This is what we need. Laws could never be passed in a system like this if they were not supported by the majority of the people, yet most of the time it would still function like a standard representative democracy.
Yeah, building on an insult of the Europeans gps-program, which spawned insults about Americans lack of geography skills, which led to insults about Canadas insignicans as a neighbour of the US.
After all that, you notice the insults towards Mexicans and their relative poverty? I wonder who's being the disrespectful racist here... Don't you think Mexicans can take it like everyone else?
If I serve you a meal every day that weighs less than 1% of your body weight and have that meal concist of less than 1% arsenic, it shouldn't do any harm to you, right?
But seriously man, what kind of education do you have? You might think what you just posted was witty, but actually, it was empty rethoric that will never work on anyone with some basic understanding of the atmosphere works. No, I will not teach you why, go back to school.
Exactly, this is what happens in Sweden. We have pretty strict laws about connecting stuff to the grid etc, and I'd say thats a good thing. It forces those who want to invest to cooperate and buy one of those +1MW turbines. Their efficiency is so much better, the cost per kW is so much lower and because of the high investment, people are better at researching exactly where to put them.
Those small turbines are just a waste of materials, they can never compete with the big ones, and as such, they will never be good investments or truly green. They're only good for offloading the grid in extremely remote locations or for giving home owners that cozy DIY feeling.
It's basically the same as international waters, it depends on what flag you're flying. The owner is american, and that means the satellite is a tiny part of america. Thus, american patents apply to it.
But people who are not farmers are rarely the ones who starve. And when they are, they will live in socities that depend heavily on agriculture. If food prices go up, they will be in a better position as well.
Yes, the ones that DO starve might starve harder if the rich part of the world are too cheap to increase aid according to increasing food prices...
But the ones that are close the starvation will be able to avoid it simply because their economies are based heavily on agriculture, and that in turn will make them richer as prices go up. Richer people can afford education, and education is an important part of democracy, and democracy is THE cure for starvation.
Yes, but climate change as fast as what we've seen recently is very rare, and it happens just as the civilization is becomming truly global, meaning we can't just migrate. Not to mention that starvation is something most people have never experienced, unlike previous centuries.
That's exactly what I thought before I tried it. Really, just try it. Never close anything. I don't think there's really a limit to how many tabs you can have open. I sometimes have around ten tabs in every window and around 10 windows. That's 100 tabs right there.
But I suppose this is why some of us keep all sorts of junk on our computer desktop and others prefer to keep everything tucked away or atleast in folders on the desktop. Some of us just likes living in a mess.
No, you're the one missing something. You're not a good communicator just because your buddies understand you or because everyone who speaks your language understands you. Now, if the message you're sending out is directed at a specific group and that group doesn't understand the language you're speaking, you have utterly failed.
The articles headline says "Clueless Guys Can't Read Women" and that just isn't fair, its just half the truth. The full truth is that there are always two parties responsible for a failed communication. If you really want to find a scapegoat, it has to be the one sending out the message, which would be the women in this case. If it was a political article and the author openly admitted to pushing some kind of agenda, it would have been acceptable, but come on, this is science. It's supposed to be objective.
What's worse is that a stupid headline like that was not spawned out of lack of space or anything like that, but pure and simple sexism. In our society, it's accepted that women are good communicators, and if communications fail between a man and a woman, its the man who is to blame. The article tries to reinforce that idea, even though the research doesn't support it at all.
A lunar or martian space elevator could possibly be built with current materials. And when it comes to extracting resources from asteroids, some argue that a space elevator design is the only way to do it.
So will we see space elevators in our lifetime? No one knows. But it's not at all impossible. On earth however, your estimate is probably correct.
But do read up on lunar space elevators, its a very interesting concept:
What you're saying reminds me of that quote by Gallileo:
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
What you say is true from an outsiders perspective, but that means nothing for us. You might be wondering what God has to do with this, but you sound exactly like people who shrug at any issue and say "inshallah".
Really? So I guess we'll see FPS players migrating to Wii now, huh? Seriously, what kind of mouse do you use if you think the wiimote is on par with a mouse? The And what keyboard setup do you use if you think those buttons compare to a keyboard?
But yeah, fighters, I'll give you that. They're mostly about doing specific combinations as fast as possible, and for those games, consoles are great.
Well, it's cool that we can find proof of any kind of molecules on extrasolar planets, but I'm still waiting for the discovery of O2 on an extra solar planet, that will be the discovery of the century. Methane is not so cool.
Um... If there's any political goal of the olympics, I'd say its to allow countries to demonstrate their greatness by other means than war. It's about peace, not freedom(tm).
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but I don't see where it says this would only give you liberal opinions if you read the liberal-tagged news. On the contrary, it will give you what other liberals blog about, and that is probably more often than not things that they do not agree with.
Besides, it does say it offers the option to see things "from the other side" by giving you the same story but with the oposite tag, and that could be very useful.
Well, IPv4 is ultimately the reason why people have NATs, and from my experience, most people with a NAT do occtionally run into problems. But these people could never guess that their problems are caused by the NAT and could be solved by simply getting more IPs.
For this reason, you rarely see people picking ISPs that offer more IPs and that means IPv6 comes along slowly. From the ISPs point of veiw, supply of IPs is greater than demand.
Its like people who use a terrible OS (and I'm not even talking Vista here, but more like win 98 or something) and get viruses and all sorts of malware. They don't seem to understand that all those issues they're having with their computer is not something you have to put up with, that there is a solution. This makes demand for really good OSes relatively low.
Who says everyone will be investing? Obviously, some people will be richer than others, and generally, the older you are, the richer you will be simply because your experience is worth more and you will have saved for a longer period. For this reason, most people will be working, but of the oldest 10%, very few will be working.
I didn't say just investing either, I said good investments. Even in an economy that is not growing, you can still make good investments. The only thing different from a rapidly growing economy is that not all investments are good.
And who says the economy can't grow without population growth? Sure, it will grow slower, but advancing technology, improving infrastructure etc., will still allow it to grow. Infact, the reason why people in third world countries get more children than in the 1st world is that children in the third world is a good investment. In other words, children contribute to the economy. In the first world however, studying and working hard is a much more effective way to invest your time. Thus, the economy builds upon itself rather than on the backs of new people.
Besides, growing populations really has nothing to do with this, a population can stop growing even with out no aging, and isn't more likely to stop growing because there is no aging.
And lastly, why do you assume that everyone will be retiring before 100? That has nothing to do with this discussion. We're not talking about eternal life, we're talking about removing aging. People would retire when they where rich enough. This would happen one day for nearly everyone. For some it might take ten years, for others a few hundred years, for still others thounsands of years. And occationally, people would be pulled out of their retirement because their investments failed.
Most likely, it will be an alternative for countries who want to start their own nuclear programs for domestic needs. Some people will call it an imperialistic way of keeping the powerful tools out of the hands of poor people, others will say its simply a way to make the world safer.
Well, I think you're being a bit naive here. The question is, what is the US governments plan here? If global energy was the issue, I'm sure it would save more to just build standard large scale plants at home. As the parent pointed out, there's something strange going on when a country all of sudden gets an interest in solving other countries problems, especially when the solutions are this complicated, risky and probably expensive.
Personally, I think the idea here is to simply offer these to Iran and similar countries and say "we offer these for a fair price if you stop your nuclear program" with the unspoken alternative being war. But you never know.
Slashdot Mirror
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representative_direct_democracy
This is what we need. Laws could never be passed in a system like this if they were not supported by the majority of the people, yet most of the time it would still function like a standard representative democracy.
Your view is the first truly scientific and tolerant I've seen stated here. Every child deserves parents like you.
Yeah, building on an insult of the Europeans gps-program, which spawned insults about Americans lack of geography skills, which led to insults about Canadas insignicans as a neighbour of the US.
After all that, you notice the insults towards Mexicans and their relative poverty? I wonder who's being the disrespectful racist here... Don't you think Mexicans can take it like everyone else?
I see. Well, in that case...
If I serve you a meal every day that weighs less than 1% of your body weight and have that meal concist of less than 1% arsenic, it shouldn't do any harm to you, right?
But seriously man, what kind of education do you have? You might think what you just posted was witty, but actually, it was empty rethoric that will never work on anyone with some basic understanding of the atmosphere works. No, I will not teach you why, go back to school.
Photons can be called particles.
Exactly, this is what happens in Sweden. We have pretty strict laws about connecting stuff to the grid etc, and I'd say thats a good thing. It forces those who want to invest to cooperate and buy one of those +1MW turbines. Their efficiency is so much better, the cost per kW is so much lower and because of the high investment, people are better at researching exactly where to put them.
Those small turbines are just a waste of materials, they can never compete with the big ones, and as such, they will never be good investments or truly green. They're only good for offloading the grid in extremely remote locations or for giving home owners that cozy DIY feeling.
It's basically the same as international waters, it depends on what flag you're flying. The owner is american, and that means the satellite is a tiny part of america. Thus, american patents apply to it.
But people who are not farmers are rarely the ones who starve. And when they are, they will live in socities that depend heavily on agriculture. If food prices go up, they will be in a better position as well.
Yes, the ones that DO starve might starve harder if the rich part of the world are too cheap to increase aid according to increasing food prices...
But the ones that are close the starvation will be able to avoid it simply because their economies are based heavily on agriculture, and that in turn will make them richer as prices go up. Richer people can afford education, and education is an important part of democracy, and democracy is THE cure for starvation.
Yes, but climate change as fast as what we've seen recently is very rare, and it happens just as the civilization is becomming truly global, meaning we can't just migrate. Not to mention that starvation is something most people have never experienced, unlike previous centuries.
So yes, I'd say this is pretty new.
Why are high food prices a danger?
That's exactly what I thought before I tried it. Really, just try it. Never close anything. I don't think there's really a limit to how many tabs you can have open. I sometimes have around ten tabs in every window and around 10 windows. That's 100 tabs right there.
But I suppose this is why some of us keep all sorts of junk on our computer desktop and others prefer to keep everything tucked away or atleast in folders on the desktop. Some of us just likes living in a mess.
No, you're the one missing something. You're not a good communicator just because your buddies understand you or because everyone who speaks your language understands you. Now, if the message you're sending out is directed at a specific group and that group doesn't understand the language you're speaking, you have utterly failed.
The articles headline says "Clueless Guys Can't Read Women" and that just isn't fair, its just half the truth. The full truth is that there are always two parties responsible for a failed communication. If you really want to find a scapegoat, it has to be the one sending out the message, which would be the women in this case. If it was a political article and the author openly admitted to pushing some kind of agenda, it would have been acceptable, but come on, this is science. It's supposed to be objective.
What's worse is that a stupid headline like that was not spawned out of lack of space or anything like that, but pure and simple sexism. In our society, it's accepted that women are good communicators, and if communications fail between a man and a woman, its the man who is to blame. The article tries to reinforce that idea, even though the research doesn't support it at all.
A lunar or martian space elevator could possibly be built with current materials. And when it comes to extracting resources from asteroids, some argue that a space elevator design is the only way to do it.
So will we see space elevators in our lifetime? No one knows. But it's not at all impossible. On earth however, your estimate is probably correct.
But do read up on lunar space elevators, its a very interesting concept:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_space_elevator
What you're saying reminds me of that quote by Gallileo:
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use."
What you say is true from an outsiders perspective, but that means nothing for us. You might be wondering what God has to do with this, but you sound exactly like people who shrug at any issue and say "inshallah".
Really? So I guess we'll see FPS players migrating to Wii now, huh? Seriously, what kind of mouse do you use if you think the wiimote is on par with a mouse? The And what keyboard setup do you use if you think those buttons compare to a keyboard?
But yeah, fighters, I'll give you that. They're mostly about doing specific combinations as fast as possible, and for those games, consoles are great.
It's funny, you were modded troll even though what you said is both true and relevant. We really need to rename that planet.
Well, it's cool that we can find proof of any kind of molecules on extrasolar planets, but I'm still waiting for the discovery of O2 on an extra solar planet, that will be the discovery of the century. Methane is not so cool.
Um... If there's any political goal of the olympics, I'd say its to allow countries to demonstrate their greatness by other means than war. It's about peace, not freedom(tm).
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this, but I don't see where it says this would only give you liberal opinions if you read the liberal-tagged news. On the contrary, it will give you what other liberals blog about, and that is probably more often than not things that they do not agree with.
Besides, it does say it offers the option to see things "from the other side" by giving you the same story but with the oposite tag, and that could be very useful.
Put some of these into fights:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foster-Miller_TALON
And I would watch it.
Well, IPv4 is ultimately the reason why people have NATs, and from my experience, most people with a NAT do occtionally run into problems. But these people could never guess that their problems are caused by the NAT and could be solved by simply getting more IPs.
For this reason, you rarely see people picking ISPs that offer more IPs and that means IPv6 comes along slowly. From the ISPs point of veiw, supply of IPs is greater than demand.
Its like people who use a terrible OS (and I'm not even talking Vista here, but more like win 98 or something) and get viruses and all sorts of malware. They don't seem to understand that all those issues they're having with their computer is not something you have to put up with, that there is a solution. This makes demand for really good OSes relatively low.
Who says everyone will be investing? Obviously, some people will be richer than others, and generally, the older you are, the richer you will be simply because your experience is worth more and you will have saved for a longer period. For this reason, most people will be working, but of the oldest 10%, very few will be working.
I didn't say just investing either, I said good investments. Even in an economy that is not growing, you can still make good investments. The only thing different from a rapidly growing economy is that not all investments are good.
And who says the economy can't grow without population growth? Sure, it will grow slower, but advancing technology, improving infrastructure etc., will still allow it to grow. Infact, the reason why people in third world countries get more children than in the 1st world is that children in the third world is a good investment. In other words, children contribute to the economy. In the first world however, studying and working hard is a much more effective way to invest your time.
Thus, the economy builds upon itself rather than on the backs of new people.
Besides, growing populations really has nothing to do with this, a population can stop growing even with out no aging, and isn't more likely to stop growing because there is no aging.
And lastly, why do you assume that everyone will be retiring before 100? That has nothing to do with this discussion. We're not talking about eternal life, we're talking about removing aging. People would retire when they where rich enough. This would happen one day for nearly everyone. For some it might take ten years, for others a few hundred years, for still others thounsands of years. And occationally, people would be pulled out of their retirement because their investments failed.
Most likely, it will be an alternative for countries who want to start their own nuclear programs for domestic needs. Some people will call it an imperialistic way of keeping the powerful tools out of the hands of poor people, others will say its simply a way to make the world safer.
Well, I think you're being a bit naive here. The question is, what is the US governments plan here? If global energy was the issue, I'm sure it would save more to just build standard large scale plants at home. As the parent pointed out, there's something strange going on when a country all of sudden gets an interest in solving other countries problems, especially when the solutions are this complicated, risky and probably expensive.
Personally, I think the idea here is to simply offer these to Iran and similar countries and say "we offer these for a fair price if you stop your nuclear program" with the unspoken alternative being war. But you never know.