Re: "The unique aspect of Uber is that we exist in the physical world"
"The unique aspect of Uber is that we exist in the physical world"
Just like British Rail, then?
18 posts • joined 30 Mar 2011
Five nines as long as nothing goes wrong, yeah any old x86 box will do that most of the time. But agreeing (with consequences) that it WILL be up 99.999% for the coming year is a completely different story.
Five nines is a bit over 5 minutes of downtime per year.
I dunno about you, but it takes me longer than that to even get out of bed and fire up a computer if said legacy box craps out at 4 AM. Promising five nines takes having kit working together across multiple datacenters, to start with.
To take that a bit further, what is a "climate denyer" anyway? It seems to come up everywhere in this sort of discussion, as a nicely dismissive term for anyone who is even the least bit sceptical.
I think nobody who isn't certifiable will deny there is a thing we call climate, so "climate denyer" at face value makes no sense.
I think nobody who isn't certifiable will deny that it changes. Always has, always will, that's what climate DOES. So even if we take "climate" to be short for "climage change", "climate denyer" still doesn't make sense.
Using "climate denyer" to describe people who aren't quite convinced WHY climate changes, is just really sloppy language.
The only people I can think of who sort of fit the "climate denyer" description are the ones fighting tooth and nail to STOP our climate from changing any further. Now isn't that ironic, ms Morissette?
> And using underground tunnels for power storage? Hint: pumped storage systems are built at
> altitude for a good reason. Also have a think about exactly how polluted all those tunnels are.
So turn it around. Generate power from filling the holes by gravity, and pump it back out when there's spare power. That's not the problem. (Even leakage works in your favour here.)
It won't be very efficient, but granted it's a way to store energy that's not too far out there.
In a lot of cases that depends on how you value your time.
My weapon of choice is a motorcycle. My commute takes a fairly steady 30 minutes. By public transport it's an hour, if no connections are missed.
Yes running the bike is more expensive even if you ignore fixed cost (insurance etc), but those 5 extra hours of free time per week are certainly not without value.
Nevermind the transmission losses.
The biggest fault in that line of thinking is that yes you can string a cable from Scotland to down south and send the power over, but Scotland will want some power for themselves as well. So you'd need enough windmills up there to power both Scotland and down south.
And then when it's calm in Scotland people will wave their hands and just reverse the reasoning and power Scotland from the south where it'll be windy then, they hope.
This means you'd have to have enough wind capacity to power both locations, in both locations.
(Then what happens if it's calm in both Scotland and down south, right so let's add some in Wales to power Wales and Scotland and the south, errr um er right...)
All this adds up to truly mindboggling amounts of turbines on top of the already rather shocking number needed to replace just one big coal or nuke plant.
Not that simple. Yes, 2/3 was used to get to low orbit. More specifically, to get the huge launcher to get to the moon into low orbit. They didn't stop for fuel in low orbit, they had to bring it all up in one go.
Look at the Atlas that shot John Glenn into orbit. That's a dinky toy compared to a Saturn V. (120.000 kg vs 3 million kg.) The Saturn V is as big as it is *because* it needs to go so much further out.
Besides, psych trauma isn't exactly a rational or linear or measured response...
It's a bit like saying falling down the stairs is as bad as being in a plane crash, because the number of broken legs is comparable. The incidents themselves are wildly different in scale and impact, but the resulting trauma can indeed be similar.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022