I’ve seen turboprops in museums and on the internet with around six or eight blades. When I looked on the Wikipedia page for propfan engines, which seems to be another name for an open turbofan, the distinction seemed to be mainly how the blades were shaped (like propellor blades or turbine blades) and how tightly-integrated everything is (you can swap the propeller out on a turboprop).
How many blades do you have to add to a turboprop before it’s promoted to an open turbofan and touted as a major new innovation?
Humans with two working eyes can tell the difference between a flat painted surface and a 3D world. Humans with only one eye might crash, though.
Someone was telling me the other day that the cheapest new car available in the UK was an electric Dacia. Obviously, you can get a used car for less than a new one, but electric cars are within reach of normal people, or at least normal enough people to not have Mr Moneybags budgets.
Ethereum’s been proof-of-stake rather than proof-of-work for couple of years now, so it’s no longer energy intensive.
There inherently can’t be a way to make proof of work lies wasteful as long as there are people who want to do the work. If you make hardware more, then it makes it cheaper to do the same amount of work, so people buy more hardware and do more work and more power gets used. If you make hardware less efficient, people just use the old hardware. You have to abandon proof of work altogether and switch it to something else that isn’t inherently tied to energy usage.
First, someone has to email [email protected] to tell Randal Munroe that there’s a potential licence violation so he can file a suit.
xkcd comics are available under a CC-By-NC 2.5 licence, so you’ve successfully pirated by not including attribution (as long as people can’t tell at a glance that it’s xkcd from the art style or comment thread you posted it to), but to seal the deal, it’d be a crime to sell it.
A Spud apologist! Sabotage by a scarecrow was beyond Bob’s control, and the cause of most problems.
People fall off rooftops fitting solar panels, burn to death repairing wind turbines that they can’t climb down fast enough to escape, and dams burst and wash away towns. Renewable energy is much less killy than fossil fuels, but per megawatt hour, it’s comparable to nuclear, despite a few large incidents killing quite a lot of people each. At the moment, over their history, hydro is four times deadlier than nuclear, wind’s a little worse than nuclear, and solar’s a little better. Fission power is actually really safe.
The article’s talking about fusion power, though. Fission reactions are dangerous because if you’ve got enough fuel to get a reaction at all, you’ve got enough fuel to get a bigger reaction than you want, so you have to control it carefully to avoid making it too hot, which would cause the steam in the reactor to burst out and carry chunks of partially-used fuel with it, which are very deadly. That problem doesn’t exist with fusion. It’s so hard to make the reaction happen in the first place that any problem just makes the reaction stop immediately. If you somehow blew a hole in the side of the reactor, you’d just get some very hot hydrogen and very hot helium, which would be harmless in a few minutes once they’d cooled down. It’s impossible for fusion power, once it’s working, not to be the safest way to generate energy in history because it inherently avoids the big problems with what is already one of the safest ways.
That’s misleading in the other direction, though, as PhysX is really two things, a regular boring CPU-side physics library (just like Havok, Jolt and Bullet), and the GPU-accelerated physics library which only does a few things, but does them faster. Most things that use PhysX just use the CPU-side part and won’t notice or care if the GPU changes. A few things use the GPU-accelerated part, but the overwhelming majority of those use it for optional extra features that only work on Nvidia cards, and instead of running the same effects on the CPU if there’s no Nvidia card available, they just skip them, so it’s not the end of the world to leave them disabled on the 5000-series.
A billion dollars worth of bitcoin isn’t that much of the total amount of bitcoin any more, so any impact on the price would be because of people reacting emotionally to the news, not because they’re was suddenly a flood of extra bitcoin in circulation.
The Free Software movement was generally a leftist objection to the limitations on computer use that capitalism was causing, and the open source movement was a pro-corporate offshoot to try and make the obvious benefits more compatible with capitalism (which it’s been pretty successful at, even if it has reintroduced some of the problems Free Software was trying to stop in the first place). Anyone who’s making a distinction between the two at the minimum is recognising that capitalism is why we can’t have certain specific nice things, so it’s not a huge leap to blame it for other problems, too.
As for a sensible middle ground, the Free Software movement designed its licences to work in the capitalist societies they operated in, so the incompatibility with corporate use has never been as big a deal as it’s been made out to be. Corporations can use copyleft-licenced software just fine as long as they’re not unreasonable about it. It’s totally fine for a corporation to use a GPL tool internally and even have an internal fork as long as they put the source code for their internal fork on the company’s file share so the employees using the tool can improve it if they get the urge. They can even sell products that depend on LGPL or MPL libraries if they make the source of the builds of those libraries they used available on their website or otherwise accessible to their customers (and use a DLL/.so/.dylib build of the library of it’s LGPL). These restrictions are all less of a pain than making an MIT-licenced clone of an existing project, but companies have opted to make clones instead. The only bonus this gives them is that they can make it proprietary again later, and it has the added risk that one of their competitors could make a proprietary fork with a killer feature they can charge for, which isn’t a nice risk. There are other benefits to investing in making your own clone of something, but they don’t depend on the license it uses.
You’ve got it backwards. The phaser’s pointed directly away from the warp core, so the safest possible direction. Geordie’s at the phaser end, and Data’s the one relying on a tiny little target getting hit and using his own body as a backstop.
Illegal numbers are so illegal that you just linked a Wikipedia article containing a bunch of them, i.e. not very illegal. For an AI company already skirting copyright law, they’re not a concern at all.
The joke is partly that lots of trans women in particular enjoyed this game in particular, so plenty of people who noticed the switcheroo in the tweet will still see it as an opportunity to talk about the game rather than seeing the game as something irrelevant that could be swapped out for another.
Nintendo used to have a page on emulation on their website incorrectly claiming that it was always illegal and all emulators had solely been created to enable piracy. This new claim is not compatible with their previous action of having that page.
You’d expect musk of all people to know you need to spend 45 billion to buy the server first.
Tilting your head shouldn’t make a difference as ‘modern’ (as in the ones that cinemas started using fifteen years ago) 3D glasses use clockwise and anticlockwise circular polarisation filters, and obviously, turning something 90° doesn’t change whether it’s clockwise or anticlockwise. Other kinds of polarisation filters do care about being rotated, which is probably where the artist got the impression it applied to 3D glasses, but it would be dumb to try and use that kind as obviously, people tilt their heads.
What better time for prank signs than right after a real flood?
I was meaning that the blade count and detachability was the difference in definition between turboprop and propfan/open turbofan, not that it was necessarily the thing making the engine more efficient.