On the contrary.. Those will be promoted as fine examples of tolerance and diversity. Videos which criticize this or the bases they operate on will be flagged as 'extremist', have their monetization revoked, and comments disabled.
How are you folks dealing with the mortal sin of non sexualized portable-potties at football games and other events?
It never bothered me because I simply do not equate urination or defecation as sexual. Just something you do because you are alive. I know there's rule 34, but there's gotta be a lot of projection going on here with the outraged.
They will be labeled as racist/sexist/homophobic whatever-nazis. When logical argumentation becomes 'hate speech', it's game over for the enlightenment.
Or MGTOW or feminist videos? Gun control versus second amendment affecionados. Or Bill Maher, and whoever hates him? A lot of these folk have an intense hatred towards each other. Be it liberal, or conservative.
We live in a world where some folks want a whole lot of speech muzzled, and the pro muzzlers are more than happy to call their antagonists hate speech.
They better have their policies very tightly defined, because it becomes a muzzling of controversy otherwise.
You and I know what best practices are, so why the fuck don't we "AI" the computing devices?
It's a market problem, plus it's a We problem, plus the unknown person/group problem.
The profit margin is pretty thin for many devices and the software to run them, and the lifetime of a device or software is likewise very short. Security is about the last thing on their minds. Milking whatever profit can be had out of product A while Product B is getting ready for release is a problem.
Then there is the we issue. The collective we is still using stupid passwords like Password1, and don't think twice about clicking on email links. At this point, it is obvious that the collective "we" is not going to be of much help in matters of computing security.
It's nothing short of amazing that 30 year old SMBv1 is still being shipped toggled on. (it is being removed from the OS finally) This is the part that might be conjecture. It's been known to be a gaping security hole for years, so why was it still there. Microsoft had no problems making a shitload of peripherals obsolete with Vista, and no issues with abandoning Windows 7 users. But SMBv1? That must be included, and it must be turned on by default. So it's not hard to imagine that someone wanted it turned on by default.
Liability is what's gonna kill the free software movement. Many reasons.
Liability for general purpose computing is not going to happen. It would make software way more expensive, and mean locked down desktops and laptops that prevent users from downloading, connecting, and configuring.
In addition to that, we have the most vulnerable OS being the biggest OS, and the Chinese building the Internet of things essentially open systems, so what would we do? Sue them?
It isn't to blame the victims here, but the ascendency of personal computing for the masses means that most computing devices are owned by people with very little idea of security. In a world where people click on random stuff they get in email, it's gonna be very hard to get any real security.
An ideal form of carbon sequestration is known as "coal".
When the plants which created current fossil fuels were living, bacteria and fungi had not evolved the ability to break down certain key parts of the plants. Today, they have. So we will never be able to go back.
aaaaaannnnnddd. Exactly.
Coal won't happen again. Maybe some peat - we have a local lake that emulates peat formation, and the methane it releases hardly makes for sequestration. And burning that crap is hardly commercially feasible.
In a hundred years, the mining and burning of coal will be regarded like the present generation regards slavery: unspeakably evil and known to be a usual part of commerce of the day to their shock. It will be a capital felony.
I look at coal as something that should have been abandoned a long time ago, but it was more of a bootstrap technology, similar how natural gas is a transition energy source. Not perfect by a long shot, but beats the hell out of rearranging the landscape, burying valleys and lopping off the tops of mountains.
So I'm not really in favor of killing people over coal extraction. It will die a natural death all by itself.
Yep, if people had listened 30 years ago it is possible we'd be living in a nuclear powered world. Safe from the nonsense in the Middle East. Safe from nuclear reactors stretched beyond their limits. Safe from global warming.
30 years ago, eh? Just a little over a year from April 26, 1986.
As a nuc power proponent, even you should recognize the irony in your post. People did listen. They just didn't listen to you.
Way to shift the goalposts. Someone needs to write that legislation before it can be sponsored, and that part hasn't been done. That is not on Congress as a whole and you know it.
Hmm, I wonder if maybe we could do something like have committees. Maybe they could be composed of congress critters, who would write up stuff, and send it out to have discussions with other congress critters, then possibly go back to committee to iron out suggestions and/or addotions or deletions. Then maybe after that these congress critters could vote on it, then send it to another group of congress critters that would do much the same.
There, I invented something that has never existed before!
How big a haircut are you willing to personally so that Apple can do it's civic duty and pay all the taxes on that repatriated capital.
Sure, let's take that to the logical end. Why have any corporate tax law? Why have taxes? They just lower the stock price.
I want to be clear, I'm not some Randian claiming that tax is theft and all that crazy stuff.
I'm claiming that Apple and Google are acting rationally, and put in a similar situation I'd expect most people here to act the same.
The solution is not to say "oh, Apple must be evil now", the solution is to recognize that "oh, Apple is responding to some really strong incentives when it takes all these strategies to reduce its taxes, if we fix those incentives then Apple and a lot of other companies will start paying more tax."
Kinda weird that Apple and Google are abusing the tax system for profit, and the rest of the US business community hasn't. Who knew?
I'm with you. Governments are fucked up. They are corrupt. They are going to bend the average citizen over at every opportunity.
This is true. It's because people are corrupt, people are fucked up.
The only saving grace of Guvmint is that it has people that stand in the way of each others not so enlightened self interest. Doesn't always work, but beats the shit out of the alternative
So "free market" built the interstate system? That's an interesting argument you got there.
The useful ignorant have been convinced that crypto anarchy is the way to go. Zero taxes, and all guvmint services free.
tha's how during th eKenyan terror babies they could unironically hold up signs that said Keep your government hands off my medicaid!
That's how a woman I know who hates government in all of its forms believes she is entitled to entirely free healthcare for the rest of her life because her now deceased husband served in the military. She is also a big believer that she should pay no taxes at any level.
That's how if you give them a list of things that should be cut in order to enable their no taxes agenda they have a rough time coming up with anything they want cut. On themselves. The other are all cheating, but they need their benefits and services. And free healthcare. And roads. And snow plowing, and natural disaster help. And a big military,
Autism has nothing to do with celibacy, using meth, running around naked outside, sleeping 10 hours a night and not eating beans because nobody understands what glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency is
Maybe not directly, but Autism is strongly correlated with most of those things... except maybe the meth.
Have we reached the point where 100 percent of us are autistic yet?
There's a research psychiatrist (who I cannot remember now) who has been researching recovery. He is finding the best thing for a survivor for trauma is finding someone who is non-judgemental even tempered person and just hanging with them does wonders.
That's really interesting.
I wonder if that was gender based. I've read and listened to some work that while women are helped by talk, that men are best helped by something similar to what you note, hanging with some other guys, doing some stuff, maybe performing some sort of shared labor. It sounds odd, but I know that many men after some loss or trauma, will throw themselves into their work. The women in their lives often accuse them of not facing their grief, but it could possibly just be a mental difference between the two sexes.
You do have to be an outlier to get noticed. If you go around doing what everybody else does, you'll blend in to the background, and you also won't be doing anything terribly novel or intriguing.
Makes sense that discovery comes from people who are different.
Pretty much agree about the differentness getting people noticed. But it's the differentness, not the genius.
The entire article sounds like some racist screed about how Dark Skinned People from Africa are stronger but dumb, or the sexist bullshit that wimminfolk can't do serious work because they go crazy every month.
Sorry everyone, but genius comes in all shapes and forms. And some of them live in McMansions in the suburbs, and enjoy football games. Just like "normal people".
And some remarkably obtuse people do eccentric things. Or sleep ten hours a day. Or four. Or not.
And some remarkably average people are quirky as all hell.
Or not.
As well, where is the certification agency that hands out genius certification? I need to talk to them.
You must be deaf. Plenty of people, like commentators here such as yourself, do say that abortion = killing babies. They're also off the Internet, watching Fox News and listening to right wing talk shows.
Or are you saying none of those people are Republicans or vote Republican?
He's having difficulty processing what happened, and is trying to apply his bubblethink to anyone who dares to point out that the problem runs deeper than people who just harm those who he considers "the other". It's going to be difficult for some folks to see that the stereotype that they have put together that marks anyone to the left of them as baby killers, gun rights activists, and every other stereotype of the liberal other. That has been a core principle that has been ramped up a few notches every election cycle, so this has gone beyond cognitive dissonance to shaking their very souls.
Seriously? Republicans are now responsible for this foolishness? Come on, you are talking about some minor "not in the main stream" things and ascribing it to the whole party. It's a logical fallacy of "guilt by association".
No you dumass. I said that it does not fit the narrative. Quit making up strawmen to beat up so you can strut around like a little cock-a-whoop.
The narrative that we see posted in here and all over the internet is that "liberals want to tke our guns away", and that the solution for these problems is more firearms in everyone's hands. The head of the NRA wants armed guards in every school.
But whatever their kookiness is, my point that you missed in your madcap haste to say I was painting with an overly large brush, is that an avowed and obvious liberal, who uses his second amendment right to own and use a gun despite his obvious mental illness, does not fit the narrative.
It doesn't fit. The people I know who can be counted on to quack about liberals coming after our guns after every other tragedy, which usually involves people they don't consider their own, and yes, I know a few who think Sandy Hook was a false flag, are experiencing shock that one of their own was injured by a left winger using a gun. They usually go into one of their sterotpyed rants about leftists trying to use every excuse to take their guns away, but they are still trying to process this, and are unusually quiet after this tragedy. It doesn't fit the narrative. This is hard for them.
Scalise is an American. I consider him one of my own. And it pisses me off that a deranged man so easily committed that crime. But I don't fit my friends narrative because I don't want people like the nut job who injured him and the others to own or posess firearms.
I don't want to take normal people's guns away. But I certainly don't support the mentally ill having them. Perhaps you do support the mentally ill having access to weapons like that?
This is getting out of hand... WAY out of hand. The specific targeting of the right needs to end. I'm not talking about the nut jobs with guns, but those who engage in irresponsible verbal targeting that encourage the nut jobs with guns and provide them targeting.
Come on folks, all this hateful rhetoric needs to come to a full and final stop.
Wow. While I agree that the hate is fully developed, are you for a minute suggesting that this is a matter that Liberals have suddenly declared war on the Right? I remember lots of death threats against the Kenyan Terror Baby Second amendment solutions is not a left wing inventions.
As for a full and final stop, what you want, martial law and elimination of the first amendment?
What I think was the shocking thing is that while for many years now, this has not been a thing regarding Republicans. There wasn't your level of outrage when Gabby Giffords took a head shot and 5 people were killed in Tuscon Arizona.
And the idea Sandy Hook was a false flag operation staged by liberals to enact gun control.
Wasn't a whole lot of right wing outrage when that young fellow shot up a church full of Black folks. Mostly we heard about second amendment rights and that everyone should be armed.
But this is unnerving for many people, because it wasn't going according to the "script". This was a person who was in no way shape or form anything but a liberal. An unhinged one. That doesn't fit in with the second amendment narrative. Liberals hate guns, liberals are coming to take your guns away. Turns out we can all be hurt by nuts with firearms.
I don't know about other folks, but I use and enjoy my firearms. I'm a stable person, however. But if we stand in the way of keeping nut jobs from keeping them, This American horror story will simply repeat itself over and over.
Meanwhile, I hope that Representative Scalise and the others injured, make a speedy and full recovery, and commend the law and first responders for keeping the mayhem to a relative minimum, and for taking out the nutjob who did this crime.
The subsidies nonhydro renewable energy receives account for about 2 of the 10 cents per kWh while all other forms account for fractions of a penny. That's the problem, renewable subsidies are significantly higher then the profits, they would literally be loosing money if not for subsidies.
So anyhow, here is the question. Actually a couple. Are the non renewable energy sources going to last forever? Or if they aren't, we just fold up the tents and kill ourselves?
As well, should the US go to the concept of - if it doesn't work from the very beginning, doesn't spring like Venus from the ocean, fully formed, it must not be done? Not everything works right from the beginning, and susidies have allways been used, either through regular or th eultimate technology driver, total war.
In other words, allow the rest of the world to subsidize promising technology, and only adopt them after they are fully realized and in practice, which means no subsidies at all for anything, and America ceding technological leadership to the rest of the world.
Sounds like the USA's path to becoming a third world nation. Let China build the solar panels and energy efficient products, and the people in the US who can afford them can buy them, and be grateful that someone else is doing the hard work.
I know that it doesn't fit in with the marriage of fossil fuel interests and free market libertarians, but there is definitely a place for Government to encourage promising energy technologies. Because whether direct, or University driven research on all forms of energy generation, it's subsidies all the way down.
I wirelessly charged a Nexus 5 for years. Then an S8.
Works great. No issues.
Maybe if you use one that's designed properly or built some time after the 18th century you'd get along with it, luddite.
Maybe if you understood the laws of physics.
It's a transformer primary on the charging pad, a secondary inside the phone, and it performs the age old inductive coupleling transformer effect. It's about as cutting edge as vacuum tubes. There is nothing high tech about it. If given the choice between filling the space taken up by the secondary coil or battery, I'd take battery any day.
It's also terribly inefficient, and requires much more precision coupling than plugging into a cord or placing in a charging dock, and there are some applications of smartphones that it does not work at all for.
If you have no problem with it, then by golly, have a participation trophy. Your glowing feeling does not invalidate the laws of physics or its shortcomings.
Slashdot Mirror
Lest you be menstruating and find nowhere to place your used tampon.
Why, in 2017, I have to point out something as simple as this that my 7 year old understands to adults I don't know.
Eeeeeeeewwwww Using the same facility where a woman who is menstruating has been in. Oh the horrors! Oh my god, man, You are creeping me out.
Did you know that women actually fart too?
Bullshit.
On the contrary.. Those will be promoted as fine examples of tolerance and diversity. Videos which criticize this or the bases they operate on will be flagged as 'extremist', have their monetization revoked, and comments disabled.
How are you folks dealing with the mortal sin of non sexualized portable-potties at football games and other events?
It never bothered me because I simply do not equate urination or defecation as sexual. Just something you do because you are alive. I know there's rule 34, but there's gotta be a lot of projection going on here with the outraged.
They will be labeled as racist/sexist/homophobic whatever-nazis. When logical argumentation becomes 'hate speech', it's game over for the enlightenment.
Or MGTOW or feminist videos? Gun control versus second amendment affecionados. Or Bill Maher, and whoever hates him? A lot of these folk have an intense hatred towards each other. Be it liberal, or conservative.
We live in a world where some folks want a whole lot of speech muzzled, and the pro muzzlers are more than happy to call their antagonists hate speech.
They better have their policies very tightly defined, because it becomes a muzzling of controversy otherwise.
Then you're not the person to tackle this issue.
Then again, who is? Or are you suggesting a "VolksComputer".
This kind of thinking pisses me off.
It's a goddam computer.
You and I know what best practices are, so why the fuck don't we "AI" the computing devices?
It's a market problem, plus it's a We problem, plus the unknown person/group problem.
The profit margin is pretty thin for many devices and the software to run them, and the lifetime of a device or software is likewise very short. Security is about the last thing on their minds. Milking whatever profit can be had out of product A while Product B is getting ready for release is a problem.
Then there is the we issue. The collective we is still using stupid passwords like Password1, and don't think twice about clicking on email links. At this point, it is obvious that the collective "we" is not going to be of much help in matters of computing security.
It's nothing short of amazing that 30 year old SMBv1 is still being shipped toggled on. (it is being removed from the OS finally) This is the part that might be conjecture. It's been known to be a gaping security hole for years, so why was it still there. Microsoft had no problems making a shitload of peripherals obsolete with Vista, and no issues with abandoning Windows 7 users. But SMBv1? That must be included, and it must be turned on by default. So it's not hard to imagine that someone wanted it turned on by default.
Liability is what's gonna kill the free software movement. Many reasons.
Liability for general purpose computing is not going to happen. It would make software way more expensive, and mean locked down desktops and laptops that prevent users from downloading, connecting, and configuring.
In addition to that, we have the most vulnerable OS being the biggest OS, and the Chinese building the Internet of things essentially open systems, so what would we do? Sue them?
It isn't to blame the victims here, but the ascendency of personal computing for the masses means that most computing devices are owned by people with very little idea of security. In a world where people click on random stuff they get in email, it's gonna be very hard to get any real security.
An ideal form of carbon sequestration is known as "coal". When the plants which created current fossil fuels were living, bacteria and fungi had not evolved the ability to break down certain key parts of the plants. Today, they have. So we will never be able to go back.
aaaaaannnnnddd. Exactly.
Coal won't happen again. Maybe some peat - we have a local lake that emulates peat formation, and the methane it releases hardly makes for sequestration. And burning that crap is hardly commercially feasible.
In a hundred years, the mining and burning of coal will be regarded like the present generation regards slavery: unspeakably evil and known to be a usual part of commerce of the day to their shock. It will be a capital felony.
I look at coal as something that should have been abandoned a long time ago, but it was more of a bootstrap technology, similar how natural gas is a transition energy source. Not perfect by a long shot, but beats the hell out of rearranging the landscape, burying valleys and lopping off the tops of mountains. So I'm not really in favor of killing people over coal extraction. It will die a natural death all by itself.
Yep, if people had listened 30 years ago it is possible we'd be living in a nuclear powered world. Safe from the nonsense in the Middle East. Safe from nuclear reactors stretched beyond their limits. Safe from global warming.
30 years ago, eh? Just a little over a year from April 26, 1986.
As a nuc power proponent, even you should recognize the irony in your post. People did listen. They just didn't listen to you.
Way to shift the goalposts. Someone needs to write that legislation before it can be sponsored, and that part hasn't been done. That is not on Congress as a whole and you know it.
Hmm, I wonder if maybe we could do something like have committees. Maybe they could be composed of congress critters, who would write up stuff, and send it out to have discussions with other congress critters, then possibly go back to committee to iron out suggestions and/or addotions or deletions. Then maybe after that these congress critters could vote on it, then send it to another group of congress critters that would do much the same.
There, I invented something that has never existed before!
So are you saying the President was an idiot to make these promises to begin with or that he is an idiot now for not seeing them carried out?
Yes.
How big a haircut are you willing to personally so that Apple can do it's civic duty and pay all the taxes on that repatriated capital.
Sure, let's take that to the logical end. Why have any corporate tax law? Why have taxes? They just lower the stock price.
I want to be clear, I'm not some Randian claiming that tax is theft and all that crazy stuff.
I'm claiming that Apple and Google are acting rationally, and put in a similar situation I'd expect most people here to act the same.
The solution is not to say "oh, Apple must be evil now", the solution is to recognize that "oh, Apple is responding to some really strong incentives when it takes all these strategies to reduce its taxes, if we fix those incentives then Apple and a lot of other companies will start paying more tax."
Kinda weird that Apple and Google are abusing the tax system for profit, and the rest of the US business community hasn't. Who knew?
I'm with you. Governments are fucked up. They are corrupt. They are going to bend the average citizen over at every opportunity.
This is true. It's because people are corrupt, people are fucked up.
The only saving grace of Guvmint is that it has people that stand in the way of each others not so enlightened self interest. Doesn't always work, but beats the shit out of the alternative
So "free market" built the interstate system? That's an interesting argument you got there.
The useful ignorant have been convinced that crypto anarchy is the way to go. Zero taxes, and all guvmint services free.
tha's how during th eKenyan terror babies they could unironically hold up signs that said Keep your government hands off my medicaid!
That's how a woman I know who hates government in all of its forms believes she is entitled to entirely free healthcare for the rest of her life because her now deceased husband served in the military. She is also a big believer that she should pay no taxes at any level.
That's how if you give them a list of things that should be cut in order to enable their no taxes agenda they have a rough time coming up with anything they want cut. On themselves. The other are all cheating, but they need their benefits and services. And free healthcare. And roads. And snow plowing, and natural disaster help. And a big military,
i know i'm feeding a troll here; but what would you propose instead of taxes to pay for all the services you (directly and indirectly) consume.
bake sales?
cricket chirps.
Autism has nothing to do with celibacy, using meth, running around naked outside, sleeping 10 hours a night and not eating beans because nobody understands what glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency is
Maybe not directly, but Autism is strongly correlated with most of those things... except maybe the meth.
Have we reached the point where 100 percent of us are autistic yet?
There's a research psychiatrist (who I cannot remember now) who has been researching recovery. He is finding the best thing for a survivor for trauma is finding someone who is non-judgemental even tempered person and just hanging with them does wonders.
That's really interesting.
I wonder if that was gender based. I've read and listened to some work that while women are helped by talk, that men are best helped by something similar to what you note, hanging with some other guys, doing some stuff, maybe performing some sort of shared labor. It sounds odd, but I know that many men after some loss or trauma, will throw themselves into their work. The women in their lives often accuse them of not facing their grief, but it could possibly just be a mental difference between the two sexes.
You do have to be an outlier to get noticed. If you go around doing what everybody else does, you'll blend in to the background, and you also won't be doing anything terribly novel or intriguing.
Makes sense that discovery comes from people who are different.
Pretty much agree about the differentness getting people noticed. But it's the differentness, not the genius. The entire article sounds like some racist screed about how Dark Skinned People from Africa are stronger but dumb, or the sexist bullshit that wimminfolk can't do serious work because they go crazy every month.
Sorry everyone, but genius comes in all shapes and forms. And some of them live in McMansions in the suburbs, and enjoy football games. Just like "normal people".
And some remarkably obtuse people do eccentric things. Or sleep ten hours a day. Or four. Or not.
And some remarkably average people are quirky as all hell.
Or not.
As well, where is the certification agency that hands out genius certification? I need to talk to them.
I just heard that United is offering beating at half price!
You must be deaf. Plenty of people, like commentators here such as yourself, do say that abortion = killing babies. They're also off the Internet, watching Fox News and listening to right wing talk shows.
Or are you saying none of those people are Republicans or vote Republican?
He's having difficulty processing what happened, and is trying to apply his bubblethink to anyone who dares to point out that the problem runs deeper than people who just harm those who he considers "the other". It's going to be difficult for some folks to see that the stereotype that they have put together that marks anyone to the left of them as baby killers, gun rights activists, and every other stereotype of the liberal other. That has been a core principle that has been ramped up a few notches every election cycle, so this has gone beyond cognitive dissonance to shaking their very souls.
Seriously? Republicans are now responsible for this foolishness? Come on, you are talking about some minor "not in the main stream" things and ascribing it to the whole party. It's a logical fallacy of "guilt by association".
No you dumass. I said that it does not fit the narrative. Quit making up strawmen to beat up so you can strut around like a little cock-a-whoop.
The narrative that we see posted in here and all over the internet is that "liberals want to tke our guns away", and that the solution for these problems is more firearms in everyone's hands. The head of the NRA wants armed guards in every school.
But whatever their kookiness is, my point that you missed in your madcap haste to say I was painting with an overly large brush, is that an avowed and obvious liberal, who uses his second amendment right to own and use a gun despite his obvious mental illness, does not fit the narrative.
It doesn't fit. The people I know who can be counted on to quack about liberals coming after our guns after every other tragedy, which usually involves people they don't consider their own, and yes, I know a few who think Sandy Hook was a false flag, are experiencing shock that one of their own was injured by a left winger using a gun. They usually go into one of their sterotpyed rants about leftists trying to use every excuse to take their guns away, but they are still trying to process this, and are unusually quiet after this tragedy. It doesn't fit the narrative. This is hard for them.
Scalise is an American. I consider him one of my own. And it pisses me off that a deranged man so easily committed that crime. But I don't fit my friends narrative because I don't want people like the nut job who injured him and the others to own or posess firearms. I don't want to take normal people's guns away. But I certainly don't support the mentally ill having them. Perhaps you do support the mentally ill having access to weapons like that?
This is getting out of hand... WAY out of hand. The specific targeting of the right needs to end. I'm not talking about the nut jobs with guns, but those who engage in irresponsible verbal targeting that encourage the nut jobs with guns and provide them targeting.
Come on folks, all this hateful rhetoric needs to come to a full and final stop. Wow. While I agree that the hate is fully developed, are you for a minute suggesting that this is a matter that Liberals have suddenly declared war on the Right? I remember lots of death threats against the Kenyan Terror Baby Second amendment solutions is not a left wing inventions.
As for a full and final stop, what you want, martial law and elimination of the first amendment?
What I think was the shocking thing is that while for many years now, this has not been a thing regarding Republicans. There wasn't your level of outrage when Gabby Giffords took a head shot and 5 people were killed in Tuscon Arizona.
And the idea Sandy Hook was a false flag operation staged by liberals to enact gun control. Wasn't a whole lot of right wing outrage when that young fellow shot up a church full of Black folks. Mostly we heard about second amendment rights and that everyone should be armed.
But this is unnerving for many people, because it wasn't going according to the "script". This was a person who was in no way shape or form anything but a liberal. An unhinged one. That doesn't fit in with the second amendment narrative. Liberals hate guns, liberals are coming to take your guns away. Turns out we can all be hurt by nuts with firearms.
I don't know about other folks, but I use and enjoy my firearms. I'm a stable person, however. But if we stand in the way of keeping nut jobs from keeping them, This American horror story will simply repeat itself over and over.
Meanwhile, I hope that Representative Scalise and the others injured, make a speedy and full recovery, and commend the law and first responders for keeping the mayhem to a relative minimum, and for taking out the nutjob who did this crime.
The subsidies nonhydro renewable energy receives account for about 2 of the 10 cents per kWh while all other forms account for fractions of a penny. That's the problem, renewable subsidies are significantly higher then the profits, they would literally be loosing money if not for subsidies.
So anyhow, here is the question. Actually a couple. Are the non renewable energy sources going to last forever? Or if they aren't, we just fold up the tents and kill ourselves?
As well, should the US go to the concept of - if it doesn't work from the very beginning, doesn't spring like Venus from the ocean, fully formed, it must not be done? Not everything works right from the beginning, and susidies have allways been used, either through regular or th eultimate technology driver, total war.
In other words, allow the rest of the world to subsidize promising technology, and only adopt them after they are fully realized and in practice, which means no subsidies at all for anything, and America ceding technological leadership to the rest of the world.
Sounds like the USA's path to becoming a third world nation. Let China build the solar panels and energy efficient products, and the people in the US who can afford them can buy them, and be grateful that someone else is doing the hard work.
I know that it doesn't fit in with the marriage of fossil fuel interests and free market libertarians, but there is definitely a place for Government to encourage promising energy technologies. Because whether direct, or University driven research on all forms of energy generation, it's subsidies all the way down.
I wirelessly charged a Nexus 5 for years. Then an S8.
Works great. No issues.
Maybe if you use one that's designed properly or built some time after the 18th century you'd get along with it, luddite.
Maybe if you understood the laws of physics.
It's a transformer primary on the charging pad, a secondary inside the phone, and it performs the age old inductive coupleling transformer effect. It's about as cutting edge as vacuum tubes. There is nothing high tech about it. If given the choice between filling the space taken up by the secondary coil or battery, I'd take battery any day.
It's also terribly inefficient, and requires much more precision coupling than plugging into a cord or placing in a charging dock, and there are some applications of smartphones that it does not work at all for.
If you have no problem with it, then by golly, have a participation trophy. Your glowing feeling does not invalidate the laws of physics or its shortcomings.
My Sonicare toothbrush has been wirelessly charging every night for 15 years.
Wow. So Android didn't have it first. 8^)