39 karma · joined May 23, 2012
This isn't always true. Carnot's Theorem works in reverse as well, so you can use a heat pump (like an air con unit) so get more heat out of your electricity than just dumping it into a coil. This is actually practical and is being done today for heating houses, you can easily beat the other inefficiencies because the temperature difference that you are trying to create for your house is much smaller than the one between the gas furnace and the ambient temperature around the power station.
For heating a pan though I think this is unlikely to be practical any time soon.
So for gas hobs to beat induction hobs, if we assume 100% efficiency for an induction hob (electrical energy to heat energy in the food), the pan needs to get >55% of the chemical energy from the gas into the food.
I don't have any figures but it isn't infeasible that a gas hob could be more efficient.
What is currently being worked on is a lobby system so you can create an account and view listings of what games are being hosted. The work is probably going to be added to the game soon, then further improvements like a ranking system can be added in the future.
Government funding is pretty limited so a lot of schools are supported by the church there, I think the funds are mainly provided by Christian organisations outside of the country.
My theory is that people with a better education are more keen on education. In South Sudan the people in church leadership are highly educated compared with the average person.
There were several PV and battery setups there which worked pretty well. Obviously you need to be careful with the amount of power that you use, but it can run computers, TV and lighting with a reasonable setup.
There was a computer lab at one installation which had one desktop machine acting as a server and about 15 thin clients to keep the power usage low.
In other areas people are doing things which weren't even possible on old hardware, think about 3D graphics. Real time lighting approximations are doing really clever stuff, just look at the latest unreal engine demo. If you put these into old hardware you would get the same quality render in less time. Modern ray tracing engines are using more sophisticated algorithms, giving better results in less time.
Beyond the algorithmic work optimising for modern hardware is different to old hardware. An optimal program for old hardware isn't optimal for modern hardware and vice versa. Now if a program needs data from RAM you have to wait hundreds to cpu cycles. Even accessing the L3 cache, which is in a modern processor chip, takes about 75 cycles on modern chips. So you can recalculate things and find your program runs faster.
Similar things happen with branches, I was looking at some GPU shaders recently and there was a simple raytracing loop (parallax occlusion mapping), the obvious way to do it is to stop when you intersect the surface. Instead it is actually faster to always run the loop for 10 steps because this removes the branch. So you do twice as many loop iterations on average but your code runs faster.
Of course you can afford to be sloppy as well. People are 'sloppy' so that their code is faster to write, easier to read and less likely to have bugs (3 lines of python is pretty likely to be easy to read and bug free). I would say software is advancing in many different ways, which hardware has enabled to happen.
For my current company the invitation to the interview says that if they like you then you will be invited to continue to another stage of the interview after lunch (they deliberate/discuss while you have lunch).
I would agree that in England we spend more time gardening (though "most of their 'home' time" would be an exaggeration, possibly true in summer). There is strong separation of gardens in the UK as well, not having a fence would be very unusual, whereas where I was in the US back and front yards weren't clearly delineated.
Now add some HFTs, these make a profit (there is empirical evidence for this claim). Now money is leaving the market without going to long term investors. Thus the long term investors are making less profit.
Now the big unsubstantiated assumption I have used above is that HFT adds no value to the market. I do not feel I am in any position to argue about whether this assumption is good or not. The above argument is presented in the hope that it makes things clearer and points towards what I think is the fundamental point which needs to be discussed: "Do HFT traders add value of a market?"
The structure a large companies provides can, if done well, handle the things that get in the way and let you get on with developing. Of course you generally get a prescribed set of tasks so you don't have much flexibility with what you need to get done.
You have to be willing to live fairly near to work of course. For me it would probably take about the same amount of time to drive to work. It takes me about 13 minutes to cycle and rush hour traffic will slow a car down.
If I want to go longer distances I can catch a train (and take the bike for the other end) or take a bus. Occasionally hiring a car is also possible for rare occasions.
So for me using a bike is completely feasible for living in a city.
Each course had a short list of recommended books and usually the lecturer would give a few comments about each book at the start of the course. These were for supplementary reference and were widely available in the libraries. I bought one text book during my course for my favourite area, so I could keep it after University. Otherwise the libraries were completely adequate.
I studied maths, I know that computer science and physics were the same. With arts subjects students used so many books that it wouldn't be reasonable to by them. I am not aware of any courses having required textbooks but I don't know for certain.
This is not directly comparable to the energy density of gasoline or a lithium ion battery which use chemical reactions to store the energy. So you can turn almost 100% of the energy in a lithium ion battery into useful work but if you put the equivalent number of joules into heating an object you wouldn't get close unless you have a handy 0 kelvin object.