Yes, but it'll be difficult to fund making ethanol from a plant which is illegal to grow on purpose.
You can't even get pseudoephedrine in legit cold medicines in my home state without signing papers, simply because of homemade meth. How are you going to convince governments like this to legalize growing hemp for fuel, or any other practical use, when it can always be used for the recreational use?
I thought those protests already happened, back when they tried to put methanol in some gasoline blends...
I imagine they'll use the same safeguards with the sawgrass for ethanol that they do with Monsanto's new varieties of corn. [sardonic grin]
(Anyone dare imagine what would happen if Monsanto's "terminator" gene spread to more natural varieties of corn? I mean other than patent violations...)
The energy market is large, but most of the big players are oil companies. Your method might work for things like the article's new methods for ethanol--$X million and flattering press might be enough. But for more radical ideas (think of practical solar-powered cars), you'll likely need grants to get the people most interested in those innovations the money to work toward those innovations.
Have you tried to watch Who Killed the Electric Car?
Fully electric cars are very realistic. For a brief period, they were done commercially. But it's politically improbable to restart that program. Oil companies don't want too many new competitors--or classic publicly-funded competitors--selling fuel, and car companies don't want too many new companies selling cars...
Hydrogen still requires refining and pumps, so it doesn't bother the oil cos. so much. And it still has to be burned, so it doesn't bother car cos. so much.
I myself feel that if hydrogen cars become popular, it'll be an inferno waiting to happen--imagine 200 million Hindenburgs...
Yes, but you can't throw someone in jail just for lying to the American people.
The First Amendment gives some protection to lying to the American people via the newspapers, as long as it isn't provably libeling any particular American people. After all, if only the truth can be published, then what happens if someone manages to legislate definitions of "truth" that don't jibe with reality? How can anyone fight the establishment's view of the world if you can't lie to the American people and the establishment gets to say what's a lie?
What's outright illegal is lying to the American government under oath.
It's true. The system did once have something closer to bottom-up than they do now. (Though even now, I think you could argue that the listeners have some say on who wins American Idol. [sardonic grin])
Perhaps the music industry would be purer if there were still such things as regional record labels. Of course, no one on/. likes region limits, and they aren't quite as practical now--but aside from that, those were more diverse times.
But even in those early days, there were major labels, and the major labels even then influenced DJs from above. The first great rock&roll DJ, Alan Freed, had to leave the DJ biz over payola--back then, labels paid DJs for playing records directly. You can imagine that he wasn't alone.
Above a certain scale, recorded music was never really bottom-up. There were decades when it was much closer to it--before Clearchannel--but never really.
Covert means "hidden."
When she was a covert spy, the world at large didn't know she was a spy at all. The reporters, when they said she was a spy, didn't say that she was a covert spy because the act of reporting that she was a spy broke her cover. It likely didn't occur to them to write, "Her being a spy was news to us."
That's how this sort of thing is supposed to work, right?
And again, she wasn't the one who wrote the op-ed pieces.
Maybe her actions endangered her cover. (The job goes when the cover goes.) But if the administration sped the process, it was being irresponsible. They lost a source of secret info, and it's possible some of it would've been good info.
Of course, we'll never know for sure how much the administration helped break her cover. Scooter Libby was found guilty of muddying that area.
I've heard that that entire CIA bureau was covert (and thus outed).
Anyway, since when should Valerie Plame be responsible for what her husband tells the NY Times op-editor?
And since when should a spy's waging war on the president in the NY Times be a reason for anyone in the executive branch to break that spy's cover illegally? In more creative times, such op-ed pieces could have been a good way to maintain her cover. ("She can't possibly be working that intimately for the government--not when she says such things about it!")
Yowsa.
I have a hard time believing that Shulgin could (and did) do a good job personally testing all the psychedelic drugs. I know he must've, but it boggles me.
Near the end, how could he be sure that he was reacting to the drug he just took and not feeling the effects of an earlier drug flashing over a later, less effective/potent one?
Ah, yes. Now if only Apple had still made Apple//s when those who grew up using them were ready to buy one.
Apple had a huge opportunity with the Apple// in the schools, and squandered it when its successors, the original Macintosh and similar systems, were both too different from Apple//s & too expensive. Liking the idea of Apple Macs wasn't enough to give Apple the market.
If MS isn't careful, they could get in similar hot water with Vista--the "cool" factor might fail to override the inconvenience factors. So it's possible that they're trying to figure out how to work their way out of that corner as profitably as possible.
Oops...you are right, this is better than nothing for the FSF. The timing coincidence may even help, I realize...
Oh, and the iPhone hype is on the mainstream media, too.
The Madrid train bombing happened just before an election in Spain.
That election, the Spanish government, for good or ill, changed from one sympathetic to our "war on terror" to one unsympathetic to it.
It is possible that the one affected the other.
To hack into TV stations around the world and broadcast to everyone programs guaranteed to peacefully kill braincells and up world consumption of everything? To aid the RIAA in its world domination schemes? [sardonic grin]
And Yahoo!Mail now has unlimited storage, plus links to a blog site (for public storage--complete with photo album option) and what used to be Flicker. Their e-mail folder actually has links for "photos" and "attachments."
It's easier than it looks.
People with severe autism have no social life, for various reasons.
Mice with active cases of "severe autism" likely also have no social life. Keep them in cages with other mice, and it should be easy to tell which mice couldn't care less that there are other mice in their cages.
If an experimental treatment suddenly makes an "autistic" mouse notice and care that there are other mice in its cage, then it is treating the autism.
Is it too much to make sure that the cure not be worse than the disease?
The fella who invented the lobotomy got a Nobel Prize. Lobotomies were very effective at controlling emotions that were otherwise hard to control--this is before the modern psych drug was invented. But it cut a few nerves critical to normal social functioning in the process.
There is also the paradox of anti-depressants spurring suicidal thoughts, and the problem of older anti-depressants depressing every variety of thought. Those drugs were and are very nearly forced on people when the conditions they treat are caught, but I'm not certain that it's always to the best for the patients.
This fragile-X cure also messes with nerves fairly directly. The BBC suggests that this shouldn't make any variants of the lobotomy problem--we're talking redardation-autism, not Aspergerish autism--but some of us do want to be sure the side-effects aren't worse than the disease.
Just write it out, in its entirety, on a giant poster, or engrave it in its entirety on a large metal plaque. Use a large font and all-caps. Cover the engraved GPLv.3 with a cloth until the time of unveiling; then lift the veil, and there it is!
Stallman should probably read it out as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Just what we need--wood-burning cars!
I think that the clean-air groups might have a problem with making all engines diesel...
Yes, but it'll be difficult to fund making ethanol from a plant which is illegal to grow on purpose.
You can't even get pseudoephedrine in legit cold medicines in my home state without signing papers, simply because of homemade meth. How are you going to convince governments like this to legalize growing hemp for fuel, or any other practical use, when it can always be used for the recreational use?
I thought those protests already happened, back when they tried to put methanol in some gasoline blends...
I imagine they'll use the same safeguards with the sawgrass for ethanol that they do with Monsanto's new varieties of corn. [sardonic grin]
(Anyone dare imagine what would happen if Monsanto's "terminator" gene spread to more natural varieties of corn? I mean other than patent violations...)
The energy market is large, but most of the big players are oil companies. Your method might work for things like the article's new methods for ethanol--$X million and flattering press might be enough. But for more radical ideas (think of practical solar-powered cars), you'll likely need grants to get the people most interested in those innovations the money to work toward those innovations.
Have you tried to watch Who Killed the Electric Car?
Fully electric cars are very realistic. For a brief period, they were done commercially. But it's politically improbable to restart that program. Oil companies don't want too many new competitors--or classic publicly-funded competitors--selling fuel, and car companies don't want too many new companies selling cars...
Hydrogen still requires refining and pumps, so it doesn't bother the oil cos. so much. And it still has to be burned, so it doesn't bother car cos. so much.
I myself feel that if hydrogen cars become popular, it'll be an inferno waiting to happen--imagine 200 million Hindenburgs...
Yes, but you can't throw someone in jail just for lying to the American people.
The First Amendment gives some protection to lying to the American people via the newspapers, as long as it isn't provably libeling any particular American people. After all, if only the truth can be published, then what happens if someone manages to legislate definitions of "truth" that don't jibe with reality? How can anyone fight the establishment's view of the world if you can't lie to the American people and the establishment gets to say what's a lie?
What's outright illegal is lying to the American government under oath.
It's true. The system did once have something closer to bottom-up than they do now. (Though even now, I think you could argue that the listeners have some say on who wins American Idol. [sardonic grin]) /. likes region limits, and they aren't quite as practical now--but aside from that, those were more diverse times.
Perhaps the music industry would be purer if there were still such things as regional record labels. Of course, no one on
But even in those early days, there were major labels, and the major labels even then influenced DJs from above. The first great rock&roll DJ, Alan Freed, had to leave the DJ biz over payola--back then, labels paid DJs for playing records directly. You can imagine that he wasn't alone.
Above a certain scale, recorded music was never really bottom-up. There were decades when it was much closer to it--before Clearchannel--but never really.
Last I checked, the NY Times isn't a court of law. It may be unethical to lie in the NY Times, but it's still legal.
Covert means "hidden."
When she was a covert spy, the world at large didn't know she was a spy at all. The reporters, when they said she was a spy, didn't say that she was a covert spy because the act of reporting that she was a spy broke her cover. It likely didn't occur to them to write, "Her being a spy was news to us."
That's how this sort of thing is supposed to work, right?
And again, she wasn't the one who wrote the op-ed pieces.
Maybe her actions endangered her cover. (The job goes when the cover goes.) But if the administration sped the process, it was being irresponsible. They lost a source of secret info, and it's possible some of it would've been good info.
Of course, we'll never know for sure how much the administration helped break her cover. Scooter Libby was found guilty of muddying that area.
I've heard that that entire CIA bureau was covert (and thus outed).
Anyway, since when should Valerie Plame be responsible for what her husband tells the NY Times op-editor?
And since when should a spy's waging war on the president in the NY Times be a reason for anyone in the executive branch to break that spy's cover illegally? In more creative times, such op-ed pieces could have been a good way to maintain her cover. ("She can't possibly be working that intimately for the government--not when she says such things about it!")
And then we will swear in President Dick Cheney. Be careful what you wish for.
iTunes can't be that substantial a thorn. The record labels submit songs to iTunes willingly.
Yowsa.
I have a hard time believing that Shulgin could (and did) do a good job personally testing all the psychedelic drugs. I know he must've, but it boggles me.
Near the end, how could he be sure that he was reacting to the drug he just took and not feeling the effects of an earlier drug flashing over a later, less effective/potent one?
Ah, yes. Now if only Apple had still made Apple //s when those who grew up using them were ready to buy one. // in the schools, and squandered it when its successors, the original Macintosh and similar systems, were both too different from Apple //s & too expensive. Liking the idea of Apple Macs wasn't enough to give Apple the market.
Apple had a huge opportunity with the Apple
If MS isn't careful, they could get in similar hot water with Vista--the "cool" factor might fail to override the inconvenience factors. So it's possible that they're trying to figure out how to work their way out of that corner as profitably as possible.
Oops...you are right, this is better than nothing for the FSF. The timing coincidence may even help, I realize...
Oh, and the iPhone hype is on the mainstream media, too.
Great. So #1 on the list could be a series of top-secret incidents 300 pages long?
You could also say that the incidents on September 11 were flying!
The Madrid train bombing happened just before an election in Spain.
That election, the Spanish government, for good or ill, changed from one sympathetic to our "war on terror" to one unsympathetic to it.
It is possible that the one affected the other.
To hack into TV stations around the world and broadcast to everyone programs guaranteed to peacefully kill braincells and up world consumption of everything? To aid the RIAA in its world domination schemes? [sardonic grin]
And Yahoo!Mail now has unlimited storage, plus links to a blog site (for public storage--complete with photo album option) and what used to be Flicker. Their e-mail folder actually has links for "photos" and "attachments."
It's easier than it looks.
People with severe autism have no social life, for various reasons.
Mice with active cases of "severe autism" likely also have no social life. Keep them in cages with other mice, and it should be easy to tell which mice couldn't care less that there are other mice in their cages.
If an experimental treatment suddenly makes an "autistic" mouse notice and care that there are other mice in its cage, then it is treating the autism.
Is it too much to make sure that the cure not be worse than the disease?
The fella who invented the lobotomy got a Nobel Prize. Lobotomies were very effective at controlling emotions that were otherwise hard to control--this is before the modern psych drug was invented. But it cut a few nerves critical to normal social functioning in the process.
There is also the paradox of anti-depressants spurring suicidal thoughts, and the problem of older anti-depressants depressing every variety of thought. Those drugs were and are very nearly forced on people when the conditions they treat are caught, but I'm not certain that it's always to the best for the patients.
This fragile-X cure also messes with nerves fairly directly. The BBC suggests that this shouldn't make any variants of the lobotomy problem--we're talking redardation-autism, not Aspergerish autism--but some of us do want to be sure the side-effects aren't worse than the disease.
Just write it out, in its entirety, on a giant poster, or engrave it in its entirety on a large metal plaque. Use a large font and all-caps. Cover the engraved GPLv.3 with a cloth until the time of unveiling; then lift the veil, and there it is!
Stallman should probably read it out as well.
And the FSF unveiling GPL v.3 online on the same day Apple is unveiling its iPhone in at&t stores everywhere furthers the goals of Free Software how?