors are 1940's but research took off in the 60's.
Given that, in her position, she and her colleague were ultimately responsible for the business. I'd love to see how the lawyers manage to pull this one off.
Not helped by Samsung's deliberate berating of other models on forums over the last few years.
Their justification is: It makes us more money which is the primary purpose of a business.
"The Sony gizmo looks like Google's less-than-popular, expensive Glass headwear."
Glass is what $1500? Sony will be $2000.
Where's A-W that marketing/top management need to justify their existence and charge you that bit extra?
There are 0 growth opportunities in your proposal which some investor can use to bump up the share price and cream off the top.
5 year re-tests are needed.
Best present for a child under 5 is a large cardboard box, how many birthdays and xmas' do you remember getting a large present and spending the rest of the day playing with the box it came in?
You're also missing the content point, many of these companies are content providers as well.
Therefore they have a vested interest in charging the competition more. Even if that is a different division.
Necessary evil, when you are on MCU grade HW with no FPU running at maybe 100Mhz and 32bit if you're lucky.
A SW floating point implementation can take 30-40x the runtime, in a hard real-time system this is not an option.
Even with a FPU it's still slow.
Fixed point arithmetic is not difficult, but does take some comprehending and yes it is possible to make mistakes.
Also politicians cannot line large donators pockets
They should acquire a building in London to provide temporary/semi permanent accommodation for MPs with appropriate security, they all seem to like moats and duck ponds.
So why not the tower of London?
It's money grabbing vapourware.
Creating fusion with a small reactor has been performed since the '50s, creating a net reaction has been the problem.
Again they make no claims to this, so they've either done it and are keeping very quiet (why would Lockheed want investment (shared liability) in something they know works) or it's a money grabbing scam.
There are photo's of E-Cat's test setup, it's vapourware.
The engine was designed in Germany and the Chassis in England.
The issue is cost.
Automotive engineering is solely focussed on cost.
If they can save a penny on a car they will.
Adding £2+ to an ECU will make the cost conscious PHB's baulk at the thought.
The safety is purely a legal requirement and then it's subjective as to whether or not they have actually met the requirement.
Strength wouldn't be an issue when you are designing the engine for this kind of output.
The main issues of high boost petrol engines of old were:
1. Lag ( or LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAG, whoosh, gear)
2. Pinking, or pre-ignition.
Variable geometry turbos and other variations along the same theme, along with electronic boost control solve 1.
Direct petrol injection solves 2.
Could we also have to deal with Sun transiting at that point aswell?
As seen above..
$1m is pocket change to Elon.
So tying his trademarked name with a museum.
Not that the museum doesn't deserve it, but Musk's aim is for the headline.
And some of you think fragmentation is a problem now.
You forgot Hubble Space Telescope
"A maximum of 52 our mates can be awarded a seat on the framework"
There corrected it for you
Good/Evil replicator here we come...
Has a kids mode too, it's not unique to the Samsung.
Vodafone had done the same thing with my SE K800i, only in this case 'Live', all other menu buttons could be remapped on the phone except this one.
They'll have a 'sale' target.
Get X customers online and flog it to one of the big providers.
So they are still searching for the infinite improbability drive??
Not really, the military gear still has much higher integrity standards to meet, radiation hardening, EMC, vibration, thermal etc.
It won't be the Off-the-shelf silicon you find in a commercial device.
"It's because there isn't enough money from VED to pay for the upkeep and new roads anyway - even then almost 100 years ago."
Nope, there's more than enough money.
VED (2012) ~£3.8B
VED + Fuel Duty (2012) ~£38B.
It was well into surplus, so rather than reduce costs they shifted the cash into the central pot.
It depends on the scale, large elements are easier to achieve actuation with hydraulics.
The motor itself has great power density, but when you add the pump, fluid (tank if it's not hydrostatic), control valves & control system it's generally heavier. You would also need to add control valves and control systems which will add additional weight.
Hydraulics are also much less efficient than an electric actuator. It depends on the system but roughly 65-70% vs roughly 90% for the electric setup.
The US had 3" in the '60s
I agree with your sentiment, but many companies are deliberately configured to prevent 'techies' from knowing this information.
Did the Beer turn into Cider through energy loss?
The Oort cloud is thought to be up to 100,000AU's in diameter.