That's why it would be great to recharge these cars from a solar or wind source, where possible.
That's why I recommend a wind generator be installed on every car. That way you can charge as you drive. Ever hang your hand out the car window and think "Wow, if I could just harness this power, I'd be rich!"
We should first worry about making alternative power sources viable as a replacement for fossil fuels, only then can we worry about their environmental impact.
Why only then? What good does it do to depend on corn based ethanol, for example, if you have to cut down all the (rain) forests to grow it? Really, you DO have to worry about what is environmentally friendly BEFORE you find yourself dependent on it.
These batteries are probably recyclable but it isn't cost effective, based on what I rad. So, the potential to recycle is there but are people actually going to do it?
Most people will, yes. Since most people won't be changing the batteries themselves, you can just mandate that mechanics recycle the batteries (and fine them heavily if they don't) and mechanics can just charge the customer the recycling fee, if any.
I think you're confusing cloning and "downloading" one's mind. I think (well, I hope) most people understand that a clone of you isn't you. At best, it is an identical twin, at worse... well, it is still just an identical twin. It still has to grow up and have its own experiences and all that.
Beyond the idea of a clone there seems to be this sci-fi dream that you could somehow capture your consciousness in some medium and insert it into another body. Presumably your original mind would be destroyed by the transfer process... or something like that.
Of course, all of this really begs the question(s) of what consciousness is and how it arises and whether or not it would transfer if you could make an exact copy of your brain and the information stored therein. My guess is that it wouldn't transfer. At best you'd have another person who acted like you and had the same memories. But because identity is ultimately very subjective (perhaps the epitome of subjective), outside observers could never really know if the original consciousness actually transfered. For similar reasons it would be impossible to tell if an AI was really conscious or just claiming to be conscious because that is what it was programmed to claim. Hell, if I wanted to go solipsist I could begin doubting that any consciousness exists at all outside of my own.:P
AOL's been spinning off their dial-up stuff for years. In Europe, they sold everything in 2006, and have been doing the same in the U.S.. They are putting all their eggs in a basket called "ad revenue", which while being a bad bet in the long run, in my book, is better than relying on selling something almost no one buys any more. --
Doesn't Google rely amlost exclusively on ad revenue? Or is the difference that Google is serving the ads and not just being a conduit for the ads?
Is Powerthirst a meme? I saw the video once but it isn't like the 300 meme where everybody and their brother feels they have to do some kind of 300 remix. And I hadn't even seen Mantage. Just looked it up though. It is amusing enough. I don't think that a funny Youtube video, in and of itself, counts as a meme.
Really, if you're going to complain about stupid internet memes, there's a whole lot more obvious ones to pick on like lolcatz or, as I mentioned, The 300. And don't forget about the rampant abuse of the demotivational poster meme which has gotten to the point where people just use it as a way of putting any old caption on a picture.
Oh my god, shut the fuck up. Every single time anybody on the Internet mentions an advertisement some d-bag has to pipe in with LOL WHAT ADS??? HUH I DONT UNDERSTAND OH LOLOLLLLLLLL I HAVE ADBLOCK GEE WHIZ. Nobody is impressed that you guys have figured out how to use AdBlock.
It just boggles my mind that people wouldn't want to take that easy step of blocking ads. The difference it makes in my browsing experience is just astounding.
Sorry to annoy you, Coward. But I'm going to keep on commenting any time someone complains about annoying advertising. I don't care if it makes me the d-bag. If I can get one person to try Adblock, I've positively impacted someone else's life. And that is what matters to me.
May I suggest walking them through turning on Remote Desktop. Might save you (and them) some frustration. Or maybe try this [lifehacker.com] if setting up Terminal Services is too much trouble. Works for me.
Still a pain in the ass for someone (me) who doesn't really use Windows on a regular basis. I hate supporting Windows and dealing with its "quirks" with a passion. But I can't say no to my parents when they need help. *shrug*
That's one of the arguments *for* installing Linux. Very easy to support remotely. Just whack Ubuntu on, and tell them it's Windows Vista or something.
They're old, not stupid. Besides, supporting Linux isn't the issue. Just getting them to the point where supporting it is the only issue is the issue. My dad runs so much Windows-only crap that it isn't even funny. He's uses the computer for much more than web browsing and email.
When the same company provides your cable service (including your cable pay-per-view service), your internet service, AND produces media content themselves; is there any doubt that this will cause a serious conflict of interest that will harm the consumer? Time-Warner has EVERY incentive to keep you from using movie download services instead of their own pay-per-view service and EVERY incentive to stop movie/TV pirate sites (to keep you from pirating Warner movies and TV).
Of course, it couldn't have anything to do with bandwidth, could it? I'm inclined to sympathize with ISPs. Remember, they still oversell their bandwidth. That is just the way being an ISP works. While they might be able to saturate their last mile connection to your home, they can't support that same usage over their peering connections. The internet just wouldn't work if everyone used all their available bandwidth all the time. Just like the telephone system couldn't support everyone making a phone call at the same time. From what I understand, just having everyone pick up the phone at once would be a problem. Even if they didn't dial. Same thing with public water. The system would crash if everyone used water like they are using bandwidth.
This is why consolidation in media is such a BAD, BAD, BAD thing for consumers. When one single company (or even small group of companies) owns your newspaper, television stations, internet service, telephone company, cable company, etc. they basically own *YOU*.
While I agree with this, I have to say that having your P2P (or even iTunes) traffic throttled is probably the least of your problems in a consolodated media world.
I know Linux kernel devs have been switching up the schedulers lately. Well, last year or so. You could conceivably notice that and even get excited about it depending on how it helps multimedia and such. For any other OS, changing the process scheduler and pager would be a pretty big deal.
Of course, it *is* just the kernel. There is so much more to a modern OS that it is hard to stay focused on the kernel unless you're a developer.
As much as I hate (detest, revile) to admit that a good Vista is good for everyone in someways (slower viruses, etc.),... oh wait. I can't get over hoping Vista dies a horrible flaming death. I don't mean to flame/troll... I know I'm biased.
I am similarly conflicted. On one hand I want the spectacle. On the other I know that I'm just going to have to support it over the phone for my parents.
And let me just head off anyone who is going to suggest "install Linux for them" or "get them to buy a mac..." I will say that I live thousands of miles away from them and, quite frankly, they're getting older and the change would probably be more trouble than it is worth.
Government interference in and regulation of capitalism is a bad thing. If you're jealous that somebody is more successful than you
WTF are you talking about? I just don't want corporations to rape the environment and abuse the workforce. And that is exactly the kinds of things they have historically done (as a rule, not an exception) in this country and continue to do around the world without a great deal of government regulation. Have you been to a country where industry is allowed pollute and treat their workers as they please? It is aweful. Absolutely aweful. The only reason the environment is as good as it is in the US (relatively speaking, of course. We still aren't suggested to eat much fish out of the Mississippi River, for example) is because we heavily regulate industry. And we still have some way to go.
What do people mean by "performance." What exactly are we talking about? The amount of time it takes to start a program? Multitasking abilities? How long it takes to copy a file on the hard drive or the network? Or is it smaller stuff like fractions of a second delay in opening the "Start" (or whatever they're calling it now) menu? Boot up time?
What does "turn[ing] off everything that differentiates vista from XP" actually do to make Vista faster? Does it just free up more RAM? Because if that is all it does, I'd say buy more RAM. It is cheap.
Not quite. Libertarians wouldn't be giving them handouts, bailing them out, giving them monopolies, subsiding them, etc.
... or regulating their practices when they do get monopolies, or imposing environmental regulations, or any number of regulations that currently keep corporations in check. My impression is that Corporate America is limited by government far more than it is helped.
Here's the way I see it: Take a party whose default position is to not interfere with corporations at all. Now subject them to the same corruptive pressures as all other politicians are under and you basically come out with a government that serves corporate interest because politicians are corrupt and doesn't regulate corporations because it is against political ideology. Worst of both worlds. I'd rather have a government that at least recognizes that corporations and industry needs to be regulated.
No. Libertarians are opposed to corporate welfare, and also regulations that are written to give the corporate establishment a competitive advantage and keep potential competitors out of the game.
I guess it depends on what corporation you are. If you already have a monopoly, a libertarian is less likely to want to break you up or regulate your practices. (say good-bye to DoJ vs. Microsoft, for example). And if you're industry, you get a free pass to dump on/rape teh the environment. Say good-bye to national parks and protected lands (owned by the government). The logging industry would have a field-day... especially since they would have no obligation to do even simple things like, I dunno, plant trees behind them?
Plus, all the lush government contracts would be gone, no more $3000 toilet seats...
How so? Does Libertarianism dictate that the government no longer buys such mundane things as toilet seats? Why should a libertarian pay less for it? How much is paid to government contractors has nothing to do with political ideology. It isn't like there is some Democrat by-law that says "Thou shalt overpay contractors." It just happens due to corruption, and nobody is immune to corruption. Not even libertarians.
I know this is off topic, but I've been wondering how various waste reprocessing technologies affect the waste disposal issue. If we are able to reprocess waste (breader reactors?), does that make the final waste less dangerous? Can we dig up existing waste and reprocess it?
I say a vote for a candidate who will vote in laws I don't want is worse than a wasted vote. I'm splitting my vote between the Greens and the Libertarians. I'm not wasting my vote on a Republicrat, whether Obama, Clinton, or McCain. I, for one, do NOT welcome our old corporate overloirds, and I, for one, refuse to follow their unconstitutional laws.
Wait a minute. Wouldn't a Libertarian president/senate/congress be a corporate wet dream?
You should just do it. Ad-hominem attacks are always the highest form of logical argument IMHO.
What logical argument? I was giving my opinion on how inconsequential 5-10 lbs is with regards to a woman's general "hotness" and you injected some non-sequitur about hacking that amount of fat of my own body with a knife. I will concede that it doesn't necessarily make you "retarded" but the comment was pretty stupid and pointless.
So how about I say "that was retarded" instead of "you are retarded" and we can forget about all the ad hom B.S. Maybe you are normally a genius with a razor wit and you were just having an "off" day. Who knows.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why I recommend a wind generator be installed on every car. That way you can charge as you drive. Ever hang your hand out the car window and think "Wow, if I could just harness this power, I'd be rich!"
-matthew
Why only then? What good does it do to depend on corn based ethanol, for example, if you have to cut down all the (rain) forests to grow it? Really, you DO have to worry about what is environmentally friendly BEFORE you find yourself dependent on it.
-matthew
Most people will, yes. Since most people won't be changing the batteries themselves, you can just mandate that mechanics recycle the batteries (and fine them heavily if they don't) and mechanics can just charge the customer the recycling fee, if any.
-matthew
If it is anything like my laptop, it'll start off at 300 mile range and slowly decrease to about 150 within a year or so.
-matthew
I think you're confusing cloning and "downloading" one's mind. I think (well, I hope) most people understand that a clone of you isn't you. At best, it is an identical twin, at worse... well, it is still just an identical twin. It still has to grow up and have its own experiences and all that.
:P
Beyond the idea of a clone there seems to be this sci-fi dream that you could somehow capture your consciousness in some medium and insert it into another body. Presumably your original mind would be destroyed by the transfer process... or something like that.
Of course, all of this really begs the question(s) of what consciousness is and how it arises and whether or not it would transfer if you could make an exact copy of your brain and the information stored therein. My guess is that it wouldn't transfer. At best you'd have another person who acted like you and had the same memories. But because identity is ultimately very subjective (perhaps the epitome of subjective), outside observers could never really know if the original consciousness actually transfered. For similar reasons it would be impossible to tell if an AI was really conscious or just claiming to be conscious because that is what it was programmed to claim. Hell, if I wanted to go solipsist I could begin doubting that any consciousness exists at all outside of my own.
-matthew
Doesn't Google rely amlost exclusively on ad revenue? Or is the difference that Google is serving the ads and not just being a conduit for the ads?
Is Powerthirst a meme? I saw the video once but it isn't like the 300 meme where everybody and their brother feels they have to do some kind of 300 remix. And I hadn't even seen Mantage. Just looked it up though. It is amusing enough. I don't think that a funny Youtube video, in and of itself, counts as a meme.
Really, if you're going to complain about stupid internet memes, there's a whole lot more obvious ones to pick on like lolcatz or, as I mentioned, The 300. And don't forget about the rampant abuse of the demotivational poster meme which has gotten to the point where people just use it as a way of putting any old caption on a picture.
It just boggles my mind that people wouldn't want to take that easy step of blocking ads. The difference it makes in my browsing experience is just astounding.
Sorry to annoy you, Coward. But I'm going to keep on commenting any time someone complains about annoying advertising. I don't care if it makes me the d-bag. If I can get one person to try Adblock, I've positively impacted someone else's life. And that is what matters to me.
-matthew
Still a pain in the ass for someone (me) who doesn't really use Windows on a regular basis. I hate supporting Windows and dealing with its "quirks" with a passion. But I can't say no to my parents when they need help. *shrug*
Really? I found that nearly all internet advertising disappears somewhere around the time AdBlock Plus we released. My theory is that...
*disables adblock*
OMG, WTF? People are still looking at that kind of crap on a daily basis?
The only non-crappy ad is a blocked ad.
-matthew
Didn't Bill Gates once say, "127.0.0.1 should be enough for anybody." Damn, he's always so short sited.
Have we reached Peak IP?
They're old, not stupid. Besides, supporting Linux isn't the issue. Just getting them to the point where supporting it is the only issue is the issue. My dad runs so much Windows-only crap that it isn't even funny. He's uses the computer for much more than web browsing and email.
OS X would be my first choice for them.
-matthew
Of course, it couldn't have anything to do with bandwidth, could it? I'm inclined to sympathize with ISPs. Remember, they still oversell their bandwidth. That is just the way being an ISP works. While they might be able to saturate their last mile connection to your home, they can't support that same usage over their peering connections. The internet just wouldn't work if everyone used all their available bandwidth all the time. Just like the telephone system couldn't support everyone making a phone call at the same time. From what I understand, just having everyone pick up the phone at once would be a problem. Even if they didn't dial. Same thing with public water. The system would crash if everyone used water like they are using bandwidth.
While I agree with this, I have to say that having your P2P (or even iTunes) traffic throttled is probably the least of your problems in a consolodated media world.
-matthew
I know Linux kernel devs have been switching up the schedulers lately. Well, last year or so. You could conceivably notice that and even get excited about it depending on how it helps multimedia and such. For any other OS, changing the process scheduler and pager would be a pretty big deal.
Of course, it *is* just the kernel. There is so much more to a modern OS that it is hard to stay focused on the kernel unless you're a developer.
-matthew
Please. SP1 has more electrolytes than your body has room for. It'll run so fast they'll think your computer is from Kenya!
I am similarly conflicted. On one hand I want the spectacle. On the other I know that I'm just going to have to support it over the phone for my parents.
And let me just head off anyone who is going to suggest "install Linux for them" or "get them to buy a mac..." I will say that I live thousands of miles away from them and, quite frankly, they're getting older and the change would probably be more trouble than it is worth.
-matthew
WTF are you talking about? I just don't want corporations to rape the environment and abuse the workforce. And that is exactly the kinds of things they have historically done (as a rule, not an exception) in this country and continue to do around the world without a great deal of government regulation. Have you been to a country where industry is allowed pollute and treat their workers as they please? It is aweful. Absolutely aweful. The only reason the environment is as good as it is in the US (relatively speaking, of course. We still aren't suggested to eat much fish out of the Mississippi River, for example) is because we heavily regulate industry. And we still have some way to go.
-matthew
What do people mean by "performance." What exactly are we talking about? The amount of time it takes to start a program? Multitasking abilities? How long it takes to copy a file on the hard drive or the network? Or is it smaller stuff like fractions of a second delay in opening the "Start" (or whatever they're calling it now) menu? Boot up time?
What does "turn[ing] off everything that differentiates vista from XP" actually do to make Vista faster? Does it just free up more RAM? Because if that is all it does, I'd say buy more RAM. It is cheap.
-matthew
Does that mean users would be forced to use the abomination that is RealPlayer? All I can say is "Haha!"
Here's the way I see it: Take a party whose default position is to not interfere with corporations at all. Now subject them to the same corruptive pressures as all other politicians are under and you basically come out with a government that serves corporate interest because politicians are corrupt and doesn't regulate corporations because it is against political ideology. Worst of both worlds. I'd rather have a government that at least recognizes that corporations and industry needs to be regulated.
I guess it depends on what corporation you are. If you already have a monopoly, a libertarian is less likely to want to break you up or regulate your practices. (say good-bye to DoJ vs. Microsoft, for example). And if you're industry, you get a free pass to dump on/rape teh the environment. Say good-bye to national parks and protected lands (owned by the government). The logging industry would have a field-day... especially since they would have no obligation to do even simple things like, I dunno, plant trees behind them?
How so? Does Libertarianism dictate that the government no longer buys such mundane things as toilet seats? Why should a libertarian pay less for it? How much is paid to government contractors has nothing to do with political ideology. It isn't like there is some Democrat by-law that says "Thou shalt overpay contractors." It just happens due to corruption, and nobody is immune to corruption. Not even libertarians.
-matthew
I know this is off topic, but I've been wondering how various waste reprocessing technologies affect the waste disposal issue. If we are able to reprocess waste (breader reactors?), does that make the final waste less dangerous? Can we dig up existing waste and reprocess it?
Wait a minute. Wouldn't a Libertarian president/senate/congress be a corporate wet dream?
What logical argument? I was giving my opinion on how inconsequential 5-10 lbs is with regards to a woman's general "hotness" and you injected some non-sequitur about hacking that amount of fat of my own body with a knife. I will concede that it doesn't necessarily make you "retarded" but the comment was pretty stupid and pointless.
So how about I say "that was retarded" instead of "you are retarded" and we can forget about all the ad hom B.S. Maybe you are normally a genius with a razor wit and you were just having an "off" day. Who knows.
-maatthew