Slashdot Mirror

You're attacking my blog, so that is a different subject altogether.

The comment about Sifry being Jewish makes no sense unless you read this and this post.

My only intent in the first post is to mock this thing we call Memorial Day. I'm sure the Nazis had their version of Memorial Day as well. I see no reason to celebrate either.

I find it difficult to honor people for committing atrocities. To be sure, America fought wars for freedom but that is once upon a time stuff. Today we are fighting wars for greed, racist hatred, and just because we're really good at it.

I'm not celebrating this shit, and so I think my comments are appropriate.

Wave your flag, just don't do it in my face, OK?

--
Censored by Technorati
http://holocaustnow.blogspot.com/2007/01/mad-rip-p art-2.html

You're attacking my blog, so that is a different subject altogether.

The comment about Sifry being Jewish makes no sense unless you read this and this post.

My only intent in the first post is to mock this thing we call Memorial Day. I'm sure the Nazis had their version of Memorial Day as well. I see no reason to celebrate either.

I find it difficult to honor people for committing atrocities. To be sure, America fought wars for freedom but that is once upon a time stuff. Today we are fighting wars for greed, racist hatred, and just because we're really good at it.

I'm not celebrating this shit, and so I think my comments are appropriate.

Wave your flag, just don't do it in my face, OK?

--
Censored by Technorati
http://holocaustnow.blogspot.com/2007/01/mad-rip-p art-2.html

You're attacking my blog, so that is a different subject altogether.

The comment about Sifry being Jewish makes no sense unless you read this and this post.

My only intent in the first post is to mock this thing we call Memorial Day. I'm sure the Nazis had their version of Memorial Day as well. I see no reason to celebrate either.

I find it difficult to honor people for committing atrocities. To be sure, America fought wars for freedom but that is once upon a time stuff. Today we are fighting wars for greed, racist hatred, and just because we're really good at it.

I'm not celebrating this shit, and so I think my comments are appropriate.

Wave your flag, just don't do it in my face, OK?

--
Censored by Technorati
http://holocaustnow.blogspot.com/2007/01/mad-rip-p art-2.html

It isn't flamebait if it is the truth.

--
Censored by Technorati

If you are in IT, construction, or just about any other business where one has to deal with stringent project deadlines, you know exactly how true this situation is.

If you are in the study of genocide, and policies tantamount to same, you know how much bullshit is spent by those complicit in the atrocity to defend these policies.

I never suggested there was a pentagram in the basement of the Pentagon, only that, given what they are asked to do in Afghanistan and Iraq, and soon Iran and Syria, that confusing the Pentagon with the Pentagram is only natural.

Not everybody is stupid.

--
Censored by Technorati

Yeah, but did he ever get to go in the basement and see for himself? He doesn't say.

No conspiracy theory was posited here. He refutes a point that wasn't made, it is the standard for what passes as argument these days.

--
Censored by Technorati

No, I'm sorry, our troops today are engaged in atrocities around the world.

While they are not responsible for the policies they are being asked to enact, it hardly seems fitting to honor them for their sacrifice when we're looking at over a million dead Muslims by their hand.

This Memorial Day, I'm remembering those who we have killed for no reason whatsoever.

And praying that we end this madness.

--
Censored by Technorati

Hey! I had the first pentagram comment! You need to pay me royalties or otherwise Jesus is going to kick your ass!

--
Censored by Technorati

Curious to see them working so hard to explain the shape.

Could it be that they're afraid the policies they're being asked to enact today might cause some of us to believe the building design was inspired by the pentagram as used by the Church of Satan?

--
Censored by Technorati

George Monbiot has come out for (limited) tradable carbon rations. He would apply these to direct purchases of power (exempli gratia, gasoline, electricity) while leaving companies to role their carbon use into their product prices. I've been promoting http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/02/trimming.html a full second currency in carbon, where you'd have to use rations for the whole chain of carbon use, say to cover the transportation of an apple from Washington state. My thinking is that when we have the information in front of us, we will be able to make clear decisions about carbon use. With regards to trade, if a chinese company can show that a DVD player was made at a factory that uses renewable energy (which is taking off in China) and whose workers also use renewable energy, then the only carbon tagging would be for the shipping (for now http://www.greenoptions.com/blog/2007/05/10/first_ ever_solar_crossing_of_the_atlantic_ends_in_nyc). If not, then you'd make an estimate based on China's emission. To me, this would have a greater benefit than just flat tariffs since you'd be acknowledging efforts to reduce fossil fuel use in other countries product by product. Sarkozy's position only acknowledges if a country has chosen to join a treaty system but not if the country is actually accomplishing its goals, or that developed countries like to outsource their pollution.

Actually, gas gets much bigger subsidies but can't compete because it is getting scarse. Now, I'm a little suprised you think that a company has to do it for retail, and obviously in terms of the cost of delivered electricity, solar is competitive. But the strangest thing is that you think everyone needs $30K for something that is pretty obvious collateral. There is plenty of borrowing capacity to make this go pretty quickly: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/04/green-numbers. html, money that would be borrowed anyway to switch as fuels run out. I think you want to look at the costs of some of these things, including fossil fuel and nuclear subsidies to get a clearer picture.

Get over it, fascism lost: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/05/scrooge.html.

Hum, you seem a little confused. You want to go buy huge swaths of land to put up solar panels yet you seem also to understand that you could take you house off-grid (a bit wasteful) with solar. PV at 15% efficiency will do 100% of most homes' use and fit on the roof. The swaths are swaths of roofs, not land. Wind does need land, but it also can be dual use. Wind is the cheapest power contract in parts of Texas right now since gas is past peak production. Coal is also seeing reduced energy production (though not reduced tonnage) http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/05/three-cornered -ghost.html. So, what is the ROI on a levy system? If we take steps to protect ourselves, do we always measure it against our electric bill? Well, just let the cost of coal go up and you'll see a much quicker return. In the mean time....
--
Easy Entry to Solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

Hum, you seem a little confused. You want to go buy huge swaths of land to put up solar panels yet you seem also to understand that you could take you house off-grid (a bit wasteful) with solar. PV at 15% efficiency will do 100% of most homes' use and fit on the roof. The swaths are swaths of roofs, not land. Wind does need land, but it also can be dual use. Wind is the cheapest power contract in parts of Texas right now since gas is past peak production. Coal is also seeing reduced energy production (though not reduced tonnage) http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/05/three-cornered -ghost.html. So, what is the ROI on a levy system? If we take steps to protect ourselves, do we always measure it against our electric bill? Well, just let the cost of coal go up and you'll see a much quicker return. In the mean time....
--
Easy Entry to Solar: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

The too big (or important) to fail argument has saved many a behind. Think fiscal bailouts of all sorts. To me, fair tariffs, those that equal what a domestic industry has to pay to get into compliance make sense. Going with Kyoto would have obviated the need, but now EU industies have to pay to pollute and US industries don't. A reverse tariff that covers the health care costs that many EU industries don't have to pay might make sense as well. Trade isn't free if it isn't fair.
--
Get solar power: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

We are granting may favors and subsidies to the fossil fuel industry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Policy_Act_of_ 2005. Eliminating these and shifting to your tax proposal might be helpful.
--
Easy solar power: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

He promises to be a tough customer in global trade talks, saying Europe should only open its markets to those that open theirs. He wants an EU-wide tax on goods from countries - he has singled out China - that have not agreed to cap their greenhouse gas emissions.

Sounds expensive. I expect they are working on eliminating the wascally middlewabbit. On the other hand, genetically modifying some micro-organism to produce enzymes that dissolve say paper and plastic rapidly sounds like a recipe for grey goo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grey_goo.
--
Higher efficiency solar power: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

Creationism is not science because it does not predict anything.

So if someone could come up with a specific account of creation which made specific predictions, that would qualify as science? Does Message Theory qualify?

Evolution predicted the existence of genetics...

In what sense of "predict?" Darwin worked within the existing model of pangenesis. Mendel's discoveries and the emergence of modern genetics meant that it was necessary to revise Darwinian evolution into Neo-Darwinian evolution, in which traits were generated through mutation rather than acquired by effort (such as stretching the neck). So not only did Darwinian evolution not predict genetics, it had to be modified to be compatible with it. Where's the predictive element in that?

On the broader subject of "evolution predicts", I did a little search because I've rarely seen anyone praise evolution for its predictive ability (as opposed to its explanatory power). In doing so, I found a critique of the matter in a blog which I think is worth reading. The most directly relevant entry is here, but read the prior and latter entries if you have the time, since they contribute to the overall argument.

Creationism is not science because it does not predict anything.

So if someone could come up with a specific account of creation which made specific predictions, that would qualify as science? Does Message Theory qualify?

Evolution predicted the existence of genetics...

In what sense of "predict?" Darwin worked within the existing model of pangenesis. Mendel's discoveries and the emergence of modern genetics meant that it was necessary to revise Darwinian evolution into Neo-Darwinian evolution, in which traits were generated through mutation rather than acquired by effort (such as stretching the neck). So not only did Darwinian evolution not predict genetics, it had to be modified to be compatible with it. Where's the predictive element in that?

On the broader subject of "evolution predicts", I did a little search because I've rarely seen anyone praise evolution for its predictive ability (as opposed to its explanatory power). In doing so, I found a critique of the matter in a blog which I think is worth reading. The most directly relevant entry is here, but read the prior and latter entries if you have the time, since they contribute to the overall argument.

Creationism is not science because it does not predict anything.

So if someone could come up with a specific account of creation which made specific predictions, that would qualify as science? Does Message Theory qualify?

Evolution predicted the existence of genetics...

In what sense of "predict?" Darwin worked within the existing model of pangenesis. Mendel's discoveries and the emergence of modern genetics meant that it was necessary to revise Darwinian evolution into Neo-Darwinian evolution, in which traits were generated through mutation rather than acquired by effort (such as stretching the neck). So not only did Darwinian evolution not predict genetics, it had to be modified to be compatible with it. Where's the predictive element in that?

On the broader subject of "evolution predicts", I did a little search because I've rarely seen anyone praise evolution for its predictive ability (as opposed to its explanatory power). In doing so, I found a critique of the matter in a blog which I think is worth reading. The most directly relevant entry is here, but read the prior and latter entries if you have the time, since they contribute to the overall argument.

The claim is that if biofuels can do 30% of transportation with an ICE then their factor of 3 (fuel cell mediated) boost in efficiency allows much closer to 100%. It is true that biofuels are causing a rise in corn prices now and may continue to do so. So, how far wrong can the DOE be? Is the 30% figure compatible with sound farm policy http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/05/juicing.html? To me is seems a stretch, but we have not, as Brazil has, looked all that hard at using less fertile land for fuel production. They are getting very close to 30% already and plan on doing more.

The best place to look for a debate over the substantive law issue is the case file of Elektra v. Barker. If you don't like reading legal documents, and want to read a general description of the issues, which I wrote for an entertainment lawyers' publication, check this article in Hollywood Reporter Esq.

the transcript
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=elek tra_barker_070126OralArgument
via
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/#Ele ktra_v_Barker
or via
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007 /01/index-of-litigation-documents.html

the transcript
http://www.ilrweb.com/viewILRPDF.asp?filename=elek tra_barker_070126OralArgument
via
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/#Ele ktra_v_Barker
or via
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007 /01/index-of-litigation-documents.html

I'm surprised at you, Alter_Fritz. Didn't you read the transcript of the January 26, 2007, oral argument in Elektra v. Barker, where Judge Karas lectured Mr. Gabriel on the absence of "volition".

The State of South Carolina owns the copyright to the Code of Laws of South Carolina.

http://fulldecent.blogspot.com/2007/05/intelligenc e-in-sc.html

http://answersingenes.blogspot.com/2006/12/creatio nism-explained.html

That just about covers it, I think.

Actually, let's be careful here.

Ohio University's office of Student Legal Services has done an excellent job -- far better than the SLS at many other schools -- of advising the students. In fact they affirmatively went out of the way to help them find counsel and to make them aware of their legal rights, and of resources upon which they could draw.

The problem is that under their charter, they're not authorized to litigate in federal court, and have to refer the students to outside counsel.

Now the university's counsel's office should be taking a more activist role than it has, as Mr. Hazelbaker eloquently pointed out in his letter (pdf).

Faster?
http://tweakers.net/reviews/657/6

OK maybe it's 2 x faster for TPC style stuff, but it had timeout errors in this benchmark:
http://wskills.blogspot.com/2007/01/postgresql-vs- mysql-benchmark.html

CBS was nuts to cancel Jericho.

1) With 9.5 million viewers it ranked 48 out of 142 of all programs. This includes stints against American Idol and Dancing with the Stars. Also this does NOT include web-based viewership, which is an integral part of this show. Total number of actual eyes most likely puts it in the top 25. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_displa y/television/features/e3ifbfdd1bcb53266ad8d9a71cad 261604f

2) Two major case studies are showing that this is not "just about Jericho". http://copywriteink.blogspot.com/search/label/jeri cho and http://find-the-boots.blogspot.com/ What we are seeing is a paradigm shift between Old Media and New Media. The core essence of which is that modern technology is rendering Nielsen rating obsolete, and that successful shows like Jericho are tapping into additional resources that change it from a 42 minute a week stint on the couch into a week long web-based multi-media interactive experience with the creators and peer to peer.

3) There is a lot of resistance by non-fans to other "save my show" movements because of the sheer number of cancellations. Most people have had favorite show cancelled, and most people have been impotent to do anything about it. And for a majority of those people, they will resent the empowerment that a successful movement has.

4) The bottom line is that CBS has a crisis on it's hands. Right now it is faced off a virtual organization with: about 50,000 volunteer employees, some business sponsorship, a current operating budget of about $120,000 per month, and the potential for membership growth well into the millions (people and dollars). As a practical matter they have to deal with a swamped email voicemail issue, 10 tons of peanuts, two full page ads on Tuesday, and the inability to get any traction with their new fall lineup.

If CBS considers this a win -- canceling a solidly ranked show, teeing off millions of fans, and doing battle against an organized viral campaign -- then something is broken at CBS. And for those people that don't have a vested interest in this movement (non-CBS execs and non-fans) but who are trolling with negative comments, basically you are irrelevant. Not in a derogatory way, but in an analytical way. It is not a value-added asset that will contribute to CBS' decision making process, nor will it deter most fans that are here to see this issue through to the end. For us we have our facts, and an issue, and the agility of a New Media organization.

CBS was nuts to cancel Jericho.

1) With 9.5 million viewers it ranked 48 out of 142 of all programs. This includes stints against American Idol and Dancing with the Stars. Also this does NOT include web-based viewership, which is an integral part of this show. Total number of actual eyes most likely puts it in the top 25. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_displa y/television/features/e3ifbfdd1bcb53266ad8d9a71cad 261604f

2) Two major case studies are showing that this is not "just about Jericho". http://copywriteink.blogspot.com/search/label/jeri cho and http://find-the-boots.blogspot.com/ What we are seeing is a paradigm shift between Old Media and New Media. The core essence of which is that modern technology is rendering Nielsen rating obsolete, and that successful shows like Jericho are tapping into additional resources that change it from a 42 minute a week stint on the couch into a week long web-based multi-media interactive experience with the creators and peer to peer.

3) There is a lot of resistance by non-fans to other "save my show" movements because of the sheer number of cancellations. Most people have had favorite show cancelled, and most people have been impotent to do anything about it. And for a majority of those people, they will resent the empowerment that a successful movement has.

4) The bottom line is that CBS has a crisis on it's hands. Right now it is faced off a virtual organization with: about 50,000 volunteer employees, some business sponsorship, a current operating budget of about $120,000 per month, and the potential for membership growth well into the millions (people and dollars). As a practical matter they have to deal with a swamped email voicemail issue, 10 tons of peanuts, two full page ads on Tuesday, and the inability to get any traction with their new fall lineup.

If CBS considers this a win -- canceling a solidly ranked show, teeing off millions of fans, and doing battle against an organized viral campaign -- then something is broken at CBS. And for those people that don't have a vested interest in this movement (non-CBS execs and non-fans) but who are trolling with negative comments, basically you are irrelevant. Not in a derogatory way, but in an analytical way. It is not a value-added asset that will contribute to CBS' decision making process, nor will it deter most fans that are here to see this issue through to the end. For us we have our facts, and an issue, and the agility of a New Media organization.

That is great to hear. The only question I have is why on _earth_ the safe (and standards-compliant) mode isn't the default, with the weird MySQL-only accept-Feb-30-as-a-valid-date kind of behaviour enabled with a special option for those who really want it.

It's this kind of thing that makes me still suspicious of MySQL. I hope that for the next release - 6.0 or whatever it is - they can make a clean break with historical stupidity, and release a DBMS that gives safe, ANSI-compliant behaviour out of the box. However, there's nothing wrong with letting the sysadmin deliberately loosen some of the transactional constraints in cases where ultra high speed is important, although note that for all its supposed emphasis on speed over correctness, MySQL is slower than Postgres.

Star Wars is a new Beowulf, but we as a culture cannot own it and make it ours. It is now eternal and unchanging, as will be our culture. Another word for eternal and unchanging is dead.

It is not dead which can forever lie, and with strange aeons, even death may die.

"Tell me again what about that is, in any way, simple"

Firefox's Memory Leak Bug or a Feature ?

Was it The Beast? I've heard that this shite wins taste tests, but have yet to coroborate anything better than bronze. Still though. What's wrong with "American-Style Lager" beer drinkers?

The point is not that people want less copyright, the point is that these corporations want MORE. They're shifting the paradigm (pardon my French) from "copyright is a government granted monopoly" to "copyright is ours by default and you're a pirate."

The government grants the copyright monopoly not because it wants these firms to make money; they grant it because they hope that ARTISTS (see what I did there?) will make more of their art when they can make a buck off of what they do, for the purpose of making a rich culture. So, the purpose of copyright is not financial but cultural gain. This comes with the implied benefit that the ARTIST can make money. When the copyright is held by anyone but the artist, there is no more cultural gain to be had.

The default setting for stuff that goes out of your head and into other people's sight/ears/whatever is that it is no longer yours. I tell you my Great Idea, now you can use it. I sing you my song, you can play it as well. That's the default mode. It's very easy to copyright something (just stick on your name, the year and the alt0169 symbol) but it's so hard to get it back into the public domain where it belongs (after a reasonable period of time,) it's ridiculous.

Also, extending copyright past the death of the artist involved. Make more art, Jimi! Make more art, Django! Make more art, Pablo! Make more art, Joan!

The article is lacking some information. Here are some better links:

Official reCAPTCHA site
Hide your email address with reCAPTCHA (super easy!)
A more detailed blog post about how the system works

Disclaimer: I work with Luis von Ahn, who's the professor running the reCAPTCHA project.

The Crusades turned into campaigns of slaughter, rape, and pillage, and woe to the poor Jews in the way. Indeed, the Crusades mark the first large-scale mob violence directed against Jews which is going to become, unfortunately, the pattern for the next hundreds of years. The later pogroms are just going to be a repeat of this idea. The Jews were not the only -- and in fact, not the primary -- victims of the Crusaders. Muslims were. If you're a student of Islamic history, you know that a large part of the reason why the Arab world is today the way it is has to do with the Crusades. All the brutality directed toward them devastated the Arab peoples economically, made the Arab world very closed, and contributed to Arab hatred of the West.

Even so, the conditions for the urban kids you mention are a lot worse than you might think. My point still stands.

> JUST WHY DO NOVELL CUSTOMERS NEED PROTECTING FROM "MICROSOFT IP" BY THIS COVENANT NOT TO SUE?

This has been answered countless times. Personally, I think Andreas Jaeger said it best: Let me state clearly: We do not think that Novell's Linux distributions violate valid patents - but if they do, we do change the code to avoid or work around the patent. Meanwhile we have some means in place to protect customers and developers better. So, it's some kind of important insurance.

We did not expect that Microsoft would sue individuals. But who would have known a couple of years ago that the record industry is going after individuals downloading or copying music and driving them in bankruptcy. Therefore the agreements consider a promise not to sue.

The meaning is clear: customers want the extra assurance. When you've got billions of dollars, you cannot avoid so many risks, you become a big target. This is why Microsoft customers asked for the protection from Novell as well, of not being sued.

The big problem we have is that successive governments seem to think installing CCTV cameras helps, which it manifestly doesn't.
... and if you want to know why it doesn't, and also why I'm not too worried about CCTV and people shouting "Orwell! Panopticon!" then read this blog entry by a UK traffic warden. It pretty much sums up my experience of trying to use CCTV footage to identify whoever vandalised my car in a private car park.

tobacco, drugs, weapons, and prostitution

Don't forget to add domain names with the word google in them (e.g. http://lastgoogle.blogspot.com/), as I learned much to my chagrin.

Not to mention that a lot of this hype is just that -- hype. Here's a brief post on the actual relationship between ethanol and tortillas. Mexico's corn farmers have been suffering as corn prices plummetted over the past decade since NAFTA brought in cheap American corn. Tortilla prices *fell* significantly during this time when the US unloaded its bulk surplus. Now, ethanol is making use of that corn, but also, US corn production is *down*. We pushed Mexican farmers out of business, and then ended up producing less while using more, cutting them off from their cheap supply.

Also to note: the "waste" from making ethanol isn't wasted. It's reprocessed for animal food, esp. cattle feed. While cellulosic ethanol is still in the works, cattle can digest cellulose just fine. Making ethanol only uses up the starches. The cellulose and nutrients remain behind.

This was the predominent sentiment at the renewable fuels conference at the Aspen Institute on Monday, corn prices were too low and now we're seeing something more realistic. Many people tried to point out that this does not translate into higher beef prices since many of the new ethanol plants are built right next to feedlots so that the wet used mash can be fed right to cattle, saving on the energy cost of drying it. But, people were worried about the bad press also I think. Some were worried that OPEC would boost production around harvest time too.

To me, we've had a wise policy of ensuring food surpluses so that famine can be avoided. The implementation might have been done a little differently, but farm subsidies of some sort or another are going to have to be a part of it since people will only pay for about what they need but security against famine requires producing more that what people need. So, shouting hoorray, now there will be an "undistorted" market in corn makes me think that we might be losing a very wise policy of ensuring surpluses.
--
Solar power: abundance is the only option: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

It's Official: Ballmer has lost it:

Is aQuantive everyone else's leftover and a poor choice? No, it's an excellent company. ... However, it was also a great company last year, the year before that, the year before that, and the year before that - when incidentally it was trading at a fraction of the current market price and already on the radar of investment forums including MSFT's own Moneycentral (not to mention being right under MS's nose in Seattle). But just like in '00/'01, when Ballmer could and should have been using MSFT's [then] legendary cash pile to make a ton of smart accretive acquisitions for pennies on the dollar, he was too distracted. ... this expensive and rather desperate acquisition is proof positive that even Ballmer acknowledges it. So, once again, shareholders get to pick up the tab. ... As Warren Buffett says, "The best side to be on in a bidding war is the losing side". So why did MSFT management do the unthinkable and not only engage in, but win, a bidding war? Because they once again failed to proactively understand the market and competitive forces and thereby position the company advantageously and cost-effectively. ... Such is the collective brilliance that we paid $1B in bonuses for.

You don't get biodiesel from palm oil unless you live in the EU I think. US production in based on soy and cannola or waste streams. The EU countries have gone with diesel in a big way but have not required local production for their blend. So, when the cheap biodiesel from palm oil started coming in, they bought it and more land went into production. But, this land was a carbon sink before being converted and not it is carbon source, a big one. Suatainability standards for bio-fuels are being drafted now and will be a big help in letting people know if their source of biofuels makes sense or not.
--
Use silicon as your solar middleman! http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

Do it with oysters, they mature faster! All you have to do is be sure that all that up stream biofuel production does not increase the nitrogen load and kill all the oyster/clam beds. If you do oysters you can also get value added in your sequestration by using the shells as a building material called tabby: http://www.bcgov.net/bftlib/tabby.htm. Biomineralization is one of the key sequestration methods and we need to make room for it through nitrogen/phosphorous management.
--
Rent solar power and save: http://mdsolar.blogspot.com/2007/01/slashdot-users -selling-solar.html

Quoth Who da'Punk:

Holy crap.

In my opinion, this is a huge demonstration of fear, desperation, and dim-dog market tail-light chasing greed on our part. Every acquisition represents our failure to use our 70,000+ employee base to solve a solution or create a new market. Rather than buying back stock or pushing out a dividend, shareholder money got mis-invested in a hugely overpriced acquisition. And you're a shareholder why?