To view any of Google's markets as zero-sum is fundamentally myopic, and plays to Google's advantage. Any competitor is better served identifying something that Google doesn't do well for the customer, and focusing on that instead of taking market share away from Google. Of course, this requires real work and innovation.
Yet didn't Google take market share from Yahoo, etc. with its search business by simply doing it better? Same goes for Gmail (Hotmail) and Google Maps (MapQuest)...
The Soviet Union (not *Russia*) probably could have beat the Third Reich and her European allies(don't forget Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) on their own. After the Germans failed to capture Moscow in late '41 (and indeed, they never came that close ever again - the Soviets launched a counterattack), it became an attrition war which Germany could not win. The Soviets had Before you scream "Lend Lease", realize that didn't kick in much until about 1943, by then you have Stalingrad and the destruction of an entire German army(the 6th), not to mention those of the Romanians and Bulgarians.
Japan was not really a threat to the SU - the defeat at Khalkin Gol pretty much showed the IJA could not deal with an opponent with modern tanks, in places they were useful. (They had success in Malayasia, Burma and the Phillipines because tanks weren't really useful there, and China didn't have much in that department)
The Allied powers (U.S./Great Britain and Canada) similiarly could have defeated the Axis powers by themselves, assuming their was sufficient political support. I have seen quotes that the U.S. alone was producing almost 60% of the world's crude oil in 1940. When you add in Great Britian, the Germans would have been outproduced. And you get the A-bomb in mid-45 to boot.
I was wondering if any programming language has done something like this:
class A {
property B {// specify B's type
type integer;// specify legal values for B
constraint B > 0;
constraint B 100;// specify that B can be read and written from outside the class
public read, write;// specify default value, used on initialization
default 1;
} }
Would seem to reduce the amount of boilerplate code you would have to write in terms of getter/setter functions, and make everything clearer. You could just say A.B = 5 or C = A.B without having to call A.setB(5) A.getB(). Object initialization would also be much more clear, you would simply create the object and set any values you want.
You will burn an awful lot of money betting the minimum over and over again waiting for that rare opportunity when your odds improve to about 50.5% or so.
Actually, no. Even playing basic strategy, on average you will not lose that much. And you are betting comparatively small amounts compared to those big bets.
So you lose say 0.5% on bets that total, say, a thousand, then you make your big bets of tens of thousands in the last few hands, and get that 10% ROI. With that much money invested, the overhead for airfare, hotel, etc. is comparatively small. Seems to work out to me.
...Because, of course, secession was evil and illegal when the South did it, but good and legal when the West Virginians did it.
But, er, didn't the West Virginians *refuse* to secede? To put it another way, your comment would be accurate if the WVs had seceded *and formed their own country*. But they didn't. They essentially just stayed with the union.
Actually, the parent has somewhat of a point. As per the US Constitution, no state could be divided without the consent of the state legislature. So West Virginia couldn't legally become a state without the consent of the Virginia legislature, which of course never gave permission. But, like so many things during that period, on both sides, it was a case of "might makes right".
Kirk has always been - and always will be - a swaggering action-oriented character, but he also picked up leadership and wisdom along his carer - skills he would have learned during his progression through Starfleet as an Ensign, Lieutenant, Commander, etc. So at the end of the movie when they promoted Kirk from midshipman to Captain, I couldn't stifle a laugh...
Yeah that may have been somewhat unbelievable but there are some historical examples of that happening - look at David Farragut for instance, captained a ship when he was 12 years old. Napoleon was also promoted up the chain rather quickly. The Civil War had plenty of colonels who were in their early 20s, etc.
Well there are people in England at the moment who are saying that global warming can't possibly be happening because it is very cold in the South of England at the current moment in time. The coldest it has been for about 20 years.
It is cold at the moment, colder than in for example Scotland, Greenland and Antarctica.
Trying to get them to understand the difference between "climate" and "weather", and the fact that it is global average temperatures that are increasing, is impossible. Instead they focus on today's temperatures in some little corner of England. The fact that today's temperatures in a little corner of Scotland are unseasonably warm doesn't matter though.
Actually there is one theory that the UK and much of Western Europe is going to get *colder*, because the melting of ice will shut down the Atlantic currents which keep those areas abnormally warm given its latitude.
No, the suspect shouldn't have talked to the police at all. Never talk to police, consent to any kind of search, or offer anything that you aren't legally required to.
If you're guilty, sure. But what if you didn't do anything. Non-cooperation would seem to arouse even more suspicion. Granted, there are alot of cops/DAs that simply want a collar/conviction, but if no one every cooperated with the police/investigators it would very hard to confict anyone. It also furthers an "us vs. them" mentality with respect to law enforcement and the general population.
1) Educating and qualifying mechanics to work on the car. Your average Joe at the gas station isn't going to be able to service this thing right off the bat, nor will he be able to open the hood and figure it out after a few minutes' inspection. At least for the first two or three years this car is on the market, you'll be forced to rely on dealer service, simply because there won't be trained mechanics anywhere else. And if you break down someplace where there isn't a dealer handy, you're hosed.
EVs are primarily going to be used for commuting, so I imagine most people aren't going to be that far from the dealer where they bought the car.
2) Availability of parts. There is lots and lots more that goes into an electric car, or indeed any car, besides a few hundred feet of wire, an electric motor and a few batteries. If your alternator dies, if you have to replace a transmission or some other drivetrain component, if your windshield cracks, all of those require many more parts to complete beyond the obvious part that's malfunctioning. The problem is compounded if you have multiple systems damaged at once, as in the context of an accident. You'll have to have some mechanism in place to get those parts from their Chinese manufacturers to a U.S. dealer service department, quickly and efficiently. (This is harder than it sounds; as a personal example, I can confirm that for a certain well-known German luxury manufacturer, a replacement front bumper fascia took three weeks to ship from Stuttgart, where replacing the same part on an American vehicle took two days.)
Yet people still buy Germany luxury cars, despite this problem.
On a related note, you also have to worry about the general lack of infrastructure. Right or wrong, as it stands right now the entire transportation infrastructure in the US is set up to deal with internal combustion vehicles. Changing over to an electric infrastructure is going to take time, at least two or three years and probably more like five or seven, during which time the drivers of electric vehicles are going to be at a major disadvantage. You won't be able to charge most places, won't be able to get service most places, might not be able to drive on freeways or other limited access roads (at least here, freeways are restricted to internal combustion vehicles with engines greater than 125 CC displacement, which can't be powered farm equipment, and must be able to maintain a minimum speed of 55 MPH). Those restrictions might be enough to put people off electrics entirely, or at the very least slow their adoption. It'd be a damned shame if that happened, but it's a very real risk. In the meanwhile, everyone who bought these electric cars will be in the lurch, and if the manufacturer folds, the vehicles will be little more than hobby pieces.
Like I said before, people are using their cars 99% for commuting, most likely with 50 miles from their home, round trip. You recharge at home at night. No need to build charging stations or anything like that. Even if they were - the infrastructure is already there. Every where you can find a gas station, you can find an electric outlet. But you wouldn't do that, except in an emergency, as the batteries take time to charge.
Electric power is actually more readily available than gasoline. We have an entire grid devoting to distributing it. Gas has to be shipped to specific gas stations. I don't see an infrastructure problem.
where suburbs never developed, where cities remained small and compact, where we retained strong investment in our national rail and trolley infrastructure, you would have something valid to say about biking
I live in the burbs. I would have biked to my job which was about 8 miles from me by road if I felt I could have done it without a significant risk to my life every time I went out there.
It may not be the "solution" but I think its worth investing through a pilot program.
Switching to a public school, after MUCH begging and pleading to my parents, was the BEST move I made.
I'm glad that you were able to have a good experience in one of America's public schools. Maybe you should tell your story to the president elect. Guess where he is sending (and has always sent) his kids?
And before anyone screams "Security!" at the top of your lungs, I can't imagine the security problems in the D.C. public schools are any worse than the University of Texas, and both Bush girls graduated from there.
I attended Catholic elementary schoo and was lucky enough to get a chance to to attendrom the top public high school in the country by some measures. It was a governor's school and there were admittance requirements so I was not guaranteed to get in. If I didn't, I would have went to the Catholic high school. I am obviously glad I made it in the governor's school.
But my experience is probably exceptional. In many locations, the public schools are simply abysmal and no sane parent is going to send their kids there. The New Orleans area is particular example. And if you ask our president elect, I'm sure he would add Chicago and D.C. to that list. At least in hushed, private conversation.
If they have the optional power to do something specified, what kind of power do they have to do something that isn't specified?
Well there is that "general welfare" clause:-)
But even if you go with a strict intrepreation, as long as it doesn't conflict with the 10th amendment (meaning that it doesn't override any state or local laws), they should be able to do anything they want.
Or at least thats my amateur interpreation.
Re:"soon-to-be Leader of the Free World"
on
Obama's "ZuneGate"
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
As a Dutch citizen I have the perfect freedom to:
- get abortions
Legal in the US
- get serviced by a hooker
Well you can do that in Nevada. Its not like the Dutch have NO restrictions on prostitution, (no street hookers)
- get divorced
You can't get divorced in the US?
- speak my mind
We can't do this in the US?
- drink on a sunday
WTF? Have you been to the US since 1950? Their are some states that have prohibitions on where/when alcohol can be sold, I don't know of of any state that prohibits consumption in a private residence.
- go where I please (we don't need visa for 99% of the planet)
Getting a visa is going to largely depend on the *other* country, not your own.
Currently, the United States Air Force has air superiority
That's why it's called air superiority, not air just-a-little-better-than-everyone-else. Its purpose is to ensure that the air can be used at will by the commander - not that he might-or -might-not be able to use the air, if the enemy doesn't try too hard, and he got a mother may I...
I think you are speaking of air supremacy - i.e. we would be able to destroy any ( perhaps several:-) ) air force(s) that dared to take to the skies.
Air superiority is merely having a significant advantage in the air.
> Also, even if it were possible, I'd surprised if they could beat photosynthesis from an perspective of efficiency.
Solar panels already do. Have done for quite a while. Photosynthesis runs at about 5-6% efficiency under optimal conditions.
There are many tricky things in biology, but beating the efficiency of photosynthesis is not one of those things.
Humans produce photovoltaic cells in manner that is highly efficient (compared to plants) using techniques like chemical vapor deposition in "clean rooms" free of oxygen. Would the same hold true for nanites? You need to take into account the amount of energy necessary to produce the solar cell in the first place. For something like a nanite operating in a environment where Ga/As is very rare, (not to mention an abundance of oxygen) and to extract those rare metals and produce a working photovoltaic cell that will beat photosynthesis, I'm not convinced. I would like to see some hard numbers, but since (as far as I know), we don't have nanites capable of assembling a PV cell, we don't know.
The limiting factor would be the rarer metals (gallium, arsenic, etc.), needed to construct a photovoltaic not silicon. Also, even if it were possible, I'd surprised if they could beat photosynthesis from an perspective of efficiency.
Entrapment is when the authorities cause you to commit a crime (that you wouldn't otherwise) which is not the case here since the crime was already committed.
Slightly OT, but if that was the case, couldn't you get most cases of soliciting prostitution (where the police officer poses as a prostitute) thrown out?
But when talking about areas like phenomenology, epistemology & cosmology I don't see any real connection, or any kind of overlap (without really forcing it). Not that it's a bad thing -- it's just an apples and oranges kind of thing.
Epistemology does have some relevance in the AI field.
Interesting, was this atmospheric CO2 they were doing this with? Or did it have to be concentrated CO2 like what you would get from a coal-burning power plant or an exhaust pipe?
Actually, I think the gun issue is unimportant simply because neither side is going to have much room to work with it. Between the Heller Decision and the beating that the Democratic legislators took after the assault weapons ban there isn't going to be much traction for wide regulation.
Yes I agree it has become a "dead issue" for both parties. With the Heller decision, the right has largely won the debate. But I don't think the Republicans are going to want to press it anymore than that. Even the Bush administration was telling the Supreme Court that the wording of the decision should not go so far as to open the door for challenging the federal automatic weapons laws passed in the 80s under Reagan, and it didn't. Pushing for overturning those bans would kill McCain at the ballot box, since most people while they think handguns, shotguns, and some rifles are OK aren't going to want your average citizen to be allowed a.50 cal or an RPG. Only extremists (such as myself), would agree with that position.
Obama is likely to win at this point, he's going to have his hands full of other crap and if he plans on having a hope as a second term president he's going to keep his head low on the issue of 2nd Amendment rights until he gets re-elected. And even in that case he has to hope for a serious Democratic majority in the legislature or it's going to be a moot point. I don't really know if that will happen as it seems that neither party seems to be able to keep a solid hand on both the presidency and the legislature at the same time.
The gun issue is something Obama doesn't want to touch. It will only hurt him. But actually I think it would hurt McCain if he calls out Obama on it. Even if most Americans agree with his position, he would be seen as ignoring the countries most pressing problems (economy, war) in favor of an issue that has largely been settled anyway.
We have more than enough carbon and oxygen to sustain our population. Remember it was us who dug up all that carbon in the first place and converted into CO2
Couldn't agree more - especially with the comment about o-chem being mostly about "hand-waving". You learn some basic things about how electrons move around in a reaction. But that is insufficient for to be able to deduce the outcome of a given reaction for all but trivial cases. Like biology, it is almost entirely descriptive, not predictive like physics.
Slashdot Mirror
Americans called it Manifest Destiny
The Germans called it Liebensraum
To view any of Google's markets as zero-sum is fundamentally myopic, and plays to Google's advantage. Any competitor is better served identifying something that Google doesn't do well for the customer, and focusing on that instead of taking market share away from Google. Of course, this requires real work and innovation.
Yet didn't Google take market share from Yahoo, etc. with its search business by simply doing it better? Same goes for Gmail (Hotmail) and Google Maps (MapQuest)...
The Soviet Union (not *Russia*) probably could have beat the Third Reich and her European allies(don't forget Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria) on their own. After the Germans failed to capture Moscow in late '41 (and indeed, they never came that close ever again - the Soviets launched a counterattack), it became an attrition war which Germany could not win. The Soviets had Before you scream "Lend Lease", realize that didn't kick in much until about 1943, by then you have Stalingrad and the destruction of an entire German army(the 6th), not to mention those of the Romanians and Bulgarians.
Japan was not really a threat to the SU - the defeat at Khalkin Gol pretty much showed the IJA could not deal with an opponent with modern tanks, in places they were useful. (They had success in Malayasia, Burma and the Phillipines because tanks weren't really useful there, and China didn't have much in that department)
The Allied powers (U.S./Great Britain and Canada) similiarly could have defeated the Axis powers by themselves, assuming their was sufficient political support. I have seen quotes that the U.S. alone was producing almost 60% of the world's crude oil in 1940. When you add in Great Britian, the Germans would have been outproduced. And you get the A-bomb in mid-45 to boot.
I was wondering if any programming language has done something like this:
class A { // specify B's type // specify legal values for B // specify that B can be read and written from outside the class // specify default value, used on initialization
property B {
type integer;
constraint B > 0;
constraint B 100;
public read, write;
default 1;
}
}
Would seem to reduce the amount of boilerplate code you would have to write in terms of getter/setter functions, and make everything clearer. You could just say A.B = 5 or C = A.B without having to call A.setB(5) A.getB(). Object initialization would also be much more clear, you would simply create the object and set any values you want.
You will burn an awful lot of money betting the minimum over and over again waiting for that rare opportunity when your odds improve to about 50.5% or so.
Actually, no. Even playing basic strategy, on average you will not lose that much. And you are betting comparatively small amounts compared to those big bets. So you lose say 0.5% on bets that total, say, a thousand, then you make your big bets of tens of thousands in the last few hands, and get that 10% ROI. With that much money invested, the overhead for airfare, hotel, etc. is comparatively small. Seems to work out to me.
...Because, of course, secession was evil and illegal when the South did it, but good and legal when the West Virginians did it.
But, er, didn't the West Virginians *refuse* to secede? To put it another way, your comment would be accurate if the WVs had seceded *and formed their own country*. But they didn't. They essentially just stayed with the union.
Actually, the parent has somewhat of a point. As per the US Constitution, no state could be divided without the consent of the state legislature. So West Virginia couldn't legally become a state without the consent of the Virginia legislature, which of course never gave permission. But, like so many things during that period, on both sides, it was a case of "might makes right".
Kirk has always been - and always will be - a swaggering action-oriented character, but he also picked up leadership and wisdom along his carer - skills he would have learned during his progression through Starfleet as an Ensign, Lieutenant, Commander, etc. So at the end of the movie when they promoted Kirk from midshipman to Captain, I couldn't stifle a laugh...
Yeah that may have been somewhat unbelievable but there are some historical examples of that happening - look at David Farragut for instance, captained a ship when he was 12 years old. Napoleon was also promoted up the chain rather quickly. The Civil War had plenty of colonels who were in their early 20s, etc.
Well there are people in England at the moment who are saying that global warming can't possibly be happening because it is very cold in the South of England at the current moment in time. The coldest it has been for about 20 years.
It is cold at the moment, colder than in for example Scotland, Greenland and Antarctica.
Trying to get them to understand the difference between "climate" and "weather", and the fact that it is global average temperatures that are increasing, is impossible. Instead they focus on today's temperatures in some little corner of England. The fact that today's temperatures in a little corner of Scotland are unseasonably warm doesn't matter though.
Actually there is one theory that the UK and much of Western Europe is going to get *colder*, because the melting of ice will shut down the Atlantic currents which keep those areas abnormally warm given its latitude.
No, the suspect shouldn't have talked to the police at all. Never talk to police, consent to any kind of search, or offer anything that you aren't legally required to.
It can't help you.
Don't just take my word, how about a law professor and a cop?
If you're guilty, sure. But what if you didn't do anything. Non-cooperation would seem to arouse even more suspicion. Granted, there are alot of cops/DAs that simply want a collar/conviction, but if no one every cooperated with the police/investigators it would very hard to confict anyone. It also furthers an "us vs. them" mentality with respect to law enforcement and the general population.
What's so hard about supporting an electric car?
Quite a bit, if you think about it:
1) Educating and qualifying mechanics to work on the car. Your average Joe at the gas station isn't going to be able to service this thing right off the bat, nor will he be able to open the hood and figure it out after a few minutes' inspection. At least for the first two or three years this car is on the market, you'll be forced to rely on dealer service, simply because there won't be trained mechanics anywhere else. And if you break down someplace where there isn't a dealer handy, you're hosed.
EVs are primarily going to be used for commuting, so I imagine most people aren't going to be that far from the dealer where they bought the car.
2) Availability of parts. There is lots and lots more that goes into an electric car, or indeed any car, besides a few hundred feet of wire, an electric motor and a few batteries. If your alternator dies, if you have to replace a transmission or some other drivetrain component, if your windshield cracks, all of those require many more parts to complete beyond the obvious part that's malfunctioning. The problem is compounded if you have multiple systems damaged at once, as in the context of an accident. You'll have to have some mechanism in place to get those parts from their Chinese manufacturers to a U.S. dealer service department, quickly and efficiently. (This is harder than it sounds; as a personal example, I can confirm that for a certain well-known German luxury manufacturer, a replacement front bumper fascia took three weeks to ship from Stuttgart, where replacing the same part on an American vehicle took two days.)
Yet people still buy Germany luxury cars, despite this problem.
On a related note, you also have to worry about the general lack of infrastructure. Right or wrong, as it stands right now the entire transportation infrastructure in the US is set up to deal with internal combustion vehicles. Changing over to an electric infrastructure is going to take time, at least two or three years and probably more like five or seven, during which time the drivers of electric vehicles are going to be at a major disadvantage. You won't be able to charge most places, won't be able to get service most places, might not be able to drive on freeways or other limited access roads (at least here, freeways are restricted to internal combustion vehicles with engines greater than 125 CC displacement, which can't be powered farm equipment, and must be able to maintain a minimum speed of 55 MPH). Those restrictions might be enough to put people off electrics entirely, or at the very least slow their adoption. It'd be a damned shame if that happened, but it's a very real risk. In the meanwhile, everyone who bought these electric cars will be in the lurch, and if the manufacturer folds, the vehicles will be little more than hobby pieces.
Like I said before, people are using their cars 99% for commuting, most likely with 50 miles from their home, round trip. You recharge at home at night. No need to build charging stations or anything like that. Even if they were - the infrastructure is already there. Every where you can find a gas station, you can find an electric outlet. But you wouldn't do that, except in an emergency, as the batteries take time to charge.
Electric power is actually more readily available than gasoline. We have an entire grid devoting to distributing it. Gas has to be shipped to specific gas stations. I don't see an infrastructure problem.
where suburbs never developed, where cities remained small and compact, where we retained strong investment in our national rail and trolley infrastructure, you would have something valid to say about biking
I live in the burbs. I would have biked to my job which was about 8 miles from me by road if I felt I could have done it without a significant risk to my life every time I went out there.
It may not be the "solution" but I think its worth investing through a pilot program.
Switching to a public school, after MUCH begging and pleading to my parents, was the BEST move I made.
I'm glad that you were able to have a good experience in one of America's public schools. Maybe you should tell your story to the president elect. Guess where he is sending (and has always sent) his kids?
And before anyone screams "Security!" at the top of your lungs, I can't imagine the security problems in the D.C. public schools are any worse than the University of Texas, and both Bush girls graduated from there.
I attended Catholic elementary schoo and was lucky enough to get a chance to to attendrom the top public high school in the country by some measures. It was a governor's school and there were admittance requirements so I was not guaranteed to get in. If I didn't, I would have went to the Catholic high school. I am obviously glad I made it in the governor's school.
But my experience is probably exceptional. In many locations, the public schools are simply abysmal and no sane parent is going to send their kids there. The New Orleans area is particular example. And if you ask our president elect, I'm sure he would add Chicago and D.C. to that list. At least in hushed, private conversation.
If they have the optional power to do something specified, what kind of power do they have to do something that isn't specified?
Well there is that "general welfare" clause :-)
But even if you go with a strict intrepreation, as long as it doesn't conflict with the 10th amendment (meaning that it doesn't override any state or local laws), they should be able to do anything they want.
Or at least thats my amateur interpreation.
As a Dutch citizen I have the perfect freedom to: - get abortions
Legal in the US
- get serviced by a hooker
Well you can do that in Nevada. Its not like the Dutch have NO restrictions on prostitution, (no street hookers)
- get divorced
You can't get divorced in the US?
- speak my mind
We can't do this in the US?
- drink on a sunday
WTF? Have you been to the US since 1950? Their are some states that have prohibitions on where/when alcohol can be sold, I don't know of of any state that prohibits consumption in a private residence.
- go where I please (we don't need visa for 99% of the planet)
Getting a visa is going to largely depend on the *other* country, not your own.
Currently, the United States Air Force has air superiority That's why it's called air superiority, not air just-a-little-better-than-everyone-else. Its purpose is to ensure that the air can be used at will by the commander - not that he might-or -might-not be able to use the air, if the enemy doesn't try too hard, and he got a mother may I ...
I think you are speaking of air supremacy - i.e. we would be able to destroy any ( perhaps several :-) ) air force(s) that dared to take to the skies.
Air superiority is merely having a significant advantage in the air.
> Also, even if it were possible, I'd surprised if they could beat photosynthesis from an perspective of efficiency.
Solar panels already do. Have done for quite a while. Photosynthesis runs at about 5-6% efficiency under optimal conditions.
There are many tricky things in biology, but beating the efficiency of photosynthesis is not one of those things.
Humans produce photovoltaic cells in manner that is highly efficient (compared to plants) using techniques like chemical vapor deposition in "clean rooms" free of oxygen. Would the same hold true for nanites? You need to take into account the amount of energy necessary to produce the solar cell in the first place. For something like a nanite operating in a environment where Ga/As is very rare, (not to mention an abundance of oxygen) and to extract those rare metals and produce a working photovoltaic cell that will beat photosynthesis, I'm not convinced. I would like to see some hard numbers, but since (as far as I know), we don't have nanites capable of assembling a PV cell, we don't know.
The limiting factor would be the rarer metals (gallium, arsenic, etc.), needed to construct a photovoltaic not silicon. Also, even if it were possible, I'd surprised if they could beat photosynthesis from an perspective of efficiency.
Entrapment is when the authorities cause you to commit a crime (that you wouldn't otherwise) which is not the case here since the crime was already committed.
Slightly OT, but if that was the case, couldn't you get most cases of soliciting prostitution (where the police officer poses as a prostitute) thrown out?
But when talking about areas like phenomenology, epistemology & cosmology I don't see any real connection, or any kind of overlap (without really forcing it). Not that it's a bad thing -- it's just an apples and oranges kind of thing.
Epistemology does have some relevance in the AI field.
Interesting, was this atmospheric CO2 they were doing this with? Or did it have to be concentrated CO2 like what you would get from a coal-burning power plant or an exhaust pipe?
Actually, I think the gun issue is unimportant simply because neither side is going to have much room to work with it. Between the Heller Decision and the beating that the Democratic legislators took after the assault weapons ban there isn't going to be much traction for wide regulation.
Yes I agree it has become a "dead issue" for both parties. With the Heller decision, the right has largely won the debate. But I don't think the Republicans are going to want to press it anymore than that. Even the Bush administration was telling the Supreme Court that the wording of the decision should not go so far as to open the door for challenging the federal automatic weapons laws passed in the 80s under Reagan, and it didn't. Pushing for overturning those bans would kill McCain at the ballot box, since most people while they think handguns, shotguns, and some rifles are OK aren't going to want your average citizen to be allowed a .50 cal or an RPG. Only extremists (such as myself), would agree with that position.
Obama is likely to win at this point, he's going to have his hands full of other crap and if he plans on having a hope as a second term president he's going to keep his head low on the issue of 2nd Amendment rights until he gets re-elected. And even in that case he has to hope for a serious Democratic majority in the legislature or it's going to be a moot point. I don't really know if that will happen as it seems that neither party seems to be able to keep a solid hand on both the presidency and the legislature at the same time.
The gun issue is something Obama doesn't want to touch. It will only hurt him. But actually I think it would hurt McCain if he calls out Obama on it. Even if most Americans agree with his position, he would be seen as ignoring the countries most pressing problems (economy, war) in favor of an issue that has largely been settled anyway.
We have more than enough carbon and oxygen to sustain our population. Remember it was us who dug up all that carbon in the first place and converted into CO2
Couldn't agree more - especially with the comment about o-chem being mostly about "hand-waving". You learn some basic things about how electrons move around in a reaction. But that is insufficient for to be able to deduce the outcome of a given reaction for all but trivial cases. Like biology, it is almost entirely descriptive, not predictive like physics.
Better yet, his home phone number. I mean if it can apply to data lines, it should apply to voice lines to, right?
You still need a 42"+ HDTV that can do 1080p, which will run you $1k+