Goodness knows America and the Russians/Soviets had our share of staggering failures in our respective space programs, and launching something into orbit should be well within the capabilities of the South Koreans.
The problems that arise from the human contribution to global warming can be prevented or at least reduced. Unfortunatley, making even the tiniest suggestion that we do anything to reduce or prevent human contribution to global warming causes the conservolibertarians to start crying like little girls.
You conspiracy theorists probably won't believe it's a problem until it starts messing up the economy, and by then it'll be too late to do anything about it.
The most prominent global warming denier to publish a scientific work got his conclusions backwards because he apparently doesn't understand the difference between degrees and radians. You could, I suppose, argue that McKitrick made an honest mistake, but the problem is that he makes a lot of mistakes like this seemingly every time he publishes a paper, and this guy is the cream-of-the-cream in global denial "scientist" circles (assuming that by "scientist" you mean "oil company whore").
Of course, if you think there's anything wrong with McKitrick's work, that means you must be part of the vast international conspiracy against oil companies, coal companies, and American conservolibertarians.:D
It's always good to hear this kind of analysis. Somehow, the idea of the Chinese government actually prosecuting piracy didn't make any sense. Now it does.
...you still need teams of people who do nothing but sit there and watch video recordings to find whatever bits of video the judge and both lawyers want. One way or the other, you've got plenty of low-paid, low-ranking schmucks reviewing a large quantity of surveillance footage, which more or less gets us back to the privacy issue.
unfortunately, your rationalization completely ignores the fact that most ISPs are perfectly capable of providing customers what they paid for without resorting to things like this. That's where your metaphors catastrophically fail.
The maker of this image is obviously as much of a propaganda-addled redneck as the poster above, but this is still an affront to both free speech and fair use rights. Our copyright laws have gotten seriously out of hand. Unfortunately, things got this way because corporate interests can legally buy all the congressmen they want, and the US Supreme Court recently ruled that this form of legal bribery is "protected free speech". Dammit.
The old argument "Oh yeah? Well, the rest of the media is just as biased and incorrect in the opposite direction" only works if you ignore the total lack of journalistic credibility by FOX News. They recently went into a court case and argued that it was their constitutional right to fire journalists for refusing to lie. It never ceases to amaze me that there are still people in this world who take FOX News seriously.
Hell, FOX "News" pioneered the main tactics for producing a news show without having to hire all those pesky expensive journalists. Sadly, many of these tactics have been adopted by the other two major "news" cable channels, which is just one more reason to never use cable news of any sort as your primary source for information.
As much as I hate to agree with one of the frothing Microserf fanbois, there is definitely a double standard being applied here. This kind of thing shouldn't be acceptable no matter who does it.
The whole concept behind capitalism is that the guy who builds the better mousetrap and/or sells it for less money gets the bigger marketshare. In this case that didn't happen.
We've seen waves of such posters at another forum I frequent. We were wondering what the hell was going on, and now we have an explanation.
This might not be a bad thing if the creatards stuck around and tried to defend their arguments, but they never do. They simply post a lot of ridiculous and easily-debunked nonsense, then either run away, or continue to make nonsensical posts without ever directly addressing a single argument presented by other people. Post-and-dash is not something you do when your position can stand up to the scrutiny of honest debate.
Unlike a lot of other liberals, my brain doesn't freeze up at the mere utterance of the word "nuclear" ("nukyuler" if you're Bush or Carter), but as of right now nuclear energy is not cost effective without a lot of subsidizing by the government. I suspect that as carbon-based energy resources get more expensive, nuclear energy (as well as other energy sources) will become more and more economically viable.
Actually, they spend more on bribing (excuse me, "lobbying") congresscreatures and senators than they spend on R&D. That whole "drugs are expensive because of R&D" argument is just a lie to placate the gullible.
The original proposal was to build the SSC at Fermilab so that the Tevatron could be used to feed the SSC, thereby saving money. Then some morons in congress decided that it would be a good idea to waste huge amounts of taxpayer money in order to appease Republican by building a totally separate facility in Texas.
The added cost of building an entire new facility pretty much spelled doom for the SSC project.
This is the real reason for the charge, of course.
Summer is the time when the electric company makes the most money, because everyone is running their air conditioners. Solar panels generate the most electricity right when power consumption should be at its highest, so the total amount of money made by the electricity company goes down during the critical summer peak as the number of households with solar panels increases.
So the obvious solution is to discourage people from installing solar panels by tacking on an extra fee. How you rationalize the fee is entirely beside the point: the fee results in fewer homes with solar panels, which translates to more money for the electric company.
This is pure bullshit, and this bullshit is only possible because of the legal monopoly enjoyed by electric companies.
Slashdot Mirror
Oooh, who is "they" in this case? I love a good conspiracy theory!
Goodness knows America and the Russians/Soviets had our share of staggering failures in our respective space programs, and launching something into orbit should be well within the capabilities of the South Koreans.
The problems that arise from the human contribution to global warming can be prevented or at least reduced. Unfortunatley, making even the tiniest suggestion that we do anything to reduce or prevent human contribution to global warming causes the conservolibertarians to start crying like little girls.
You conspiracy theorists probably won't believe it's a problem until it starts messing up the economy, and by then it'll be too late to do anything about it.
...like creationists every day.
The most prominent global warming denier to publish a scientific work got his conclusions backwards because he apparently doesn't understand the difference between degrees and radians. You could, I suppose, argue that McKitrick made an honest mistake, but the problem is that he makes a lot of mistakes like this seemingly every time he publishes a paper, and this guy is the cream-of-the-cream in global denial "scientist" circles (assuming that by "scientist" you mean "oil company whore").
Of course, if you think there's anything wrong with McKitrick's work, that means you must be part of the vast international conspiracy against oil companies, coal companies, and American conservolibertarians. :D
It's always good to hear this kind of analysis. Somehow, the idea of the Chinese government actually prosecuting piracy didn't make any sense. Now it does.
[conservotard]ZOMG, he's advoca... advic... advo... he's FOR TEH WUN WURLD GUVMENT![/conservotard]
...you still need teams of people who do nothing but sit there and watch video recordings to find whatever bits of video the judge and both lawyers want. One way or the other, you've got plenty of low-paid, low-ranking schmucks reviewing a large quantity of surveillance footage, which more or less gets us back to the privacy issue.
unfortunately, your rationalization completely ignores the fact that most ISPs are perfectly capable of providing customers what they paid for without resorting to things like this. That's where your metaphors catastrophically fail.
The maker of this image is obviously as much of a propaganda-addled redneck as the poster above, but this is still an affront to both free speech and fair use rights. Our copyright laws have gotten seriously out of hand. Unfortunately, things got this way because corporate interests can legally buy all the congressmen they want, and the US Supreme Court recently ruled that this form of legal bribery is "protected free speech". Dammit.
lol wut
The old argument "Oh yeah? Well, the rest of the media is just as biased and incorrect in the opposite direction" only works if you ignore the total lack of journalistic credibility by FOX News. They recently went into a court case and argued that it was their constitutional right to fire journalists for refusing to lie. It never ceases to amaze me that there are still people in this world who take FOX News seriously.
Hell, FOX "News" pioneered the main tactics for producing a news show without having to hire all those pesky expensive journalists. Sadly, many of these tactics have been adopted by the other two major "news" cable channels, which is just one more reason to never use cable news of any sort as your primary source for information.
...he's a program! Sorry, had to join in the fun.
WUT? HOW DAER U CRITICIZE MICROSOFTZ? APPLE & LINUX ARE JUST AS BAD!!!1!1!!1 [/fanboi]
As much as I hate to agree with one of the frothing Microserf fanbois, there is definitely a double standard being applied here. This kind of thing shouldn't be acceptable no matter who does it.
...put on a cape, diving helmet, and boots. Then I would attack the nearest dragon or flagged Horde player with a fishing pole.
That was my thoughts exactly when I read this: "Isn't this more or less what Chrome did?"
The whole concept behind capitalism is that the guy who builds the better mousetrap and/or sells it for less money gets the bigger marketshare. In this case that didn't happen.
We've seen waves of such posters at another forum I frequent. We were wondering what the hell was going on, and now we have an explanation.
This might not be a bad thing if the creatards stuck around and tried to defend their arguments, but they never do. They simply post a lot of ridiculous and easily-debunked nonsense, then either run away, or continue to make nonsensical posts without ever directly addressing a single argument presented by other people. Post-and-dash is not something you do when your position can stand up to the scrutiny of honest debate.
Unlike a lot of other liberals, my brain doesn't freeze up at the mere utterance of the word "nuclear" ("nukyuler" if you're Bush or Carter), but as of right now nuclear energy is not cost effective without a lot of subsidizing by the government. I suspect that as carbon-based energy resources get more expensive, nuclear energy (as well as other energy sources) will become more and more economically viable.
Thanks to the Magic of the Free Market, we have more competition and pay higher prices! USA! USA! USA!
Actually, they spend more on bribing (excuse me, "lobbying") congresscreatures and senators than they spend on R&D. That whole "drugs are expensive because of R&D" argument is just a lie to placate the gullible.
I refuse to accept your answer! You are clearly part of the conspiracy against Microsoft! *chews on carpet*
The original proposal was to build the SSC at Fermilab so that the Tevatron could be used to feed the SSC, thereby saving money. Then some morons in congress decided that it would be a good idea to waste huge amounts of taxpayer money in order to appease Republican by building a totally separate facility in Texas.
The added cost of building an entire new facility pretty much spelled doom for the SSC project.
Fermilab will remain on line decades, just as the colliders it surpassed are still running.
For some experiments done at the LHC, Fermilab will be the only collider capable of verifying results.
This is the real reason for the charge, of course.
Summer is the time when the electric company makes the most money, because everyone is running their air conditioners. Solar panels generate the most electricity right when power consumption should be at its highest, so the total amount of money made by the electricity company goes down during the critical summer peak as the number of households with solar panels increases.
So the obvious solution is to discourage people from installing solar panels by tacking on an extra fee. How you rationalize the fee is entirely beside the point: the fee results in fewer homes with solar panels, which translates to more money for the electric company.
This is pure bullshit, and this bullshit is only possible because of the legal monopoly enjoyed by electric companies.