Non-IT News Thread
-
That's some awesome stuff. What a breakthrough that could be!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
That's some awesome stuff. What a breakthrough that could be!
Yeah, it's definitely a large leap... but what about after that? Is 10x the current capacity of Lithium batteries the limit? What do we do then? Or will that suffice through ways of making things more energy efficient?
What ever happened to the micro-cells thing... where a super large capacity battery could charge in a second and last for a hella long time with a ton of output?
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
That's some awesome stuff. What a breakthrough that could be!
Especially if there's a big difference in weight between the Lithim batteries and the Flouride batteries.
-
@dafyre said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
That's some awesome stuff. What a breakthrough that could be!
Especially if there's a big difference in weight between the Lithim batteries and the Flouride batteries.
Even if there is not - it's 10 times the capacity... that's HUGE! Assuming it's not 10 times the cost. or 10 times more likely to explode, etc, etc, etc.
-
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@dafyre said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
That's some awesome stuff. What a breakthrough that could be!
Especially if there's a big difference in weight between the Lithim batteries and the Flouride batteries.
Even if there is not - it's 10 times the capacity... that's HUGE! Assuming it's not 10 times the cost. or 10 times more likely to explode, etc, etc, etc.
Currently, it eats the anodes.
For one thing, the anode and cathode of the prototype battery tend to dissolve completely in the electrolyte.
-
@JaredBusch said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Dashrender said in Non-IT News Thread:
@dafyre said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
That's some awesome stuff. What a breakthrough that could be!
Especially if there's a big difference in weight between the Lithim batteries and the Flouride batteries.
Even if there is not - it's 10 times the capacity... that's HUGE! Assuming it's not 10 times the cost. or 10 times more likely to explode, etc, etc, etc.
Currently, it eats the anodes.
For one thing, the anode and cathode of the prototype battery tend to dissolve completely in the electrolyte.
Yeah I read that.
-
Well it IS fluoride, haha.
-
@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
That's some awesome stuff. What a breakthrough that could be!
Yeah, it's definitely a large leap... but what about after that? Is 10x the current capacity of Lithium batteries the limit? What do we do then? Or will that suffice through ways of making things more energy efficient?
What ever happened to the micro-cells thing... where a super large capacity battery could charge in a second and last for a hella long time with a ton of output?
10x the current capacity... A Tesla Model 3 with the mid size battery pack goes coast to coast on one charge. A laptop works for 5 days without being plugged in. A smartphone would go for 2-3 weeks. What more do you really want?
Micro-cells? You mean the micro hydrogen generators? Those are generally too expensive for practical use, at least currently.
-
The Sun in its rearview mirror, Voyager 2 is in interstellar space
The solar wind is no longer registering on the spacecraft's instruments.
Voyager 2 was actually the first of the two probes launched back in 1977, but its trajectory had it reaching its first destination, Jupiter, after Voyager 1. Its trailing position had a large impact on its future; after Voyager 1 obtained sufficient data at Saturn, Voyager 2 was switched from a route that optimized data gathering to one that sent it past the ringed planet on a trajectory that boosted it toward Uranus and Neptune. That difference meant that Voyager 1 reached interstellar space much earlier.
-
UK PM to face vote of no confidence later today.
-
@scottalanmiller So...what does that mean in American terms? PM getting impeached?
-
@NerdyDad said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller So...what does that mean in American terms? PM getting impeached?
It's a gap in American political system. Everyone has it but us. It's not for when the PM does something illegal, it's for when they are simply incompetent.
There are two forms of this in the UK. The one now is that the party (Tories) of the PM have lost faith in her to lead the party and feel she needs to be tested.
The other is if parliament (the house) feel that the government has failed and need to remove it (lawmakers forcing a new vote.)
The second has been held off in the UK because the opposition party loves watching the primary party go at each other.
In the US, incompetence is not considered a reason to remove a government.
-
So impeachment is the closest thing that we have, but it's not related. Impeachment opens a president to a legal attack. But a no confidence is a direct means of removing someone all in one fell swoop.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
In the US, incompetence is not considered a reason to remove a government.
Which has never been more obvious the last couple years.
-
@Obsolesce said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
In the US, incompetence is not considered a reason to remove a government.
Which has never been more obvious the last couple years.
Indeed.
Or the WW administration. Or LBJ. There have been some real winners in the past.
-
Doctor Who wraps a solid season with its first female Time Lord
New showrunner Chris Chibnall made some bold choices to set his Doctor apart.
Ratings-wise, Whittaker's incarnation has been a smashing success. Nearly 11 million people worldwide watched the premiere episode ("The Woman Who Fell to Earth"), the largest audience for the series since 2013's Christmas special, "The Time of the Doctor," marked the transition from Matt Smith's 11th Doctor to Peter Capaldi's 12th. The new series as a whole averaged more than 8 million viewers per episode. And the reviews have been almost universally positive.
-
we have a 4 year election cycle. That is our equivalent, though only in purpose. Presidents may get only 1 term if they are incompetent. In the UK, the governments can last for as long as the majority holds.
-
@Donahue said in Non-IT News Thread:
we have a 4 year election cycle. That is our equivalent, though only in purpose. Presidents may get only 1 term if they are incompetent. In the UK, the governments can last for as long as the majority holds.
That's not very different. In the US it is always four years, in the UK it is no more than five years. In reality, I think UK elections are as often, or more often, than US ones. So the US doesn't solve anything in that way, it's actually just about the same.
We have two term maximums, but many argue that that undermines competence and makes things worse, rather than better, because it makes finding someone truly good less useful and by the time a good person has learned the job, they are gone.
-
@mlnews said in Non-IT News Thread:
Doctor Who wraps a solid season with its first female Time Lord
New showrunner Chris Chibnall made some bold choices to set his Doctor apart.
Ratings-wise, Whittaker's incarnation has been a smashing success. Nearly 11 million people worldwide watched the premiere episode ("The Woman Who Fell to Earth"), the largest audience for the series since 2013's Christmas special, "The Time of the Doctor," marked the transition from Matt Smith's 11th Doctor to Peter Capaldi's 12th. The new series as a whole averaged more than 8 million viewers per episode. And the reviews have been almost universally positive.
They have all been original, but I cannot say that they have been spectacular. There are many things that definitely sets this doctor apart from the others:
-
Obviously the first reason is that this is a female doctor on screen. There have been references to previous iterations being a female doctor, but this is the first time that the doctor, as a whole character, has been a female.
-
No consistent story thread followed throughout any of the episodes the entire season, except for the loss of a spouse/grandmother shared by 2 companions that more or less ties episodes 1,2, and the last one together.
-
No old villains ever appeared in these episodes. No daleks, no cybermen, no weeping angels (those still scare me), no intelligence, and no Master.
But I think they missed a big opportunity with a villain opportunity in the Rosa Parks episode. That could have been a great series (no spoilers).
According to my wife (who is the official whovian of the family) is hearing rumors that, if the current showrunner (Chibnall) and doctor (Whitaker) stay, it could be 2020 before we get another series, besides the New Years special. We've already waited ALL of 2017 and half of 2018 to forget Capaldi and the travesty he did as a doctor. Its beginning to become unfair to the whovian fans to wait another year for another season. We barely got 10 episodes out of this one (while American shows usually gets about 20 episodes a season). </rant>
EDIT: Forgot to add to the rant that some of the episodes were basic bashing on America on a political view, such as where the spiders occupied the hotel <not giving any spoilers, go watch it to see what I'm talking about>.
-
-
@NerdyDad said in Non-IT News Thread:
- Obviously the first reason is that this is a female doctor on screen. There have been references to previous iterations being a female doctor, but this is the first time that the doctor, as a whole character, has been a female.
Not technically, Joanna Lumley (from Are You Being Served?) was on screen as a doctor during a special decades ago.
Many of us have pulled for her over the years to get a few seasons of the main show. She has always been a great actress and would have rocked it.
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/b1/82/ff/b182ff6171c822c0d0adb674b299f319.jpg
