So, they tested wells 5 km from the fracking site and they tested wells close to the site. That is like saying they tested land close to a uranium mine and it had more uranium on it than land further away, that must be a result of the uranium mine. When in actuality, maybe that has something to do with why the mine is there in the first place. I am not saying that the same is the case in this situation. I am saying that until someone does more thorough studies, we do not know that there is not a relationship between why they put these wells where they did and this phenomena.
but it is, IME, pretty solid evidence when you can chart the level of methane in the well water against the distance from the fracking site.
Or perhaps, it is just the distance from a site that was optimal to drill a well that would use the fracking technology. The logic you use is very similar to the logic used by people who were convinced that vaccines caused autism. This does not mean that fracking is not a problem. It just means that you need to actually determine quantitatively what the problem is.
Let's face it, SOME aspect of the fracturing process, whether it be frac water dumping, well casing failure (gotta get that pressurized water down there somehow), or the (far less likely but not yet confirmed to be impossible) slight possibility those fractures are of much greater extent than expected, is contaminating wells on a widespread basis.
Actually, that is not the case. We do not know what the incidence of methane in the water was in those wells before the gas companies started fracking (at least based on both of the articles linked to in the summary). We do not even know what the incience of methane in water wells near other, non-fracking gas wells is. Until we have at least a proxy for an answer to those questions, we will be unable to evaluate the level of risk that fracking brings and if it actually is causing a problem. Additionally, with that information, we will be able to determine how to ameliorate the problem.
There is a basic problem with the study as reported in both articles. There is no comparison to the amount of methane in the water from wells in the vicinity of gas wells that do not use fracking. This means that the methane may be in the ground water, whether or not fracking is used. Without knowing the amount of methane that was in the water in these wells before the fracking started, or having a comparison to ground water near gas wells where fracking is not used, we are unable to accurately evaluate the level of risk from fracking without knowing the answer to this question.
Have we not learned anything from the various anti-progress "studies" that have been done in the past? This does not mean that this study is anti-progress, it just means that there is further information necessary before we jump to conclusions.
I have found that whether or not a comment on a subject gets modded down or up on Slashdot depends on two things. The first is the article it follows and the wording of the summary. I can't define it, but when I read a summary on Slashdot that bears on one of the hot button topics (Apple products, Linux, religion, etc) I can usually tell if which direction the discussion will lean. The second, depending on which side of the issue has mod points and is on Slashdot. I have seen comments on one thread get modded troll and on another thread a very similar comment will get modded +5 Insightful/Informative.
All of that is to say that while Slashdot's moderation system isn't perfect, it works out pretty well. While there are a few people on both sides of just about every issue who will mod people down just because they disagree, most people on Slashdot actually wish to hear the opinions of those who disagree with them on a topic.
Jeremy Clarkson of the BBC show Top Gear was ecstatic to get around the Nurburgring track in 10 minutes in a diesel Jaguar. So, I would say that, yes it is a particularly tortuous track.
Failing to see road signs is a completely different phenomena than forgetting why you went into the store. I rarely miss a street sign, but with significant frequency I forget why I went to the store.
Actually, the portion of the population that tend to be most strongly opposed to helping the less fortunate tend to vote Democratic. As a general rule, Democrats want the government to take care of the less fortunate so that they don't have to feel guilty about not doing anything for them themselves. All you have to do to recognize this is look at charitable giving according to political party affiliation.
I am about to move to an area that is fairly far out of in the boonies, but I will be choosing between cable and FIOS for my Internet connection at the new place. A friend of mine lives in downtown San Jose, Ca, the best he can do is really poor DSL. He is pissed at me.
That has actually been tried. In addition, several municipalities sued gun manufacturers for selling guns used in crimes. I do not remember if that got to the Supreme Court or if it was knocked down by Circuit Courts (if the latter it was at least two). I suspect (and hope) that this case will have similar results.
"the real hurdle is convincing people that a non-lawyer is entitled to call out a federal judge on their logic in the first place."
No, the real hurdle is convincing people that someone who has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of an ability to reason logically is entitled to call anyone out on their logic.
Yeah, but Wordperfect's MakeItFit feature would expand it to fit as well as shrink it to fit. If you typed a paper that needed to be 7 pages, but what you wrote was only 5 pages MakeItFit would increase font size and adjust margins to make it work out. I loved that feature.
NO, the main point is installing GPS devices in every vehicle so as to be able to track where people actually go. So far any of these proposals that have gotten further than, "We should consider taxing vehicles based on how many miles they travel," have included a provision that every car have a GPS installed to track how many miles they travel (supposedly to distinguish between miles traveled on roads where the tax applies and roads where the tax does not apply). This is about tracking people, not about tax revenue.
In what way is Google creating platform lock-in? I am not saying that they aren't, I just haven't read anything that suggests that they are (and I have read several stories that indicate they are spending extra money to ensure that users of some of their products are not locked in).
Actually, Frederick Pohl is one of the science fiction authors who did a very good job of placing his plots within the realm of possibility according to scientific theory of the time that he wrote the story. At one time there was a fairly large subsegment of science fiction authors who did this. I do not know if scientific theory has changed in such a way as to make the ideas in the Gateway series obsolete, but at the time it was written it was withing the realm of possibility (although no technology could at that time be conceived that would allow it).
You make some good points. However, the reason that legalizing marjuana scored so highly on the "open gov" site set up by the government in the U.S. was because groups associated with promoting legalizing marijuana "trolled" the site to push that issue. That doesn't mean that legalizing marijuana is a bad idea (my opinion on that switches back and forth over time), it just means that people who want marijuana legalized made a concerted effort to get the idea to poll highly on the site, some of the tactics used were calculated to make the issue appear to have greater support than it actually does.
As to your main point, you are correct that there are several studies that show that if you get a group to make a decision in a manner where the charisma of individual members is prevented from influencing decisions the group has a tendency to make better decisions than any other decision making system.
Well, since I believe that government assistance programs will never make a significant positive impact on poverty, we are obviously never going to agree. I have worked with several organizations that help the impoverished, both in the U.S. and in third world countries. Even in third world countries, where the majority of the poor are poor through no fault of their own, I observed that the majority of the poor did not know the types of behavior that would help them get out of their situation. In the parts of one third world country where I worked with an organization, the poor would not have been able to get themselves out of their poverty without the pressure on the government from the organization. However, the changes that the government made (allowing the residents to obtain property rights, extending the public sewer system, improving the local roads, etc) had been tried in nearby areas and failed, because there had not been a concurrent effort working with the poor showing them how to make long term improvements in their lives rather than squandering the improvements on short term pleasures. Of course the reason that the poor in that area had a tendency to squander on short term pleasures was a history in that country of these advances being temporary and if you did not cash out right away, the government was likely to undo the opportunity in a short time. The organization I worked with was able to make changes because they were able to show the people how they could consolidate their gains in ways that the government would have difficulty rescinding and they were able to show government officials improvements in the situation that outweighed the benefits the officials might get from corrupt deals that reversed it (partly by making it clear that they would publicize it thoroughly throughout both that third world country and to elected officials in Washington, DC...since the people doing this were American citizens who could not easily be dismissed as terrorists or terrorist sympanthizers, there was no easy way for local government officials to threaten them or otherwise nuetralize them).
You are aware that Woz no longer works for Apple, right? For that matter, I am pretty sure that he either doesn't work for anyone or whoever he works for, he is more valuable as a "name" in their employ than for any work product he produces.
Slashdot Mirror
So, they tested wells 5 km from the fracking site and they tested wells close to the site. That is like saying they tested land close to a uranium mine and it had more uranium on it than land further away, that must be a result of the uranium mine. When in actuality, maybe that has something to do with why the mine is there in the first place. I am not saying that the same is the case in this situation. I am saying that until someone does more thorough studies, we do not know that there is not a relationship between why they put these wells where they did and this phenomena.
but it is, IME, pretty solid evidence when you can chart the level of methane in the well water against the distance from the fracking site.
Or perhaps, it is just the distance from a site that was optimal to drill a well that would use the fracking technology. The logic you use is very similar to the logic used by people who were convinced that vaccines caused autism. This does not mean that fracking is not a problem. It just means that you need to actually determine quantitatively what the problem is.
Let's face it, SOME aspect of the fracturing process, whether it be frac water dumping, well casing failure (gotta get that pressurized water down there somehow), or the (far less likely but not yet confirmed to be impossible) slight possibility those fractures are of much greater extent than expected, is contaminating wells on a widespread basis.
Actually, that is not the case. We do not know what the incidence of methane in the water was in those wells before the gas companies started fracking (at least based on both of the articles linked to in the summary). We do not even know what the incience of methane in water wells near other, non-fracking gas wells is. Until we have at least a proxy for an answer to those questions, we will be unable to evaluate the level of risk that fracking brings and if it actually is causing a problem. Additionally, with that information, we will be able to determine how to ameliorate the problem.
There is a basic problem with the study as reported in both articles. There is no comparison to the amount of methane in the water from wells in the vicinity of gas wells that do not use fracking. This means that the methane may be in the ground water, whether or not fracking is used. Without knowing the amount of methane that was in the water in these wells before the fracking started, or having a comparison to ground water near gas wells where fracking is not used, we are unable to accurately evaluate the level of risk from fracking without knowing the answer to this question.
Have we not learned anything from the various anti-progress "studies" that have been done in the past? This does not mean that this study is anti-progress, it just means that there is further information necessary before we jump to conclusions.
I have found that whether or not a comment on a subject gets modded down or up on Slashdot depends on two things. The first is the article it follows and the wording of the summary. I can't define it, but when I read a summary on Slashdot that bears on one of the hot button topics (Apple products, Linux, religion, etc) I can usually tell if which direction the discussion will lean. The second, depending on which side of the issue has mod points and is on Slashdot. I have seen comments on one thread get modded troll and on another thread a very similar comment will get modded +5 Insightful/Informative.
All of that is to say that while Slashdot's moderation system isn't perfect, it works out pretty well. While there are a few people on both sides of just about every issue who will mod people down just because they disagree, most people on Slashdot actually wish to hear the opinions of those who disagree with them on a topic.
Jeremy Clarkson of the BBC show Top Gear was ecstatic to get around the Nurburgring track in 10 minutes in a diesel Jaguar. So, I would say that, yes it is a particularly tortuous track.
That was kind of what I was getting at. I am glad to see someone else agrees.
Failing to see road signs is a completely different phenomena than forgetting why you went into the store. I rarely miss a street sign, but with significant frequency I forget why I went to the store.
Actually, the portion of the population that tend to be most strongly opposed to helping the less fortunate tend to vote Democratic. As a general rule, Democrats want the government to take care of the less fortunate so that they don't have to feel guilty about not doing anything for them themselves. All you have to do to recognize this is look at charitable giving according to political party affiliation.
I forgot to mention, it is at the intersection of a dirt road and a paved road that is barely wide enough for two cars.
I am about to move to an area that is fairly far out of in the boonies, but I will be choosing between cable and FIOS for my Internet connection at the new place. A friend of mine lives in downtown San Jose, Ca, the best he can do is really poor DSL. He is pissed at me.
That has actually been tried. In addition, several municipalities sued gun manufacturers for selling guns used in crimes. I do not remember if that got to the Supreme Court or if it was knocked down by Circuit Courts (if the latter it was at least two). I suspect (and hope) that this case will have similar results.
"the real hurdle is convincing people that a non-lawyer is entitled to call out a federal judge on their logic in the first place."
No, the real hurdle is convincing people that someone who has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of an ability to reason logically is entitled to call anyone out on their logic.
I do know of places that sell off bulk lots of used computer equipment. I am sure that they have laptops from time to time (if not all of the time).
This device is $25, the Trim-Slice device starts at $199. At $25, I'm willing to forgive a lot. At $200, I can get a fully functioning laptop (used).
Yeah, but Wordperfect's MakeItFit feature would expand it to fit as well as shrink it to fit. If you typed a paper that needed to be 7 pages, but what you wrote was only 5 pages MakeItFit would increase font size and adjust margins to make it work out. I loved that feature.
NO, the main point is installing GPS devices in every vehicle so as to be able to track where people actually go. So far any of these proposals that have gotten further than, "We should consider taxing vehicles based on how many miles they travel," have included a provision that every car have a GPS installed to track how many miles they travel (supposedly to distinguish between miles traveled on roads where the tax applies and roads where the tax does not apply). This is about tracking people, not about tax revenue.
In what way is Google creating platform lock-in? I am not saying that they aren't, I just haven't read anything that suggests that they are (and I have read several stories that indicate they are spending extra money to ensure that users of some of their products are not locked in).
You do know that there is an amazingly simple way to separate the salt from the water, right? It is called evaporation.
Actually, Frederick Pohl is one of the science fiction authors who did a very good job of placing his plots within the realm of possibility according to scientific theory of the time that he wrote the story. At one time there was a fairly large subsegment of science fiction authors who did this. I do not know if scientific theory has changed in such a way as to make the ideas in the Gateway series obsolete, but at the time it was written it was withing the realm of possibility (although no technology could at that time be conceived that would allow it).
You make some good points. However, the reason that legalizing marjuana scored so highly on the "open gov" site set up by the government in the U.S. was because groups associated with promoting legalizing marijuana "trolled" the site to push that issue. That doesn't mean that legalizing marijuana is a bad idea (my opinion on that switches back and forth over time), it just means that people who want marijuana legalized made a concerted effort to get the idea to poll highly on the site, some of the tactics used were calculated to make the issue appear to have greater support than it actually does.
As to your main point, you are correct that there are several studies that show that if you get a group to make a decision in a manner where the charisma of individual members is prevented from influencing decisions the group has a tendency to make better decisions than any other decision making system.
Remember there is a difference betwen iOS and OS X.
For now.
Better to pay the EU billions than allow a competitor into their market space.
Well, since I believe that government assistance programs will never make a significant positive impact on poverty, we are obviously never going to agree. I have worked with several organizations that help the impoverished, both in the U.S. and in third world countries. Even in third world countries, where the majority of the poor are poor through no fault of their own, I observed that the majority of the poor did not know the types of behavior that would help them get out of their situation. In the parts of one third world country where I worked with an organization, the poor would not have been able to get themselves out of their poverty without the pressure on the government from the organization. However, the changes that the government made (allowing the residents to obtain property rights, extending the public sewer system, improving the local roads, etc) had been tried in nearby areas and failed, because there had not been a concurrent effort working with the poor showing them how to make long term improvements in their lives rather than squandering the improvements on short term pleasures. Of course the reason that the poor in that area had a tendency to squander on short term pleasures was a history in that country of these advances being temporary and if you did not cash out right away, the government was likely to undo the opportunity in a short time. The organization I worked with was able to make changes because they were able to show the people how they could consolidate their gains in ways that the government would have difficulty rescinding and they were able to show government officials improvements in the situation that outweighed the benefits the officials might get from corrupt deals that reversed it (partly by making it clear that they would publicize it thoroughly throughout both that third world country and to elected officials in Washington, DC...since the people doing this were American citizens who could not easily be dismissed as terrorists or terrorist sympanthizers, there was no easy way for local government officials to threaten them or otherwise nuetralize them).
You are aware that Woz no longer works for Apple, right? For that matter, I am pretty sure that he either doesn't work for anyone or whoever he works for, he is more valuable as a "name" in their employ than for any work product he produces.