321–330 of 386 posts
It seems an additional hurdle is anti-fouling. Those barnacles and algae act as an insulator, making the cold-water cooling advantage less and less of an advantage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They should have probably prepared two tubes like that, and flipped a coin to randomly dunk one in water, and leave the other one up?
The outcome you're looking for is pumping one full of oxygen and one full of nitrogen - at least to verify care vs nitrogen.
"The team is speculating that the greater reliability may be connected to the fact that there were no humans on board, and that nitrogen rather than oxygen was pumped into the capsule." That does sound plausible. But I do wonder how much might have been due to extra care. If I were the sysadmin on the project, I probably would have spent extra time on component selection, cable seating, burn-in testing, etc. Lots of…
This: "there were no humans on board" Made me think of this: "The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This: "there were no humans on board" Made me think of this: "The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment."
Is there more to that quote that makes it make sense? Otherwise both the human and the dog are redundant as a pair as their purposes are circular and don't benefit the factory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This: "there were no humans on board" Made me think of this: "The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment."
Is there more to that quote that makes it make sense? Otherwise both the human and the dog are redundant as a pair as their purposes are circular and don't benefit the factory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This: "there were no humans on board" Made me think of this: "The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to keep the man from touching the equipment."
Is there more to that quote that makes it make sense? Otherwise both the human and the dog are redundant as a pair as their purposes are circular and don't benefit the factory.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that really still an issue? From my understanding, it's sort of a solved problem. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-AdW030xQB4
That’s a cool video with interesting information, but I don’t think the conclusion from it that fouling is a solved issue.
I'm not sure how the MS Natick's cooling system works, but if it's anything like a ship, the heat transfer surface is NOT typically the skin of the hull (although keel coolers are essentially that, but I don't see keel coolers on the Natick hull). Instead, ship cooling systems typically suck in the virtually endless supply of cold seawater, run it through a heat exchanger (often a plate type), generally with a feshwater loop on the other side that runs to hardware to be cooled. The servers would be cooled by this fresh chillwater loop.
The above system only works if a.) you have much excess cool seawater than heat infusion (i.e. you're not trying to cool a large server farm in a stationary pond or small lake), and b.) You have means to clean the biofouling that will occur on the seawater side of the heat exchanger if left unabated. The latter, as indicated by reduced cooling capacity, may be why MS needed to stop the project 3 years shy of the objective completion date.
Nobody talking about the potential military applications of a hardened processing infrastructure underwater? Once upon a time Russia toyed with the idea of putting ICBM silos at the bottom of lakes. Say you wanted to run a network of hydrophones on the seafloor. You might want to do the data processing in-situ rather than transmit everything back to shore. If I were microsoft I might be interested in those potential…
I must ask, apart from the renewable energy factor, why do it in Orkney? There are many islands and archipelagos in Scotland, the Hebrides which are closer to the mainland but still out of the way of fishing. Many of them are going to be setup with tidal and wind generators. Would be interesting to see how it was tethered to the shore with networking and power. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/mar/17/10me…
Depending on the exact shape, sometimes dropping giant bits of steel in the ocean can be very good for shipping; we purposefully sink ships that are EOL for this exact purpose fairly often.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depending on the exact shape, sometimes dropping giant bits of steel in the ocean can be very good for shipping; we purposefully sink ships that are EOL for this exact purpose fairly often.
That's the first I've heard of something like this. What's the purpose of dropping specifically-shaped steel into the ocean?
IIRC, it gives coral a place to grow.