The article even mentions that their telescope was examined to make sure it wasn't a rocket launcher. This jives with what I think would happen if a bunch of guys went out at night with large tube like objects in that country. It does however sound like they still have to deal with light pollution, but from US bases.
As far a children learning to swear I learned from my dad. One of my first complete and correct sentences was "Oh fuck this!". I was about one and a half years old and trying to put together a roof rake (it was the summer) and there was a screw and wing nut to hold it together and I just couldn't get it together. So after a little bit I got frustrated and with a piece of the rake in each hand held it up in the air proclaimed "Oh fuck this!", threw it to the ground, and stomped off.
After reading the article it doesn't sound like this technology is far off as the process sounds similar to things that are already done on an industrial scale. Yes it requires a vacuum chamber, but the ability to deposit the various materials is the same process that is done to deposit the shiny lining on the inside of plastic bags. Also it uses masks to lay the materials down in the correct locations which to me sounds similar to what is done in the semiconductor industry with photo-lithography. Also it doesn't sound like this uses high heat, caustic chemicals, or expensive lenses. So the usual 5-10 years before it comes to market (i.e. we will never see it) doesn't seem to be an issue. Currently the downfall of this tech sounds like its poor efficiency being only around 1% but even that shouldn't be a problem as I mentioned in an older post that 1% of the earth covered with 1% efficient solar cells would meet all of our current energy needs as we receive about 4 orders of magnitude more energy from the sun a day than we use. I didn't see what materials this requires other than the paper substrate so that may also be a limiting factor.
By not crapping in their drinking water they might actually have a source of clean water. A proper outhouse might go quite far in accomplishing this.
I do wonder why something like the basic outhouse won't work. You dig a hole, put a tank* in, built the structure around it. When it gets full either have a truck come and empty it or build a new one. Also when planning an outhouse the best place for it is down stream from your water supply and usually 100' (30 meters) from the well. This way even if the tank leaks it won't contaminate your water supply since it is down stream and a way from it as the dirt acts as a filter.
* The tank can be pretty much made of anything, like an old metal barrel, old plastic barrel, concrete, special formed plastic tank. I have seen all of these used for outhouses.
It appears that the bill failed to pass the house. The final vote was 233 for it 193 against it. Even though it had a simple majority it failed to achieve the two thirds majority required for expedited action. Republicans are expected to try again to pass it shortly but this time requiring only a simple majority.
All I ever get back from most of my representatives is a stand form letter du jour (a different one for each issue), and a request for campaign donations when the next elections comes around since I had contacted them. The only exception I have ever had on this was my local senator to the state of Minnesota (Senate district 37 Chris Gerlach) who actually writes back a letter addressing specific point I bring up. I frequently write, e-mail and call my representatives (each one probably 3-4 times a year) I receive and actually read the Minnesota government publication session weekly so I know what bills have been submitted and what is going on so I am probably the worst kind of constituent for a sitting politician, one that is actually informed and active.
The government cannot force you to do something that the government itself is not constitutionally allowed to do. Any attempt to do so by legislation would be unconstitutional, not a law, never was, IMVHO.
If only this were the case. You do realize that previous to the War on Drugs the last time the government tried to ban a substance they needed a constitutional amendment to do so. The biggest issue is people simply accept what BS the government shovels in them. We finally have started to see some cracks in this with the push back on the Affordable Care Act (otherwise known as Obama Care). Those fighting it may be fighting it for the wrong reasons, don't like Obama, but are fighting against it. Even if one takes the most liberal (not the liberal political view) interpretation of the commerce clause or the general welfare clause of the US constitution it seems the individual mandate is unconstitutional. In my view single payer system would have at least been constitutional since congress has the power to tax and spend and great latitude has been given on what they can tax and what the can spend.
Partially correct. The ones who are really smart get government bailouts when their schemes fail and have people falling over themselves defending them in the media. They even do their work out in the open.
I loved my Easy Bake Oven when I was a child. My mom had a cook book, I think it was a Betty Crocker one, that had conversions for a bunch of the baked goods so you could make them in the Easy Bake. I actually wore the stupid thing out, eventually it got all warped and you couldn't slide the pans in or out. Yes I am a guy and when I was little I wanted to be a chef so this was a near perfect toy.
I was quoting from the article its self. Yes I understand that the bill was passed by a Democratically-controlled Congress. In both cases, when it was passed and now, it was used by politicians for grandstanding.
How about make it run well on on all hardware capable of running XP SP3? You may not get the fancy display bells and whistles (Aero), but the core APIs and should still be the same. This would actually get a lot of people to upgrade. I don't expect fancy display features to work on old hardware, but it would be nice since I have a perfectly good windows machine that I am not going to upgrade since it does what I want for a windows box but would like the added security updates of a more modern OS.
My understanding is that he won it because of the hope of peace he brought. I have a feeling the real reason was because he wasn't Bush. No I am not trying to bash Obama or support Bush, but Obama hadn't done anything at that point especially since the period for nominations had closed only 11 days after Obama had taken office. So what did he do in those 11 days to merit the prize other than not being Bush?
I think the point is that most of those other countries have learned from past mistakes. How about we don't have countries that are actively engaged in egregious human rights violations on the human rights commission. Unfortunately the nuclear weapon genie is out of the bottle and can't be put back in. As much as people like like to beat on the US for our use of nuclear weapons or our massive stockpiles (we probably don't need North Dakota being a world nuclear super power) the simple fact is as long as someone has them we will need them and others will want them. I will even give you this the US does spend too much on its military, personally I would like to say bring all the troops and equipment home. This includes getting out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Korea, Japan, Kuwait, Cuba, Germany, France, England, and any other country we have troops in (probably the better portion of countries in the world). The purpose of the US military is to keep the US safe from foreign threats, specifically invasion. I don't think we have to worry about the UK invading or attacking the US, or just about any other country on Earth, and what threat does Libya pose?
I never said they didn't have their place, but in general it is better to avoid them especially if that is the only tool you know as you end up with code like the old apple soft basic. I think it is like the old adage goes, if all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail, is applicable.
Slashdot Mirror
The article even mentions that their telescope was examined to make sure it wasn't a rocket launcher. This jives with what I think would happen if a bunch of guys went out at night with large tube like objects in that country. It does however sound like they still have to deal with light pollution, but from US bases.
I believe that one of them is your battleships always loses to warriors or pike men.
As far a children learning to swear I learned from my dad. One of my first complete and correct sentences was "Oh fuck this!". I was about one and a half years old and trying to put together a roof rake (it was the summer) and there was a screw and wing nut to hold it together and I just couldn't get it together. So after a little bit I got frustrated and with a piece of the rake in each hand held it up in the air proclaimed "Oh fuck this!", threw it to the ground, and stomped off.
This one is actually vapor ware as the process involves a vapor deposit process.
After reading the article it doesn't sound like this technology is far off as the process sounds similar to things that are already done on an industrial scale. Yes it requires a vacuum chamber, but the ability to deposit the various materials is the same process that is done to deposit the shiny lining on the inside of plastic bags. Also it uses masks to lay the materials down in the correct locations which to me sounds similar to what is done in the semiconductor industry with photo-lithography. Also it doesn't sound like this uses high heat, caustic chemicals, or expensive lenses. So the usual 5-10 years before it comes to market (i.e. we will never see it) doesn't seem to be an issue. Currently the downfall of this tech sounds like its poor efficiency being only around 1% but even that shouldn't be a problem as I mentioned in an older post that 1% of the earth covered with 1% efficient solar cells would meet all of our current energy needs as we receive about 4 orders of magnitude more energy from the sun a day than we use. I didn't see what materials this requires other than the paper substrate so that may also be a limiting factor.
By not crapping in their drinking water they might actually have a source of clean water. A proper outhouse might go quite far in accomplishing this.
I do wonder why something like the basic outhouse won't work. You dig a hole, put a tank* in, built the structure around it. When it gets full either have a truck come and empty it or build a new one. Also when planning an outhouse the best place for it is down stream from your water supply and usually 100' (30 meters) from the well. This way even if the tank leaks it won't contaminate your water supply since it is down stream and a way from it as the dirt acts as a filter.
* The tank can be pretty much made of anything, like an old metal barrel, old plastic barrel, concrete, special formed plastic tank. I have seen all of these used for outhouses.
It appears that the bill failed to pass the house. The final vote was 233 for it 193 against it. Even though it had a simple majority it failed to achieve the two thirds majority required for expedited action. Republicans are expected to try again to pass it shortly but this time requiring only a simple majority.
All I ever get back from most of my representatives is a stand form letter du jour (a different one for each issue), and a request for campaign donations when the next elections comes around since I had contacted them. The only exception I have ever had on this was my local senator to the state of Minnesota (Senate district 37 Chris Gerlach) who actually writes back a letter addressing specific point I bring up. I frequently write, e-mail and call my representatives (each one probably 3-4 times a year) I receive and actually read the Minnesota government publication session weekly so I know what bills have been submitted and what is going on so I am probably the worst kind of constituent for a sitting politician, one that is actually informed and active.
The government cannot force you to do something that the government itself is not constitutionally allowed to do. Any attempt to do so by legislation would be unconstitutional, not a law, never was, IMVHO.
If only this were the case. You do realize that previous to the War on Drugs the last time the government tried to ban a substance they needed a constitutional amendment to do so. The biggest issue is people simply accept what BS the government shovels in them. We finally have started to see some cracks in this with the push back on the Affordable Care Act (otherwise known as Obama Care). Those fighting it may be fighting it for the wrong reasons, don't like Obama, but are fighting against it. Even if one takes the most liberal (not the liberal political view) interpretation of the commerce clause or the general welfare clause of the US constitution it seems the individual mandate is unconstitutional. In my view single payer system would have at least been constitutional since congress has the power to tax and spend and great latitude has been given on what they can tax and what the can spend.
Partially correct. The ones who are really smart get government bailouts when their schemes fail and have people falling over themselves defending them in the media. They even do their work out in the open.
This is necessary to prevent government employees from raping citizens. Please, let's think of the citizens.
FTFY.
This might not be that bad of an idea after all.
You forgot the other root password "terrorism"
I loved my Easy Bake Oven when I was a child. My mom had a cook book, I think it was a Betty Crocker one, that had conversions for a bunch of the baked goods so you could make them in the Easy Bake. I actually wore the stupid thing out, eventually it got all warped and you couldn't slide the pans in or out. Yes I am a guy and when I was little I wanted to be a chef so this was a near perfect toy.
No it just means its time for a distraction. It will probably pass the house, but will probably be completely ignored by the senate.
I was quoting from the article its self. Yes I understand that the bill was passed by a Democratically-controlled Congress. In both cases, when it was passed and now, it was used by politicians for grandstanding.
No it is just grandstanding by Republicans. What a great way to make some hay while ignoring the real issues.
For those who would like to actually read it the bill it is H.R.2417 and here is the complete text of the bill.
How about make it run well on on all hardware capable of running XP SP3? You may not get the fancy display bells and whistles (Aero), but the core APIs and should still be the same. This would actually get a lot of people to upgrade. I don't expect fancy display features to work on old hardware, but it would be nice since I have a perfectly good windows machine that I am not going to upgrade since it does what I want for a windows box but would like the added security updates of a more modern OS.
Why don't I have any mod points today. Parent should be bumped up.
So your saying it is basically some cock waving.
My understanding is that he won it because of the hope of peace he brought. I have a feeling the real reason was because he wasn't Bush. No I am not trying to bash Obama or support Bush, but Obama hadn't done anything at that point especially since the period for nominations had closed only 11 days after Obama had taken office. So what did he do in those 11 days to merit the prize other than not being Bush?
I think the point is that most of those other countries have learned from past mistakes. How about we don't have countries that are actively engaged in egregious human rights violations on the human rights commission. Unfortunately the nuclear weapon genie is out of the bottle and can't be put back in. As much as people like like to beat on the US for our use of nuclear weapons or our massive stockpiles (we probably don't need North Dakota being a world nuclear super power) the simple fact is as long as someone has them we will need them and others will want them. I will even give you this the US does spend too much on its military, personally I would like to say bring all the troops and equipment home. This includes getting out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Korea, Japan, Kuwait, Cuba, Germany, France, England, and any other country we have troops in (probably the better portion of countries in the world). The purpose of the US military is to keep the US safe from foreign threats, specifically invasion. I don't think we have to worry about the UK invading or attacking the US, or just about any other country on Earth, and what threat does Libya pose?
For those who don't know the UN human rights commission has has such wonderful upstanding members as like Libya, Syria, Zimbabwe, People's Republic of China, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan all of whom have continued to fight for basic human rights.
This is no different than the UN human rights commission with such wondrous members like Libya, Syria, Zimbabwe, People's Republic of China, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan.
I never said they didn't have their place, but in general it is better to avoid them especially if that is the only tool you know as you end up with code like the old apple soft basic. I think it is like the old adage goes, if all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail, is applicable.