Janxy

I have a 64GB SSD for the system ( I've moved the entire user dir, including hidden dirs to a larger HDD ) and my Arma/TOH installations on another SSD. The PC boots very quickly indeed and everything seems snappy as opposed to sluggish. As far as Arma is concerned, stuttering has more or less disappeared and although I didn't notice an overall increase in FPS, perceived performance is significantly higher.

This is the first one of my own i've had a chance to do for awhile. I can't say the lyrics haven't been influenced to some degree by Arma2/3 and what happened in greece recently. I hope you enjoy it. https://soundcloud.com/al-bongo-shaw/dreamsofakind-mix2

If i'd have let deleted/corrupt files/folders or even trashed filesystems get to me, i'd have stopped using computers years ago. :)

Edit: already answered. :). Need faster fingers...

I'm fine with Steam. I've used it for over 8 years and yes in the past it's been a clunky pile of poo. Nowdays it doesn't really make any noticable footprint on my machine when running games from it. I've turned all the annoying stuff off, set my library to be my preferred page, sorted. I understand the arguments that it prevents trading games. But from my englishcentric POV, nowhere I know will take PC games for trade anyway. Besides I tend to hang on to the games I buy ( yes even FPDR! ). And will I see myself wanting to sell my copy Arma3 at any point anyway? I seriously doubt it. The arguments against modding are completely irrelevant and I think alot of the anger comes from a misunderstanding of the terms. The license is non exclusive i.e. You can distribute anywhere else as well as Steam. You grant Valve the right to distribute on any media, to create derivative works and credit you. It's no different to a GPL or even ( it seems ) how the modding community works now...more or less. For me the advantages of Steam outweigh what are I see as minor negatives. Steam promotes indie games, is a good distribution platform, Steam sales rock, promotes modding. If my drives die for any reason, I simply reinstall Steam, log in and reinstall them. And if it helps to slow down hackers and cheats then that can only be a good thing. Roll on Arma3.

But if you do ( and you can both release on Steam and Armaholic&co, because the license you grant Valve is non exclusive ), you'll have a potential audience of 5 million+ who are only a click or two away from your mod.

Which means that the creator WILL be identified if Valve executes the right to distribute etc. The license you grant Valve is more or less the same as a GPL, which = distribution ( on any media ) and derivative creation as long as creators and contributors are credited.

No, you misunderstand. It clearly says " identify You as the source of the Contribution". It's no different from a standard GPL really.

Wow that's quite low of ITV to use Arma2 like that. I've posted the links from the OP on my FB account, there's a few media types on my friends list so hopefully it'll make it's way onto some mainstream uk news. It could turn out to be a nice bit of advertising for BIS.

Yes, but it's going to be available on the Onlive service. That will make everything better, honest. PMSL. :o:

Those tables show the same info I posted. I think you may be getting weight mixed up with molecular weight, which is a much better unit of equivalence. Hydrogen has a lower energy content per unit volume than the "anes". Nope, I understood what you meant. I was wondering just how big those gasbags would have to be to provide a sustainable supply from storage to end use.Hydrogen seems like a good solution at face value, but once some thought is applied to the problem of production right through to power generation and end use it's quite clear it's a very inefficient fuel. Don't get me wrong, i'm all for alternative forms of energy as it's very clear our continued reliance on fossil fuels is a path leading to disaster. Climate change is real, man made or not. There is plenty of information and studies available that support it, despite what the climate sceptics and religious loonies think. DMarkwick has the most sensible and probably most efficient idea of localised hydrogen generation. Storage is still a major issue though. Hydrogen forms an explosive mix with air from concentrations of about 4% to 75(ish)% and it goes off with a hell of a bang. I expect the result will be loud and quite catastrophic. I wonder if anyone out there in Arma land knows how fast it combusts with resultant shockwave speed etc?

I don't think that idea would float ( groan ) given that the enthalpy of combustion for hydrogen is −286 kJ/mol.Avogadro's law says, a mol of any gas occupies 22.4 liters. Approx Energy to boil a kettle = 378 kJ ( 1 liter (roughly 1 kilogram, 2.2 lbs) of cold water at about 10°C (50°F) raised 90°C to its boiling point (100°C or 212°F). The amount of energy = 4.2 × 1000 grams × 90 degrees = 378,000 joules or 378 kJ. ) Therefore assuming 100% efficiency: mols of hydrogen burnt to boil one kettle = 1.32 mols = 29.56 liters According to the UK Tea Council, as a nation we guzzle 165m cups of tea and 70m cups of coffee each day so say 200m cups at 1/3 of a liter each or assuming one kettle to 3 cups = 29.56 x 66,67000 = 197076520 litres or approx 197million liters of hydrogen per day, just to keep Britain in brews. That's one hell of a gas bag ( insert wife joke here ).

I almost spat my coffee out all over my keyboard. PMSL.

Sweden has developed a tank that is allegedly invisible in the infrared range. Will this render FLIR obsolete? Link to full article below http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/05/invisible_tank_sweden/

Indeed, Hydrogen burned in Oxygen produces Heat + Water. Though as well as the significant problems in production, transport and storage which PELHAM has quite correctly stated, there are several others to take into consideration. Hydrogen burns ( mostly ) with an ultraviolet flame, which would make the detection of burning leaks a major problem without specialised equipment and training. Also the enthalpy of combustion of Hydrogen is much less than the Hydrocarbons in use today. If we take natural gas ( Methane, one of the simplest "anes" ) as an example, it has approx 3 times the enthalpy of combustion than Hydrogen does. In a nutshell it would take 3 times the amount of Hydrogen than Methane ( by molecular weight ) to produce the same amount of energy. As you go up the "ane" chain the difference is much greater. Our future energy security will be a mixture of renewable, fossil, nuclear and microgeneration ( solar pv, solar thermal, ground/air source heat pumps etc ) which will help mitigate the amount of energy needed to be generated from production nodes and transported.