Re: Tottenham Court Road, early 1970s.
I should make one of those my next I.O.T. project
5178 posts • joined 1 May 2015
what primarily defines a cult has several aspects to it:
a) hierarchical authoritarian leadership, wielding control over your personal life
b) punishment for non-compliance/rebellion
c) manipulation (emotional or other types of coercion)
These things alone (unfortunately) aren't necessarily a guarantee that it's a cult, but if you see all three in an organization, it's probably time to leave. If nothing else, it's a recipe for abuse.
Also, you have to lie down to be a doormat. Just sayin'
I came to the conclusion long ago that a number of people get involved in a church or religion so that they can have control over other people's lives, and there's enough people WANTING others to control them, that they have plenty of willing victims showing up. Both sides of this (in my opinion) represent some kind of psycnological disorder, and I wouldn't even begin to guess how to cure that. I doubt therapy would be enough. Problems like _THAT_ are most likely too deep.
That, of course, does not in any way impugn that those others NOT in the above 2 categories have something wrong with them for attending a church or being part of a religion. Most likely they're just regular people who happen to be religious, like maybe half of the world's population...
/me thinks: party in hell, I'll bring the liquor. it beats hot cocoa and s'mores
When I was 4 years old I distinctly remember having a dream in which my sister and I were eaten by a lion and got turned into poo. Anthromorphic poo. I suppose vegetables feeil pain when we turn THEM into poo. So I should be a 100% carnivore [at least the animals are DEAD].
So how can I turn _THIS_ into a religion so _I_ can be a gozillionaire with an infinite number of women to have sex with at my command, ordering people around and acting like an evil dictator all the time, muahahahahaha!
[it'd be a bit like being the 'dear leader' of North Korea]
and yet, it seems that Elron actually BELIEVED his own B.S. - or else he was an excellent actor.
Also worth pointing out, why do SO many celebs fall for this obvious bullcrap? are they THAT desperate for meaning to their otherwise vacuous lives that they MUST fill it with *THAT* ???
this is the reason why trains over short distances don't work very well, and why we have busses and shuttles at train stops (for things _like_ commuting, for example). If you're stopping every few hundred feet, the train can't get up to speed. Same kinds of implications here, as the meatbags inside the "transportation device" can't handle more than 2G of acceleration safely (this number may be smaller than 2G, I was guessing).
So, unless the stops are several MILES apart, which would defeat the purpose of its existence, it ain't gonna be practical.
"How much money would that save anyway?"
When it comes to ANY kind of public transportation, it's not about the money, it's about the SQANDERED TIME, waiting around to connect to another bus/trolley/train/whatever. If you're lucky, they show up every 30 minutes (or less, in some places). Some busses have hourly schedules. Some even WORSE.
[no wonder people don't like public transportation in way too many places, with notable exceptions ONLY in a very small number of localized areas]
Somewhat recently I pointed out that, with all of the hassles involved in flying between San Diego and Las Vegas, it would have been cheaper (overall) and taken the SAME AMOUNT OF TIME to rent a car and drive there and back, if you share the same car. And you wouldn't have to leave "at a certain time" etc. or hassle with baggage claim.
(other implications are obvious I think)
I like the self-driving car concept instead. You call up for a car, it shows up in under 5 minutes, and takes you to your destination. you subscribe to the service, theoretically being cheaper than car ownership. If properly managed, THAT would work (and it would be PRIVATELY owned, not "public" and therefore NOT subject to governmentium and politics).
webmasters lawyers and lawmakers"
Fixed it for ya.
The moment that Google [and other search providers] were *REQUIRED* to insert filtering for whatever reason, 'right to be forgotten' being ONE of them, it opened the door to MANIPULATE the search results any way that "they" see fit.
So how about THIS instead: FREE competing services that don't filter, except for settings YOU send along with the query.
The internet does best when completely UN-regulated. Don't try and justify socialist or moralist ideas upon the world. THAT will _ONLY_ empower some "Internet Pope" (self-appointed or otherwise) to wield power, and we don't need YET ANOTHER one of _THOSE_ kinds of people, now do we???
[And _I_ thought the 60's was about "power to the people" - turns out, it was about "power to CERTAIN people" - just the same old CRAP under a different [mis]label I guess]
"if CERN discovers as predicted that antimatter generates weak negative gravity (ie around -3%) and entangled antimatter more so, its possible that the drive I've invented could work."
well, as one mad scientist to another, you can try kickstarter...
either that or realize that the energy required to produce enough antimatter is of "stellar" proportions.
"So the FCC has authority over space as well, now?"
I think they just authorize the use of RF to communicate with them. But, effectively, it looks like it, for U.S. companies at least. Yeah I'm not happy about that either. I'd think NASA or even the FAA should have that jurisdiction. Maybe it's time for Con-grab to define the regulatory roles better.
"It's even more fun to watch women moving from in front, easier to see their tits."
Yeah, I guess I'm an ass-man... And like I always like to say around time when the breast cancer charities are asking for money to cure breast cancer: A boob is a terrible thing to waste! So yeah, definitely cure THAT!
the problem isn't fear of tits, but rather, the implication that showing tits have: (alleged) bad male behavior. Too many men have been castrated by radical feminism and are afraid to be themselves.
As for me: left paren, dot, Y, dot, right paren
Think about it: It's fun to follow the women's movement while watching from behind. And when normal male behavior is classified as "toxic masculinity", you KNOW there's gonna be a BACKLASH!
But, apparently, they're not amused by the prank over at the Utah bar association. Getting all self-righteous over it is actually what the prankster would WANT to happen. So it was a successful prank.
"I won't be happy until, 'It's Certificates all the way down.'"
I won't be happy until *THE* *TOLLBOOTH* on the intarwebs (and for for appLICATION developers, particularly open source and independent developers) has been ERADICATED, because it OBVIOUSLY doesn't do a DAMN bit of good to have the *DAMNED* *CERTS*! Except, for those skimming off of the top and keeping "the little guy" in his place...
And that goes TRIPLE for KERNEL DRIVERS.
/me points out that in the Linux world, YOU! DO! NOT! HAVE! THIS! CRAP!!!
"radioactive decay rates can't be constant if the Earth is only 6000 years old"
I don't think that even the 6000 year old Earth crowd believes THAT. Instead the theory is that the earth was created with isotopes "in that state", including light beams from distant stars and stuff like that.
just playing "angel's advocate" on this one. I'm familiar with creationist arguments and some of them have merit. Claiming the earth is only 6,000 years old, however, is completely clueless. [you can still reconcile biblical creation against evolution, if you don't take it word-for-word literally, but those who do take it literally are subjecting themselves to rules they can't possibly defend. Still, creationism is an interesting study, at least to me].
but yeah, it's convenient to 'hand wave' the science when your god can just create it "that way"
"It wasn't about efficiency, it was about Edison (DC) versus Tesla (AC), with Edison 'proving' that AC was more dangerous by demonstrating electrocutions using AC."
They certainly weren't more 'dangerous', as high voltage DC and high voltage AC will still kill you. But the AC version would be a LOT more entertaining... [doing the 50/60 cycle jitters in the chair].
Edison was just wrong about AC and we all know it. But he was a SORE LOSER. And he HATED Tesla because of it. They used to get along, until AC vs DC. Tesla was right. Tesla had the ability to think 'dynamically' and do simulations in his head. That's how he came up with the idea of a rotating magnetic field, and alternating current, as I understand it. He pictured it in his mind. Those of us who can ALSO do that kind of thing understand it completely, I'd guess. And I'd also guess that Edison couldn't really do that, though his 'static' imagination was still pretty brilliant.
"The issues with sources like wind and solar is that due to politicians swallowing the green lobby lies"
I'm with you on that last part (swallowing the green lobby lies), but I think we should still use wind and solar generators, because other forms of energy are still finite, and I doubt the EU (or post-brexit UK) wants to prop up the price of oil by using even more of it for electricity. If you want energy independence, you use more of what you have, and less of what you must import. So there ya go. Besides, most of the trouble in the Middle East is ultimately caused by too much world money going into the hands of people who tend to support things _like_ terrorism, and we don't need Middle East politics affecting the world economy so much, now do we?
So even if the 'renewables' policy was driven by 'human caused global warming' hysteria, it's still a reasonable outcome to have plenty of solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, and whatever other 'renewable' someone can think up and implement at a reasonable cost to the consumer.
Then, on non-windy winter nights, you can burn the midnight oil for power [so to speak]. But the rest of the time you can get it from Mr. Sun instead.
"AC was just more efficient with less line loss."
this mostly has to do with distribution locally, not over distance. the problem with DC is that you can't EASILY convert a high voltage (like 100kv) into a line voltage for home use (let's say 220 or 110). So the generators had to make DC at 'what you get at the wall socket', meaning very high current and lots of loss.
However, if you send DC over distance at 100kv (let's say), then all you need is a motor/generator setup on each end. In fact, an MG can go BOTH directions. A DC line under the channel could then be a bi-directional power connection. It's probably why they do it "that way". Also a DC setup could have surge capacitors and batteries on it to help absorb transients etc. etc.. Sort of like submarine power, which still has backup generators and batteries very similar to old WW2 diesel subs. Hey, it works!
The motor/generator [for those who do not know] is what it says on the tin. It's a motor on one side, and a generator on the other side. The mode of operation is essentially based on how the regulators are set up to work. A generator on the DC side will regulate voltage. A motor on the DC side will regulate speed. Similarly, if the AC side is operating as a generator, its frequency regulates the DC side. If it's operating as a motor, the voltage and current on the DC side determines the loading. Both the voltage and speed regulation modes would have appropriate settings curves, so that load is shared and regulated properly, and you adjust the regulator's curve point to maintain 50Hz (or whatever), or 'n' volts on the DC bus.
Also in this way you can parallel the MG sets, so that you can take one or more off line for maintenance [yeah those DC brushes will need to be changed out periodically, and the contacts cleaned, etc.] but with proper care and maintenance, an MG set will spin for DECADES without major problems, and operate very efficiently. They really do work very very well, and are probably the most reliable way to transfer very large power levels between AC and DC, while simultaneously allowing bi-directional flow.
Additionally, you could use a motor/generator for standard conversion - a 60Hz unit on one side, a 50Hz unit on the other, with an appropriate number of poles on each so that they spin the same speed. Often they're used for 400Hz systems in that way.
Another advantage of using DC to transfer power is that you separate the line frequency controls on either end of the distribution. I assume this is what they wanted to do here. And when you're putting power lines under water, maybe the inductive losses are much higher with AC than with DC. I'd guess that's it at face value, without researching even.
I'm pretty sure that HDTV standards allow for different frame rates, like 24fps [movies], 25fps (EU standard I guess), 30fps (US standard I guess). Over here in the USA we're doing HDTV pretty much everyplace now. The 'pulldown' and 'telecine' algorithms are well known and supported by common open source tools like ffmpeg and mencoder, last I checked. And at least one HDTV I've seen had Linux on it (GPL declaration in the printed stuff). I think even VLC can do the conversion. So there ya go.
I don't think it really matters any more what the actual frame rate is for the video, other than the perception of the viewer. I happen to like 25fps since it makes the files a bit smaller.
But the reason "back in the day" was to synchronize the vertical sweep with the line frequency in order to avoid the kinds of problems that a CHEAP CRAPPY POWER SUPPLY would have, a line frequency pattern that would vertically sweep across the screen. If you synchronized it with the line frequency, it was less annoying. Fortunately electronics have improved since the 1950's, and that's no longer a problem.
"You probably also think we use inches."
you don't? (how about miles, pounds, gallons, ...)
yeah only us US'ians still measure based on a King's anatomy. I wouldn't mind using all metric if the damned bolts on my car were all metric... and I needed a 5/16" wrench the other day to loosen the battery terminals so I could replace the battery. Yeah, it's just unavoidable.
And every damned recipe in every recipe book uses freaking tablespoons and cups. What the hell?
"They explained that the grid had to let the frequency change when compensating for load"
Exactly. The frequency (generator shaft speed, essentially) is regulated based on load. There's a "curve slope" that's used, essentially like a speed control, to make the generators turn a bit slower as load increases. Doing it this way is a lot more stable, and handles transient load conditions better.
So, at high loads, frequency is just a bit lower than at no load. And this has several interesting effects: First of all, if you run generators in parallel, they tend to load balance very nicely. Second, if you get a power transient, it's a very smooth transition with very little over/undershoot. And every generator on the grid would essentially be able to maintain this load balance correctly. You could, for example, cause one generator plant to take up more load by INCREASING its frequency setting, and leaving the others alone (this is what an Independent Systems Operator would be responsible for managing). Doing this could keep the generation and the load close to one another. If Kosovo is using more power, then generators close to Kosovo should be providing it. That kind of thing. And you can keep nuclear power plants running at 100% power as well [they don't do so well with transients, inherent design thing]. Anyway, it's really very cooperative like that.
"The real issue is that of less electricity being put into the system than was claimed and is not being provided."
Yes, and that means power was STOLEN.
One of the following probably took place:
a) power generating company(ies) reported more power going onto the grid than was really provided;
b) someone(s)'s tapping power from the system and NOT paying for it
c) equipment seriously malfunctioning (probably not likely)
In the case of 'a', they're being ripped off by one or more power generating companies. SOMEONE is getting the money for "providing" more than was actually on the grid, so I'd guess "follow the money".
In the case of 'b', some marijuana grow houses (or other gross power thieves) tapped directly into the distribution lines somewhere, in a manner that's not being sensed well enough to indicate a problem, and are powering up some large equipment [like growhouse lighting] on a rather massive scale with stolen kilowatts. So an audit of the grid seems to be in order [it was detected down to the region already, so I'd guess "more of the same" to locate it].
"Is there such a thing at all nowdays? It is cheaper to throw in a quartz osciallator or a real time clock than to measure grid frequency."
not necessarily. old-school analog clocks probably still have synchronous motors in them. And I remember constructing a digital clock (well, back in the 70's) that used line frequency. Since you had to have a transformer [back then] it made sense to just use it. Seriously, though, it's not that hard to get the incoming AC frequency, through a very cheap capacitor, and then measure it with a single input pin on a dedicated clock IC. Crystals probably cost $1 more than that (and typical crystal oscillators need 2 capacitors, one on each end of the crystal). And that assumes that you don't want a backup battery for when power goes out, so the clock just flashes 12 after a power outage. This would be, a VERY cheap clock, yeah.
Anyway, my $.10 worth.
"Bad news: it might take 6 months to charge in the first place!"
most LiPo can charge at 0.5C safely, so ~3-4 hours for a full charge, at a peak of 1.5 giga-amps . You'll need a ~6 GW power converter for that. yeah, might need to run it on a 12kv line, too (at half a million amps).
your power company would either hate you or love you, depending.
Also the peak current would only be for about 30 minutes, after which it tapers off for the next 2 hours or so.
/me thinks of Griswald's christmas lights, and the need to start up a nuke reactor to power them
post-edit: the flux capacitor only needed 1.21 "jiggawatts"
Emojis are like a cancer. They started with those stupid sideways smiley things and grew into a hideous mass of toxic waste. It makes me want to *vomit* (and there's no emoji for vomit, and if there were, I wouldn't use it anyway because it's funnier if I just type out *vomit*)
icon, because, I'm facepalming. And it's not an emoji.
"Belfiore wrote that "if a customer does want to switch out of S mode, they will be able to do so at no charge, regardless of edition."
What the *HELL* was Belfiore *SMOKING* before coming up with THAT?
(You REALLY shouldn't implement new business ideas that you thought up when you were stoned)
does 'SH!+' mode turn OFF the ability to run "legacy" applications (i.e. Win32 API) or any kind of "backward" compatibility? Because, rumor has it, THAT is the TRUE goal here. That's right, ONE! BIG! HAPPY! UWP! FAMILY! (via "the store") !!! All *DUMBED* *DOWN* to the *LOWEST* common denominator, running 'SH!+' mode "CRapps" from "The Store!!!" Because, it's *MODERN* !!!
ugh, now I need more 'pink liquid' so I don't vomit.
"I imagine that problems with the vagina can happen or indeed the penis, as a part of his job wouldn't he have these? In textbooks and stuff?"
I actually considered that, if the Doctor were researching child sexual abuse and had the photos as part of that research.
I wonder who you'd "register with" if you WERE doing such research, in order to avoid being prosecuted for having the stuff? Because, as a physician, it's probably legitimate research. Similar for psychologists and, of course, law enforcement people.
I better stop before "they" actually DO come to get me...
"that wouldn't help with the apps on the phones"
Someone like me would invent a new "not back door" encryption 'app' that would a) act like a file system, storing your data encrypted within it as if it were an SD card or other removable storage; b) use a very strong encryption method that's well known and well published and has NO! BACK! DOOR!!! [with a HUGE key that's hashed from an arbitrarily long pass phrase plus a salt that's stored as part of the device itself]
So to decrypt the file you wouldn't just be able to take the SD card out and put it into another device; you'd have to at LEAST analyze the device and know what "salt" data needs to be used when generating the hash from the password. That's one possibility, anyway [others also exist].
This way, the app ITSELF does the encrypting, and it deliberately has NO back door. Although, I suppose storing the SALT within a 'back door-able' encrypted file isn't that bad. Sure, yeah, why not! Throw 'em that bone!
That way, ONLY those who used this (illegal?) app would have STRONG encryption, and you KNOW that anybody getting ahold of that APK would be able to install/run it, and even if you PUBLISH THE SOURCE, it wouldn't matter much, would it? [then anybody with an SDK could build the thing and install it as 'a developer' or on a jailbroken phone]
And THIS just proves how POINTLESS the argument is to have a "not a backdoor, seriously, not!" encryption method. With a back door. Shhhh...
"And of course, the key escrow will never be breached..."
nor will the WRONG person ever be in power to abuse it.
When you consider all of the outright illegal shenanigans that took place within the top levels of the FBI, regarding Mrs. Clinton, the Steele dossier, and (alleged) lying to the FISA courts to get a warrant on a member of a rival candidate's campaign, yeah, sure, we can "trust" that the keys would be kept safe/secret.
Riiiight. Am I on 'Candid Camera' ?
Fact: Human nature is what it is. Those who wield power often ABUSE it. Period. That's why we must NEVER allow *them* to have TOO MUCH.
As for those who want back doors or "not back doors" in encryption algorithms, I say this: Do you want someone you don't know to have a master key to all of your locks, in case you're a criminal or a terrorist? Do you think it will be kept safe?
The 4th ammendment to the U.S. Constitution was written in part to deal with this specific thing. I believe they had locks on doors back then. This is NOT a new concept. The cops can do REAL police work instead of being FORNICATING LAZY.
And, if every HONEST LAW ABIDING CITIZEN used this "back door" encryption, then EVERYBODY WHO ENGAGES IN ILLEGAL ACTIVITY will simply use one of a BOZILLIAN EXISTING METHODS that do NOT have back doors, with super-strong keys, and THAT genii has been OUT OF THE BOTTLE for so damn long it's pathetic.
Icon in response to the idea that the FBI guy was 'right' in asking for the "not a back door, really, honest!" encryption method, because, he thought of it, and therefore it's *POSSIBLE* !!!
When certain keys (or key 'signatures') had known vulnerability problems, such as multiple keys could resolve the decryption, I think every key generator had its list of "poor crypto" key signatures to avoid. Or something like that. I remember seeing an update to Debian and/or FreeBSD for something similar, probably more than 10 years ago. It might have even been done to OpenSSL [I just don't remember the details, that's all].
Faece-book can monetize anything that's "free" as long as it ONLY works with Faecebook. It becomes a 'feature". Like the 'Edge' browser, which ONLY works on Win-10-nic. If you want to run the Edge browser, you need to have Win-10-nic.
It used to be (back in the day) that the applications you ran determined the platform you used. That's the kind of thinking _I_ am thinking of. It's how Faece-book "monetizes" something that's "free".
And, there's also the data slurping mentioned earlier)
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019