Who cares. At least this wasn't a full fledged subsidy (read free no-strings-attached handout) like oil, corn, coal, and natural gas get regularly without anyone complaining about it. It doesn't matter if these industries are performing better, because you aren't seeing any benefits from those businesses, unless you count the fact that you get low-cost high-fructose corn syrup for a few cents cheaper than it would cost without subsidies. The government took a gamble backing a loan, and lost. If they would have won then you would still probably be complaining about some other bullshit, like "Well, if they succeeded in spite of the loan then they really didn't need the loan LOLZ!". This is an atom in the bucket compared to what the government really spends money on. I like how people with political agendas get on here and comment without perspective on the real issues.
There isn't a 1 to 1 correspondence in job loss and job creation, however that aside, it doesn't mean that green technology is a waste of time and resources. We will need it someday.
The guy that posted this article is a moron asshole. Not only is he actually stretching the truth, he is also using a false example to make some bullshit political point. This company didnt recieve subsidies, it was loans. Furthermore, as you said, "An experimental business fails in a collapsing economy".
Steven P. Jobs has bragged about his mastery of stealing ideas from others, stating, "Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
I mean no offense when I say "dumbed down". I just think its better to get an idea of the more big-picture concepts rather than delve into the equations. I am a math PhD student, and I notice many times getting down to the abstract equation level makes you lose sight of the big picture. People like Stephen Hawking and Richard Feynman are/were superb at explaining the big picture while having the knowledge to do the nitty-gritty stuff. Unfortunately most scientists that write textbooks are not that great at doing that.
I'm not actually sure that is what the OP wants. I understand just the surface of relativity. I don't have any desire to sit down and play with the equations since I trust they are correct. Sometimes delving into the equations makes you lose sight of the big picture, so that is why I think its better to read books from someone who understands it.
Id just recommend reading a "dumbed-down" book first that covers the basic outlines. If its just a hobby I don't understand why you would want to know the in-depth details since you probably wont be playing with equations most of the time. Otherwise, read up on differential and integral calculus, multivariable calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, electromagnetism, and introductory astronomy. You don't need much more advanced than that to understand the basics. I doubt you will be proving theorems and such. You can get some Schaums Outlines books on some of those topics that would guide you through the process.
So, this star is cold enough to be the same temperature as the human body? I assume this is at the surface. How the hell does it sustain fusion/fission? It seems to me like its a borderline gas giant or something.
Well, unfortunately its penalizing the younger generation for your benefit. Why should we have to pay more in our lives than you did throughout your entire life? Id rather not pay into social security at all and just not be able to enroll in it later, but its not optional for me. Maybe you should have monitored the politicians a little closer throughout your life to make sure the money was available, and stayed where it is instead of joining the general fund and being spent on all manner of government bureaucracies. People let this problem fester for decades and just turned their head away from it. Not my problem.
The social security and medicare budget is twice what the defense budget is. Granted, defense shouldn't cost that much, but I don't think social security and medicare should be that expensive either.
It took me till about 7th grade to realize that in full, but then again I always understood what was shown in class. I just never did my homework because it took forever doing 20 problems reinforcing the same easy thing. How many times do you have to repeat the same thing to learn it? For some people its probably harder, but If I was actually challenged with something cool in 7th grade like building a robot, or programming a video game, I would totally have done all my homework. Its not natural for a kid to sit at a desk quietly and perform tasks like a robot. Its normal for them to go and explore nature and the world. As Neil Degrasse Tyson says:
Curiosity is something we all have as kids and is beaten out of us as adults. Parents come up to me, "How do I get my kids interested in science?" They're already interested in science. Just stop beating it out of them....... Because we tell them to shut up and sit down after spending a year telling them how to walk and talk. We teach them how to walk and talk, and they start touching things — "Oh, don't touch that, Junior. Sit down. Stop making noise. Stop banging on the pots and pans." Every one of those is an experiment. It's an experiment in acoustics. But you don't want your pots dirty, so you tell them to stop.
You're afraid your dish might break, so you tell them to stop playing with the china. Well, what's the cost of replacing your dish? A few dollars. If it's expensive, maybe twenty dollars. Why is it that you don't spend that, but you'll easily write a check to send your kid to some fancy school for thirty or forty thousand dollars a year? "Oh, because at the end, they'll have the degree from this school." It ain't about the degree. It's about: How do you think? That doesn't have to come from an institution, it comes from your trajectory through life and whether your appetite for learning, whether your urge to query the unfolding of nature around you is nurtured or quelled. That's the difference. "Squashed." "Quelled" is too calm. "Squashed."
What happens, the kid goes and plays in the mud. "Don't play in the mud; you'll get your clothes..." There's bugs in the mud. That's kinda cool. They turn over a rock. "You'll get dirt on your clothes." There's millipedes under the rock. Let the kid find the millipedes. Plucks the — off the rose — "Don't break the rose like that; that's a rose." No, they want to see what's inside the rose; it's kinda interesting. The middle is not the same as the outside. Let the experiment run its course.
That is the most insane bunch of bullshit I have ever heard. You want to have all our land fouled up and unable for habitation or farming? Do you want our food supplies to absorb all the chemicals we pump into the environment so we end up with cancers in our 20's? Do you want lakes and rivers so polluted you can't fish out of them or swim in them? Give me a break. This is what the EPA is for, to ensure things have minimal effect on the environment. Frankly, they don't actually do that great of a job since they allow a lot of shit to slide by. Idiots like you will kill off humanity and revert Earth to some kind of primordial world full of Jellyfish, algae and bacteria living in sludge.
Funny thing about that. China is polluting their own land severely with their mining, manufacturing, and power production to the point they will have serious economical costs someday. For the short term it makes them more competitive, but when China starts having high cancer rates, birth defects and can't farm vast tracks of land they will suffer.
Slashdot Mirror
Who cares. At least this wasn't a full fledged subsidy (read free no-strings-attached handout) like oil, corn, coal, and natural gas get regularly without anyone complaining about it. It doesn't matter if these industries are performing better, because you aren't seeing any benefits from those businesses, unless you count the fact that you get low-cost high-fructose corn syrup for a few cents cheaper than it would cost without subsidies. The government took a gamble backing a loan, and lost. If they would have won then you would still probably be complaining about some other bullshit, like "Well, if they succeeded in spite of the loan then they really didn't need the loan LOLZ!". This is an atom in the bucket compared to what the government really spends money on. I like how people with political agendas get on here and comment without perspective on the real issues.
There isn't a 1 to 1 correspondence in job loss and job creation, however that aside, it doesn't mean that green technology is a waste of time and resources. We will need it someday.
China wont be able to sustain that forever. Eventually they will have to deal with it.
The guy that posted this article is a moron asshole. Not only is he actually stretching the truth, he is also using a false example to make some bullshit political point. This company didnt recieve subsidies, it was loans. Furthermore, as you said, "An experimental business fails in a collapsing economy".
Someones making money on solar panels. There are everywhere here in Colorado partially powering rural/suburban homes and such.
One day we will need green technologies. The scientific evidence of things getting worse is overwhelming.
Whats funny about this is that had they not tried to sue in the first place, they could have probably out-competed them in the marketplace.
Steven P. Jobs has bragged about his mastery of stealing ideas from others, stating, "Picasso had a saying - 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we have always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CW0DUg63lqU
What a bunch of assholes. This dude was a great man and they piss all over his memory.
I mean no offense when I say "dumbed down". I just think its better to get an idea of the more big-picture concepts rather than delve into the equations. I am a math PhD student, and I notice many times getting down to the abstract equation level makes you lose sight of the big picture. People like Stephen Hawking and Richard Feynman are/were superb at explaining the big picture while having the knowledge to do the nitty-gritty stuff. Unfortunately most scientists that write textbooks are not that great at doing that.
I'm not actually sure that is what the OP wants. I understand just the surface of relativity. I don't have any desire to sit down and play with the equations since I trust they are correct. Sometimes delving into the equations makes you lose sight of the big picture, so that is why I think its better to read books from someone who understands it.
Id just recommend reading a "dumbed-down" book first that covers the basic outlines. If its just a hobby I don't understand why you would want to know the in-depth details since you probably wont be playing with equations most of the time. Otherwise, read up on differential and integral calculus, multivariable calculus, linear algebra, differential equations, electromagnetism, and introductory astronomy. You don't need much more advanced than that to understand the basics. I doubt you will be proving theorems and such. You can get some Schaums Outlines books on some of those topics that would guide you through the process.
Very well, however a side effect of fusion is heat. So then the absence of significant heat seems like its possible there is no fusion.
Then how exactly is it possible to call it a star at all? Its more like a lone gas giant with possibly a bunch of large moons.
Interesting thought. Reminds me of 2010: The year we make contact. Which planets are they?
So, this star is cold enough to be the same temperature as the human body? I assume this is at the surface. How the hell does it sustain fusion/fission? It seems to me like its a borderline gas giant or something.
At that rate neanderthals are the same species. Europeans and Asians have 4-6 % neanderthal dna.
Well, today my schedule just got full.
Well, unfortunately its penalizing the younger generation for your benefit. Why should we have to pay more in our lives than you did throughout your entire life? Id rather not pay into social security at all and just not be able to enroll in it later, but its not optional for me. Maybe you should have monitored the politicians a little closer throughout your life to make sure the money was available, and stayed where it is instead of joining the general fund and being spent on all manner of government bureaucracies. People let this problem fester for decades and just turned their head away from it. Not my problem.
The social security and medicare budget is twice what the defense budget is. Granted, defense shouldn't cost that much, but I don't think social security and medicare should be that expensive either.
So move. I got the hell out of Texas. Its the biggest shit hole in the entire US.
It took me till about 7th grade to realize that in full, but then again I always understood what was shown in class. I just never did my homework because it took forever doing 20 problems reinforcing the same easy thing. How many times do you have to repeat the same thing to learn it? For some people its probably harder, but If I was actually challenged with something cool in 7th grade like building a robot, or programming a video game, I would totally have done all my homework. Its not natural for a kid to sit at a desk quietly and perform tasks like a robot. Its normal for them to go and explore nature and the world. As Neil Degrasse Tyson says:
Curiosity is something we all have as kids and is beaten out of us as adults. Parents come up to me, "How do I get my kids interested in science?" They're already interested in science. Just stop beating it out of them....... Because we tell them to shut up and sit down after spending a year telling them how to walk and talk. We teach them how to walk and talk, and they start touching things — "Oh, don't touch that, Junior. Sit down. Stop making noise. Stop banging on the pots and pans." Every one of those is an experiment. It's an experiment in acoustics. But you don't want your pots dirty, so you tell them to stop. You're afraid your dish might break, so you tell them to stop playing with the china. Well, what's the cost of replacing your dish? A few dollars. If it's expensive, maybe twenty dollars. Why is it that you don't spend that, but you'll easily write a check to send your kid to some fancy school for thirty or forty thousand dollars a year? "Oh, because at the end, they'll have the degree from this school." It ain't about the degree. It's about: How do you think? That doesn't have to come from an institution, it comes from your trajectory through life and whether your appetite for learning, whether your urge to query the unfolding of nature around you is nurtured or quelled. That's the difference. "Squashed." "Quelled" is too calm. "Squashed." What happens, the kid goes and plays in the mud. "Don't play in the mud; you'll get your clothes ..." There's bugs in the mud. That's kinda cool. They turn over a rock. "You'll get dirt on your clothes." There's millipedes under the rock. Let the kid find the millipedes. Plucks the — off the rose — "Don't break the rose like that; that's a rose." No, they want to see what's inside the rose; it's kinda interesting. The middle is not the same as the outside. Let the experiment run its course.
-Neil Degrasse Tyson
That is the most insane bunch of bullshit I have ever heard. You want to have all our land fouled up and unable for habitation or farming? Do you want our food supplies to absorb all the chemicals we pump into the environment so we end up with cancers in our 20's? Do you want lakes and rivers so polluted you can't fish out of them or swim in them? Give me a break. This is what the EPA is for, to ensure things have minimal effect on the environment. Frankly, they don't actually do that great of a job since they allow a lot of shit to slide by. Idiots like you will kill off humanity and revert Earth to some kind of primordial world full of Jellyfish, algae and bacteria living in sludge.
Funny thing about that. China is polluting their own land severely with their mining, manufacturing, and power production to the point they will have serious economical costs someday. For the short term it makes them more competitive, but when China starts having high cancer rates, birth defects and can't farm vast tracks of land they will suffer.
Even a moron can be more unbiased than you.