yes, I will tell it to people who are idiots in keeping their plant operations.
"Oh, well they just employed idiots" is no comfort when a disaster actually happens. Employing idiots and opportunists seems to be the norm at nuclear power plants. I'm a big nuclear booster, yet I feel at this point you absolutely have to assume that the people working at the plants will be corrupt, slackers, incompetent, or all of the above.
Guy says nuclear isn't all that'due to mining and transportation, dude responds with talk about radioactivity and also says it's too cloudy for solar in America. Guy points out solar works in Germany, which is cloudier than America. Dude responds with talk about subsidies.
That's because talk about subsidies is bringing the argument back on topic, after the AC derailed it with his fox news story link. It's not "shifting goalposts," it's someone else not getting distracted by fluff that has little bearing on the topic at hand.
That's ridiculous. Germany isn't paying/subsidizing people to break windows or other net-negative value endeavors
No, but what they -are- doing is replacing a cheaper form of power with a much more expensive form of power. The actual electricity and value coming into the home is the same, the end customer simply pays more for it, thus having less money with which to do what they want.
I don't have numbers handy, but I'd also estimate that a larger percentage of that money is sent out of the country, making it a loss from a different economic model as well.
I don't know why you saw all that; I saw nothing like that when I visited (Safari with pop-up & flash blocke... oh)...
Yeah. There is a website I go to that I really like. They do good work on it, it's informative, etc.
However, they have mixed ads. Some are static images, others... well, there would be flash ads there if I didn't block flash by default. It's replaced with alt text saying "we rely on ad revenues to keep the website running. Please add us to your whitelist!" For flash ads? No thanks. If they want more advertising revenue, they can replace the flash ads with static ads and I'll see the ads again.
I don't read crap from blogs from delusional skeptics.
Except it's the non-skeptics who are delusional: homeopaths, chiropractors, religious people, astrologers etc. It's quite difficult to have negative delusions.
I don't think it's that difficult. There are a fair number of "moon landing hoax" believers, and "9/11 Truthers" seems to be all the rage now in conspiracy circles. Maybe it involves taking what could be a negative belief and turn it into a "positive" one, something to believe in rather than something to deny. Like "the moon landing just didn't happen" resonates less than "There is a large conspiracy in the circles of government to make you believe that the moon landing happened."
Awful special effects? Aside from the implausible eye-bugging scenes, the effects are pretty good, at least for the time. It won a Special Achievement Oscar (this was the last time there was no "Best Visual Effects" category) in 1991 for its effects, beating out the runners-up Back to the Future III, Dick Tracy, and Ghost. Not terrible use of miniatures, one of the last big effects movies to not make extensive use of CGI.
nope. just watched my 89 year old grand father in a wheelchair put in a chokehold, you asshole. i'd shove my foot so far up your sour grapes, you won't remember what year it is.
Uhhhh, cool story bro? What does it have to do with the topic at hand?
I posted an article in another response the the St. Mary's frosh week incident. When the girls were asked why they participated they said they weren't feminist so it didn't matter to them.
Ugh. I'm trying to find the upside to that Nova Scotia chant and it doesn't seem like there is one, nor does it seem like people are overreacting to it. It seems like a cheerful chant in support of raping underage girls in an area which has a high proportion of sexual assault.
That doesn't seem like anti-feminism, that's just nasty. You don't have to be a feminist to be against it.:-/
There seem to be a lot of moderators (or one very active one) who are abusing the moderation system on this particular article. It's not just you, I've seen several posts now in this story marked as troll for the simple sin of "this guy said something positive about an OS I dislike, or something negative about the OS I like."
But there were bystanders around who had called the police. They very well could have stepped in if the fight got out of hand.
Are you serious? Brian Stow suffered potentially fatal (instead, "just" lifetime brain damage) head wounds when he was jumped in the parking lot of Dodger Stadium after a Giants/Dodgers game. Lots of people being around didn't help him out, especially when it takes just one or two blows to cause enough head/brain trauma to kill someone. It's called The Bystander Effect, and it's worth a read.
1) Adding more to the national debt than even Monkey Boy Dubya did - Check
I could check it to see if those numbers are correct, adjusted for inflation, but I'm a bit too lazy, and I suspect you're correct on point #1 anyway. The housing meltdown happened the year Obama was elected, I don't think I can quite blame him for that. I suppose he could have fiddled while the economy burned to the ground, but some people hold their presidents to higher standards.
2) Failed to end wars in Iraq/Afghanistan despite campaign promise - Check
Iraq is long ended, Afghanistan has been winding down for a long time. Nothing much going on over there anymore except for the occasional terrorist strike, and I could see that existing forever.
3) Didn't shut down Gitmo despite campaign promise - Check
Amazing what a congressional cut of funding can do with your ability to act. Could Obama have done more if he really wanted to pull out all the stops? Probably.
4) Signed the extension to the warrantless wiretapping programming despite claiming to be against it before becoming president - Check
5) Enormously expanded the scope NSA surveillance over the general public - Check
These are big ones. Along with the drone programs / extraordinary rendition that he also didn't stop, I'd say those are his greatest failings as president.
6) Starting even more skirmishes in the Middle East that the US has no part in being in - Check
Libya turned out surprisingly well. I was worried we'd get bogged down there. I don't think I want Syria intervention, it seems like a far worse situation for everyone.
This case had nothing to do with race and everything to do with defending oneself against an aggressor. Anyone who brought race into it was a racist. The only reason this even went to court is because racists are trying to make it where you can't defend yourself if your aggressor is black.
Hold on, hold on. Look, I think Zimmerman's story was the true one, and that the jury got it right, but you can't deny that the circumstances leading up to the incident were racially charged. Trayvon used an incorrect racial slur regarding Zimmerman. Zimmerman followed Trayvon because he profiled him, partly based on race. There were even reasons why racially profiling Trayvon wasn't unreasonable (there was a rash of break-ins in the neighborhood, a month earlier Zimmerman had caught a young black man breaking into a neighbor's home, Trayvon wasn't familiar and Zimmerman thought he looked like he was casing all the houses). And to say that anyone who mentions race with the case is a racist?
The jury took into account the stand-your-ground law.
The oft-referenced stand-your-ground law actually had little bearing on this case. It was ordinary self-defense, and there's no state in the nation where you cannot use lethal force if an assailant is using lethal force. A stand-your-ground law doesn't need to come into question. Now if Trayvon ran towards him and Zimmerman shot him before he got there, that would be a definite Stand Your Ground case (and a truly ugly one at that...), but those aren't the circumstances of the events as determined by the courts.
Based on the evidence alone, there was no justification for killing in self-defense
If your head is being repeatedly slammed into the pavement, you have every reason to think you're about to die.
this won't ever happen, but I'd love to have a legal reason to kick your ass
you're a bully...bullies are shirveled little half/men deep inside...they have to push others down to make themselves feel worthy
So if someone attacks you... you're a bully if you defend yourself. And you fully admit you wish you could bully him for his statements. This is strange reasoning. This entire thread, almost every post, feels like "black = white, up = down."
You do know that all amendments are not equals, they are not sacred, and that people have the right to prefer some over others, right ? An amendment could even be canceled by a new amendments if enough people support it.
The only time to disregard an amendment is if another amendment counters it. Otherwise, that's pretty close to sacred, yes.
Slashdot Mirror
yes, I will tell it to people who are idiots in keeping their plant operations.
"Oh, well they just employed idiots" is no comfort when a disaster actually happens. Employing idiots and opportunists seems to be the norm at nuclear power plants.
I'm a big nuclear booster, yet I feel at this point you absolutely have to assume that the people working at the plants will be corrupt, slackers, incompetent, or all of the above.
Guy says nuclear isn't all that'due to mining and transportation, dude responds with talk about radioactivity and also says it's too cloudy for solar in America. Guy points out solar works in Germany, which is cloudier than America. Dude responds with talk about subsidies.
That's because talk about subsidies is bringing the argument back on topic, after the AC derailed it with his fox news story link.
It's not "shifting goalposts," it's someone else not getting distracted by fluff that has little bearing on the topic at hand.
That's ridiculous. Germany isn't paying/subsidizing people to break windows or other net-negative value endeavors
No, but what they -are- doing is replacing a cheaper form of power with a much more expensive form of power. The actual electricity and value coming into the home is the same, the end customer simply pays more for it, thus having less money with which to do what they want.
I don't have numbers handy, but I'd also estimate that a larger percentage of that money is sent out of the country, making it a loss from a different economic model as well.
I don't know why you saw all that; I saw nothing like that when I visited (Safari with pop-up & flash blocke... oh)...
Yeah. There is a website I go to that I really like. They do good work on it, it's informative, etc.
However, they have mixed ads. Some are static images, others ... well, there would be flash ads there if I didn't block flash by default. It's replaced with alt text saying "we rely on ad revenues to keep the website running. Please add us to your whitelist!" For flash ads? No thanks. If they want more advertising revenue, they can replace the flash ads with static ads and I'll see the ads again.
I don't read crap from blogs from delusional skeptics.
Except it's the non-skeptics who are delusional: homeopaths, chiropractors, religious people, astrologers etc. It's quite difficult to have negative delusions.
I don't think it's that difficult. There are a fair number of "moon landing hoax" believers, and "9/11 Truthers" seems to be all the rage now in conspiracy circles.
Maybe it involves taking what could be a negative belief and turn it into a "positive" one, something to believe in rather than something to deny. Like "the moon landing just didn't happen" resonates less than "There is a large conspiracy in the circles of government to make you believe that the moon landing happened."
You're clearly not a parent. It's more fun because one of the greatest joys a parent can have is fucking with their kids.
What unfortunate phrasing. :-(
Bah, kids these days! I was born in 1975... maybe I should raise my kids as if it was still the 70's.
Quick! Parents are upstairs doing their stuff, let's go downstairs and watch Star Blazers on the 10" TV there.
Awful special effects? Aside from the implausible eye-bugging scenes, the effects are pretty good, at least for the time. It won a Special Achievement Oscar (this was the last time there was no "Best Visual Effects" category) in 1991 for its effects, beating out the runners-up Back to the Future III, Dick Tracy, and Ghost. Not terrible use of miniatures, one of the last big effects movies to not make extensive use of CGI.
What the hell are they if they aren't conservative?
They favor government intervention, just intervention in the areas they feel are most important, or have some economic interest in.
nope. just watched my 89 year old grand father in a wheelchair put in a chokehold, you asshole. i'd shove my foot so far up your sour grapes, you won't remember what year it is.
Uhhhh, cool story bro? What does it have to do with the topic at hand?
Which people? From what I've read, you could be talking about pretty much all the parties involved.
Except for the 9-year-old. It's the 9-year-old who doesn't care about what all the fuss is about, no surprise.
I posted an article in another response the the St. Mary's frosh week incident. When the girls were asked why they participated they said they weren't feminist so it didn't matter to them.
Ugh. I'm trying to find the upside to that Nova Scotia chant and it doesn't seem like there is one, nor does it seem like people are overreacting to it. It seems like a cheerful chant in support of raping underage girls in an area which has a high proportion of sexual assault.
That doesn't seem like anti-feminism, that's just nasty. You don't have to be a feminist to be against it. :-/
And they were right. It's not OK.
I would at least want "Oh" instead of "OK."
Oh, I have many a fond memory of using xv. That was a fun media viewer.
My comment was modded as "Troll"???
Really? Seriously??
There seem to be a lot of moderators (or one very active one) who are abusing the moderation system on this particular article. It's not just you, I've seen several posts now in this story marked as troll for the simple sin of "this guy said something positive about an OS I dislike, or something negative about the OS I like."
But there were bystanders around who had called the police. They very well could have stepped in if the fight got out of hand.
Are you serious? Brian Stow suffered potentially fatal (instead, "just" lifetime brain damage) head wounds when he was jumped in the parking lot of Dodger Stadium after a Giants/Dodgers game. Lots of people being around didn't help him out, especially when it takes just one or two blows to cause enough head/brain trauma to kill someone. It's called The Bystander Effect, and it's worth a read.
Did Anne Frank try to beat beat the entirety of Nazi Germany to death? I must have been sick that day.
That sounds "wicked sick." I want to see that movie.
of trying to stand your ground when dealing with bigoted stalkers that don't like it when their blacks get all uppity.
The George Zimmerman case did demonstrate one important lesson: You don't have the right to assault with lethal force the weird guy walking after you.
Trayvon thought he could take him. He was wrong. Now we move on.
What is Obummer fixing?
1) Adding more to the national debt than even Monkey Boy Dubya did - Check
I could check it to see if those numbers are correct, adjusted for inflation, but I'm a bit too lazy, and I suspect you're correct on point #1 anyway. The housing meltdown happened the year Obama was elected, I don't think I can quite blame him for that. I suppose he could have fiddled while the economy burned to the ground, but some people hold their presidents to higher standards.
2) Failed to end wars in Iraq/Afghanistan despite campaign promise - Check
Iraq is long ended, Afghanistan has been winding down for a long time. Nothing much going on over there anymore except for the occasional terrorist strike, and I could see that existing forever.
3) Didn't shut down Gitmo despite campaign promise - Check
Amazing what a congressional cut of funding can do with your ability to act. Could Obama have done more if he really wanted to pull out all the stops? Probably.
4) Signed the extension to the warrantless wiretapping programming despite claiming to be against it before becoming president - Check
5) Enormously expanded the scope NSA surveillance over the general public - Check
These are big ones. Along with the drone programs / extraordinary rendition that he also didn't stop, I'd say those are his greatest failings as president.
6) Starting even more skirmishes in the Middle East that the US has no part in being in - Check
Libya turned out surprisingly well. I was worried we'd get bogged down there. I don't think I want Syria intervention, it seems like a far worse situation for everyone.
wtf is purple drank?
Recreational drug cocktail
.
He was let down by societies glorification of "the Thug Life".
Oh my God, I wish I had mod points (and hadn't posted a thousand times in this story already).
This alone deserves +5, Informative.
This case had nothing to do with race and everything to do with defending oneself against an aggressor. Anyone who brought race into it was a racist. The only reason this even went to court is because racists are trying to make it where you can't defend yourself if your aggressor is black.
Hold on, hold on. Look, I think Zimmerman's story was the true one, and that the jury got it right, but you can't deny that the circumstances leading up to the incident were racially charged. Trayvon used an incorrect racial slur regarding Zimmerman. Zimmerman followed Trayvon because he profiled him, partly based on race. There were even reasons why racially profiling Trayvon wasn't unreasonable (there was a rash of break-ins in the neighborhood, a month earlier Zimmerman had caught a young black man breaking into a neighbor's home, Trayvon wasn't familiar and Zimmerman thought he looked like he was casing all the houses). And to say that anyone who mentions race with the case is a racist?
Facts are not what they want. Once NBC edited the tapes to make Zimmerman a "White Racist" it was over.
The story is set and all will fall in line.
Zimmerman being a white racist sure would have made a "better story," wouldn't it?
The jury took into account the stand-your-ground law.
The oft-referenced stand-your-ground law actually had little bearing on this case. It was ordinary self-defense, and there's no state in the nation where you cannot use lethal force if an assailant is using lethal force. A stand-your-ground law doesn't need to come into question. Now if Trayvon ran towards him and Zimmerman shot him before he got there, that would be a definite Stand Your Ground case (and a truly ugly one at that...), but those aren't the circumstances of the events as determined by the courts.
Based on the evidence alone, there was no justification for killing in self-defense
If your head is being repeatedly slammed into the pavement, you have every reason to think you're about to die.
this won't ever happen, but I'd love to have a legal reason to kick your ass
you're a bully...bullies are shirveled little half/men deep inside...they have to push others down to make themselves feel worthy
So if someone attacks you... you're a bully if you defend yourself. And you fully admit you wish you could bully him for his statements. This is strange reasoning. This entire thread, almost every post, feels like "black = white, up = down."
You do know that all amendments are not equals, they are not sacred, and that people have the right to prefer some over others, right ? An amendment could even be canceled by a new amendments if enough people support it.
The only time to disregard an amendment is if another amendment counters it.
Otherwise, that's pretty close to sacred, yes.