C14 is rare and hard to extract in nature. On the other hand, if you bombard cheap C12 with neutrons for a few decades, you create a a block with a high concentration of (more) easily extracted C14. Much the same as it's easier to wash the gold contacts off an old DIMM than it is to extract gold from raw ore. The difference is that the commercial market for C14 is too small to consider recycling. C14-doped diamond as a power source has at least the potential to provide such a market. A pretty niche market, where you want a few thousand years of electricity (presumably to power electronics that will fail after a few decades), but it's a cool use of otherwise dangerous waste material.
I wonder how it's output/mass compares to that of a radioactive thermal generator.
TFA claims it can do 0.2 mW/g (vs 8 for alkaline battery). It looks like Pu-238 decay heat is around 540 mW/g, with half life of 90 years, but 90-95% of that will be lost in conversion to electricity, and it will require substantial mass for that conversion and shielding.
All of this fake news is destroying our country. Good thing we just elected a President committed to rooting out vicious lies told by the media and to holding them accountable.
Honestly, this all sounds like the opening volleys of an astroturf campaign to restrict freedom of speech and freedom of press.
You might to keep up on whether they have your SSN. I refused. five years later, I get a new job and new insurance. The insurance company got my SSN from my employer and they in turn gave it to my eye doctor. I have tried to get them to get rid of my SSN, but every time they submit a payment, the SSN comes back to them.
This is to make sure you're not cheating your government out of medicare, medicaid, insurance supplements, or tax benefits. It may only be a legal requirement for medicare recipients, but they are a large enough fraction of health care customers that they dictate process for all the rest of us.
Fake news is much more interesting than real news.
Most of us like a good story, and it hardly matters whether the story is true. "Fantastic Beasts" is a great story that people are willing to pay good money for: it's got a more-or-less coherent plot, the motivations of all parties are clearly laid out, and it resolves to a recognizable end. Hillary's emails? Donald's cabinet? Not so much. Fake stories involving real people, like Kardashian nude tweets, is the best of both worlds.
I'm pretty sure China will have no issues ignoring all moral quandries about experimenting on prisoners and will press on regardless
If they do, they won't be able to publish in any Western peer-reviewed journal, all of which contain some version 'studies must conform to the declaration of Helsinki' and all of which ask reviewers whether there are any ethical concerns regarding human or animal experiments.
Important note: Nwabudike Morgan is a fictional character from the Civilization series meant to epitomize/caricature the ruthless/sociopathic entrepreneur. Quoting him, instead of Ayn Rand, should be seen as sarcasm.
Pretty much every economists (the lefties and the righties) agree that we would be better off taxing things that we want less of (e.g. pollution) rather than things we want more of (e.g. work). If the tax money has to come from somewhere, changing behavior makes the most sense.
Which is why the founding fathers ran the country essentially off excise taxes. We could do this today: just slap a 1400% tax on alcohol and cigarette sales, and we can do away with all of the income-tested taxes. Sure, there might be some complaints over $20 beers ($70 at your local bar), but wouldn't it be good to return to the economic vision the country was built on?
I'm sincerely interested in knowing what your point is.
His point is that between 100,000 years ago (last ice age) and 100 years ago, the planet warmed by about 3 degrees. In the last 100 years, the planet has warmed by another 3 degrees. So, when Mr Ebell claims that 3 degrees is well within historical ranges, he's looking only at the delta and not the velocity.
Waffle Iron is exaggerating a bit, though - it really only took 10,000 years of warming to end the ice age, and the temperature division between pre- and post-industrial revolution is probably more like 4:2 than 3:3. Still 4 degrees in 10,000 years is two orders of magnitude faster than 2 degrees in 100. You can get downtown by walking at 1 m/s or by 100 m/s bullet train. Same trip, same distance. One takes 5 minutes, the other takes 8 hours. Also, it hurts a lot more if the bullet train hits you that if the walker hits you.
And what makes you think the current Republican establishment will still be in power a year from now?
The facts that Republicans won up and down the ticket yesterday and the next election is not until 2018. There are very few ways to interpret the 2016 election as anything other than a ringing popular endorsement of Republican policies. Seriously: look at the map for US House. The people have spoken, and they love the America in Decline narrative. They said the same thing in 2014.
Oh, yes, the Republican establishment has had such roaring success in making Donald dance to their tune so far.
Have you actually seen any of Trump's policy proposals, or have you just been watching the "who's a bigger liar" show? Trump's policy proposals, except trade, are pretty generic GOP boilerplate: repeal Obamacare, massive tax cuts, massive military expansion, secure the borders.
The only things GOP doesn't like about Trump are his language and his trade-protectionism (and they're not all that angry about the latter)
And that only half of them would land within 50 meters of the target. That's WWI accuracy from GPS-guided bullets that cost nearly $1 million each.
To be fair, the biggest WWII guns only had a range of 24 miles and a pattern size of 200 m. So half the accuracy at a quarter of the range. No argument over the cost, though: these "guns" are basically high rate of fire cruise missile launchers.
The US military isn't so much about winning wars as it is a jobs program. In the 1930s, we had the Works Project Administration, handing out menial jobs building pointless roads. Today, we have DoD, handing out engineering jobs building impractical weapon systems. You can win certain kinds of wars with impractical and expensive weapons: short wars against wildly mismatched powers, and the profits keep a lot of other engineering projects alive.
"Cable TV Price Increases Have Beaten Inflation Every Single Year For 20 Years"
I don't think any of us needed a study to tell us this.
I did. I think Comcast is paying me $10/month to hold onto one of their cable boxes and list my name as a TV subscriber for a year. Haven't even taken it out of the shipping box. I know the list price of the TV is some positive number, and I'm sure that's the one the FCC claims has been rising 6%/year, but that's not what I'm paying. I've got a $60/month internet connection that I only pay $50 for, and TV is free.
At the end of the year, I send the box back. Two months later, Comcast calls up and offers to pay me some sum to hold onto another box. I really don't get the business model - you'd think they could find cheaper warehousing for all their excess cable boxes. Or maybe just not buy so many in the first place.
I can see paying a 5% premium to be in a neighborhood where FTTH is installed. Where the cable company isn't just competing with DSL and satellite, but with a comparable technology. We've all heard that the incumbent ISP drop their prices as soon as google moves into the neighborhood, so I might even imagine recouping some of that purchase premium through lower ISP rates.
This story isn't about AT&T knowing the content of your communication, but only with whom. The Metadata.
If you're concerned that the simple fact you exchange messages with another specific person or site could set the black helicopters on you (or them), then a wireless broadcast, decryptable only by your pre-arranged partner will protect you better than encrypted, wired communication.
Can you describe "technically legal but shady as fuck" "rigging"?
Armed, private-citizen "poll watchers" are legal in many states. Even unarmed, but organized gangs of "poll watchers" can be intimidating without being illegal. To my knowledge, only one candidate has claimed that voter fraud is rampant or encouraged "poll watchers."
If you're asking about the acts of DNC during the primaries, the most commonly cited examples are the nominally impartial DNC discussing ways to discredit Sanders' religion, and their decision to limit debates to the number proposed by the Clinton camp. The former happened, and its bad behavior, but it's not likely to have swayed the outcome. The latter happened, but who cares?
Trump wasn't complaining about having to fight off women who throw themselves at him, which I'm sure does happen. He was bragging about being able to do whatever he wants to anyone he wants as a privilege of his power. He was bragging about abusing his star power.
If these transcripts are "news" I think they're good publicity for Mrs. Clinton. It shows that she'll think twice before laying into Wall Street. Regardless of whether or not you like her, her opinions and policies are well thought through and make sense.
The problem is that few voters will read the transcripts. Few websites will link to the transcripts. People, generally, don't care to learn for themselves what was said, but are happy to accept the sound-bite interpretation from their favorite, echo-chamber "news" source.
So, when he said "they let you do it" there's actually no "they let you" in that sentence?
The quote is "When you're a star, they let you." Like you "let" your boss call you an idiot. "When you're a star," you can use your fame and money to abuse people, because they know they can't fight back. "When you're a star," people will let you do things that they would never consent to.
With Trump, anything he wants to do will be an uphill battle with Congress. He won't get a rubber stamp in Congress. Roadblocks will be placed everywhere. He'll have to work with Congress to get anything done.
Trump has never had to work with committees: his management is all decree and delegate. Throw in a good bit of "what can I get away with, without violating the letter of these loan covenants." The executive branch sets a lot of regulation and policy that have the force of law without actually being law or subject to congressional approval. Likewise, recent administrations seem to have substantially increased the scope of executive order. Don't underestimate what a President can do without congress.
Especially a charismatic President well versed in media manipulation.
Public position: I'm against TPP now guys
Private position: Bring on the TPP
She can be in favor of free trade and against the TPP. In fact, that's exactly Trump's position: he's in favor of free trade, he's just convinced that the existing agreements (and TPP) were bad deals that need to be renegotiated.
Trump is less vulnerable simply because he's not as repugnant of a person as is Hillary, not even close.
Trump is less vulnerable because, as a billionaire, he can ensure that any disagreements are settled in civil court. As a private citizen, he can ensure that non-disclosure agreements are part of any legal settlements. Clinton has been under the political microscope, which is only just now focusing on Trump, for 30 years.
He can parade a group of women (that he, himself has called unattractive gold-diggers) to accuse Bill Clinton of sexual assault, while holding his own set of allegations paid to go away hidden. Her on-camera statements are all authentic, deeply held beliefs. BS he says during interviews is all just a public character played for ratings.
He can hold up any government misjudgement in the last 30 years and put it on a Clinton. Government is big, some of the decisions are life-or-death, the consequences are very public, and hindsight will show those mistakes. Trump's own misjudgements, whether they're failed businesses, unpaid contractors, or just plain fraud, are basically private and mostly hidden behind layers of incorporation and settlement-without-guilt. A billion-dollar casino fails - that's just business; really only affects a few hundred employees, and they all just go get new jobs. Maybe they sue him for $0.10 on the $1. Failure was probably more due to the incompetent managers he hired than to his own decisions, anyway.
Slashdot Mirror
C14 is rare and hard to extract in nature. On the other hand, if you bombard cheap C12 with neutrons for a few decades, you create a a block with a high concentration of (more) easily extracted C14. Much the same as it's easier to wash the gold contacts off an old DIMM than it is to extract gold from raw ore. The difference is that the commercial market for C14 is too small to consider recycling. C14-doped diamond as a power source has at least the potential to provide such a market. A pretty niche market, where you want a few thousand years of electricity (presumably to power electronics that will fail after a few decades), but it's a cool use of otherwise dangerous waste material.
I wonder how it's output/mass compares to that of a radioactive thermal generator.
TFA claims it can do 0.2 mW/g (vs 8 for alkaline battery). It looks like Pu-238 decay heat is around 540 mW/g, with half life of 90 years, but 90-95% of that will be lost in conversion to electricity, and it will require substantial mass for that conversion and shielding.
All of this fake news is destroying our country. Good thing we just elected a President committed to rooting out vicious lies told by the media and to holding them accountable.
Honestly, this all sounds like the opening volleys of an astroturf campaign to restrict freedom of speech and freedom of press.
You might to keep up on whether they have your SSN. I refused. five years later, I get a new job and new insurance. The insurance company got my SSN from my employer and they in turn gave it to my eye doctor. I have tried to get them to get rid of my SSN, but every time they submit a payment, the SSN comes back to them.
This is to make sure you're not cheating your government out of medicare, medicaid, insurance supplements, or tax benefits. It may only be a legal requirement for medicare recipients, but they are a large enough fraction of health care customers that they dictate process for all the rest of us.
Fake news is much more interesting than real news.
Most of us like a good story, and it hardly matters whether the story is true. "Fantastic Beasts" is a great story that people are willing to pay good money for: it's got a more-or-less coherent plot, the motivations of all parties are clearly laid out, and it resolves to a recognizable end. Hillary's emails? Donald's cabinet? Not so much. Fake stories involving real people, like Kardashian nude tweets, is the best of both worlds.
I'm pretty sure China will have no issues ignoring all moral quandries about experimenting on prisoners and will press on regardless
If they do, they won't be able to publish in any Western peer-reviewed journal, all of which contain some version 'studies must conform to the declaration of Helsinki' and all of which ask reviewers whether there are any ethical concerns regarding human or animal experiments.
Turns out humans have done a lot of research on shit, and we know the right answer for a lot of things already.
As we used to say: a few months in the laboratory can save hours in the library.
>Resources exist to be consumed
Citation needed.
Important note: Nwabudike Morgan is a fictional character from the Civilization series meant to epitomize/caricature the ruthless/sociopathic entrepreneur. Quoting him, instead of Ayn Rand, should be seen as sarcasm.
Pretty much every economists (the lefties and the righties) agree that we would be better off taxing things that we want less of (e.g. pollution) rather than things we want more of (e.g. work). If the tax money has to come from somewhere, changing behavior makes the most sense.
Which is why the founding fathers ran the country essentially off excise taxes. We could do this today: just slap a 1400% tax on alcohol and cigarette sales, and we can do away with all of the income-tested taxes. Sure, there might be some complaints over $20 beers ($70 at your local bar), but wouldn't it be good to return to the economic vision the country was built on?
I'm sincerely interested in knowing what your point is.
His point is that between 100,000 years ago (last ice age) and 100 years ago, the planet warmed by about 3 degrees. In the last 100 years, the planet has warmed by another 3 degrees. So, when Mr Ebell claims that 3 degrees is well within historical ranges, he's looking only at the delta and not the velocity.
Waffle Iron is exaggerating a bit, though - it really only took 10,000 years of warming to end the ice age, and the temperature division between pre- and post-industrial revolution is probably more like 4:2 than 3:3. Still 4 degrees in 10,000 years is two orders of magnitude faster than 2 degrees in 100. You can get downtown by walking at 1 m/s or by 100 m/s bullet train. Same trip, same distance. One takes 5 minutes, the other takes 8 hours. Also, it hurts a lot more if the bullet train hits you that if the walker hits you.
And what makes you think the current Republican establishment will still be in power a year from now?
The facts that Republicans won up and down the ticket yesterday and the next election is not until 2018. There are very few ways to interpret the 2016 election as anything other than a ringing popular endorsement of Republican policies. Seriously: look at the map for US House. The people have spoken, and they love the America in Decline narrative. They said the same thing in 2014.
Oh, yes, the Republican establishment has had such roaring success in making Donald dance to their tune so far.
Have you actually seen any of Trump's policy proposals, or have you just been watching the "who's a bigger liar" show? Trump's policy proposals, except trade, are pretty generic GOP boilerplate: repeal Obamacare, massive tax cuts, massive military expansion, secure the borders.
The only things GOP doesn't like about Trump are his language and his trade-protectionism (and they're not all that angry about the latter)
Apostrophes also indicate possession.
but not when used for the word {it's}
No, he's right. I see all the time: it's, their's, her's and hi's. Sometimes it goes along with your's, our's, and min'e,
And that only half of them would land within 50 meters of the target. That's WWI accuracy from GPS-guided bullets that cost nearly $1 million each.
To be fair, the biggest WWII guns only had a range of 24 miles and a pattern size of 200 m. So half the accuracy at a quarter of the range. No argument over the cost, though: these "guns" are basically high rate of fire cruise missile launchers.
The US military isn't so much about winning wars as it is a jobs program. In the 1930s, we had the Works Project Administration, handing out menial jobs building pointless roads. Today, we have DoD, handing out engineering jobs building impractical weapon systems. You can win certain kinds of wars with impractical and expensive weapons: short wars against wildly mismatched powers, and the profits keep a lot of other engineering projects alive.
"Cable TV Price Increases Have Beaten Inflation Every Single Year For 20 Years"
I don't think any of us needed a study to tell us this.
I did. I think Comcast is paying me $10/month to hold onto one of their cable boxes and list my name as a TV subscriber for a year. Haven't even taken it out of the shipping box. I know the list price of the TV is some positive number, and I'm sure that's the one the FCC claims has been rising 6%/year, but that's not what I'm paying. I've got a $60/month internet connection that I only pay $50 for, and TV is free.
At the end of the year, I send the box back. Two months later, Comcast calls up and offers to pay me some sum to hold onto another box. I really don't get the business model - you'd think they could find cheaper warehousing for all their excess cable boxes. Or maybe just not buy so many in the first place.
If they don't validate their 3rd party partners, how are they any different from Ebay?
I can see paying a 5% premium to be in a neighborhood where FTTH is installed. Where the cable company isn't just competing with DSL and satellite, but with a comparable technology. We've all heard that the incumbent ISP drop their prices as soon as google moves into the neighborhood, so I might even imagine recouping some of that purchase premium through lower ISP rates.
This story isn't about AT&T knowing the content of your communication, but only with whom. The Metadata.
If you're concerned that the simple fact you exchange messages with another specific person or site could set the black helicopters on you (or them), then a wireless broadcast, decryptable only by your pre-arranged partner will protect you better than encrypted, wired communication.
Can you describe "technically legal but shady as fuck" "rigging"?
Armed, private-citizen "poll watchers" are legal in many states. Even unarmed, but organized gangs of "poll watchers" can be intimidating without being illegal. To my knowledge, only one candidate has claimed that voter fraud is rampant or encouraged "poll watchers."
If you're asking about the acts of DNC during the primaries, the most commonly cited examples are the nominally impartial DNC discussing ways to discredit Sanders' religion, and their decision to limit debates to the number proposed by the Clinton camp. The former happened, and its bad behavior, but it's not likely to have swayed the outcome. The latter happened, but who cares?
Trump wasn't complaining about having to fight off women who throw themselves at him, which I'm sure does happen. He was bragging about being able to do whatever he wants to anyone he wants as a privilege of his power. He was bragging about abusing his star power.
If these transcripts are "news" I think they're good publicity for Mrs. Clinton. It shows that she'll think twice before laying into Wall Street. Regardless of whether or not you like her, her opinions and policies are well thought through and make sense.
The problem is that few voters will read the transcripts. Few websites will link to the transcripts. People, generally, don't care to learn for themselves what was said, but are happy to accept the sound-bite interpretation from their favorite, echo-chamber "news" source.
So, when he said "they let you do it" there's actually no "they let you" in that sentence?
The quote is "When you're a star, they let you." Like you "let" your boss call you an idiot. "When you're a star," you can use your fame and money to abuse people, because they know they can't fight back. "When you're a star," people will let you do things that they would never consent to.
With Trump, anything he wants to do will be an uphill battle with Congress. He won't get a rubber stamp in Congress. Roadblocks will be placed everywhere. He'll have to work with Congress to get anything done.
Trump has never had to work with committees: his management is all decree and delegate. Throw in a good bit of "what can I get away with, without violating the letter of these loan covenants." The executive branch sets a lot of regulation and policy that have the force of law without actually being law or subject to congressional approval. Likewise, recent administrations seem to have substantially increased the scope of executive order. Don't underestimate what a President can do without congress.
Especially a charismatic President well versed in media manipulation.
Public position: I'm against TPP now guys
Private position: Bring on the TPP
She can be in favor of free trade and against the TPP. In fact, that's exactly Trump's position: he's in favor of free trade, he's just convinced that the existing agreements (and TPP) were bad deals that need to be renegotiated.
Trump is less vulnerable simply because he's not as repugnant of a person as is Hillary, not even close.
Trump is less vulnerable because, as a billionaire, he can ensure that any disagreements are settled in civil court. As a private citizen, he can ensure that non-disclosure agreements are part of any legal settlements. Clinton has been under the political microscope, which is only just now focusing on Trump, for 30 years.
He can parade a group of women (that he, himself has called unattractive gold-diggers) to accuse Bill Clinton of sexual assault, while holding his own set of allegations paid to go away hidden. Her on-camera statements are all authentic, deeply held beliefs. BS he says during interviews is all just a public character played for ratings.
He can hold up any government misjudgement in the last 30 years and put it on a Clinton. Government is big, some of the decisions are life-or-death, the consequences are very public, and hindsight will show those mistakes. Trump's own misjudgements, whether they're failed businesses, unpaid contractors, or just plain fraud, are basically private and mostly hidden behind layers of incorporation and settlement-without-guilt. A billion-dollar casino fails - that's just business; really only affects a few hundred employees, and they all just go get new jobs. Maybe they sue him for $0.10 on the $1. Failure was probably more due to the incompetent managers he hired than to his own decisions, anyway.