... BTW: Forget Hydrogen, it is almost impossible to attain without draining large amounts of electrical current which are now being generated by coal, oil, and nuclear.
On the contrary, I don't think anything should be "forgotten" in the search for an alternatives to fossil fuels. Here's an interesting 'bio-solar' source of hydrogen...
>Biological hydrogen production is done in a bioreactor based on the production of hydrogen by algae. Algae produce hydrogen under certain conditions. In the late 1990s it was discovered that if algae[clarify] are deprived of sulfur they will switch from the production of oxygen, as in normal photosynthesis, to the production of hydrogen.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologi...gen_production
And there is the more immediate prospect of massive electricity (and hence hydrogen) production from photovoltaic panel arrays in high solar flux regions. Interestingly, Germany (given its relatively low sunlight intensity) leads the way here.. http://www.solarbuzz.com/Marketbuzz2008-intro.htm
so was the statement that a couple acres of solar cells in Arizona desert would power the US...do the math...
Couple of acres?!! Try 10,000 acres per cornfield. Watch King Corn.
enzos My bad, I wasn't aware of the bioreactors. However I read on DOE's own website that the Hydrogen infrastructure is very expensive and complicated, like storing, pressurizing, transporting, and fueling. Being able to pressurize and store enough Hydrogen to drive a vehicle over 150 miles is still a challenge. The other problems are the way the algae is grown on plastic sheets, which requires a steady stream of water to be broken down into Hydrogen, and with the low 15% efficiency is kinda blah. I recommend watching Crude Awakening, one of the prominent energy engineers admits that Hydrogen is at least 50 years away. In contrast solar energy is available today and with 40% efficiency, no water required or major storage issues. There are also many current vehicles that depend on electricity including cars (like the Tesla), forklifts, golf carts, trains, roller coasters, cranes, submarine, and even military tanks (diesel generators produce electricity). The technology is mature enough to implement at a large scale, and it has been done before.
It certainly is ridiculous. It's why the world is so fucked up today. Everything is about money and, consequently, competition.
People say that competition is what drives better products and accelerates technological evolution. This is *completely* false!!!
Competition and money absolutely slows down technological evolution. IBM will do everything to stop the knowledge from spreading outside its boundaries because it'll lose its competitive edge which would then translate into a loss of money. If competition and money were never an issue, knowledge would spread rapidly and evolution would happen quickly.
Possibly the most blatant example of slow evolution is the plague that is oil companies that are turning in record profits right now. Oil companies have always slowed down alternative energy inventions by buying rights and sitting on the technology or outright clandestinely sending thugs to kill the inventors that did not accept their offer they couldn't (read shouldn't) refuse.
Your thinking is false.
While everything might be about money, the consequence of money is not competition. Competition is what spurns invention and innovation, and competition is one of the primary supports of the foundation of Capitalism.
Murdering your competitor, or using shady tactics to STIFLE your competition is neither competitive nor ethical.
Yes, I know that does not stop it from happening anyway, but dont bag on competition, because competition is what makes America the land of possibility and opportunity.
LOL, every time i hear law suit in amercia i just cant stop laughing......
Man yea i agree with that. America and Lawsuit is so cliche. I dont know of any other country where people just constantly sue eachother like its taking someone for coffee. Harassment from a tap on the shoulder. Suing here for gettig another job in your chosen field of work like what the fuckk
It appears to mean if you specialise in a certain area, then that means you have to work for the same company for life.
Imagine if it applied to chefs, or lawyers, or teachers.
Don't get your panties in a bundle, every company has non-compete, even Apple. This is standard. What will happen is that they will come to an agreement where he cannot use his knowledge in relation to power chip for a specific number of years. The question you should be asking is.. why did he sign the non-compete?. If we let every executive just violate the non-compete, then why not also violate a non-disclosure (which i recall, most of you here like espicially when it pertains to apple).. a NDA is a lot weaker than a non-compete and you guys love it (espicially when apple is trying to keep a new product under wraps). Relax, apple and IBM will come to an agreement and IBM cannot lose this suit.. the guy signed the agreement. No one put a gun to his head and made him sign it. He could have said no and forgone a lucrative paycheck and gone to work at 7-11 if he wanted to.
I agree non-competes are worthless, but all he has to do is not disclose the salient information in the NDA which isn't hard.
If I'm building an X at IBM under an NDA and I go to Apple and they say, build me an X, I can do so without effect from the NDA, as long as I don't say "hey, I built one just like this at IBM, with these features...".
Anyway this is a yawnfest except that it's a another confirmation that Apple is getting into the chip design business. Good on 'em.
Yeah, that works until IBM get a copy of Apple X and finds it shares some amazingly similiar feature with their X. I know what you are thinking.. hey, that's not fair, how can apple build their X without overlapping with IBM X and you know what?.. that is not IBM problem. They funded X with their money. Whether Apple can build a similiar product without overlapping is apple problem. IBM does not work for apple, they are not beholden to apple shareholders. IBM says to apple, tough luck, maybe you should have build X before we did. I guess then you guys don't mind is someone else develops a clone of MacOSX by hiring some apple developers as long as the former apple employees did not say "hey, this is what i did at apple?"... see how ridiculous your argument is?
Hey! I have to respond to your line about oil companies.... as I work for one.
1. if you don't want oil, don't use it (you will have no cars, no shoes, no clothes, no almost anything). stop blaming oil companies for the sluts and greedy people we are.
2. are they turning in record profits? goooood. why nobody asked any of the banks and brokers who turned in record profits last year, or the year before, or two years ago? just look at the top 10 money makers in the last 3 years and you will see 1 oil company in and the rest are banks (bank of am, citigroup, etc.) what did these banks do? got us in the economic mess we are in right now, used (and still using) outrages fees, interest, and business practices to rip people off, move the pile of money from NY to LA to Jakarta and Hong Kong, and get more money out of it at the end of the day. I think Americans need to understand that you need to produce something, and of good quality, in order to make money. That means computers like apple, cars like the Japanese cars, nuclear reactors like the Canadian ones, etc. The DotCom crashed because they were selling puff pastry into thin air. The housing boom crashed because of speculants and greedy brokers who ripped off prople.
3. you want alternative energy? I want that too. I live in the great state of tx (because of work and not choice). I would put a solar roof but my incentives are so minimal that i do not want to spend 40k that I will maybe recoup in 30 years. i wanted to bring a small car (diesel) from europe (that has about 60miles/gal and it is much cleaner than my honda ULEV). but, sorry, can't do that because of the american protectionism toward their fat piggy cars.
4. and give me a break with oil compnies sending people to wack inventors because they did not want to sell their stuff to the oil companies. the fact of the matter is that alternative en are too expensive compared to fossil fuels and it will take time to replace the infrastructure you have in place right now. The $140/baril was the best thing that happened for alt. en. It made it more competitive with fossil fuels, people started conserving energy, and the big ugly SUV were out ofthe market.
Of course, you're correct about the political demonizing of the oil companies. The current market determines the price of oil, but the market is also affected by the politics that created these out-of-whack prices. Our involvement in the Middle East was largely driven by our oil interests. The oil companies have hugely influential lobbies in Washington. Anyone who does not understand this has bad wiring in their head.
As long as they just use their own processors in their own devices, they're still NOT COMPETING in any market.
Besides, Apple's not an idiot company-- why on Earth would they take the step backwards from ARM to PowerPC? My guess is they'd design an ARM core for use solely in their own products. (Products which IBM doesn't make and therefore DOESN'T COMPETE with.)
Do you think it's Apple's intent to dominate in a niche market, or to make future chip designs that are the best in the world, and thus, the default choice for other manufacturers of mobile products (or whatever is up their Apple-ish sleeves).
I'll be first inline if this recruit means what I forsee it to mean.
Come on Apple, get some balls and do what was conveyed to us, back in 1997, and if so, I just might suck it up and return to the Bay area. That is, if it speculates to what this hire and other recent hires may produce.
The Russians, the British and the Norwegians, as well as the Iranians have lots of oil.
Besides, i solar really kicks off, who do you think has vast desert areas?
There is no way that you can get electricity from those remote areas to the places where they are needed the most. And the Great American desert is pretty large too.
Yeah, that works until IBM get a copy of Apple X and finds it shares some amazingly similiar feature with their X. I know what you are thinking.. hey, that's not fair, how can apple build their X without overlapping with IBM X and you know what?.. that is not IBM problem. They funded X with their money. Whether Apple can build a similiar product without overlapping is apple problem. IBM does not work for apple, they are not beholden to apple shareholders. IBM says to apple, tough luck, maybe you should have build X before we did. I guess then you guys don't mind is someone else develops a clone of MacOSX by hiring some apple developers as long as the former apple employees did not say "hey, this is what i did at apple?"... see how ridiculous your argument is?
Maybe I could if I could understand your gibberish. Are you trying to say that by having someone sign an NDA means that no-one can build something similar, even if they come to it independently? An NDA just means you mustn't disclose the information to anyone else. It's not a patent.
Maybe I could if I could understand your gibberish. Are you trying to say that by having someone sign an NDA means that no-one can build something similar, even if they come to it independently? An NDA just means you mustn't disclose the information to anyone else. It's not a patent.
I understand what he's saying. It's much more complex than NDA's though.
There is no way that you can get electricity from those remote areas to the places where they are needed the most. And the Great American desert is pretty large too.
The US produces 4 trillion kWh per year. If we add cars, and make them electric, that will grow. I don't have numbers, so let's assume that's 6 trillion kWh per year.
1 square meter of photovoltaics can produce about 2 kWh per day, or 750 kWh per year. Now let's do some division.
6,000,000,000,000 / 750 = 8,000,000,000. That's 8 billion square meters, or 2 million acres.
Hmm, that's less than a square of 60 miles on a side. Humongous, but doable. You'd probably need about 50% more to accommodate inefficiencies in storage and transmission, but still....
I started writing this post to show how this was all a pipe dream, but I guess the math does work.
It appears to mean if you specialise in a certain area, then that means you have to work for the same company for life.
Imagine if it applied to chefs, or lawyers, or teachers.
Yeah, it's like saying: Hey, should you ever quit this company, consider your carrier over and start looking for a job as a janitor or something. None of your expertise you have developed during your employment here may be used in your further carrier. Good luck, sucker.
Comments
... BTW: Forget Hydrogen, it is almost impossible to attain without draining large amounts of electrical current which are now being generated by coal, oil, and nuclear.
On the contrary, I don't think anything should be "forgotten" in the search for an alternatives to fossil fuels. Here's an interesting 'bio-solar' source of hydrogen...
>Biological hydrogen production is done in a bioreactor based on the production of hydrogen by algae. Algae produce hydrogen under certain conditions. In the late 1990s it was discovered that if algae[clarify] are deprived of sulfur they will switch from the production of oxygen, as in normal photosynthesis, to the production of hydrogen.[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biologi...gen_production
And there is the more immediate prospect of massive electricity (and hence hydrogen) production from photovoltaic panel arrays in high solar flux regions. Interestingly, Germany (given its relatively low sunlight intensity) leads the way here.. http://www.solarbuzz.com/Marketbuzz2008-intro.htm
so was the statement that a couple acres of solar cells in Arizona desert would power the US...do the math...
Couple of acres?!! Try 10,000 acres per cornfield. Watch King Corn.
enzos My bad, I wasn't aware of the bioreactors. However I read on DOE's own website that the Hydrogen infrastructure is very expensive and complicated, like storing, pressurizing, transporting, and fueling. Being able to pressurize and store enough Hydrogen to drive a vehicle over 150 miles is still a challenge. The other problems are the way the algae is grown on plastic sheets, which requires a steady stream of water to be broken down into Hydrogen, and with the low 15% efficiency is kinda blah. I recommend watching Crude Awakening, one of the prominent energy engineers admits that Hydrogen is at least 50 years away. In contrast solar energy is available today and with 40% efficiency, no water required or major storage issues. There are also many current vehicles that depend on electricity including cars (like the Tesla), forklifts, golf carts, trains, roller coasters, cranes, submarine, and even military tanks (diesel generators produce electricity). The technology is mature enough to implement at a large scale, and it has been done before.
Germany 47%, wow! That was quick.
No one, no matter how brilliant, does work in a vacuum.
What are you, some kind of socialist?
It certainly is ridiculous. It's why the world is so fucked up today. Everything is about money and, consequently, competition.
People say that competition is what drives better products and accelerates technological evolution. This is *completely* false!!!
Competition and money absolutely slows down technological evolution. IBM will do everything to stop the knowledge from spreading outside its boundaries because it'll lose its competitive edge which would then translate into a loss of money. If competition and money were never an issue, knowledge would spread rapidly and evolution would happen quickly.
Possibly the most blatant example of slow evolution is the plague that is oil companies that are turning in record profits right now. Oil companies have always slowed down alternative energy inventions by buying rights and sitting on the technology or outright clandestinely sending thugs to kill the inventors that did not accept their offer they couldn't (read shouldn't) refuse.
Your thinking is false.
While everything might be about money, the consequence of money is not competition. Competition is what spurns invention and innovation, and competition is one of the primary supports of the foundation of Capitalism.
Murdering your competitor, or using shady tactics to STIFLE your competition is neither competitive nor ethical.
Yes, I know that does not stop it from happening anyway, but dont bag on competition, because competition is what makes America the land of possibility and opportunity.
LOL, every time i hear law suit in amercia i just cant stop laughing......
Man yea i agree with that. America and Lawsuit is so cliche. I dont know of any other country where people just constantly sue eachother like its taking someone for coffee. Harassment from a tap on the shoulder. Suing here for gettig another job in your chosen field of work like what the fuckk
How stupid is this noncompete agreement?
It appears to mean if you specialise in a certain area, then that means you have to work for the same company for life.
Imagine if it applied to chefs, or lawyers, or teachers.
Don't get your panties in a bundle, every company has non-compete, even Apple. This is standard. What will happen is that they will come to an agreement where he cannot use his knowledge in relation to power chip for a specific number of years. The question you should be asking is.. why did he sign the non-compete?. If we let every executive just violate the non-compete, then why not also violate a non-disclosure (which i recall, most of you here like espicially when it pertains to apple).. a NDA is a lot weaker than a non-compete and you guys love it (espicially when apple is trying to keep a new product under wraps). Relax, apple and IBM will come to an agreement and IBM cannot lose this suit.. the guy signed the agreement. No one put a gun to his head and made him sign it. He could have said no and forgone a lucrative paycheck and gone to work at 7-11 if he wanted to.
I agree non-competes are worthless, but all he has to do is not disclose the salient information in the NDA which isn't hard.
If I'm building an X at IBM under an NDA and I go to Apple and they say, build me an X, I can do so without effect from the NDA, as long as I don't say "hey, I built one just like this at IBM, with these features...".
Anyway this is a yawnfest except that it's a another confirmation that Apple is getting into the chip design business. Good on 'em.
Yeah, that works until IBM get a copy of Apple X and finds it shares some amazingly similiar feature with their X. I know what you are thinking.. hey, that's not fair, how can apple build their X without overlapping with IBM X and you know what?.. that is not IBM problem. They funded X with their money. Whether Apple can build a similiar product without overlapping is apple problem. IBM does not work for apple, they are not beholden to apple shareholders. IBM says to apple, tough luck, maybe you should have build X before we did. I guess then you guys don't mind is someone else develops a clone of MacOSX by hiring some apple developers as long as the former apple employees did not say "hey, this is what i did at apple?"... see how ridiculous your argument is?
Hey! I have to respond to your line about oil companies.... as I work for one.
1. if you don't want oil, don't use it (you will have no cars, no shoes, no clothes, no almost anything). stop blaming oil companies for the sluts and greedy people we are.
2. are they turning in record profits? goooood. why nobody asked any of the banks and brokers who turned in record profits last year, or the year before, or two years ago? just look at the top 10 money makers in the last 3 years and you will see 1 oil company in and the rest are banks (bank of am, citigroup, etc.) what did these banks do? got us in the economic mess we are in right now, used (and still using) outrages fees, interest, and business practices to rip people off, move the pile of money from NY to LA to Jakarta and Hong Kong, and get more money out of it at the end of the day. I think Americans need to understand that you need to produce something, and of good quality, in order to make money. That means computers like apple, cars like the Japanese cars, nuclear reactors like the Canadian ones, etc. The DotCom crashed because they were selling puff pastry into thin air. The housing boom crashed because of speculants and greedy brokers who ripped off prople.
3. you want alternative energy? I want that too. I live in the great state of tx (because of work and not choice). I would put a solar roof but my incentives are so minimal that i do not want to spend 40k that I will maybe recoup in 30 years. i wanted to bring a small car (diesel) from europe (that has about 60miles/gal and it is much cleaner than my honda ULEV). but, sorry, can't do that because of the american protectionism toward their fat piggy cars.
4. and give me a break with oil compnies sending people to wack inventors because they did not want to sell their stuff to the oil companies. the fact of the matter is that alternative en are too expensive compared to fossil fuels and it will take time to replace the infrastructure you have in place right now. The $140/baril was the best thing that happened for alt. en. It made it more competitive with fossil fuels, people started conserving energy, and the big ugly SUV were out ofthe market.
Of course, you're correct about the political demonizing of the oil companies. The current market determines the price of oil, but the market is also affected by the politics that created these out-of-whack prices. Our involvement in the Middle East was largely driven by our oil interests. The oil companies have hugely influential lobbies in Washington. Anyone who does not understand this has bad wiring in their head.
As long as they just use their own processors in their own devices, they're still NOT COMPETING in any market.
Besides, Apple's not an idiot company-- why on Earth would they take the step backwards from ARM to PowerPC? My guess is they'd design an ARM core for use solely in their own products. (Products which IBM doesn't make and therefore DOESN'T COMPETE with.)
Do you think it's Apple's intent to dominate in a niche market, or to make future chip designs that are the best in the world, and thus, the default choice for other manufacturers of mobile products (or whatever is up their Apple-ish sleeves).
If you cover a few thousand acres in Arizona with todays solar cells, as much as a few corn fields, they could power the whole US 24/7.
12/7 - sunset, whilst allowing great photographic moments, will prove a slight hindrance in your grand scheme.
Besides solar will only kick off once the Arabs run out of oil - in about 4 years.
McD
12/7 - sunset, whilst allowing great photographic moments, will prove a slight hindrance in your grand scheme.
Besides solar will only kick off once the Arabs run out of oil - in about 4 years.
McD
Regardless of the panic inducing headlines... oil will be with us for a while longer.
I'll be first inline if this recruit means what I forsee it to mean.
Come on Apple, get some balls and do what was conveyed to us, back in 1997, and if so, I just might suck it up and return to the Bay area. That is, if it speculates to what this hire and other recent hires may produce.
Is this also available in English?
What are you, some kind of socialist?
Sorry Senator McCain, didn't mean to make you nervous!
12/7 - sunset, whilst allowing great photographic moments, will prove a slight hindrance in your grand scheme.
Besides solar will only kick off once the Arabs run out of oil - in about 4 years.
McD
The Russians, the British and the Norwegians, as well as the Iranians have lots of oil.
Besides, i solar really kicks off, who do you think has vast desert areas?
The Russians, the British and the Norwegians, as well as the Iranians have lots of oil.
Besides, i solar really kicks off, who do you think has vast desert areas?
There is no way that you can get electricity from those remote areas to the places where they are needed the most. And the Great American desert is pretty large too.
Yeah, that works until IBM get a copy of Apple X and finds it shares some amazingly similiar feature with their X. I know what you are thinking.. hey, that's not fair, how can apple build their X without overlapping with IBM X and you know what?.. that is not IBM problem. They funded X with their money. Whether Apple can build a similiar product without overlapping is apple problem. IBM does not work for apple, they are not beholden to apple shareholders. IBM says to apple, tough luck, maybe you should have build X before we did. I guess then you guys don't mind is someone else develops a clone of MacOSX by hiring some apple developers as long as the former apple employees did not say "hey, this is what i did at apple?"... see how ridiculous your argument is?
Maybe I could if I could understand your gibberish. Are you trying to say that by having someone sign an NDA means that no-one can build something similar, even if they come to it independently? An NDA just means you mustn't disclose the information to anyone else. It's not a patent.
Maybe I could if I could understand your gibberish. Are you trying to say that by having someone sign an NDA means that no-one can build something similar, even if they come to it independently? An NDA just means you mustn't disclose the information to anyone else. It's not a patent.
I understand what he's saying. It's much more complex than NDA's though.
There is no way that you can get electricity from those remote areas to the places where they are needed the most. And the Great American desert is pretty large too.
The US produces 4 trillion kWh per year. If we add cars, and make them electric, that will grow. I don't have numbers, so let's assume that's 6 trillion kWh per year.
1 square meter of photovoltaics can produce about 2 kWh per day, or 750 kWh per year. Now let's do some division.
6,000,000,000,000 / 750 = 8,000,000,000. That's 8 billion square meters, or 2 million acres.
Hmm, that's less than a square of 60 miles on a side. Humongous, but doable. You'd probably need about 50% more to accommodate inefficiencies in storage and transmission, but still....
I started writing this post to show how this was all a pipe dream, but I guess the math does work.
How stupid is this noncompete agreement?
It appears to mean if you specialise in a certain area, then that means you have to work for the same company for life.
Imagine if it applied to chefs, or lawyers, or teachers.
Yeah, it's like saying: Hey, should you ever quit this company, consider your carrier over and start looking for a job as a janitor or something. None of your expertise you have developed during your employment here may be used in your further carrier. Good luck, sucker.