Let me spell it out for you, since the simple concept seems to escape you. The island wanted to see if they could change their Infrastructure, basically the way all'uhv that tharr 'lectrissty stuff was gettin' made, ah-hyuck! So they went an' asked the gonverme- govmer- gomerv- tha guys in charge, an' whatnot, fer sum money ta try outa' whole buncha new ideers. When they dun found one what warks an' all, they went an' bilt it! Ah-hyuck! Now that they dun figger'd out whatta'do an' whatall that don't make all that stinky smoke, thar gonna start bildin' it all over So thar it is! Gawrsh...
Now I'm off to down a bottle of Ibuprofen. Could someone else please field the next potential Darwin Award nominee that starts spouting off rhetoric and trying to cloud the issue? Talking down to that level physically pains me.
Because, as we all know, when you burn coal, you get botulinum (that's what you're looking for). CO2 is what you get when you leave food out. Thisisfact. *Sigh*
It was meant to be "tons" in the colloquial sense, not actual measurement, but if you want specifics, just look at the chart in the Wikipedia article (which is taken from the Federal Government's own report, incidentally) about the emissions. For 2002, that's 83 tons PM2.5, 129 NOx, 483 SO2, 84 PM10. In respective percentages for all pollution in the DC area, that's 65%, 10%, 20%, 46%. One plant. To provide heat. For maybe just a handful of buildings. 65% PERCENT. One can only reasonably assume that those numbers have continued since then more or less at the same levels since then, considering...
Residents of the Capitol Hill neighborhood interviewed the Architect of the Capitol about the plant in 2006. They were informed that the only way to optimizing the plant’s efficiency was to rebuild it. This however, requires an act of Congress.
...and I'm not aware of any such thing having happened just yet. So, simple multiplication gives us, as of the end of 2008 (for sake of simplicity, and leaving open any changes that might have started in 2009) 498 PM2.5, 387 NOx, 2898 SO2, 252 PM10. Again, still measuring in tons here. So, let's just stick with the coal plant. No harm there, right?
...is Capitol Hill's very own coal-fired power plant,. Sucker is still belching tons of pollutants without producing a watt of electricity, thank you very much Senators Byrd & McConnell. And take a look at all the other coal-fired plants in the US. Awesome.
Obviously, doing nothing is a bad idea. Even if what the Danes have pulled off isn't truly 100% clean & pollution free, could it possibly be as bad as what we have now?
And we care because?..
Sony had a revenue of $78.877 billion U.S. for fiscal year 2008. If they walk away from this with a little bloody nose, I won't lose any sleep and you shouldn't either, unless they're signing your paychecks.
If going towards more user-accessibility is so bad, why are more open routers and media devices appearing on the market (Netgear's new OSS router, Neuros OSD...hell, dd-wrt & tomato), and why has the Redmond gang changed their tune? Why is Apple feeling the burn for being draconian with their recent restrictions and user-unfriendliness? Your counterargument fails as badly as your knowledge of current tech sector news.
"Here you've put me in a tough situation: I can't honestly decide whether to say, 'Duh,' uh, 'Doy,' or a very sarcastic, 'Oh, really?'" Regardless of who cooks up the new device/format, is this the first time since the "digital revolution" someone has tried to dupe consumers into thinking they were paying for the physical and/or digital media format itself, rather than what I guess you would call Intellectual Property usage rights? No. And it's definitely not the first time a significant enough number of people savvied up and refused to play their rigged game. The piracy thing, IMHO, has been, and will continue to be a back-burner issue that they're more than eager to substitute for the fair use question. At least Sony didn't try to make a mountain range out of that molehill, but just moved on.
Did I fudge up? Yeah, I fudged up. Awesome.
Revised: see either 10 Amendment or somewhere or other in the Constitution (I'm too lazy & tired to actually search for the applicable part)
Coffee fanatic here, and I'm honestly not sure. The tax is definitely more acceptable/reasonable than bans, the latter being something left to the FDA when it finds that something actually contains cyanide or some nasty bull$#!^. At least this is a step in the right direction, but they need to tread very lightly when it comes to what *adults* *choose* to drink (see 1st Amendment) and focus more on institutions that supply food to kids (see schools, after-school programs, etc), diet education programs, etc... Also, manufacturers of beverages should be required to help fund both long & short term studies that evaluate the effects of high fructose (or whatever all the "bad" ingredients are) drinks on various aspects of health across a variety of ages (overseen by FDA of course, to reduce bias), then make publicly available said results. If the drinks are really that bad, maybe soda cans will start carrying a Surgeon Generals warning just like cigarettes.
...not necessarily the only outcome. IMHO, I could see a lot of people more technically disinclined sticking with either whatever form a handheld user operated device might still have, or at most an Asimovian personal assistant, predicting the user's needs via advanced biometrics (robot body optional, I guess). More technically savvy might go direct a-la Ghost in the Shell or Lain, but that kind of closely linked hookup obviously has major security issues that would need to be addressed first. I haven't read any other comments, but I'm sure everyone has already dogpiled on about security so I'll leave that to persons more learned than myself...
Slashdot Mirror
So they'll need to fertilize a little bit more... So what? Point please?
Let me spell it out for you, since the simple concept seems to escape you. The island wanted to see if they could change their Infrastructure, basically the way all'uhv that tharr 'lectrissty stuff was gettin' made, ah-hyuck! So they went an' asked the gonverme- govmer- gomerv- tha guys in charge, an' whatnot, fer sum money ta try outa' whole buncha new ideers. When they dun found one what warks an' all, they went an' bilt it! Ah-hyuck! Now that they dun figger'd out whatta'do an' whatall that don't make all that stinky smoke, thar gonna start bildin' it all over So thar it is! Gawrsh... Now I'm off to down a bottle of Ibuprofen. Could someone else please field the next potential Darwin Award nominee that starts spouting off rhetoric and trying to cloud the issue? Talking down to that level physically pains me.
Residents of the Capitol Hill neighborhood interviewed the Architect of the Capitol about the plant in 2006. They were informed that the only way to optimizing the plant’s efficiency was to rebuild it. This however, requires an act of Congress.
...and I'm not aware of any such thing having happened just yet. So, simple multiplication gives us, as of the end of 2008 (for sake of simplicity, and leaving open any changes that might have started in 2009) 498 PM2.5, 387 NOx, 2898 SO2, 252 PM10. Again, still measuring in tons here. So, let's just stick with the coal plant. No harm there, right?
...is Capitol Hill's very own coal-fired power plant,. Sucker is still belching tons of pollutants without producing a watt of electricity, thank you very much Senators Byrd & McConnell. And take a look at all the other coal-fired plants in the US. Awesome. Obviously, doing nothing is a bad idea. Even if what the Danes have pulled off isn't truly 100% clean & pollution free, could it possibly be as bad as what we have now?
And we care because?.. Sony had a revenue of $78.877 billion U.S. for fiscal year 2008. If they walk away from this with a little bloody nose, I won't lose any sleep and you shouldn't either, unless they're signing your paychecks.
If going towards more user-accessibility is so bad, why are more open routers and media devices appearing on the market (Netgear's new OSS router, Neuros OSD...hell, dd-wrt & tomato), and why has the Redmond gang changed their tune? Why is Apple feeling the burn for being draconian with their recent restrictions and user-unfriendliness? Your counterargument fails as badly as your knowledge of current tech sector news.
...they're more than eager...
should be
...most companies/media groups are more than eager...
"Here you've put me in a tough situation: I can't honestly decide whether to say, 'Duh,' uh, 'Doy,' or a very sarcastic, 'Oh, really?'" Regardless of who cooks up the new device/format, is this the first time since the "digital revolution" someone has tried to dupe consumers into thinking they were paying for the physical and/or digital media format itself, rather than what I guess you would call Intellectual Property usage rights? No. And it's definitely not the first time a significant enough number of people savvied up and refused to play their rigged game. The piracy thing, IMHO, has been, and will continue to be a back-burner issue that they're more than eager to substitute for the fair use question. At least Sony didn't try to make a mountain range out of that molehill, but just moved on.
Did I fudge up? Yeah, I fudged up. Awesome. Revised: see either 10 Amendment or somewhere or other in the Constitution (I'm too lazy & tired to actually search for the applicable part)
Read this...: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure ...then, just to make sure, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externalities
Basically, the premise is that because of indifference from both the drink manufacturers and consumers overall on the possible* negative impact on health nationwide of softdrinks & similar items, the government should step in.
*qualifier in b4 everyone screams "IT'S NOT PROVEN!" at me.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup#Health_effects
Coffee fanatic here, and I'm honestly not sure. The tax is definitely more acceptable/reasonable than bans, the latter being something left to the FDA when it finds that something actually contains cyanide or some nasty bull$#!^. At least this is a step in the right direction, but they need to tread very lightly when it comes to what *adults* *choose* to drink (see 1st Amendment) and focus more on institutions that supply food to kids (see schools, after-school programs, etc), diet education programs, etc... Also, manufacturers of beverages should be required to help fund both long & short term studies that evaluate the effects of high fructose (or whatever all the "bad" ingredients are) drinks on various aspects of health across a variety of ages (overseen by FDA of course, to reduce bias), then make publicly available said results. If the drinks are really that bad, maybe soda cans will start carrying a Surgeon Generals warning just like cigarettes.
...not necessarily the only outcome. IMHO, I could see a lot of people more technically disinclined sticking with either whatever form a handheld user operated device might still have, or at most an Asimovian personal assistant, predicting the user's needs via advanced biometrics (robot body optional, I guess). More technically savvy might go direct a-la Ghost in the Shell or Lain, but that kind of closely linked hookup obviously has major security issues that would need to be addressed first. I haven't read any other comments, but I'm sure everyone has already dogpiled on about security so I'll leave that to persons more learned than myself...
Young punks running around, vial fulls of polymerase chains, splicing and forking like there's no tomorrow...