The release date lag is just to remind you constantly that you suck at making video games, you're lucky we aren't charging you more. If there was any competition, make the release date late in the US for a couple hit games, and we'll get the message, until then, keep whining and be glad it's getting released for you at all.
There are plenty of those maps already, and telescopes are placed at some of these locations. A high resolution map in a city is meaningless except on a dry windy cloudless night that has blown all particulate matter away, so maybe then the scatter from lights will be low, so there will be local dark spots, where you see the stars well. I doubt the scatter is ever that low. So I think you are correct, there is no value here, besides aesthetic.
I think MMS is a much bigger issue. If I you can't get pics of hot girls on your cell, nobody is gonna switch. I would have already switched to GV if it supported MMS.
I meant you'd have to buy another Mac, thus spending $2,000 total. I did not know you could replace their batteries, but either way you can't replace them now. So just move my story 1 or 2 yrs forward and it all makes sense, and is a reason not to buy a mac.
They get hacked quicker than Windows and now this?
Paying twice the price for something that lasts half as long as their competitors seems nonsensical to me.
Although they do look pretty, and that counts a lot.
Posted from my 4yr old $500 (at the time) Acer. The battery went about 2 yrs ago, so if I had a Mac I'd have to upgrade and be out $2,000 by now.
Well prices should go up then. Flying planes into remote areas to deliver mail at 40cents an envelope is nonsensical. UPS and DHL and FEDEX could easily compete if they were allowed to. The USPS is not vital at all.
Roads are infrastructure, and you can't just have other companies building out a competing set of roads, there are a limited amount of roads to be built. State planning is necessary.
Everyone benefits from roads, and everyone used to benefit from the postal service, but now most important paperwork is done electronically. Now the USPS is mostly a subsidized delivery service for old people that still write letters. It's also great for spammers to fill my mailbox up with junk.
It doesn't forbid competition as the law does now. It's illegal to compete in first class mail service. Allow competition and stop bailing them out and they'll crumble.
We can have a post office at the whitehouse, but that doesn't mean we have to fund it. I would definitely support getting rid of crappy snail mail services that lose billions each year. It's about time for an amendment to that.
East coast. That's my point, it's made locally, therefore in the USA it's not made with sugar. And in other countries sugar is cheap, because they don't tax it to death, and often they can grow it locally, so coke is made with it.
Ha, I have NEVER seen it in a grocery store. They switched because of some sugar tax in the 50s. Then the tax was lifted but they didn't switch back to sugar in the US because customers preferred the taste. Over time the sugar import tax in the US increased, so now they won't switch because of the sugar tariff makes sugar expensive in the US. Why do you think every product, besides the new organic products, have high fructose corn syrup and never have sugar.
Don't forget that plant based materials are radioactive and will irradiate your drink to some degree. Oil is nice and old, so everything is dead, but all plants have fallout from the atomic bomb testing. It's also easy to test the effects of one material, now you have dozens are organic materials that can interact with each other as well as your body. I definitely agree with your glass idea, anything of quality is in a glass bottle, (beer, wine, alcohol, root beer and good sodas), and back when coke was made with sugar and therefore was of higher quality, it too was in a glass bottle.
And yes, I know the radiation from plants is probably less than just the K40 antimatter annihilations within your body, nevermind the radon and solar radiation.
It's more so that we all missed the invitation, because of the lack of a Facebook presence we have. Missing parties is what nerds are very good at, and this time a quarter million people knew about it before the nerds at slashdot did. At least now we can all complain about it and feel important once again.
We only need something like.001% of the sunlight hitting the earth to satisfy all of our current energy needs. The Sun is the biggest energy source in our solar system, solar IS the future, fusion and fission plants created on earth will never compete with solar in the near future. Another 10-15yrs of coal doesn't seem like it would cost that much more to clean up than the previous 100yrs we already have to clean up. And what you are really talking about is just the difference that nuclear would make. Fusion and fission will be great for spaceships, but not electricity production near a star.
How can you make a reactor terror proof?(planes/bombs/espionage) What if a nation drops bombs on it? Trying to convince me a nuclear plant is safer than solar or wind? Decentralizing power is advantageous no matter how you slice it, and nuclear does not offer that, nor should it, as the number of safety concerns would then increase. Once solar is cheaper than coal we will stop having this stupid discussion; face facts that right now coal/oil/nat gas is much safer, cheaper, and easier to use than nuclear. In the future, solar will be cheaper safer and easier to use. Nuclear should be used for space propulsion, if something goes wrong, you can contaminate space without anyone complaining.
You're missing a key point. Bridges collapsing and ferries sinking pose about the same risk, so it's nonsensical to be scared of one more than the other.
Now if when the bridge collapsed it contaminated every farm along that river and the surrounding valley for 30yrs. Made every crop and animal grown in that region unedible for 30yrs, while the ferry just sunk, then it would be a fair comparison of nuclear to solar/wind/tidal.
A nuke facility is a terrorists wet dream, they are small highly visible, centralized power plants. A release or shutdown is a huge problem. Whereas solar or wind are composed of giant fields of them, imagine trying to take out a GW of solar, it would probably take you more dynamite that you could get your hands on. Even if it is attacked, there is no radiation release in the environment. Just face facts, it's impossible to make a reactor safe to environmental/terrorist/national attacks. Decentralized solar and wind power offers us benefits in all areas, it's just too expensive right now, so let's keep building coal for the next 5-10yrs until it's cheaper.
You may think the risk is manageable, but a chernobyl event in the ranch land would destroy cattle ranches (and some of the best beef in the world) for 30yrs. That risk is too high.
That's what they do now, hoping just for them to settle. If they paid for their opponents lawyers, they would be broke after a case or two. If you haven't noticed, lawyers are pervasive in washington, on the left especially, so it's hard to change.
We don't have 'loser pays' in the USA, so this isn't going to be a precedent. Until the law is changed, we will continue to have millions of frivolous law suits precisely because it's cheaper to settle than defend, regardless of if you are innocent or not.
There's no 3g up here if you are using T-mobile, I was using Wifi and getting those delays. But there is 2.5G, and that's enough for the texts to get through. I'm assuming 3g would drop calls if I was driving around anyway?
I'm so far north, Sprint doesn't even offer service, yet somehow Verizon had the whole place blanketed in 3G years ago.
Noooooo..... think of all the underage 16yr nerds.... we all remember our youth, they need this to be law so that they can see some free porn online. Think of the humanity, imagine a world where you don't get 10 million porn hits without even trying. This effectively allows people to do anything they want online, if this disappears, simply going to Youporn would require you to show an id. There are a ton of zip codes on youporn that are banned, a couple states worth if you have ever bothered looking, imagine actually banning something like 5-10 US states from watching porn online, i mean come on, that's just insanity.
So please, be sure you know what this means before you start wishing for it.... this is one of the laws that makes the internet as free as it is. If you don't wanna give away your privacy, don't post geotagged pictures on sites known for selling to advertisers, maybe post them on your own site. Allowing stupidity to dictate what the law should be is dagerous....... basically some guy/girl knowingly posts something to the internet and invites other people to look it at, and then gets upset because a couple other people saw it..... wtf! These are the same schmucks complaining that watch every leaked celebrity video, which are the real invasions of privacy.
The people getting rich from making stuff I want are the people that don't think about me? Nobody forced me to buy their product, yet I'm sure you want the government to forcefully take my money and waste it on something.
So if they guess wrong and lose money, they should not only go bankrupt, but each new successful business they create, be it changing the name/product or whatever, they should be chased down for their failure. The risk of hiring people and creating jobs does not always work out, and if it doesn't, they must be held responsible! And if they succeed and create thousands of jobs.... well then, now they must be truly evil and really not care about the public..... it's the fucking public that made them rich and profitable because they provided a service so good, the public willfully gave them money!
I don't even know where to start with how poor your analysis is. Those companies were prevented from being regulated by the free market precisely because the government stepped in, well besides Union Carbide, but they got sued to the tune of almost $1 billion and that prevented who knows how many future incidents.
Goldman Sachs was selling derivatives, marketable because of the demand created by Fanny and Freddy, and had a huge market in large part because Glass–Steagall was repealed (so now any bank can use deposits to invest). When they went bankrupt they got bailed out, so instead of being jobless and broke, they are still rich because the government gave them money, and they gave AIG money, who owed a lot to Goldman for all those credit default swaps(bets that Goldman won) had to be paid. Now nobody will learn their lesson because the free market was prevented from working. Profits???? they went bankrupt.
BP was also about to go bankrupt, but then Obama said they wouldn't sue them that much and started toning down the rhetoric. In any event, the reason why people did high risk drilling in the gulf is because there is a $75 million cap in damages written in law by the US government, which obviously Obama is skirting to go after BP.. This law was too spur drilling. Without the low cap, unsafe deep water drilling would be much less likely to occur.
It's another classic case of liberals blaming companies for making decisions based on laws the liberals wanted passed. The only thing I can see people as seeing as bad is that the banks all sold their loans to Goldman to package up into derivatives, but that's because FDIC wasn't repealed, just Glass–Steagall, which essentially makes the US banking system guaranteed to be unstable and highly risky. This guaranteed your deposits, so the average person doesn't care what investment his bank is doing, not should he care, since the government guarantees the money. And at the same time, the bank can do whatever the hell they want with the money, super high risk, whatever, even though it's FDIC insured. So bankers gladly play high risk on Wallstreet since it's not their money, and the investors (regular people putting money in the bank), never look or care how they are doing.
Slashdot Mirror
The release date lag is just to remind you constantly that you suck at making video games, you're lucky we aren't charging you more. If there was any competition, make the release date late in the US for a couple hit games, and we'll get the message, until then, keep whining and be glad it's getting released for you at all.
There are plenty of those maps already, and telescopes are placed at some of these locations. A high resolution map in a city is meaningless except on a dry windy cloudless night that has blown all particulate matter away, so maybe then the scatter from lights will be low, so there will be local dark spots, where you see the stars well. I doubt the scatter is ever that low. So I think you are correct, there is no value here, besides aesthetic.
How can I have a phone number that forwards MMS to my email and calls to my SIP? GV is the best solution yet there is only SMS capability.
I think MMS is a much bigger issue. If I you can't get pics of hot girls on your cell, nobody is gonna switch. I would have already switched to GV if it supported MMS.
I meant you'd have to buy another Mac, thus spending $2,000 total. I did not know you could replace their batteries, but either way you can't replace them now. So just move my story 1 or 2 yrs forward and it all makes sense, and is a reason not to buy a mac.
They get hacked quicker than Windows and now this? Paying twice the price for something that lasts half as long as their competitors seems nonsensical to me. Although they do look pretty, and that counts a lot. Posted from my 4yr old $500 (at the time) Acer. The battery went about 2 yrs ago, so if I had a Mac I'd have to upgrade and be out $2,000 by now.
Well prices should go up then. Flying planes into remote areas to deliver mail at 40cents an envelope is nonsensical. UPS and DHL and FEDEX could easily compete if they were allowed to. The USPS is not vital at all.
Roads are infrastructure, and you can't just have other companies building out a competing set of roads, there are a limited amount of roads to be built. State planning is necessary.
Everyone benefits from roads, and everyone used to benefit from the postal service, but now most important paperwork is done electronically. Now the USPS is mostly a subsidized delivery service for old people that still write letters. It's also great for spammers to fill my mailbox up with junk.
It doesn't forbid competition as the law does now. It's illegal to compete in first class mail service. Allow competition and stop bailing them out and they'll crumble.
We can have a post office at the whitehouse, but that doesn't mean we have to fund it. I would definitely support getting rid of crappy snail mail services that lose billions each year. It's about time for an amendment to that.
This is just gonna make it harder to get rid of the USPS.
East coast. That's my point, it's made locally, therefore in the USA it's not made with sugar. And in other countries sugar is cheap, because they don't tax it to death, and often they can grow it locally, so coke is made with it.
Ha, I have NEVER seen it in a grocery store. They switched because of some sugar tax in the 50s. Then the tax was lifted but they didn't switch back to sugar in the US because customers preferred the taste. Over time the sugar import tax in the US increased, so now they won't switch because of the sugar tariff makes sugar expensive in the US. Why do you think every product, besides the new organic products, have high fructose corn syrup and never have sugar.
Don't forget that plant based materials are radioactive and will irradiate your drink to some degree. Oil is nice and old, so everything is dead, but all plants have fallout from the atomic bomb testing. It's also easy to test the effects of one material, now you have dozens are organic materials that can interact with each other as well as your body. I definitely agree with your glass idea, anything of quality is in a glass bottle, (beer, wine, alcohol, root beer and good sodas), and back when coke was made with sugar and therefore was of higher quality, it too was in a glass bottle.
And yes, I know the radiation from plants is probably less than just the K40 antimatter annihilations within your body, nevermind the radon and solar radiation.
It's more so that we all missed the invitation, because of the lack of a Facebook presence we have. Missing parties is what nerds are very good at, and this time a quarter million people knew about it before the nerds at slashdot did. At least now we can all complain about it and feel important once again.
I also suppose it's unfair to compare old designs, that are run by unsafe companies, in a highly geologically active location to today's powerplants.
We only need something like .001% of the sunlight hitting the earth to satisfy all of our current energy needs. The Sun is the biggest energy source in our solar system, solar IS the future, fusion and fission plants created on earth will never compete with solar in the near future. Another 10-15yrs of coal doesn't seem like it would cost that much more to clean up than the previous 100yrs we already have to clean up. And what you are really talking about is just the difference that nuclear would make. Fusion and fission will be great for spaceships, but not electricity production near a star.
How can you make a reactor terror proof?(planes/bombs/espionage) What if a nation drops bombs on it? Trying to convince me a nuclear plant is safer than solar or wind? Decentralizing power is advantageous no matter how you slice it, and nuclear does not offer that, nor should it, as the number of safety concerns would then increase. Once solar is cheaper than coal we will stop having this stupid discussion; face facts that right now coal/oil/nat gas is much safer, cheaper, and easier to use than nuclear. In the future, solar will be cheaper safer and easier to use. Nuclear should be used for space propulsion, if something goes wrong, you can contaminate space without anyone complaining.
You're missing a key point. Bridges collapsing and ferries sinking pose about the same risk, so it's nonsensical to be scared of one more than the other.
Now if when the bridge collapsed it contaminated every farm along that river and the surrounding valley for 30yrs. Made every crop and animal grown in that region unedible for 30yrs, while the ferry just sunk, then it would be a fair comparison of nuclear to solar/wind/tidal.
A nuke facility is a terrorists wet dream, they are small highly visible, centralized power plants. A release or shutdown is a huge problem. Whereas solar or wind are composed of giant fields of them, imagine trying to take out a GW of solar, it would probably take you more dynamite that you could get your hands on. Even if it is attacked, there is no radiation release in the environment. Just face facts, it's impossible to make a reactor safe to environmental/terrorist/national attacks. Decentralized solar and wind power offers us benefits in all areas, it's just too expensive right now, so let's keep building coal for the next 5-10yrs until it's cheaper.
You may think the risk is manageable, but a chernobyl event in the ranch land would destroy cattle ranches (and some of the best beef in the world) for 30yrs. That risk is too high.
Not everyone has learned from Chernobyl, there are still reactors in Russian that operate without containment domes.
Great, great idea. It makes for fun strategic analysis as well. Seems like a perfect risk/reward ratio for both sides.
That's what they do now, hoping just for them to settle. If they paid for their opponents lawyers, they would be broke after a case or two. If you haven't noticed, lawyers are pervasive in washington, on the left especially, so it's hard to change.
We don't have 'loser pays' in the USA, so this isn't going to be a precedent. Until the law is changed, we will continue to have millions of frivolous law suits precisely because it's cheaper to settle than defend, regardless of if you are innocent or not.
There's no 3g up here if you are using T-mobile, I was using Wifi and getting those delays. But there is 2.5G, and that's enough for the texts to get through. I'm assuming 3g would drop calls if I was driving around anyway?
I'm so far north, Sprint doesn't even offer service, yet somehow Verizon had the whole place blanketed in 3G years ago.
Noooooo..... think of all the underage 16yr nerds.... we all remember our youth, they need this to be law so that they can see some free porn online. Think of the humanity, imagine a world where you don't get 10 million porn hits without even trying. This effectively allows people to do anything they want online, if this disappears, simply going to Youporn would require you to show an id. There are a ton of zip codes on youporn that are banned, a couple states worth if you have ever bothered looking, imagine actually banning something like 5-10 US states from watching porn online, i mean come on, that's just insanity.
So please, be sure you know what this means before you start wishing for it.... this is one of the laws that makes the internet as free as it is. If you don't wanna give away your privacy, don't post geotagged pictures on sites known for selling to advertisers, maybe post them on your own site. Allowing stupidity to dictate what the law should be is dagerous....... basically some guy/girl knowingly posts something to the internet and invites other people to look it at, and then gets upset because a couple other people saw it..... wtf! These are the same schmucks complaining that watch every leaked celebrity video, which are the real invasions of privacy.
The people getting rich from making stuff I want are the people that don't think about me? Nobody forced me to buy their product, yet I'm sure you want the government to forcefully take my money and waste it on something.
So if they guess wrong and lose money, they should not only go bankrupt, but each new successful business they create, be it changing the name/product or whatever, they should be chased down for their failure. The risk of hiring people and creating jobs does not always work out, and if it doesn't, they must be held responsible! And if they succeed and create thousands of jobs.... well then, now they must be truly evil and really not care about the public..... it's the fucking public that made them rich and profitable because they provided a service so good, the public willfully gave them money!
I don't even know where to start with how poor your analysis is. Those companies were prevented from being regulated by the free market precisely because the government stepped in, well besides Union Carbide, but they got sued to the tune of almost $1 billion and that prevented who knows how many future incidents.
Goldman Sachs was selling derivatives, marketable because of the demand created by Fanny and Freddy, and had a huge market in large part because Glass–Steagall was repealed (so now any bank can use deposits to invest). When they went bankrupt they got bailed out, so instead of being jobless and broke, they are still rich because the government gave them money, and they gave AIG money, who owed a lot to Goldman for all those credit default swaps(bets that Goldman won) had to be paid. Now nobody will learn their lesson because the free market was prevented from working. Profits???? they went bankrupt.
BP was also about to go bankrupt, but then Obama said they wouldn't sue them that much and started toning down the rhetoric. In any event, the reason why people did high risk drilling in the gulf is because there is a $75 million cap in damages written in law by the US government, which obviously Obama is skirting to go after BP.. This law was too spur drilling. Without the low cap, unsafe deep water drilling would be much less likely to occur.
It's another classic case of liberals blaming companies for making decisions based on laws the liberals wanted passed. The only thing I can see people as seeing as bad is that the banks all sold their loans to Goldman to package up into derivatives, but that's because FDIC wasn't repealed, just Glass–Steagall, which essentially makes the US banking system guaranteed to be unstable and highly risky. This guaranteed your deposits, so the average person doesn't care what investment his bank is doing, not should he care, since the government guarantees the money. And at the same time, the bank can do whatever the hell they want with the money, super high risk, whatever, even though it's FDIC insured. So bankers gladly play high risk on Wallstreet since it's not their money, and the investors (regular people putting money in the bank), never look or care how they are doing.