the defendant in this suit is coming out with a product 10 years after billions of advertising have been spent on ipod/ipad/etc and trying to ride coat tails.. and using this as "free advertising" for a product that has not made it to market despite 12 years of work on it..
... wait, so you're saying that the product in question actually predates apple's product by 2 years?
I guess we all have different opinions on the topic but the Facebook application for the iPhone, for me, is 1000x better than the web interface. In fact, I'd rather visit Facebook via my phone than the website any day. Less clutter, no ads, no bullshit, and I can get shit done quickly--in and out--like websites were meant to be.
Allow me to introduce your PC-based surfing to a little app called "firefox", with its addon friends "noscript" and "adblockplus". I absolutely love how they make my surfing experience faster - not downloading all the flash and graphical ads makes pages load ten times faster. (Yes, even facebook!)
Now, all I need to do is find a decent plugin for streaming together those articles that for some reason get broken up into one page per paragraph, and I'll be all set.
Fair enough. Here you go. It's a bit outdated (being from March and all), but I doubt the situation changed significatively in the last 6 months.
I asked for a citation because I felt it was inaccurate. A quick google search proved your point, but with some reservations...
On 17 March 2009, there were about 2,300 applications available for download from the Android Market, according to T-Mobile chief technical officer Cole Brodman. By December 2009, there were over 20,000 applications available for download in the Android Market. By August 2010, there are over 80,000 applications available for download in the Android Market, with over 1 billion application downloads . Recent months (in 2010) have shown an ever increasing growth rate, recently (in May 2010) surpassing 10,000 additional applications per month.
In addition, that's just the "official" "app store". There are links to 3 "alternative stores" on that same wiki page. I would post a link to Apple's alternative stores, but there don't seem to be any that are available without jailbreaking your device. Apple appears to have failed at quelling the android uprising.
As of September 1, 2010, there are at least 250,000 third-party applications officially available on the App Store, with over 6.5 billion total downloads.
This data appears to contradict me, and reinforce your position. There are, apparently, more apps for iOS than for android. However, it would appear that Apple's momentum is slowing, whereas android's momentum appears to be increasing. Development of new iPhone apps appears to have dropped below 10,000 new apps per month, whereas android is now above that line, and continuing to increase.
I suppose the argument could go either way, if we want to get picky, but it still stands to reason that android is still picking up steam, and iOS is slumping - probably largely due to the bad press the iPhone and iPad have received as of late, whereas no one seems to have anything bad to say about 'droid.
And a parting shot: If the number of available apps is your only beef with android, what will you do when the developers stop developing for iOS, due to the myriad restrictions placed upon the apps that even make it into the store?
The parent is modded off-topic, then troll? A link to a method of accomplishing both the OP's objectives is totally on-topic. I could understand a lack of moderation due to apathy, but wtf is wrong with you, mods? The parent is on-topic, and I don't see how pointing out a system that functions on both android and iOS is any kind of troll.
Perhaps there is something I don't know about sencha touch, which causes it to be an abomination of some kind? In that case, the proper response is to reply with the missing information, notmoderate into oblivion.
The only reason I can see for giving the parent any kind of grief is that it wasn't a clickable link.
Fair enough, but are there really no games on consoles that you want to play?
Not badly enough that I would want to waste enough money to buy a decent gaming PC (note: multi-purpose machine) on a single-purpose consumer appliance, no.
That seems unlikely, and if that's not the case, you're only hurting yourself if you refuse to buy a console.
Wow, I better yank my wallet out and throw away money I don't have on a console, then, eh? Who knows, maybe there's 2 games I would want to play (as opposed to your implied 1), and it would only cost me $200 each! (Consider $200-$300 for the console, plus $50-$60 per game... yeah, not a good value proposition, especially when I can build a good quad-core system for the same price.)
I respect when people stand for their principles, but there's not much point when it won't change anything.
You're right, kinda... Except that it *does* change things when I refuse to purchase a piece of equipment that doesn't suit my needs - the company making it doesn't get my money. If enough people decide that consoles are a waste of space, maybe we'll have seen the last of them at some point.
And before you go assaulting my pricing, consider that I own a half-dozen computers, and my newest console is a Super Nintendo. The computers get used for more than just gaming, and the Nintendo gets pulled out when a friend or relative brings children to my house. In other words, very rarely. More often, friends come over for lan parties, and they don't even have to bring their own systems. When I don't have friends over playing networked games, I'm able to use those systems for distributed processing. Therefore, your argument that I am somehow hurting myself by not shelling out hundreds of dollars to a company I don't like (remember the rootkits, and have you ever had to crack the case on a VAIO?) for a product I don't even want, much less need, is ridiculous at best.
As a PC gamer, I've never figured out how it's even possible to play an FPS on a console. How can you possibly aim with those sticks? Or do they all come with auto-aim?
Yeah, pretty much - the sticks take some getting used to, of course, but also the system uses a "near enough" aiming system that pretty much amounts to an aimbot. It's a crutch, for sure, but how can you expect pixel precision from analog sticks? (Never mind that PC FPS games have been pixel-accuracy-required since day one, and if a PC uses the same tech that the consoles do to "make aiming easier" then the user gets banned for cheating...)
I say if you're going to sit in front of the tv for hours at a time, it's better for you to be playing a videogame.
As a matter of fact, doing "work" on a computer uses quite few calories - I would imagine the same holds true for any game requiring at least a moderate amount of thinking while timing moves properly. Contrast this with the fact that one burns fewer calories watching TV than one does sleeping.
... and once again, you come up with yet another (zomg unsolvable!) issue, with no attempt at a resolution.
I stand by my statement that you are a die-hard pessimist who can not be made happy. I give up on trying to drag you into the future. I wish you the best of luck.
No, the point you're trying to make is that you can be a pessimist forever, instead of coming up with your own solutions. I give you a viable solution, and you find ways to tear it apart.
Want to fix the wet, muddy environment? Swap the batteries in the barn, like I said the first time. If your barn is wet and muddy, well, that's a different story entirely.
If the battery is designed to be easily moved/removed, then even this isn't an issue. Pack the battery in a plastic housing, allowing easy insertion and removal into the tractor's undercarriage. Use (gasp!) locking levers to hold it in place, or cotter pins, or what have you. The terminals can be sealed in that clear goo that terminals are sealed with in existing technology, if you are concerned about moisture contaminating the contacts (wow, good thing I never drive my car in the rain, it might get wet or muddy).
(Re)installing a several-hundred-pound battery can be as simple as using a cart and a hydraulic jack. Two carts, if you want to get picky, and complain that you can't put a battery in with the old battery sitting on your cart. Use actual tires on your carts, if you don't have a concrete floor in your barn (is that why it's wet and muddy?) I have no idea where you're getting your electrical power, but I've already given ideas on that in my previous posts.
I believe I could solve every issue you have with implementing an electric tractor (and using solar power for your farm, for that matter), and you would still bitch because now the tractor doesn't smell like diesel.
In other words, stop whining and complaining that I'm not thinking for you, about something outside my field of expertise (and apparently well inside yours).
There's no way that's ever going to be practical, particularly for vehicles that are used in wet, muddy conditions.
Whatever, man, you win.
I was trying to show you how you can work around your problems, you just want to shove more problems at me. Learn to think for yourself, it's highly productive.
Can you think of a foolproof battery connector that can reliably handle hundreds of volts at hundreds of amps, while being safe to connect and disconnect quickly in a wet environment? How would you design a connector to meet those requirements?
What does it matter whether I can think something up? I'm a computer geek, not a battery builder. Use a connector I designed, and you'd probably get fried in a clean, dry environment.
I have no mod points... and I would be throwing them away by commenting if I had them, but you're already at +5 Insightful, so we'll dismiss that for now.
You, sir, have made an amazing post, and I hereby commend you; I post this while clapping, cheering, and standing in my seat (virtually, of course).
Yes, my post will be modded into obscurity because I'm not actually adding anything to the discussion, but it's worth it (who needs karma, anyway?) to express my pleasure at reading this post. You have managed to sum up (ok, not quite succinctly) a large number of the issues with the patent system in its current form, and even cast doubt on whether it should exist in any form in today's hyper-communicative society.
I have to drive once a week about 40 miles each way, with no guarantee of a charger at the far end.
Are you seriously going to tell me that you can't figure out how to put a 50' extension cord in your trunk? Or maybe you're trying to say that you drive out into the woods every week, where there's no electrical power at all?
100-mile-there-and-back range is nice until you have to spend 2 hours in stop-and-go traffic for the "there" and "back" part
Spoken like someone who has never driven, or even ridden in a hybrid or full EV. When you stop, the car is off. The only things still making any noise, or moving at all, or lighting up, are the radio, the climate control system, and the headlights (if driving at night). It was actually rather startling, and took some getting used to, when driving a hybrid... pull up to a stop light, and 3 seconds later, the combustion engine shuts off. It fires back up again when you take your foot off the brake and apply the accelerator. In other words, stop-and-go traffic has a minimal effect on your driving distance, due to the fact that you're only using the electricity as motive force when you're moving.
you need something that can produce a couple of hundred horsepower, more or less continuously, and with a minimal "recharge" time.
Have you never heard of replacing the batteries? This is one of the things being considered for electric vehicle charging stations, actually, if they can get the manufacturers to standardise on a single battery shape. Even if that won't work for mass-produced vehicles, who says you can't be charging 6 or 7 batteries in the barn? Hell, use the ones not being used to push big metal objects around to store the power from your solar arrays.
It's not like I'm even asking you to think outside the box, this is existing technology.
Still, what gauls me the most about this sort of rampant trumpeting by the anti-vaccination folks is the incredible hubris it demonstrates.
Gaul (Latin: Gallia) is a historical name used in the context of Ancient Rome in references to the region of Western Europe approximating present day France, Luxembourg and Belgium, most of Switzerland, the western part of Northern Italy, as well as the parts of the Netherlands and Germany on the left bank of the Rhine.
gall: 1
a : bile; especially bile obtained from an animal and used in the arts or medicine
b : something bitter to endure
c : bitterness of spirit, rancor
2: brazen boldness coupled with impudent assurance and insolence
I believe definition 1,b of gall is the word you were actually looking for.
Your problem, sir, is one I refer to as "reading comprehension failure"; possibly compounded by some things I call "dumb as a rock" and "willful refusal to be educated", but let's take one thing at a time. I'd rather think you didn't have time to read the material, or look it up, than think you were just too stupid to comprehend it.
Please allow me the privilege of raising your awareness level.
For instance, try this link. It should lead you to a wiki article on breeder reactors, along with a nice little news article about India's new reactor projects. Note: projects, plural; as in more than one.
Your reading, at this point, may enlighten you to the concept of a "sealed breeder reactor", which produces far fewer waste products than conventional reactors, is easier to control, and should it have a "meltdown", the effects are much less pronounced than "conventional" reactors (as in, the nearest 30 miles aren't irradiated, and nothing blows up).
A little further reading may grant you the information required to understand that thorium is hugely more prevalent than you seem to currently believe, and is actually easier to produce at a fissionable quality than uranium. As a matter of fact, one way to produce uranium is to put thorium in a breeder reactor. Ooh, look, a two-for-one deal!
So, it's cheaper, easier, and safer... a direct contradiction of your uninformed statements of "fact".
Yes, reactors of many types have been built. The problem (and my point) is that none of those experimental reactors built have delivered the safe and inexpensive power that was promised.
Worse, none have even shown that the respective technology has the potential to become safe and inexpensive.
Conclusion: Once you have a basic understanding of the topics you so vehemently protest, perhaps then we will listen to your meandering bullshit.
Once it costs more to use a traditional vehicle than an electric or hybrid, that's what people are going to buy without even giving it a second thought.
It's already more expensive to operate a combustion-engine vehicle than an electric one. Pennies per mile, instead of dollars. No oil changes. No gas to buy. Less moving parts, meaning fewer parts replacements. The problem is simply that the industry thrives on all these "problems", leading to our economy being based on their existence.
I've owned an electric lawn mower for 3 years now. The only maintenance I've had to do is replacing the blade because I tried to use it as a bush hog (hint: works no better or worse than a gas-powered mower would). I've saved hundreds of dollars in gas, and it's so much quieter, it's unbelievable. My wife refers to it as "vacuuming the yard". I can hold a conversation with someone while they walk next to the mower, without shouting. It doesn't spew huge clouds of smoke when I fire it up for the first time of the season. It doesn't leak oil or gas all over the place. It doesn't stink of petrochemicals, whether it's in use or not. Less fossil fuel use, less air pollution, less noise pollution...
I paid $250 for the mower, and $50 for a huge extension cord... The new blade was $20 at Lowe's or Home Depot, I don't recall which. Assuming I'd spend $5 on gas for a single mowing, I've saved more just in gasoline over the course of the last 3 years than I've spent on the mower.
Now factor in that electricity is so cheap, I actually use it to not only mow the lawn, but also to "sweep" the sidewalk afterward... makes a pretty good leaf-blower, too. And my electricity bill never even noticed... I think it might have cost me fifty cents for the whole summer.
I have an electric weed-eater, too. Works just as well as the old gas-powered one, except it's about half the weight, and I don't have to mix up gas and oil together to make it run. Oh, and it doesn't wake up the neighbors when I run it at 8 o'clock on a Saturday morning. Makes a bit of noise, admittedly, but much less than a gas-powered weed-eater. Oh, and I think I paid something along the lines of $40 for it, as compared to the hundred or so it costs for a gas-powered model.
Here, see if this link works for you; it may be tied to my location information, or something, but for me that's a link to Lowe's showing me string trimmers... $30-$70 for electric ones, $100-$240 for gas-powered ones. Noisy, expensive, heavy, smelly, extra-work (gas-oil mix)... why would I ever want a gas-powered string trimmer again?
Oh, yeah, back to the topic at hand... So, tell me... why aren't we using electric vehicles?
Slashdot Mirror
Now, I'm wondering where that leaves Suse and Ubuntu in the Cloud space.
Ubuntu has cloud computing as an option for the base install of their server product. I believe the actual hosting is done via Amazon.
the defendant in this suit is coming out with a product 10 years after billions of advertising have been spent on ipod/ipad/etc and trying to ride coat tails.. and using this as "free advertising" for a product that has not made it to market despite 12 years of work on it..
... wait, so you're saying that the product in question actually predates apple's product by 2 years?
I guess we all have different opinions on the topic but the Facebook application for the iPhone, for me, is 1000x better than the web interface. In fact, I'd rather visit Facebook via my phone than the website any day. Less clutter, no ads, no bullshit, and I can get shit done quickly--in and out--like websites were meant to be.
Allow me to introduce your PC-based surfing to a little app called "firefox", with its addon friends "noscript" and "adblockplus". I absolutely love how they make my surfing experience faster - not downloading all the flash and graphical ads makes pages load ten times faster. (Yes, even facebook!)
Now, all I need to do is find a decent plugin for streaming together those articles that for some reason get broken up into one page per paragraph, and I'll be all set.
[citation needed]
Fair enough. Here you go. It's a bit outdated (being from March and all), but I doubt the situation changed significatively in the last 6 months.
I asked for a citation because I felt it was inaccurate. A quick google search proved your point, but with some reservations...
On 17 March 2009, there were about 2,300 applications available for download from the Android Market, according to T-Mobile chief technical officer Cole Brodman.
By December 2009, there were over 20,000 applications available for download in the Android Market.
By August 2010, there are over 80,000 applications available for download in the Android Market, with over 1 billion application downloads
. Recent months (in 2010) have shown an ever increasing growth rate, recently (in May 2010) surpassing 10,000 additional applications per month.
copypasta from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android_Market
In addition, that's just the "official" "app store". There are links to 3 "alternative stores" on that same wiki page. I would post a link to Apple's alternative stores, but there don't seem to be any that are available without jailbreaking your device. Apple appears to have failed at quelling the android uprising.
As of September 1, 2010, there are at least 250,000 third-party applications officially available on the App Store, with over 6.5 billion total downloads.
copypasta from the similar article for apple's "marketplace".
This data appears to contradict me, and reinforce your position. There are, apparently, more apps for iOS than for android. However, it would appear that Apple's momentum is slowing, whereas android's momentum appears to be increasing. Development of new iPhone apps appears to have dropped below 10,000 new apps per month, whereas android is now above that line, and continuing to increase.
I suppose the argument could go either way, if we want to get picky, but it still stands to reason that android is still picking up steam, and iOS is slumping - probably largely due to the bad press the iPhone and iPad have received as of late, whereas no one seems to have anything bad to say about 'droid.
And a parting shot:
If the number of available apps is your only beef with android, what will you do when the developers stop developing for iOS, due to the myriad restrictions placed upon the apps that even make it into the store?
FOSS is all fine and dandy, but end users usually don't know or don't give a damn.
... because FOSS advocates aren't end users? Interesting viewpoint...
You've got to be kidding me.
The parent is modded off-topic, then troll? A link to a method of accomplishing both the OP's objectives is totally on-topic.
I could understand a lack of moderation due to apathy, but wtf is wrong with you, mods? The parent is on-topic, and I don't see how pointing out a system that functions on both android and iOS is any kind of troll.
Perhaps there is something I don't know about sencha touch, which causes it to be an abomination of some kind?
In that case, the proper response is to reply with the missing information, not moderate into oblivion.
The only reason I can see for giving the parent any kind of grief is that it wasn't a clickable link.
--
Whoops, there went my karma...
(and far less apps are unjustly removed from the Android market than Apple's app store)
There are far fewer apps to begin with...
[citation needed]
Fair enough, but are there really no games on consoles that you want to play?
Not badly enough that I would want to waste enough money to buy a decent gaming PC (note: multi-purpose machine) on a single-purpose consumer appliance, no.
That seems unlikely, and if that's not the case, you're only hurting yourself if you refuse to buy a console.
Wow, I better yank my wallet out and throw away money I don't have on a console, then, eh? Who knows, maybe there's 2 games I would want to play (as opposed to your implied 1), and it would only cost me $200 each!
(Consider $200-$300 for the console, plus $50-$60 per game... yeah, not a good value proposition, especially when I can build a good quad-core system for the same price.)
I respect when people stand for their principles, but there's not much point when it won't change anything.
You're right, kinda... Except that it *does* change things when I refuse to purchase a piece of equipment that doesn't suit my needs - the company making it doesn't get my money. If enough people decide that consoles are a waste of space, maybe we'll have seen the last of them at some point.
And before you go assaulting my pricing, consider that I own a half-dozen computers, and my newest console is a Super Nintendo. The computers get used for more than just gaming, and the Nintendo gets pulled out when a friend or relative brings children to my house. In other words, very rarely. More often, friends come over for lan parties, and they don't even have to bring their own systems. When I don't have friends over playing networked games, I'm able to use those systems for distributed processing. Therefore, your argument that I am somehow hurting myself by not shelling out hundreds of dollars to a company I don't like (remember the rootkits, and have you ever had to crack the case on a VAIO?) for a product I don't even want, much less need, is ridiculous at best.
As a PC gamer, I've never figured out how it's even possible to play an FPS on a console. How can you possibly aim with those sticks? Or do they all come with auto-aim?
Yeah, pretty much - the sticks take some getting used to, of course, but also the system uses a "near enough" aiming system that pretty much amounts to an aimbot. It's a crutch, for sure, but how can you expect pixel precision from analog sticks?
(Never mind that PC FPS games have been pixel-accuracy-required since day one, and if a PC uses the same tech that the consoles do to "make aiming easier" then the user gets banned for cheating...)
On the bright side, you no longer have a girlfriend. Good job!
I say if you're going to sit in front of the tv for hours at a time, it's better for you to be playing a videogame.
As a matter of fact, doing "work" on a computer uses quite few calories - I would imagine the same holds true for any game requiring at least a moderate amount of thinking while timing moves properly. Contrast this with the fact that one burns fewer calories watching TV than one does sleeping.
Except the study was about action games, and the improvement was in speed, not accuracy.
From the summary:
action based video games train people to make quick, accurate decisions.
Speed and accuracy.
I'll just assume you're not a gamer, shall I?
... and once again, you come up with yet another (zomg unsolvable!) issue, with no attempt at a resolution.
I stand by my statement that you are a die-hard pessimist who can not be made happy.
I give up on trying to drag you into the future.
I wish you the best of luck.
Even the price of fish will get higher because electric or fuel cell powered boats are rather impractical due to range-energy density issues.
Yeah, because there's no way we could harness wind power to move a boat.
No, the point you're trying to make is that you can be a pessimist forever, instead of coming up with your own solutions. I give you a viable solution, and you find ways to tear it apart.
Want to fix the wet, muddy environment? Swap the batteries in the barn, like I said the first time. If your barn is wet and muddy, well, that's a different story entirely.
If the battery is designed to be easily moved/removed, then even this isn't an issue. Pack the battery in a plastic housing, allowing easy insertion and removal into the tractor's undercarriage. Use (gasp!) locking levers to hold it in place, or cotter pins, or what have you. The terminals can be sealed in that clear goo that terminals are sealed with in existing technology, if you are concerned about moisture contaminating the contacts (wow, good thing I never drive my car in the rain, it might get wet or muddy).
(Re)installing a several-hundred-pound battery can be as simple as using a cart and a hydraulic jack. Two carts, if you want to get picky, and complain that you can't put a battery in with the old battery sitting on your cart. Use actual tires on your carts, if you don't have a concrete floor in your barn (is that why it's wet and muddy?) I have no idea where you're getting your electrical power, but I've already given ideas on that in my previous posts.
I believe I could solve every issue you have with implementing an electric tractor (and using solar power for your farm, for that matter), and you would still bitch because now the tractor doesn't smell like diesel.
In other words, stop whining and complaining that I'm not thinking for you, about something outside my field of expertise (and apparently well inside yours).
There's no way that's ever going to be practical, particularly for vehicles that are used in wet, muddy conditions.
Whatever, man, you win.
I was trying to show you how you can work around your problems, you just want to shove more problems at me. Learn to think for yourself, it's highly productive.
Can you think of a foolproof battery connector that can reliably handle hundreds of volts at hundreds of amps, while being safe to connect and disconnect quickly in a wet environment? How would you design a connector to meet those requirements?
What does it matter whether I can think something up? I'm a computer geek, not a battery builder. Use a connector I designed, and you'd probably get fried in a clean, dry environment.
I have no mod points... and I would be throwing them away by commenting if I had them, but you're already at +5 Insightful, so we'll dismiss that for now.
You, sir, have made an amazing post, and I hereby commend you; I post this while clapping, cheering, and standing in my seat (virtually, of course).
Yes, my post will be modded into obscurity because I'm not actually adding anything to the discussion, but it's worth it (who needs karma, anyway?) to express my pleasure at reading this post. You have managed to sum up (ok, not quite succinctly) a large number of the issues with the patent system in its current form, and even cast doubt on whether it should exist in any form in today's hyper-communicative society.
My hat is off to you, sir. Bravo.
Is there a vaccine against grammar nazis?
Yes, as a matter of fact, there is. It's called education.
You see, if you cease to misspell words and use language incorrectly, you are no longer bothered by "grammar nazis". Amazing, I know, but there it is.
Please don't be offended at my efforts to enlighten my fellow English-speaking humans.
I have to drive once a week about 40 miles each way, with no guarantee of a charger at the far end.
Are you seriously going to tell me that you can't figure out how to put a 50' extension cord in your trunk?
Or maybe you're trying to say that you drive out into the woods every week, where there's no electrical power at all?
100-mile-there-and-back range is nice until you have to spend 2 hours in stop-and-go traffic for the "there" and "back" part
Spoken like someone who has never driven, or even ridden in a hybrid or full EV. When you stop, the car is off. The only things still making any noise, or moving at all, or lighting up, are the radio, the climate control system, and the headlights (if driving at night). It was actually rather startling, and took some getting used to, when driving a hybrid... pull up to a stop light, and 3 seconds later, the combustion engine shuts off. It fires back up again when you take your foot off the brake and apply the accelerator. In other words, stop-and-go traffic has a minimal effect on your driving distance, due to the fact that you're only using the electricity as motive force when you're moving.
you need something that can produce a couple of hundred horsepower, more or less continuously, and with a minimal "recharge" time.
Have you never heard of replacing the batteries? This is one of the things being considered for electric vehicle charging stations, actually, if they can get the manufacturers to standardise on a single battery shape. Even if that won't work for mass-produced vehicles, who says you can't be charging 6 or 7 batteries in the barn? Hell, use the ones not being used to push big metal objects around to store the power from your solar arrays.
It's not like I'm even asking you to think outside the box, this is existing technology.
Still, what gauls me the most about this sort of rampant trumpeting by the anti-vaccination folks is the incredible hubris it demonstrates.
Gaul (Latin: Gallia) is a historical name used in the context of Ancient Rome in references to the region of Western Europe approximating present day France, Luxembourg and Belgium, most of Switzerland, the western part of Northern Italy, as well as the parts of the Netherlands and Germany on the left bank of the Rhine.
gall:
1
a : bile; especially bile obtained from an animal and used in the arts or medicine
b : something bitter to endure
c : bitterness of spirit, rancor
2: brazen boldness coupled with impudent assurance and insolence
I believe definition 1,b of gall is the word you were actually looking for.
Your problem, sir, is one I refer to as "reading comprehension failure"; possibly compounded by some things I call "dumb as a rock" and "willful refusal to be educated", but let's take one thing at a time. I'd rather think you didn't have time to read the material, or look it up, than think you were just too stupid to comprehend it.
Please allow me the privilege of raising your awareness level.
For instance, try this link. It should lead you to a wiki article on breeder reactors, along with a nice little news article about India's new reactor projects. Note: projects, plural; as in more than one.
Your reading, at this point, may enlighten you to the concept of a "sealed breeder reactor", which produces far fewer waste products than conventional reactors, is easier to control, and should it have a "meltdown", the effects are much less pronounced than "conventional" reactors (as in, the nearest 30 miles aren't irradiated, and nothing blows up).
A little further reading may grant you the information required to understand that thorium is hugely more prevalent than you seem to currently believe, and is actually easier to produce at a fissionable quality than uranium. As a matter of fact, one way to produce uranium is to put thorium in a breeder reactor. Ooh, look, a two-for-one deal!
So, it's cheaper, easier, and safer... a direct contradiction of your uninformed statements of "fact".
Yes, reactors of many types have been built. The problem (and my point) is that none of those experimental reactors built have delivered the safe and inexpensive power that was promised.
Worse, none have even shown that the respective technology has the potential to become safe and inexpensive.
Conclusion: Once you have a basic understanding of the topics you so vehemently protest, perhaps then we will listen to your meandering bullshit.
Once it costs more to use a traditional vehicle than an electric or hybrid, that's what people are going to buy without even giving it a second thought.
It's already more expensive to operate a combustion-engine vehicle than an electric one. Pennies per mile, instead of dollars. No oil changes. No gas to buy. Less moving parts, meaning fewer parts replacements. The problem is simply that the industry thrives on all these "problems", leading to our economy being based on their existence.
I've owned an electric lawn mower for 3 years now. The only maintenance I've had to do is replacing the blade because I tried to use it as a bush hog (hint: works no better or worse than a gas-powered mower would). I've saved hundreds of dollars in gas, and it's so much quieter, it's unbelievable. My wife refers to it as "vacuuming the yard". I can hold a conversation with someone while they walk next to the mower, without shouting. It doesn't spew huge clouds of smoke when I fire it up for the first time of the season. It doesn't leak oil or gas all over the place. It doesn't stink of petrochemicals, whether it's in use or not. Less fossil fuel use, less air pollution, less noise pollution...
I paid $250 for the mower, and $50 for a huge extension cord... The new blade was $20 at Lowe's or Home Depot, I don't recall which. Assuming I'd spend $5 on gas for a single mowing, I've saved more just in gasoline over the course of the last 3 years than I've spent on the mower.
Now factor in that electricity is so cheap, I actually use it to not only mow the lawn, but also to "sweep" the sidewalk afterward... makes a pretty good leaf-blower, too. And my electricity bill never even noticed... I think it might have cost me fifty cents for the whole summer.
I have an electric weed-eater, too. Works just as well as the old gas-powered one, except it's about half the weight, and I don't have to mix up gas and oil together to make it run. Oh, and it doesn't wake up the neighbors when I run it at 8 o'clock on a Saturday morning. Makes a bit of noise, admittedly, but much less than a gas-powered weed-eater. Oh, and I think I paid something along the lines of $40 for it, as compared to the hundred or so it costs for a gas-powered model.
Here, see if this link works for you; it may be tied to my location information, or something, but for me that's a link to Lowe's showing me string trimmers... $30-$70 for electric ones, $100-$240 for gas-powered ones.
Noisy, expensive, heavy, smelly, extra-work (gas-oil mix)... why would I ever want a gas-powered string trimmer again?
Oh, yeah, back to the topic at hand... So, tell me... why aren't we using electric vehicles?
There's more oil off of Roosevelt Island than we've burned so far.
There's a shitload off the coast of the gulf of mexico, too... how do we get it into our cars, and out of the water?