Posts by MatthewSt 520 publicly visible posts • joined 12 Jun 2013
Fahrenheit was originally designed so that 0 was the freezing point of brine, 30 was water, and 90 was normal body temperature. There were 180 degrees between water boiling and freezing, which has more factors than 100 to make maths without a calculator easier.
Just with it being the 1700s it just wasn't created that accurately!
If we're talking about driving sensibly, then an electric car will get 4.1 to 4.5 miles/kWh on motorway, and 5 in urban (as opposed to the 3.4 I'd used for the above calculation). I'd intentionally low-balled the electric number to stop the argument turning into a "but you'll never get that number". So the 15 kWh will give me 60-75 miles.
Also, you're assuming that 100% of your electricity is generated using fossil fuels. At this point in time (17:30 on a Sunday evening), the UK is running on 39.5% carbon free generation.
You're literally the only person in this thread who's suggested we dispose of still-usable ICE vehicles. Some can be converted, others can carry on until they're too expensive to maintain / considered too polluting. Change has to happen gradually, and the infrastructure will catch up.
Regarding construction, the EPA (https://www.epa.gov/greenvehicles/electric-vehicle-myths) reckons that taking into consideration the full lifecycle EV's emit less than half the amount of GHG compared to regular cars.
Regarding the features, none of what you're describing there requires electric cars and exists just as frequently (if not more so) in ICE vehicles. The features that he's talking about are things like being able to run your house from your car's battery when the grid is busy / out / electricity is expensive. The EV I drive has physical buttons for everything (air conditioning, radio, etc) that you need while driving.
Yes, if the emergency requires more than 70 miles driving and I need to set off as soon as I got home without stopping on the way then they'll probably die.
If you're the kind of person that likes to be prepared for that kind of emergency, then you wouldn't drive from Oxford to Bradford without stopping, you'd top up as you were travelling.
> Driving around with what amounts to an electrochemical bomb in the floor is not my idea of fun
As opposed to driving with what amounts to a chemical bomb in the back?
Energy density can improve (same way that engine efficiency could probably improve) but currently my car can drive further without stopping (280 miles) than I can. Charging facilities (granted, when they work) can already add 23 miles/minute to your battery, so 5 minutes charge while you nip in for a wee gives you another 100 miles.
There are always going to be edge cases that aren't easily solvable, but the vast majority of us aren't trying to drive 350 miles in one go. I can drive back to Bradford from Oxford, plug the car in, and it's ready to go again the following morning. Doesn't suit everyone, but that doesn't mean it suits no one
How does that compare to the wear caused by the 1000+ 44,000Kg fuel tankers doing 220,000km each year carrying the 15 billion Kg of petrol and 12.5 billion Kg of diesel that were used in the UK in 2021?
Not disputing that the car weighs more and causes more wear than the equivalent petrol car, but basing the entire argument on a single metric isn't going to last very long.
Also, I go back to my original point: if weight of electric vehicles is as much of a problem as people claim then why are we permitting heavy cars of any fuel type?
Not that they're interested in using it this way, but it wouldn't be impossible for your Auth provider to issue you a token (JWT?) that you can then paste into whatever platform wants to verify your age.
The token only contains proof that the bearer is over 18. Doesn't contain any identifying information. Auth provider don't know where you used it, Auth consumer knows what provider it came from but not who it was assigned to.
Combine that with rate limits (restrict how long tokens are valid, how many each user account can generate per day, how many times the consumer will accept the same key) and you're most of the way there! It won't entirely prevent a black market for them, but nothing can
> This is because the businesses that supply these products and services are forced by legislation to adhere to industry standards.
Not quite, they choose to adhere to these industry standards because customers wouldn't buy their products if they didn't. Apple could easily make a device that can't call Samsung phones (like the iPod Touch, which only supported WiFi so did Facetime fine but no phone calls). Same way that Ford could sell a car that required specific fuel. Wouldn't make any business sense for them to do it though.
Not sure you've understood IR35 correctly here (unless I've misunderstood your complaint): He spoke as a one off at an event. He may have been paid a ridiculous amount of money for it, but I don't think anyone could argue that means he is an employee of International Symposium on Blockchain Advancements (or whoever was running the conference).
If he has a personal services company, and he goes around doing a lot of one off talks for a load of different companies, then that is actually contracting and doesn't go anywhere near IR35. If one company decided they needed him to do daily/weekly speeches in their offices (perhaps they're trying to get rid of some staff) then he'll need to be declared within the scope of it.
Same reason that if you're running .NET in AWS Lamda's you don't contact Microsoft for support, you contact AWS
There are now 2 "supported" options to install dotnet on Ubuntu
1) Through packages.microsoft.com (compiled by Microsoft, supported by Microsoft)
2) Through packages.ubuntu.com (compiled by Canonical, supported by Canonical)
If you'd rather read the information on Canonical's site then you can find it here - https://canonical.com/blog/install-dotnet-on-ubuntu
Because the majority of phishing attacks convince you to enter your credentials into a site that then goes and makes use of them to spam contacts, exfiltrate data etc
Certificate based has 2 benefits
1) The certificate can be configured to be used on particular websites only (so you're no longer relying on the user noticing a dodgy URL)
2) The private key is never sent to the server, so they can't pretend to be you
"and drop any messages they wished"
As long as they also dropped every message after it, and carried on building their own blockchain at a slightly faster rate than the "legitimate" one. Due to the way each is signed, you can't just remove one out of the middle.
Not pro-blockchain by any stretch, but I'm pro-facts and would prefer it if the criticisms (and benefits) of the technology were all genuine
While that sounds impressive, it's important to remember that streaming (especially on demand) is very tolerant of latency / jitter and dropouts. It may be buffering 10+ seconds in advance, which means that your 1 second dropout was actually closer to 11 consecutive seconds of actual connection problems. Any problems shorter than 5 seconds or so would be hidden.
Not defending Google's stance here, but I'd be inclined to believe that a company making billions out of selling ads probably wouldn't be making billions if they didn't do the tracking.
Yes you can tell that a visitor to a website about cars likes cars, but are you going to sell them a mid-life crisis sports car or a family hatchback? Maybe the ads don't want to be for cars at all, as if they're interested in cars then chances are they might already have a car. They might be interested in going to F1. Or insurance. The whole point of tracking is that you're not chasing it just for clicks. As strange as it sounds, advertisers actually want to sell the products that they're advertising, otherwise they're just wasting money. It's in their best interest for the ads to be relevant.
As for TV programming, where do you think the information about the demographics came from? It came from people being asked what they watched and volunteering that kind of tracking information. The broadcasters don't just say "Death in Paradise is on at 9pm, go work it out for yourselves".
The article does go on to address that:
* skillset required to have knowledge of n cloud platforms
* bandwidth charges for data moving between the two
* latency
Standards (Kubernetes?) sort of go a way towards the first, the 2nd you'd have to legislate some form of interconnect rates (Cloudflare have the bandwidth alliance, these two have their own deal), the third you'll find tricky to solve through regulatory intervention
Don't know about the more recent versions, but we found Skype very good for group messaging and calling. Easy to see who's read up to where, handles flakey connections well (including the dreaded offline scenario), good for calls and screen sharing too.
Considering it's pretty much the same infrastructure, it's depressing how much better it is than Teams...!
7kwh for home car charging (11-22kwh if you're lucky enough to have 3 phase). A lot of home chargers now support being remotely guided to charge during "green" times. No harm in PCs doing the same thing though. It's not always about renewable, but the supply and demand too.
Have a look at something like https://carbonintensity.org.uk/ for details
Back in my early days I was working on an application hosted on Windows on a Virtuozzo cluster (which was sort of containers before containers were a thing). We hit a bug that was resolved in the latest Service Pack of Windows so out of hours I started the update process on all 6 servers that made up the environment. When the first three restarted, they didn't come back.
Turns out Virtuozzo used some crazy single instance features (or something like that) where each server "ran on top of" and used the same code as the underlying host. By running the updates I completely hosed the environment. I was given a very stern talking to by my manager (but I gather not as stern as the talking to he got from his manager) but thankfully that was the worst of it.
What people seem to overlook in these kinds of scenarios is that if the person means well, they'll treat it as a lesson. They're not going to want to make the same mistake twice! You just have to work out what the intent was, and whether that person is capable of learning from it
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
