Umm, this is not a presidential election. Secondly, depending on where you live your state's representatives in the Electoral College may be bound by law to vote the will of the people.
Just what we need, more sheeple. Now if you'd said "Ask your friend *why* he intends to vote A instead of B," that'd be good advice; especially if one asks multiple friends.
Yes, and some might interesting questions weren't they? Q1 was the only thing properly discussed. Q3 had a view ads, but they could have gotten their point across much better if they simply said that they'd like the ability for caregrivers to unionize. And Q2? A rather bad solution to a problem for which we have better solutions (instant run-off). I kept a pretty close eye on this election cycle and never saw any discussion of Q2 outside of a few specialty newsletters.
Umm, France actually has compulsory voting too. IMHO, compulsory voting is antithetical to democracy. If you wish to address the usual issues of apathy, etc. which are used to bolster the case for this abomination you could go along way by simply enstating a federal voting holiday.
>I don't agree with the stage setting and pre-approved actors. I don't feel like I'm >given much of a choice really, and I don't feel that it's going to matter who is voted >in, because by virtue of being on the ballot to begin with... the candidates all >conform or are inline with those who are already in power already. Man did you drink the Kool-Aid. Nowhere is it written that we have a two party system.
Grrr take 2 (fucking random Firefox shortcuts), I hope these numbers are right (or wrong??)
First, you might consider restoring native ecosystems. IIRC the sod in praries is an effective (if slow to develop) sequestration method. Second, you do realize that'd produce far more fiber than we could reasonably use, right?
There are two obvious choices for your proposed method: gluttonous pines, or bamboo. Pulling some random numbers out of the aetherweb we have:
Mash them altogether, assuming a tree is 100% carbohydrate and therefore 38 kg of carbon (from CnH2nOn): (6 GtC/year * 9E11 kg/Gt )/( 800 trees/acre * (38kgC/tree/50 year) ) calls for the planting of some 9 billion acres of forest; 14 million square miles or a little more than the combined land area of the three largest nations on Earth (Russia, Canada, and United States)! To say nothing of making a dent in historic emissions, or an increase in the rate since 2000.
Unless of course a few thousand tons of ice can melt in two weeks at ambient temperatures;-) But then, one can also look at the tree line to see that the foreground is no longer being scoured.
1) And I don't trust Republicans, Libertarians or Democrats. What's your point? There are means other than thermometers of gauging temperature... Nobody built a giant glass tube filled with mercury and told the Sun to say "Open. Now close." [http://www.gly.uga.edu/schroeder/geol1121H/isotop e.html]
2) Ignoring the false dichotmoy, no. Not if it pushes the system out of it's current meta-stable position onto a different track/cycle.
Aren't you guys supposed to be all for the free-market and anti-government intervention?! Come off it, it's not as if you need a large feedstock, just the occasional infusion to replace "worn out" lines. Of course you need some ethics, but existing sources acceptable to many/most (but anti-FSM hardliners) should suffice.
I think you have a few flawed conceptions there yourself. Granted, Gilligan's Islands inhabitants don't haven enough surplus to support a "modern" lifestyle, but your assumption of a linear relationship seems to have been pulled from nether regions.
Secondly, you've missed the point, which is exactly that with a suitable cookbook and road map it needn't take 15,000 years the second time around. Why spend all the time and money learning to make cassoulet when what you really want is a souffle? If you can go straight to (clean) electric trams, why spend decades along the way on wood- and coal-based steam?
There's no reason this library couldn't include any number of political science or management texts as well. History too.
You're not going to be able to open the magic books and get from Bronze age to stem cells in a few years, probably not even decades, but you can definitely shave a hefty chunk of time off.
As for something setting us back quite a bit, no, I think it's quite feasible. If you knock out a hefty number of people through plague or asteroid... Most of what few people and institutions are left are going to fall to pieces trying to cope, because they *don't* know how things work. Any sudden climatic shift would be especially devestating, as people will be wrapped up in simply figuring out the new rules of the game to survive.
It's called openstreetmap. Why do people keep harping on about GIS and imagery? In the US (yes, there's more to the planet) so much data is freely available, and any publicly produced content would be especially circumspect. As for imagery, well it's out of date the instant you have it so that's pointless, unless you mean putting your own bird up [But then NASA makes its data freely available] or floating a blimp around...openstre
Actually, these are some of the better ideas I've seen. But rather than gracenote, what about freedb? Giving it some decent hosting, making it possible to unify duplicates/make corrections via the web...
The Internet M*edia* DataBase would be a bit harder though...
often when you're buying access (leasing) you're also paying for
the number of seats or eyeballs that can have access (at one time).
On the other hand, while subscription costs vary greatly, many journal publishers will sell individual articles for $30-$50.
Really though, "buying" content just doesn't make sense for wikipedia. For his buddies expert-opedia, sure. Wikipedia, not so much. Besides, doesn;t this fly in the face of "no original research?"
Re:Delft University of Technology was first
on
A Giant DIY LED Display
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Indeed. In addition, while not exactly pro-nuclear, the knee-jerk reaction of the submitter is short-sighted. A well-designed barge-based reactor could be safer than a land-based one, as you have a large heat dump at your disposal in case of emergency. . o O ( Get too hot? Drop the core as a last resort. )
118 Is supposed to be the first element of the Magic Island of Stability, doubly magic even. Most man-made elements (Plutonium+) are incredibly short-lived and make poor paper weights. Learn something http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3313/02.ht ml
Exactly, marketing. You argue that there's nothing fundamentally different in the science (declaring oct-1,3,5-triene a nanomaterial), but it would seem to me there is. There is a difference between small and medium organic compounds and nanoparticles of "metals"*, "ceramics", etc. 1) Obviously there is a difference in properties between nano and bulk, otherwise there would not be interest in studying them. 2) Their biological activity is incredibly different. Compare bulk quartz to the dust which causes silicosis, or the difference between PM10 and PM2.5 Finally, I'm not certain cisplatin is the best example given it's relative newness.
The question is not about the science, or rather the use in laboratories. Rather, it's about the mass production and marketing of untested substances. Granted, a large part of the compounds produced by DOW et al. also escape rigorous testing. Compare and contrast GMOs.
*Quoted because well, at that size it's hard to exhibit many of the properties characteristic of these classes of compounds, but I repeat myself [that's the whole point].
Slashdot Mirror
Umm, this is not a presidential election. Secondly, depending on where you live your
state's representatives in the Electoral College may be bound by law to vote the will
of the people.
Just what we need, more sheeple. Now if you'd said "Ask your friend *why* he intends to
vote A instead of B," that'd be good advice; especially if one asks multiple friends.
Yes, and some might interesting questions weren't they? Q1 was the only thing properly
discussed. Q3 had a view ads, but they could have gotten their point across much better
if they simply said that they'd like the ability for caregrivers to unionize. And Q2?
A rather bad solution to a problem for which we have better solutions (instant run-off).
I kept a pretty close eye on this election cycle and never saw any discussion of Q2
outside of a few specialty newsletters.
Umm, France actually has compulsory voting too. IMHO, compulsory voting is antithetical
to democracy. If you wish to address the usual issues of apathy, etc. which are used to
bolster the case for this abomination you could go along way by simply enstating a
federal voting holiday.
>I don't agree with the stage setting and pre-approved actors. I don't feel like I'm
>given much of a choice really, and I don't feel that it's going to matter who is voted
>in, because by virtue of being on the ballot to begin with... the candidates all
>conform or are inline with those who are already in power already.
Man did you drink the Kool-Aid. Nowhere is it written that we have a two party system.
Using the 40 year age from the mass-per-tree source saves 20%,
and gets you 11.2 million square miles... still freakin' huge.
First, you might consider restoring native ecosystems. IIRC the sod in praries is an
effective (if slow to develop) sequestration method. Second, you do realize that'd
produce far more fiber than we could reasonably use, right?
There are two obvious choices for your proposed method: gluttonous pines, or bamboo.
Pulling some random numbers out of the aetherweb we have:
of a turn-around for the market, but older trees absorb more carbon).
Mash them altogether, assuming a tree is 100% carbohydrate and therefore 38 kg of
carbon (from CnH2nOn):
(6 GtC/year * 9E11 kg/Gt )/( 800 trees/acre * (38kgC/tree
calls for the planting of some 9 billion acres of forest; 14 million square miles or
a little more than the combined land area of the three largest nations on Earth
(Russia, Canada, and United States)! To say nothing of making a dent in historic
emissions, or an increase in the rate since 2000.
Also note that, "Between 72 and 88% of carbon (C) loss in forest litter decomposition
returns to the atmosphere in the form of carbon dioxide." I recommend "Cycles of
Life" by Vacalv Smil for a broader background in this area.
Some would question whether these people deserve the label 'scientist' and if 'whore' might not be more appropriate. Mbaaaa
Unless of course a few thousand tons of ice can melt in two weeks at ambient ;-) But then, one can also look at the tree line to see that the
temperatures
foreground is no longer being scoured.
Thanks
1) And I don't trust Republicans, Libertarians or Democrats. What's your point? There are means other than thermometers of gauging temperature... Nobody built a giant glass tube filled with mercury and told the Sun to say "Open. Now close." [http://www.gly.uga.edu/schroeder/geol1121H/isotop e.html]
2) Ignoring the false dichotmoy, no. Not if it pushes the system out of it's current meta-stable position onto a different track/cycle.
3) Why don't you get back to us on that?
Aren't you guys supposed to be all for the free-market and anti-government intervention?!
Come off it, it's not as if you need a large feedstock, just the occasional infusion to
replace "worn out" lines. Of course you need some ethics, but existing sources acceptable
to many/most (but anti-FSM hardliners) should suffice.
I think you have a few flawed conceptions there yourself. Granted, Gilligan's Islands
inhabitants don't haven enough surplus to support a "modern" lifestyle, but your
assumption of a linear relationship seems to have been pulled from nether regions.
Secondly, you've missed the point, which is exactly that with a suitable cookbook and
road map it needn't take 15,000 years the second time around. Why spend all the time
and money learning to make cassoulet when what you really want is a souffle? If you
can go straight to (clean) electric trams, why spend decades along the way on wood-
and coal-based steam?
There's no reason this library couldn't include any number of political science or
management texts as well. History too.
You're not going to be able to open the magic books and get from Bronze age to stem
cells in a few years, probably not even decades, but you can definitely shave a hefty
chunk of time off.
As for something setting us back quite a bit, no, I think it's quite feasible. If you
knock out a hefty number of people through plague or asteroid... Most of what few
people and institutions are left are going to fall to pieces trying to cope, because
they *don't* know how things work. Any sudden climatic shift would be especially
devestating, as people will be wrapped up in simply figuring out the new rules of the
game to survive.
Spot on.
It's called openstreetmap. Why do people keep harping on about GIS and imagery?
In the US (yes, there's more to the planet) so much data is freely available,
and any publicly produced content would be especially circumspect. As for imagery,
well it's out of date the instant you have it so that's pointless, unless you mean
putting your own bird up [But then NASA makes its data freely available] or
floating a blimp around...openstre
Meh, those people don't read /. Even if they did, the negotiations could be done by
a third party e.g; the guy with the money.
So... $100 million won't make a wave, but a single order of magnitude more and it's "mission accomplished"?
Actually, these are some of the better ideas I've seen. But rather than gracenote,
what about freedb? Giving it some decent hosting, making it possible to unify
duplicates/make corrections via the web...
The Internet M*edia* DataBase would be a bit harder though...
That's just under $187,000 evenly divided.
Of course you could put a bit more behind various committee chairs....
Yes, but:
that one publisher has an awful lot of journals
often when you're buying access (leasing) you're also paying for
the number of seats or eyeballs that can have access (at one time).
On the other hand, while subscription costs vary greatly, many journal
publishers will sell individual articles for $30-$50.
Really though, "buying" content just doesn't make sense for wikipedia.
For his buddies expert-opedia, sure. Wikipedia, not so much. Besides,
doesn;t this fly in the face of "no original research?"
Sorry, no. Thank you for playing.
Those just happen to be the incidents that someone got photographs of,
there have been many more, including Tetris.
Indeed. In addition, while not exactly pro-nuclear, the knee-jerk reaction of the
submitter is short-sighted. A well-designed barge-based reactor could be safer
than a land-based one, as you have a large heat dump at your disposal in case of
emergency. . o O ( Get too hot? Drop the core as a last resort. )
Doh! Sorry, I mean 114. :-/
118 Is supposed to be the first element of the Magic Island of Stability, doubly magic even.t ml
Most man-made elements (Plutonium+) are incredibly short-lived and make poor paper weights.
Learn something http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3313/02.h
Keyboard accelerators: C-d
Exactly, marketing. You argue that there's nothing fundamentally different in the science
(declaring oct-1,3,5-triene a nanomaterial), but it would seem to me there is. There is a
difference between small and medium organic compounds and nanoparticles of "metals"*,
"ceramics", etc. 1) Obviously there is a difference in properties between nano and bulk,
otherwise there would not be interest in studying them. 2) Their biological activity is
incredibly different. Compare bulk quartz to the dust which causes silicosis, or the
difference between PM10 and PM2.5 Finally, I'm not certain cisplatin is the best example
given it's relative newness.
The question is not about the science, or rather the use in laboratories. Rather, it's about
the mass production and marketing of untested substances. Granted, a large part of the
compounds produced by DOW et al. also escape rigorous testing. Compare and contrast GMOs.
*Quoted because well, at that size it's hard to exhibit many of the properties characteristic
of these classes of compounds, but I repeat myself [that's the whole point].