Slashdot Mirror

I did look at her MySpace page, it seems that there was a petition asking Gov. Schwarzenegger to pardon her so she won't have to go to jail, and apparently Paris herself decided to thank the individual involved by posting a "thank-you" on her page. She misspelled "sign", when asking people to "sign" the petition.

It's gone now, the MySpace page is a horrible excuse for a web page, someone needs to clean up the page, perhaps by cutting off the public's right to post there, just leaving posts cleared by a kind and caring webmaster that can turn the page into something not so out-of-control.

With so many talented webmaster types here at Slashdot, I'm sure some of you would like to somehow contact Ms. Hilton, offering your help in her time of need.

I probably could work the assignment in somehow, but I'll go ahead and let some of you cut in line ahead of me, being the nice fellow that I am.

I do play with GIMP, and I have a "Wallpaper Control Center" application in my Knoppix remaster that has a section where one can, at the touch of a button, download and install a desktop wallpaper directly from my rapidweather.com/images directory. One of them is a nice picture of Paris Hilton. I do it that way so I can change the "downloadable" wallpapers, all the others are in the CD, and are fixed.
Check the "screenshots" link, below for a screenshot of the "Wallpaper Control Center".

The application is basically for managing right clicked web images for wallpaper purposes, sizing them to a particular desktop, and saving them for future use, within a "livecd linux" environment. If the user downloads too many images and tries to apply one, the application will take notice and guide the user through a fix, where extra images are easily moved from the active "desktop wallpaper" area, where they can be managed. Almost impossible to fowl it up without the application asking questions, and arranging for fixes. Very easy to do, so if one comes across a batch of web images that you want for your desktop, download all you want, then start the control center by clicking on the IceWM toolbar icon. Much faster processing of these downloaded images than with KDE, for instance.
Here is the url for the Paris wallpaper image:

http://www.rapidweather.com/images/sample6.jpg

I can't link to it here, you'll get a Forbidden error, but you may copy the link and go there directly in your browser. To see the others, enter "sample1.jpg, etc. (There are six 1024x768 images, all produced using GIMP)

       

This may be slightly redundant but I'm expanding. At best, the forger's work could be considered a derivative work. It was mentioned that the forger, however, while claiming copyright, is making his work from a goverment designed document. There can be no copyright protection on a government work.

All Fluorescent Lamps and Tubes Should Be Recycled or Disposed as Hazardous Waste

All fluorescent lamps and tubes are considered hazardous waste in California when they are discarded because they contain mercury. (Title 22, division 4.5, chapter 11, section 66261.50)

...
All fluorescent lamps and tubes must be recycled, or taken to a household hazardous waste disposal facility, a universal waste handler (e.g., storage facility or broker), or an authorized recycling facility. (Title 22, division 4.5, chapter 23, section 66273.8)

Breaking a CFL bulb isn't really "spilling" mercury, since there's no liquid mercury in there. This link has info specific to cleaning up broken fluorescent bulbs: http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/WPIE/FluoresLamps/#CleanBr eak

As a Californian, I'd like to take this opportunity to smack down this common misconception. California's per capita energy consumption has remained flat since 1976 while it has risen in the US as a whole. Interestingly our economy also outpaced the rest of the country over the same period despite some rather despicable traitors running a company with a big E in front of their headquarters playing dirty tricks with our electricity supply in from Spring of 2000 - Fall 2001. The slander of prolifigate consumption was even spread by one who should have had the information that told him it was false. Some call him W.

As a Californian, I'd like to take this opportunity to smack down this common misconception. California's per capita energy consumption has remained flat since 1976 while it has risen in the US as a whole. Interestingly our economy also outpaced the rest of the country over the same period despite some rather despicable traitors running a company with a big E in front of their headquarters playing dirty tricks with our electricity supply in from Spring of 2000 - Fall 2001. The slander of prolifigate consumption was even spread by one who should have had the information that told him it was false. Some call him W.

If it's a California-based company, the relevant law is California Labor Code 2870-2872. Those sections put limits on the extent to which that IP agreement is legal. Any attempt by the agreement to exceed those limits is illegal and void as a matter of law according to 2870(b). The employer is also required to give you, in writing per 2872, a notice that any language in the agreement does not apply to inventions which meet 2870's criteria.

California Business and Professional Code section 16600 is also relevant to the oh-so-common non-compete clauses.

Note that California's position is that, since these are law, the fact that an employee agreed to them does not provide an out for the employer. Just to be safe, however, when I had to sign those papers I wrote in a term saying that the agreement was subject to the limitations of those two laws before I signed.

If it's a California-based company, the relevant law is California Labor Code 2870-2872. Those sections put limits on the extent to which that IP agreement is legal. Any attempt by the agreement to exceed those limits is illegal and void as a matter of law according to 2870(b). The employer is also required to give you, in writing per 2872, a notice that any language in the agreement does not apply to inventions which meet 2870's criteria.

California Business and Professional Code section 16600 is also relevant to the oh-so-common non-compete clauses.

Note that California's position is that, since these are law, the fact that an employee agreed to them does not provide an out for the employer. Just to be safe, however, when I had to sign those papers I wrote in a term saying that the agreement was subject to the limitations of those two laws before I signed.

Thanks, but in the future please provide a link to the official source. Here's the relevant text from the California legislative information web site. There's a bit more text than what you've posted. This is from the CA labor code.

Thanks, but in the future please provide a link to the official source. Here's the relevant text from the California legislative information web site. There's a bit more text than what you've posted. This is from the CA labor code.

Barratry is a criminal offense in California.

From the California Penal Code:
158. Common barratry is the practice of exciting groundless judicial proceedings, and is punishable by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding six months and by fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000).

159. No person can be convicted of common barratry except upon proof that he has excited suits or proceedings at law in at least three instances, and with a corrupt or malicious intent to vex and annoy.

Barratry prosecutions are almost unheard of, but there was one in 1988 in California and it was affirmed by an appeals court. The RIAA's activities seem to qualify. "Exciting groundless judicial proceedings" - check. "At least three instances" - check. "Corrupt or malicious intent to vex and annoy" - requires proving intent, and in this last case, that can probably be shown.

The law specifically requires the camera sensor to be where a vehicle must stop. So if you're in the intersection already, you're home free.

Since you're in California, it's CA Vehicle Code section 21455.5(a). Sections 21455.5 - 21455.7 cover all this and even include your concerns about short yellow light cycles.

Most states don't allow minors to get FIDs

FID? Flight ID? Free Induction Decay? Financial Institutions Duty? Functional Interface Drawing? Oh wait, there it is, Firearms Identification.

Guess what? FID is generally only required when purchasing a gun. SOME states require that you have a license to own a firearm, but not most.

In California, "A person must be at least 18 years of age to purchase a rifle or shotgun. To buy a handgun, a person must be at least 21 years of age, and either 1) possess an HSC plus successfully complete a safety demonstration with the handgun being purchased or 2) qualify for an HSC exemption."

It's worth mentioning that no minor without their majority can actually be said to own property anyway. Their parents/guardians can take it away at any time, so it's not really theirs. So the law focuses on providing access to minors. California law doesn't make it illegal to provide access to a firearm to a minor, but you can be guilty of a felony if a minor uses your gun to commit a crime.

Everyone surrenders their right to bear arms on a school campus except for active law enforcement, or military during the execution of orders. Even if you have a concealed carry permit it is not lawful to bring a gun to a school. This is interesting because at one time (IIRC, up until the early 1900s) California law explicitly protected your right to carry a gun on public property. That means schools, courthouses, et cetera.

http://dllr.state.md.us/labor/empm.html

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/dwd/publications/erd/pdf/ erd_9212_p.pdf

http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/ChildLaborPamphlet2000. html#8

http://198.234.41.198/w3/webwh.nsf/Files/MLLPoster .pdf/$FILE/MLLPoster.pdf

I'm not going to go through all 50 states, but as far as I know there are not ANY states in the US that do not severely limit the number of hours a minor can work. Tell me this... What do you think a 15 year old girl is going to do when it is a crime for a legitimate employer to hire her, going to the police to report that her parents are fulfilling their legal requirements to support her will lead to her arrest, and she hasn't eaten for 3 days?

This doesn't even take into account that they need a special permit that often cannot be obtained.

Unlike the HP garage, which behind a reasonably cute house in a reasonably cute neighborhood (and HP has put up the money to buy and restore the house and garage), Shockley Semi was in a very unremarkable building. It's great to have a landmark sign there but do you really need to preserve the cheap building?

Just a few blocks away is another notable site:

http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/default.asp?page_id=21522

NO. 1000 SITE OF INVENTION OF THE FIRST COMMERCIALLY PRACTICABLE INTEGRATED CIRCUIT - At this site in 1959, Dr. Robert Noyce of Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation invented the first integrated circuit that could be produced commercially. Based on 'planar' technology, an earlier Fairchild breakthrough, Noyce's invention consisted of a complete electronic circuit inside a small silicon chip. His innovation helped revolutionize 'Silicon Valley's' semicondutor electronics industry, and brought profound change to the lives of people everywhere.
Location: 844 E Charleston Rd, Palo Alto

It's also in a pretty unremarkable building.

Just a few blocks from the HP garage is another interesting site:

NO. 836 PIONEER ELECTRONICS RESEARCH LABORATORY - This is the original site of the laboratory and factory of Federal Telegraph Company, founded in 1909 by Cyril F. Elwell. Here, Dr. Lee de Forest, inventor of the three-element radio vacuum tube, devised the first vacuum tube amplifier and oscillator in 1911-13. Worldwide developments based on this research led to modern radio communication, television, and the electronics age.
Location: In sidewalk, SE corner of Channing Ave and Emerson St, Palo Alto

That building is already long gone. Unless there's something remarkable about the building or you have a sympathetic property owner, I say let progress march on.

Quick recap: on Feb 23, Assemblyman Leno (Sacramento) introduced this bill, aka AB 1668. It's a short bill so far, but at this point it has not yet been amended.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_16 51-1700/ab_1668_bill_20070223_introduced.html/

The bill has been referred to the California Assembly Committee on Jobs, Economic Development and the Economy. The first committee hearing is scheduled for April 17. Any recommendations from the committee, including modifications to the bill text, have a good chance to be approved by the Assembly at large.

There are six members of this committee. Their names, contact information, and more can be found below.

http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp? committee=131

Take a minute to read up on each member's district, personalize your message, and keep it short and to the point. It would help if you're a constituent, or at least a California resident.

It may be helpful to point out that this committee's own publications page (linked on above page) is available only in .doc format (the angle here is 'so-called public documents I can't access without paying Msft!')

One convincing argument may be that anything less than an open format will create vendor lock-in, which will remove the possibility for healthy, job-stimulating contract competition for State of California IT contracts. This will have a negative impact on the state budget.

While open formats can be supported by all current proprietary customers (ie, Microsoft), closed formats eliminate competition.

And remember: as tempting as it may be, no swearing, l33t 5p34k, or sending tubgirl links to the Republicans.

Quick recap: on Feb 23, Assemblyman Leno (Sacramento) introduced this bill, aka AB 1668. It's a short bill so far, but at this point it has not yet been amended.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_16 51-1700/ab_1668_bill_20070223_introduced.html/

The bill has been referred to the California Assembly Committee on Jobs, Economic Development and the Economy. The first committee hearing is scheduled for April 17. Any recommendations from the committee, including modifications to the bill text, have a good chance to be approved by the Assembly at large.

There are six members of this committee. Their names, contact information, and more can be found below.

http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/newcomframeset.asp? committee=131

Take a minute to read up on each member's district, personalize your message, and keep it short and to the point. It would help if you're a constituent, or at least a California resident.

It may be helpful to point out that this committee's own publications page (linked on above page) is available only in .doc format (the angle here is 'so-called public documents I can't access without paying Msft!')

One convincing argument may be that anything less than an open format will create vendor lock-in, which will remove the possibility for healthy, job-stimulating contract competition for State of California IT contracts. This will have a negative impact on the state budget.

While open formats can be supported by all current proprietary customers (ie, Microsoft), closed formats eliminate competition.

And remember: as tempting as it may be, no swearing, l33t 5p34k, or sending tubgirl links to the Republicans.

Typical. Article about legislation without the bill number or a link to the bill text.

It's SB 328. Hearings on Tuesday in Sacramento.

Okay, we're arguing over a faulty generalization that is not in any form a fact nor truth, but instead bullshit, and FUD.

"many cars can easily beat a Prius hybrid on fuel economy" is as true as "all geeks wear glasses" or "your momma is fat..." without any scientific numbers to fairly digest against.

Thank you for at least naming one vehicle such as the VW Golf to compare with, but it's only slightly comparable to the Prius in FE, size, and weight.

Briefly, fueleconomy.gov has the Golf at 34MPG for a diesel TDI (or 29.58MPG gasoline) with 638593.389 cubic inches on 3091 lbs over 98.9 inch wheelbase, or 0.01099/0.00956 MPG/lb respectively. 30miles * 30 days @ 34MPG @ $2.96 diesel = $78.

A Prius is 46MPG (16.42MPG more) on gasoline with 690373.25 (51779.861 more cubic inches) on 2890 lbs over a 106.3 inch wheelbase, or 0.01591 MPG/lb. 30 miles * 30 days @ 46MPG @ $3.228 gasoline = $63.

Price between the two is ~$1K MSRP. My scientific conclusion is the Prius is bigger, lighter, and more fuel efficient per pound than the diesel Golf, so a better value. Probably not as fun to drive, however.

Got another "easily beat a Prius hybrid on fuel economy"?

Okay, we're arguing over a faulty generalization that is not in any form a fact nor truth, but instead bullshit, and FUD.

"many cars can easily beat a Prius hybrid on fuel economy" is as true as "all geeks wear glasses" or "your momma is fat..." without any scientific numbers to fairly digest against.

Thank you for at least naming one vehicle such as the VW Golf to compare with, but it's only slightly comparable to the Prius in FE, size, and weight.

Briefly, fueleconomy.gov has the Golf at 34MPG for a diesel TDI (or 29.58MPG gasoline) with 638593.389 cubic inches on 3091 lbs over 98.9 inch wheelbase, or 0.01099/0.00956 MPG/lb respectively. 30miles * 30 days @ 34MPG @ $2.96 diesel = $78.

A Prius is 46MPG (16.42MPG more) on gasoline with 690373.25 (51779.861 more cubic inches) on 2890 lbs over a 106.3 inch wheelbase, or 0.01591 MPG/lb. 30 miles * 30 days @ 46MPG @ $3.228 gasoline = $63.

Price between the two is ~$1K MSRP. My scientific conclusion is the Prius is bigger, lighter, and more fuel efficient per pound than the diesel Golf, so a better value. Probably not as fun to drive, however.

Got another "easily beat a Prius hybrid on fuel economy"?

This issue is actually the very reason this woman got my vote in the last election. I'm glad to see she is holding to her promises. We definitely need more politicians to do this. She, unlike a large number of politicians, seems to have a reasonable grasp on the internets and tech as a whole.

http://www.ss.ca.gov/executive/bio.htm

Hardware resources and the "Green" agenda
One of the benefits frequently put forward for the use of Open Source Software is the level of resources needed to support it. This means that for equivalent Open Source and Microsoft Windows systems, the Open Source system will require less memory and a slower processor speed for the same functionality.

Open Source operating systems such as Linux do not usually have the regular major upgrades that are a feature of Windows, and thus do not have the requirement that goes with these upgrades for a new or upgraded computer to run them. This means that a computer running Linux can have a significantly longer working life than an equivalent computer running Windows. This has the potential to impact significantly on costs, including purchase of software and hardware, and indirectly by reducing business disruption whilst implementing change and upgrading. There are also potential Green Agenda benefits, through reducing the energy and resources consumed in manufacturing replacement equipment, and reducing landfill requirements and costs arising from disposal of redundant equipment.

Industry observers quote a typical hardware refresh period for Microsoft Windows systems as 3-4 years; a major UK manufacturing organisation quotes its hardware refresh period for Linux systems as 6-8 years.

Lessons learned: Adoption of Open Source, particularly for the desktop, requires investment in planning, training of users, development of skills for implementation and support, and detailed consideration of migration and interoperability issues.

Hardware resources and the "Green" agenda
One of the benefits frequently put forward for the use of Open Source Software is the level of resources needed to support it. This means that for equivalent Open Source and Microsoft Windows systems, the Open Source system will require less memory and a slower processor speed for the same functionality.

Open Source operating systems such as Linux do not usually have the regular major upgrades that are a feature of Windows, and thus do not have the requirement that goes with these upgrades for a new or upgraded computer to run them. This means that a computer running Linux can have a significantly longer working life than an equivalent computer running Windows. This has the potential to impact significantly on costs, including purchase of software and hardware, and indirectly by reducing business disruption whilst implementing change and upgrading. There are also potential Green Agenda benefits, through reducing the energy and resources consumed in manufacturing replacement equipment, and reducing landfill requirements and costs arising from disposal of redundant equipment.

Industry observers quote a typical hardware refresh period for Microsoft Windows systems as 3-4 years; a major UK manufacturing organisation quotes its hardware refresh period for Linux systems as 6-8 years.

Lessons learned: Adoption of Open Source, particularly for the desktop, requires investment in planning, training of users, development of skills for implementation and support, and detailed consideration of migration and interoperability issues.

I forced the company I worked at two years ago to switch all of their employees to hourly because of what is clearly defined in section 515.5 CA labor code.

The problem is that most employees don't meet the salary requirement to be classified as exempt. The other problem is that there have been a number of lawsuits recently regarding this and Google is just trying to protect themselves.

I am strongly of the opinion that we should all get paid for every hour that we work. Because of the industry that we are in, I'm sure the majority of us have had to work extra hours and never got paid for it. In a sense, this is a good thing but...

The unfortunate flip side is that even though you may be making more money due to OT, the quality of life at work inevitably begins to deteriorate. If most companies are going to go down the road of turning their IT staff into hourly employees, the only solution to preserve the benefits and flexibility that comes with most sys-admin and programming jobs is to unionize. It's only through collective bargaining that we can retain or regain benefits that will soon begin to widdle away from this change in status.

On a time scale choice, how about the Moore's Law scale since it is silicon after all.

How about... no. Moores law is completely unrelated... it is about cramming more transistors onto the same area of silicon by reducing the size of each transistor. You can't make solar cells smaller without a corresponding efficiency increase, and that's damn hard. We're talking about production capacity here, and even production capacity *for* production capacity. Doubling every five years is about the speed at which the semiconductor industry grew in the 1970s through the 1990s - I seriously doubt that photovoltaics can match that, much less beat it.

As you'll see in the link to the meeting, California has already done what you ask.

http://www.energy.ca.gov/electricity/consumption_b y_sector.html

Through extensive regulation, California has managed to... slow down the increase in power consumption somewhat. If you look at the table, there are a couple years where they mananged a temporary decrease, but the dominant trend continues to be a steady increase in power consumption. Even with ridiculous energy prices and occasional rolling blackouts, they still use more power. California is definitely not evidence that power consumption will decrease in the face of a lowered price.

In order to reach the pockets of compressed air, found far beneath the surface of the ground, it would be neccessary to drill and destroy the surrounding enviroment.

Or we could just make our own compressed air by burning coal or oil, which would essentially use the compressed air like a type of energy transmitting device, like a battery. While converting energy stored one way, to energy stored another way is wasteful, I think it would be a fair tradeoff because of that nice bumper sticker that let's one drive in the commute lane

Another good intro if you live in California, is Our Changing Climate - Assessing the Risk to California. This summary (based on very credible science) shows, among other things, scenarios where we'll lose 90% of the snowpack in the Sierras.

Ok, lets just assume that this is a real breakthrough, and that we can safely and cheaply:

        * manufacture said compound (AlH3)
        * store said compound
        * use said compound with high efficiency in fuel vehicles

After all, its volumetric density is fair (I calculate it at .15 kg/L hydrogen * 120 MJ/kg or 5 kwh / liter versus 9.7 kwh /liter for gasoline) and with the extra efficiency boost it IS energy competitive.

My question is - where are we going to get the aluminum? This would require a MASSIVE production spike in aluminum - to provide a replacement for the ~ 400 million metric tons of gasoline that the US alone uses.

(source: http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/statistics/gasol ine_consumption_country.php
)

Right now, the amount of aluminum we produce globally per year is about 20 times lower - 23.8 million metric tons yearly to be exact (source: http://www.world-aluminum.org/stats/formServer.asp ?form=1) and aluminum production is very energy intensive (I calculate it as being 6 times *higher* - at 30 kilowatt hours /liter - than the hydrogen is meant to store. That becomes 90 kilowatt hours / liter considering that most of the energy used in aluminum production is electric)

So the only realistic way of doing this would be to recycle the aluminum and 'rehydrate it'. And there would be a hefty price premium on the creation of the fuel ($12 / gallon at current aluminum prices, which would probably go up dramatically if this took off)

Overall then this is a mixed bag. The infrastructure costs would be substantial in creating the distribution network for the fuel, both for hydrating and recycling the fuel containers, and the energy cost would be horrific in making the aluminum.

At 30 kilowatt hours / liter, and 700 grams CO2/ kilowatt hour (if the energy making the aluminum was coal), this corresponds to 19000 grams C02 / liter of fuel, versus the 2000 grams CO2 / kilowatt hour that you get by simply burning the gasoline to go! The aluminum had better be VERY recyclable.

I'm skeptical. It'd be cool if it works, but we'll see.

Ed

They don't need a new law to deal with this. Reckless driving is already on the books in every jurisdiction. All they need is a law, regulation or ruling saying that failure to pay attention to the road, regardless of why you're not paying attention, is indeed reckless driving. Then it doesn't matter whether the guy's texting on his Blackberry, gabbing on his cel phone, has his head down fiddling with his overly-complicated stereo system or is turned around yelling at his kid in the back seat, he can get pulled over and ticketed. In California this is already the case, see California Vehicle Code sections 23103 and 23104. Besides the fine and possible jail time, it's also a 2-point violation and 4 points in 12 months or 6 points in 24 months is a suspended license which will really put a crimp in these people's lives.

They don't need a new law to deal with this. Reckless driving is already on the books in every jurisdiction. All they need is a law, regulation or ruling saying that failure to pay attention to the road, regardless of why you're not paying attention, is indeed reckless driving. Then it doesn't matter whether the guy's texting on his Blackberry, gabbing on his cel phone, has his head down fiddling with his overly-complicated stereo system or is turned around yelling at his kid in the back seat, he can get pulled over and ticketed. In California this is already the case, see California Vehicle Code sections 23103 and 23104. Besides the fine and possible jail time, it's also a 2-point violation and 4 points in 12 months or 6 points in 24 months is a suspended license which will really put a crimp in these people's lives.

Here are two items I found regarding Federal regulations. Some Googling reveals sites that discuss the summer requirement. http://www.arb.ca.gov/bluebook/bb06/40cfr/40cfr80_ 27.htm http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/420b05012.pdf

Here it is: http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/BudgetSummary/GRE/124955 9.html

Fully 50% of the California State budget goes toward education (the majority of which was mandated by Prop 98, - a voter-passed initiative which mandated that a set percentage of the California budget be spent on education). Of the remainder, 23% goes toward Health and Human Services (welfare, MediCal, etc) with the rest going toward infrastructure, salaries and the other items which are funded through the General Fund.

one of the reasons for this is a.) competitive pay, b.) suitable work conditions. I actually considered going into teaching ( BS in architectural engineering) The process involved taking a rather intensive multi discipline test. A test that dealt with college level concepts in everything from math, to the arts, to humanities. You also have to be enrolled in a teaching program. So in order to be a teacher in California you have to a.) have a degree in some field of study. b.) pass the qualification exams (see link) and be must be actively enrolled in a teaching program. or have a teaching degree.

If I did all this i probably would be making around $40,000 a year if I chose to teach in the most volatile schools. After all this I decided to stick with my career, where in pay wise i've faired much better. long story short for what you have to do to get what your paid its not worth it. not to mention the unpaid overtime ... bringing papers home to correct, lesson plans. etc.

California Teaching Credential.
http://www.ctc.ca.gov/credentials/default.html

Dammit people, read the damn bill, it's quite short. It has a four part test for formats to be adopted.

1. Interoperable among diverse internal and external platforms and applications
2. Fully published and available royalty-free
3. Implemnted by multiple vendors
4. Controlled by an open industry organization with a well-defined inclusive process for evolution of the standard

It's not perfectly worded (what are internal and external?), and it's not a perfect list, but it's a quite reasonable starting place and it doesn't allow any of the hand-wringing excuses I'm seeing in these comments. This open document stuff has been being debated in the public sector for some years now. Politicians may be many things, but they're not incapable of reading.

I've written my California Assemblyperson, you can too.

Dammit people, read the damn bill, it's quite short. It has a four part test for formats to be adopted.

1. Interoperable among diverse internal and external platforms and applications
2. Fully published and available royalty-free
3. Implemnted by multiple vendors
4. Controlled by an open industry organization with a well-defined inclusive process for evolution of the standard

It's not perfectly worded (what are internal and external?), and it's not a perfect list, but it's a quite reasonable starting place and it doesn't allow any of the hand-wringing excuses I'm seeing in these comments. This open document stuff has been being debated in the public sector for some years now. Politicians may be many things, but they're not incapable of reading.

I've written my California Assemblyperson, you can too.

once you hit a highway with a speed limit of 65MPH, you would be forced to go between 50MPH and 65MPH. If traffic forced you to go below 50MPH, your only option would be to come to a complete and immediate stop.

Nah, that's not how it works in California. The basic speed law of the state of California means that if traffic slowed down, the "max" speed limit is now lowered to the safest max speed it's safe to drive

So, if the car in front of you is going 5mph, the speed limit is 5mph, and if you hit his back bumper, you've "broken the speed limit" and can be cited.

Editing my link- doesnt seem to work

http://www.lao.ca.gov/2006/major_features/major_fe atures_2006.html

So what you are saying is:

The total cost of most projects in California occur under budget.

I'll allow you the opportunity to see how well we are doing right here:

http://www.lao.ca.gov/2006/major_features/major_fe atures_2006.html/

California is so ontrack that there are a ton of revisements.

Yeah- Im an idiot.

There is also an online form for comment here.

Just called my CA Assembly rep to ask them to support the bill. Look yours up here.
It may not be perfect, but is a move in the right direction.

California has a major share of the solar market due to strong incentives. For each rebate, the state lists the system size, seller, and cost. There were about 15K installs in the last two years. Of the over 600 sellers listed, many are "green driven" types with few installations and not much business motivation. Below is the full list of 39 sellers that have over 100 installations. They are much more likely to return calls.

PowerLight Corp. (798 installs)
Renewable Energy Concepts, Inc. (712 installs)
GE Energy USA, LLC (473 installs)
Gaiam Energy Tech dba Real Goods (449 installs)
SPG Solar, Inc. (447 installs)
Carlson Solar Inc. (334 installs)
Regrid Power, Inc (320 installs)
Akeena Solar, Inc. (311 installs)
Premier Power Renewable Energy Inc. (278 installs)
Unlimited Energy (274 installs)
Sun Light & Power Co. (233 installs)
Sharpe Solar Energy Systems, Inc. (219 installs)
GenSelf Corporation (218 installs)
Mohr Power Solar, Inc. (213 installs)
Southern California Solar Inc. (202 installs)
Helio Power (198 installs)
Advanced Solar Electric (192 installs)
Cooperative Community Energy Corp. (190 installs)
Altair Energy, Inc. (188 installs)
Borrego Solar Systems, Inc (183 installs)
Next Energy Corp (181 installs)
Borrego Solar Systems Inc. (174 installs)
M C Solar Engineering (171 installs)
Marin Solar, Inc. (170 installs)
Sierra Pacific Home and Comfort (166 installs)
Sharp Electronics Corp. (160 installs)
Energy Efficiency Solar, Inc. (156 installs)
Clean Power Systems, Inc (150 installs)
Solahart All Valley (144 installs)
Power Independence Electric (thru Home Depot) (137 installs)
Sun First Solar (129 installs)
Plan It Solar (126 installs)
Revco Solar Engineering, Inc (123 installs)
New Vision Technologies, Inc. (123 installs)
Solatron Technologies, Inc. (122 installs)
Solar Technologies (118 installs)
Solar Works (118 installs)
Independent Energy Systems, Inc. (106 installs)
TMAG Inc dba Stellar Solar (Home Depot) (102 installs)

Source data from http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/emerging_renew ables/COMPLETED_SYSTEMS.XLS

A new study, conducted by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratories and sponsored by the federal agency, predicts that off-peak electricity production is adequate for keeping 185 million plug-in hybrids on the road.

The "well-to-wheel" emissions of electric vehicles are lower than those from gasoline internal combustion vehicles. California Air Resources Board studies show that battery electric vehicles emit at least 67% lower greenhouse gases than gasoline cars -- even more assuming renewables. A PHEV with only a 20-mile all-electric range is 62% lower(http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/grnhsgas/isor.p df)

Nationally, two government studies have found PHEVs would result in large reductions even on the national grid (50% coal). The GREET 1.6 model in 2001(http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/153 .pdf) by the DOE's Argonne National Lab estimates hybrids reduce greenhouse gases by 22%, and plug-in hybrids by 36% (see table 2). An Argonne researcher reached consensus with researchers from other national labs, universities, the Air Resources Board, automakers, utilities and AD Little to estimate in July 2002 that PHEVs using nighttime power reduce greenhouse gases by 46 to 61 percent.

Washington is one of them. The right to vote can be restored, but you do lose it upon conviction of a felony.

California is another. Once you serve your sentence and are not on parole, you're eligible to register to vote.

If you want more, you are free to research the information that is publicly available on every State's website. Just find the link for the Secretary of State for the State in question.

The Federal government makes more net money off the sale of a gallon of gasoline than Big Oil does.

Could you provide a source for this information? Hint: You won't find one.

Sorry, Charlie, you lose. Unfortunately, I got moderated down to oblivion for not spewing the Slashdot party line in regards to big oil, so you and no one else will probably ever read this, but here goes:

Gasoline price breakdown.

The Federal government makes 18.4 cents per gallon of gasoline sold in the United States. Oil companies make, on average, 10 cents per gallon sold.

And yeah, I listed a conocophillips website. Mea culpla. Here's a government one that breaks down the component prices for gasoline:

http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/oog/info/gdu/gasdiesel.as p

And here's another (state) government study that breaks down cost http://www.energy.ca.gov/gasoline/margins/index.ht ml#1-2.

And here's a graph that breaks down the profit margin for oil and gas production and refining operations:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analy sis_publications/oil_market_basics/ref_image_prof_ rate.htm

Unfortunately, it only goes out to 2001, but notice that the profitability for refining operations declines below zero after 2001. In layman's terms, that means refining is losing money.

I'm sure you're all set with data to contradict mine, so fire away, since "I won't find a source"....that implies you have lots of sources.

The two parallel processes are certainly not "hand waves", but are two heavily researched topics: Pyrolysis/Gasification and Anaerobic Digestion (biodigestion).

Anaerobic digestion is very common, and happens naturally in compost heaps and landfills. The methane gas it generates is being harnessed to generate energy both in some current landfills and in the tactical biorefinery in the article. Unfortunately this technology has significant limitations in that it is only able to process the cellulose and other sugars, but no lignin (which makes up ~25% of plant mass) nor any plastics. Here is where advanced thermal technologies come in -

Pyrolysis is a form of gasification that uses high temperatures, frequently in the range of 800-1400C, to break down the molecular structure of any organic material (plastics included) into smaller (and more useful) molecules in the form of combustible gasses and liquids. The key to pyrolysis is that it is performed with very little or no oxygen present. Without oxygen, nothing can burn (combustion is simply an exothermic oxidation reaction), and nearly all of the pollutents association with incineration are broken down into useful fuel.

The company I work for is actually working on a very similar "tactical biorefinery" financed by another arm of the DOD - but we use only pyrolysis. The emissions are not a significant problem, you really do get waste mass reduction on the order of 95% into easily compressible char (which can be burned for additional fuel), and it is certainly a technology you should see around the block in the future.

On another note, these devices are not limited to the small scale "tactical" devices. There are currently over 50 operational waste to energy plants in Japan (who for obvious reasons can't afford to waste land space with trash!). One of the most impressive technologies for large scale pyrolysis uses high voltage electricity arcs to generate a plasma stream to superheat and gasify waste.

A particularly good reference for some of the cutting edge waste to energy technologies is the California Integraded Waste Management Board's website, especially their 2005 Conversion Technologies Report to the Legislature: http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Organics/Conversion/Events /

For further reading, this master's thesis by one of my boss's former students addresses all of these issues and more:
http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/UFE1001171/Mudulodu_S.pdf

--
Go Gators!

It is better to let every homocidal manic go (what all 10 serial killers in the last century?) than to wrongfully imprison and harass innocent citizens.

Let's not forget the simple profit motive behind much of this. Check out the "strategic business plan" (caution, pdf). It spells it out pretty clearly.

So the way I read that is that even if he had permission to add stuff to his profile (which clearly he did, since the changes were allowed), if the changes were not intended by the "owner of the information," then he broke this law. Pretty screwy wording, if you ask me. So basically, anytime you "modify" data in a manner not intended by the website owner, you're breaking the law (at least in California). I wonder how long before somebody uses this law to sue the RIAA for putting fake files on P2P networks?

Does kind of make one wonder though, does Lloyd Levine have any friends that own CFL companies.

Campaign funding records for Levine. Anyone recognize any of the names of people or companies in there being in the CFL business?