Something Random

[Handruin]

They're much more convenient and faster to use than email. With email, you need to load whatever email client you have. You need to either remember the address or type in the whole thing. You either fill out a subject or not and then send it. The other person with a phone then either has to have some kind of push notification enabled (I typically don't), and if they do get it, it's usually with lots of other emails. They also have to be able to have a phone which supports an internet plan. With txt message, you don't need that. You can also txt message someone with a very basic phone. Also, if the state of my phone is off when a txt is sent, I'll get the txt when I turn the phone on. The same would be true for email.

Sending a txt is much easier and in the time it takes to craft a single email, I can have either a partial or full conversation with someone about something (be it important or not). At the slight increase in cost, the added convenience of the service has been very useful. Also, you can send a txt to an email and vice vs, so that option also adds value for those who don't txt message.

I participate in facebook because I do see some value. I see no value in it as a replacement for email and lots of other communication tools for friends/family, but for what it is, it works fine for me. The one tool that I've yet to find a personal value in is twitter. I've tried it for various things and nothing makes me want to continue using it.

 

[Mercutio]

The one tool that I've yet to find a personal value in is twitter. I've tried it for various things and nothing makes me want to continue using it.

Twitter can be used as a replacement for RSS if you follow a lot of blogs ("Just made a new post at...) and in some cases can be useful if you're closely following breaking news. I wouldn't pretend that any ordinary person needs to tweet though.

 

[ddrueding]

I share Merc's distaste for Facebook. All of his points are valid, but the one that annoys me the most is the following:

Facebook has recently surpassed Walmart as the thing that reduces my faith in humanity the most. That sense that the bulk of the populace are merely cattle, acting in their own short-term, very short sighted interest out of ignorance or laziness. Giving up open communication for closed, giving up massive amounts of personal information, entrusting a single corporation with a terrible track record to manage all your social contacts.

It makes me more certain that the entire first world is losing it's collective mind.

 

[Stereodude]

The way I figure it, it's simple... If someone only wants to communicate with me via facebook, twitter, or text messages then I figure I don't need to communicate with them.

 

[LunarMist]

Its all the rage in the troposphere.

Bleh. The troposphere was awful last week. :right:

 

[LunarMist]

Fuck Facebook.

In other news, Amazon pays for return shipping if you need to RMA a product within 60 days of purchase. Sweet.

Non sequitur of the week! :rotfl: :rofl:

 

[Howell]

I have a friend who used his 1000+ global FB contacts to win a local photo contest and a free iPad. I have been so affected by it I now walk with a limp. LAME.

The most revealing part is that only ~130 people voted for him.

People sing the praises of the power of social networking but I'm still not buying it.

 

[LunarMist]

It must have been a rather small contest to have 130 votes win. :eek3:

 

[LunarMist]

The way I figure it, it's simple... If someone only wants to communicate with me via facebook, twitter, or text messages then I figure I don't need to communicate with them.

I figure that if anyone wants to communicate with me they are trying to sell me something. I don't answer the door or the phone either. irate:

 

[Stereodude]

I also don't answer the door either unless I know someone is coming over (ie: was invited). On top of that I typically don't answer the phone unless I recognize the number.

 

[Howell]

It must have been a rather small contest to have 130 votes win. :eek3:

Fewer than 50 people determined the winner despite it being online and driven by FB "likes".

 

[LunarMist]

They're much more convenient and faster to use than email. With email, you need to load whatever email client you have. You need to either remember the address or type in the whole thing. You either fill out a subject or not and then send it. The other person with a phone then either has to have some kind of push notification enabled (I typically don't), and if they do get it, it's usually with lots of other emails. They also have to be able to have a phone which supports an internet plan. With txt message, you don't need that. You can also txt message someone with a very basic phone. Also, if the state of my phone is off when a txt is sent, I'll get the txt when I turn the phone on. The same would be true for email.

Sending a txt is much easier and in the time it takes to craft a single email, I can have either a partial or full conversation with someone about something (be it important or not). At the slight increase in cost, the added convenience of the service has been very useful. Also, you can send a txt to an email and vice vs, so that option also adds value for those who don't txt message.

I participate in facebook because I do see some value. I see no value in it as a replacement for email and lots of other communication tools for friends/family, but for what it is, it works fine for me. The one tool that I've yet to find a personal value in is twitter. I've tried it for various things and nothing makes me want to continue using it.

Isn't that what a Blackberry or similar is for, to send a real e-mail? I suppose texts are easy to send on a regular phone, but what about the previous e-mails and attachments (PDF, doc, xls etc.)?

 

[Chewy509]

I share Merc's distaste for Facebook.

Likewise, in one of my classes at Uni last year, it was asked who had did not have a FB account and about 5% of people (out of roughly ~150) put there hand up. It was asked why... The most common answers were:

1. I have no intention of signing over all my personal details to some faceless corporation, that at any time can change their terms and conditions, and has the option of passing on my details to other 3rd parties without my consent.
2. I have email, phone and personal contact.
3. and this one I liked - I'm not giving all my personal information out so some recruiter can see what I do in my private life or what my friends do in their private life, which may cost me a job.

15 minutes later, they brought up the FB terms and conditions and showed people exactly what they were using, and what FB was allowed to do with their personal details.

PS. I don't have a FB account...

 

[BingBangBop]

I too don't have a FB account.

 

[Stereodude]

I had one for a short while after someone else created one with my e-mail address. I was able to take over the account via requesting a password reset and then shut it down and have it deleted.

 

[Stereodude]

So apparently no one has ever tried to put a 12.5mm thick 2.5" laptop drive in an Antec ISK-300 case before. I tried all my Google skills and couldn't find a definitive answer. I found a few other people seeking the answer to the same question, and people thinking that one might fit, and people thinking one might not. ARGH!!! :crap:

The most definitive thing I found was this configurator where you can pick 12.5mm and even 15mm thick 2.5" drives to be put in a ISK 300. However, I don't have enough faith to buy 12.5mm drives based on that.

I guess I will measure my ISK 300 when I get home from work tonight and make my own determination. Then I can either buy two 1TB 2.5" drives or not based on my conclusion. :bleh:

 

[Mercutio]

I can say that out of all the 2.5" USB enclosures I have, the 1TB Samsung drive doesn't fit in any of them. I didn't really expect it to but it would've been nice.

 

[Stereodude]

I can say that out of all the 2.5" USB enclosures I have, the 1TB Samsung drive doesn't fit in any of them. I didn't really expect it to but it would've been nice.

I bought a 2.5" eSATA / USB 2.0 enclosure specifically to hold mine. There aren't very many 2.5" eSATA / USB 2.0 enclosures that will hold a 12.5mm drive.

 

[Stereodude]

Well, it looks like you can get a 12.5mm thick 2.5" drive in one of the two 2.5" bays" in the Antec ISK 300. The other has a steel flange over it that will definitely stop a 12.5mm drive from fitting unless you cut off the flange or otherwise get it out of the way.

 

[LunarMist]

If you have an extra 3.5" bay it should be possible to fit four 2.5" drives in one of those Antec dealies.

 

[Howell]

I bought a 2.5" eSATA / USB 2.0 enclosure specifically to hold mine. There aren't very many 2.5" eSATA / USB 2.0 enclosures that will hold a 12.5mm drive.

Neat little case. Question about "If the eSATA port is a non-combo port (such as those found on PCI cards) the drive must connect to USB ports for power...."/

Does it really require two USB ports to power that like the picture of the cable seems to indicate? That would imply taking up three ports on a laptop just for the one drive.

 

[LunarMist]

Or you can often find a more compact 1TB USB 3 drive on sale for little more than the cost of a bare drive.

 

[Stereodude]

If you have an extra 3.5" bay it should be possible to fit four 2.5" drives in one of those Antec dealies.

There are no 3.5" bays. There are 2 2.5" bays and 1 slim 5.25" bay.

 

[Stereodude]

Neat little case. Question about "If the eSATA port is a non-combo port (such as those found on PCI cards) the drive must connect to USB ports for power...."

Does it really require two USB ports to power that like the picture of the cable seems to indicate? That would imply taking up three ports on a laptop just for the one drive.

I'm not exactly sure what you're asking. :scratch:

I'm able to power / connect to it from a single USB port with a 1TB Samsung drive in it if I want to use it via USB. For eSATA you can use the same single USB mini connector (being used just for power) + an eSATA cable. You don't have to use the DC power port / power cable.

 

[Stereodude]

Or you can often find a more compact 1TB USB 3 drive on sale for little more than the cost of a bare drive.

Yeah, I've seen the WD "now with USB 3.0" for $99.99 at Costco. However, none of my PCs have USB 3.0. :-?

All of my non-laptops have eSATA though. :cooler:

 

[LunarMist]

Yeah, I've seen the WD "now with USB 3.0" for $99.99 at Costco. However, none of my PCs have USB 3.0. :-?

All of my non-laptops have eSATA though. :cooler:

All of my desktops have USB 3.0 and eSATA, but none of my notebooks have either. USB 3.0 is just as fast as eSATA for the 2.5" drives and does not require the extra power cable. :bsmurf:

 

[LunarMist]

Iomega now has Personal Cloud Technology. It sounds like an experience after eating Mexican food. :eek3:

 

[time]

3000 posts for time. :beer:

Belated thanks to everyone who noticed the time.

 

[ddrueding]

I can store 1.5 months power consumption for my house in a 20 ton flywheel 6 feet tall if I can get it up to 20k RPM. Who needs batteries

 

[Handruin]

How much would that cost vs a diesel generator with the same amount of fuel for the same amount of time?

Can you really spin a 20 ton flywheel at 20K RPM without it breaking apart? How long would it take to spin it up to that speed? I assume the chamber would need to be a vacuum?

 

[ddrueding]

Haven't gotten there yet. It isn't an energy producer (like a generator), but more an alternative to batteries or hydrogen production/storage.

Storing 5.5KWh in batteries would get expensive pretty quickly, particularly considering that, to avoid deep discharges, you would need a significantly larger battery bank to get that much usable storage. Hydrogen production/storage and fuel cell generation is less efficient, and the equipment is expensive, but once your target storage level is high enough it overcomes those costs.

 

[Handruin]

I realize there would be a difference. The 20-ton flywheel would have to be spun up via some other source; be it an electric motor, or some other method like wind or a fossil fuel burning engine. That act of spinning it up must have some efficiency loss and probably a minimum amount of energy required to get it spinning to a minimum RPM. I can't imagine it would be easy to balance something that weighs 20-tons either and for even the slightest imbalance at those RPMs would be quite noticeable if not detrimental to the system.

Also, would it come with some kind of gearing system to the generator it would have to turn? As the energy is consumed from the spinning motion, the unit would slow down. As it slows to a certain point, I would only guess the RPMs would not suffice for generating electricity. That would mean to me that there is a range of RPMs that might be more efficient than others.

 

[ddrueding]

Yup. Balance would be critical. A wheel of that size made from Steel would be about 6 inches wide. There would need to be one hell of a CVT for both the drive and generation. A vacuum would be necessary as the outer portions of the wheel would be going many times the speed of sound. Considering a 20KWh li-ion battery back would only be about $50k, the only reason to go flywheel would be environmental concerns about the batteries.

 

[LunarMist]

I can store 1.5 months power consumption for my house in a 20 ton flywheel 6 feet tall if I can get it up to 20k RPM. Who needs batteries

What do the specs indicate about the RPM and capacity? Links?

 

[ddrueding]

Not a product, just straight math. Purely hypothetical.

 

[Handruin]

Curious, how did you figure out the math that a 20-ton object is capable of storing 1.5 months of power? What would be the average consumption of power over the course of 1.5 months? Does a 6 inch diameter x 6 ft high piece of steel actually get to 20-tons? When I ran a weight calculator, it says the weight would be 577.34 Lbs. Would it be this formula:

Diameter = 6 inches
Radius = 3 inches = 7.62 centimeters
Length = 72 inches = 182.88 centimeters

Volume of tube = pi x radius^2 x length
3.14 x (7.62^2) x 182.88 = 33,343.0869 cm^3

"According to the Engineering toolbox, the density of steel is 7,850 kilograms per cubic meter (7.85 grams per cubic centimeter)."

(33 343.0869 (cm^3)) x 7.85 (g / (cm^3)) = 261.743232 kilograms
261.743232 kilograms = 577.04505 pounds

20 short tons = 40 000 pounds

 

[LunarMist]

Curious, how did you figure out the math that a 20-ton object is capable of storing 1.5 months of power?

That would be the purely hypothetical part. -Ed.

 

[Handruin]

Thanks to ddrueding I'm reading about physics to understand how much energy is required to spin a 20-ton mass object to 20K RPM in a vacuum. I never took any kind of physics so I'd like to learn how to calculate this. I have to assume zero friction for the rough estimate. With friction, would it just be like adding a fluctuating and variable weight to the mass? Then the friction will likely generate heat which would then change things ever so slightly over time. Maybe that heat from friction is exchanged through liquid and also used to reclaim energy since the energy going in is converted to both the spinning object mass and also friction based heat? Maybe the bearing is liquid cooled and that heat can be used for your house during the exchange process?

 

[ddrueding]

It was a disk, actually, not a wheel. The weight was seat-of-the-pants approximation, based on what I could reasonably get into my garage, but the flywheel was a handy online calculator.

Edit: Revisiting my math, that dimension was for an earlier, lighter flywheel.

 

[Howell]

http://www.liebert.com/product_pages/product.aspx?id=59