I don't follow either slants media outlets at all, and I most certainly don't do what anybody tells me. I am largely a real libertarian with a few notable exceptions for the modern world, as the feedback mechanisms of our increasingly complex economy can impoverish millions with ease and nobody, not even the poor, cares because of what is said in the media.
I'm not putting democrats on any kind of pedestal, I am just putting republicans in a ditch, because their insults to freedom, tolerance, education, and the American dream as well as their steadfast determination to improve the amount of money they make every year even if it means destroying our economy. Not to mention their enormous insults against atheists.
I haven't been following the public broadcasting thing at all, I was referring mostly to global warming, and Michael Moore's documentaries and the reaction too them. Cute how you responded to a fraction of something and ignored the vast majority of it though.
Actually it is the same situation for all intensive purposes. The rich british had heavy taxes on American goods and forced exclusive trading agreements, making sizable profits on everything we sent them, mostly raw materials in the beginning, then selling us back manufactured goods for a high price, forcing us to buy from them or nobody else. Plus they held taxes over us that provided no gain to us, and so there was revolution. Throwing off the filthy rich scum that are abusing the poor so heavily. And I am not talking about the madisons, I am talking about the founders like Franklin, Jefferson and Washington.
I wasn't saying dismiss them outright, I was saying, after examining their arguments with science, that they are dirty liars and cheats, or simply gullible people who fell for the lies of the big republicans. Either way, I never meet one that holds their own to any kind of questioning, even when it is only ever so slight.
Lol, your funny. That was a retarded statement for the sake of comedy, right? In case you are actually being serious, allow me to note exactly how current republican "economics" would put us in another great depression.
The economy is driven by markets: The more demand for products, the better the economy is doing. Demand can't exist without people having money to spend.
Republicans want to remove all of the funding from social welfare programs of every kind. This would drive demand down significantly. They also want to deregulate the financial markets to 1920s style markets, except further. This means we have shrinking markets with growing businesses and a financial product market that can abuse this to no end. That is begging for a massive crash.
They also say that taxing the rich hurts the economy and stops businesses from growing, but that is patently absurd. The fact of the matter is that as long as markets are growing, businesses will grow, and lenders will lend them money to do so. When markets are shrinking, lenders don't lend and businesses don't grow. If there is money to be made by lending, lending will be done, irregardless of whether you tax the rich 5% or 95%.
Only thing is, the latter means wonderful joyful amounts of money to run the government, provide for the social welfare and fund investment in research, education, and infrastructure, which has a history of paying back 5x as much as is invested, or the former, which involves either massive debt or no government programs, either of which, at the moment, is disasterous.
Your republicans have fucked us over already by bringing their retarded fiscal opinions into mainstream political discussion, not it is toxic to raise taxes, and "job killing..." is the most overused statement around right now. But go ahead, gloat at your destruction of America and everything we stand for.
The majority of atheists are left-leaning because: 1. The right tends to put atheists on the same level as rapid bears in the city. 2. Atheists are atheists because we have learned to follow facts and evidence. This inherently bars us from believing anything republicans say, as none of it holds up to fact checking, and all of their statements are in direct conflict with their actions.
I'm going to have to call you out on this, because I read a good deal of legislature that comes up to vote, and typically democrats say what is in it with a plainness and honesty that is well within bounds of acceptability, while republicans spout pure propaganda for pure political gain, with no intention, basis, or drive to accurately represent what has been put forth.
Also, all shareholds of companies, and the wealthy who own/operate them have the potential to earn millions/billions more dollars if they put conservative ideas out ahead. I am not inclined to believe that google is blocking facts and research, when they provide better access to it than anyone else on the interwebs.
They may be poor and uneducated, but the recent violence towards liberals in rural areas, including beatings that send people to the hospital and the conservatives to jail, would beg to differ.
... "what makes you think you know how his viewers think?"
I have talked to dozens of them. All exactly reciting, word for word, like a cultist reading from a script, what Glenn Beck has said.
Also, reciting the words of an actor/comedian doing a parody news show on a fake news channel that don't stand up to the slightest fact check verbatim as if they are the words of some holy, unquestionable text is not thinking, it is not intelligent, and it is not truth.
CNN shows every side, and holds every side up to questioning, unlike fox, which edits out typically more than half of what respondents say, or simply cuts them off when they mention real facts that conflict with their own sensationalist propaganda.
Also, if people like you take power in 2012, I have no doubt in my mind, to the point where I would bet everything I own, that America will crash and burn, because the policy decisions republicans are currently pushing for rob most markets of around 20% of market volume by cutting off all welfare, and with shrinking markets come large economic crashes. That, and they are pushing for financial market deregulation to even less than there was in 1929. Its like they are begging for a situation worse than the great depression.
lol, yea, because number of viewers equals quality of news. Haha, what planet are you from? oh, right, Anonymous Coward planet.
Fox news is sensationalist journalism and keeps viewers through such things as the exclusive deals with several sports leagues, and hilarious comedy shows, and the national Fox news network piggybacks trust off of the thousands of local fox stations that are so reputable. Older people tend to trust groups or entities as if the name Fox actually meant an equal quality throughout.
You want real news? Watch something that can actually run for 30 seconds without failing every fact check you put it through, unlike fox. CNN, they show good, accurate shit, at times it is boring and dull, but at least it is not sensationalist bullshit.
That is not about fear, it is about anger and outrage at the actions of certain wealthy, rich people in America destroying the things we hold most dear as a country, and have since the days of our founding.
That is not at all insightful, as somebody else said, it is utterly ridiculous. Palin and Fox are scary without liberal news sources because they set forth a precedent where it is ok to lie to millions of people in order to put public support behind legislation that will kill jobs, kill our economy, and make a few rich people richer. Palin is scary because if she were actually in a position of substantial power, we would be utterly fucked. Also, I eat meat and don't know anyone who shops at whole foods or owns a prius. And for that matter, I don't know anyone stupid enough to subscribe to the noble savage theory either.
Really, that was absolutely downright douche-baggery.
But really, I wouldn't give a damn about politics if it weren't for my stake in survival. If I was rich, I would happily watch America fuck itself with an explosive spiked pinapple with serrated edges by giving republicans power. Watch them cut all welfare spending and instead give it to the rich in the form of subsidies, and due to the lack of market demand for any product at all, watch the markets plummet and the economy crash for real while a few hundred people get disgustingly rich, and can make the American people do whatever they want, as they control the "spice."
Sure it was a scare tactic to a point, but the ice caps have shrank extensively in recent years, and at the current rate the arctic ocean will be devoid of ice during the summer of 2050. Plus, to get idiots excited about making intelligent decisions for things like efficiency, which make our lives better, reduce our power consumption and make life rock, is not always easy.
On the other hand, telling a bunch of old people that the country they have lived in and loved their whole life is falling at the hands of satanic secular stalin hitler's who want to steal all your money and subject you to death panels is scary, especially when you trust the source that is saying it.
Fear mongering is easier when a group has more solid principles, and is more set in their ways.
Yes, perfectly reasonable for a town like pyongyang, NK or perhaps any city in China, or even living under the asshole Mubarak. Your post ignores so many facets of society, so many issues, so many reasons why quitting is not an option, and just ignores all of it so that you can run around and spout nonsensical bullshit about how freedoms are stupid and people should stfu and take it up the ass. Go move to a fucking communist dictatorship, and leave the freedom loving countries alone.
What is truly pathetic is the government and university websites that still don't support chrome. Nothing like completing 4 hours of forms just for the last page to flip a shit and say "YOUR NOT ON I E YOU BASTARD" and have to repeat it in a shitty ass browser while freaking out about virii.
you're confusing monopolistic behaviors as something that could possible be something besides as unethical as you can get without whipping your workers and selling their bodies for sex.
Thats not constructive at all. I use windows because it is compatible with the engineering software I have to run for my profession, and for the wide versatility win7 ult x64 offers, and frankly I rarely have problems with it. But at the same time I hate IE with a passion and am a strong supporter in google chrome for the same reason I love windows on my box. I mean, that whole thing was just a terrible oversimplified comment that makes ridiculous assumptions as to the character of anyone that isn't as gung ho everything anti-microsoft as you. Mind you, I too think they are evil, but not nearly a few percent as evil as Apple or Sony, but their OS itself holds enormous use for anyone that does more than just surf the web, and edit basic documents, especially for engineers of all kinds, I personally run about a dozen Autodesk products that run on Windows only, not to mention gaming and such.
First thing I do when I am done installing win7 ult. x64: Download chrome. IE is a fucking virus. I have uninstalled it 30 times now from this computer, even erased every last file involving it from my box, and stopped all updates containing it, then BAM there it is again. It may exist on my computer, but I am sure as hell not a user.
Clearly you didn't read the article, and your condescending tone is not just obnoxious, it is pathetic. Come off it.
The importance of this discovery is held a lot higher than other discoveries precisely because it lacks the various problems of certain materials. First of all, it is just another layer added to silicon chips, the silicon is going to do much work that it already does. Second, it has a high voltage gap that makes it much more efficient and avoids the issues that graphene has in this area, but still has a very, very tight structure very conducive of smaller manufacturing processes.
Also, unlike materials like gallium arsenide, molybdenum disulfide has a long history of use in other industries, its properties and methods for handling it properly are quite developed, significantly reducing the turnaround time. I would venture to wager that this material will be integrated into existing manufacturing processes within the next few years. Not to mention the on chip fiber optic converters, which are in significant development and could seriously blast through many existing bottlenecks for speed.
But go ahead, sit their with your unrealistically excessive pessimism and ride around on your high horse, everyone loves people like that.
Most transistors are idle most of the time, and any electron gap below 1.6 eV is going to leak like a an old ladies bladder. Silicon has a gap of 1.1, allowing electrons to cross it with relative ease. Molybdenum disulfide has a gap of 1.8 eV, higher than the charge of a single electron, making it orders of magnitude more difficult to leak any power.
Think about some basic gates, like the nand, nor, not, and, xor, and, or, the different kinds of flip flops, and think about what percentage of the transistors is idle even when the circuit is active. In many circuits, you will have less than half the transistors active, and even then it is likely that a large portion of your circuitry is dormant at any given time. So figure if a totally idle processor uses about 50 watts, while active as possible is only like 130, it is a vast amount of power being consumed. You could cut the power consumption of server farms by more than 50%, maybe even 75-85% on the far side of peak usage hours.
I toured a facility that produced micro-chips with a 70 nm process a couple years ago, it was a student facility, hence the out of date machinery, but it could successfully deposit layers of all kinds of different materials on the chip dyes with relative ease. I'm sure it won't take a few engineers more than a couple months to figure out how, and then put it into an industrial machine.
Replacing a gigawatt server farm with one that uses watts is such a substantial energy savings, that it is difficult to imagine. It would be like replacing a factory with the power usage of a lightbulb and producing just as much. This is a difference of 100,000 times less energy. That is worth it.
Lets totally get this ball rolling, and replace as many current devices and server farms as possible. So many people advocate cleaner energy solutions, but neglect the possibility of ridiculously increased efficiency. I say, if we can make retarded huge increases in efficiency, we can significantly reduce our power consumption. Plus, can you image a goddamn smart phone with a week long battery life?? Or a laptop that runs for days without needing to recharge? A server farm that could be powered by solar power and a few large battery power storage units? Plus, how much less cooling will be required with such an efficient system. We could all afford to power smart dwellings, and increase our use of technology in our everyday lives.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't follow either slants media outlets at all, and I most certainly don't do what anybody tells me. I am largely a real libertarian with a few notable exceptions for the modern world, as the feedback mechanisms of our increasingly complex economy can impoverish millions with ease and nobody, not even the poor, cares because of what is said in the media.
I'm not putting democrats on any kind of pedestal, I am just putting republicans in a ditch, because their insults to freedom, tolerance, education, and the American dream as well as their steadfast determination to improve the amount of money they make every year even if it means destroying our economy. Not to mention their enormous insults against atheists.
I haven't been following the public broadcasting thing at all, I was referring mostly to global warming, and Michael Moore's documentaries and the reaction too them. Cute how you responded to a fraction of something and ignored the vast majority of it though.
I wasn't talking about NPR. Nor do I see how you got that from that.
Actually it is the same situation for all intensive purposes. The rich british had heavy taxes on American goods and forced exclusive trading agreements, making sizable profits on everything we sent them, mostly raw materials in the beginning, then selling us back manufactured goods for a high price, forcing us to buy from them or nobody else. Plus they held taxes over us that provided no gain to us, and so there was revolution. Throwing off the filthy rich scum that are abusing the poor so heavily. And I am not talking about the madisons, I am talking about the founders like Franklin, Jefferson and Washington.
I wasn't saying dismiss them outright, I was saying, after examining their arguments with science, that they are dirty liars and cheats, or simply gullible people who fell for the lies of the big republicans. Either way, I never meet one that holds their own to any kind of questioning, even when it is only ever so slight.
Lol, your funny. That was a retarded statement for the sake of comedy, right?
In case you are actually being serious, allow me to note exactly how current republican "economics" would put us in another great depression.
The economy is driven by markets: The more demand for products, the better the economy is doing. Demand can't exist without people having money to spend.
Republicans want to remove all of the funding from social welfare programs of every kind. This would drive demand down significantly. They also want to deregulate the financial markets to 1920s style markets, except further. This means we have shrinking markets with growing businesses and a financial product market that can abuse this to no end. That is begging for a massive crash.
They also say that taxing the rich hurts the economy and stops businesses from growing, but that is patently absurd. The fact of the matter is that as long as markets are growing, businesses will grow, and lenders will lend them money to do so. When markets are shrinking, lenders don't lend and businesses don't grow. If there is money to be made by lending, lending will be done, irregardless of whether you tax the rich 5% or 95%.
Only thing is, the latter means wonderful joyful amounts of money to run the government, provide for the social welfare and fund investment in research, education, and infrastructure, which has a history of paying back 5x as much as is invested, or the former, which involves either massive debt or no government programs, either of which, at the moment, is disasterous.
Your republicans have fucked us over already by bringing their retarded fiscal opinions into mainstream political discussion, not it is toxic to raise taxes, and "job killing ..." is the most overused statement around right now. But go ahead, gloat at your destruction of America and everything we stand for.
The majority of atheists are left-leaning because:
1. The right tends to put atheists on the same level as rapid bears in the city.
2. Atheists are atheists because we have learned to follow facts and evidence. This inherently bars us from believing anything republicans say, as none of it holds up to fact checking, and all of their statements are in direct conflict with their actions.
I'm going to have to call you out on this, because I read a good deal of legislature that comes up to vote, and typically democrats say what is in it with a plainness and honesty that is well within bounds of acceptability, while republicans spout pure propaganda for pure political gain, with no intention, basis, or drive to accurately represent what has been put forth.
Also, all shareholds of companies, and the wealthy who own/operate them have the potential to earn millions/billions more dollars if they put conservative ideas out ahead. I am not inclined to believe that google is blocking facts and research, when they provide better access to it than anyone else on the interwebs.
They may be poor and uneducated, but the recent violence towards liberals in rural areas, including beatings that send people to the hospital and the conservatives to jail, would beg to differ.
... "what makes you think you know how his viewers think?"
I have talked to dozens of them. All exactly reciting, word for word, like a cultist reading from a script, what Glenn Beck has said.
Also, reciting the words of an actor/comedian doing a parody news show on a fake news channel that don't stand up to the slightest fact check verbatim as if they are the words of some holy, unquestionable text is not thinking, it is not intelligent, and it is not truth.
CNN shows every side, and holds every side up to questioning, unlike fox, which edits out typically more than half of what respondents say, or simply cuts them off when they mention real facts that conflict with their own sensationalist propaganda.
Also, if people like you take power in 2012, I have no doubt in my mind, to the point where I would bet everything I own, that America will crash and burn, because the policy decisions republicans are currently pushing for rob most markets of around 20% of market volume by cutting off all welfare, and with shrinking markets come large economic crashes. That, and they are pushing for financial market deregulation to even less than there was in 1929. Its like they are begging for a situation worse than the great depression.
lol, yea, because number of viewers equals quality of news. Haha, what planet are you from? oh, right, Anonymous Coward planet.
Fox news is sensationalist journalism and keeps viewers through such things as the exclusive deals with several sports leagues, and hilarious comedy shows, and the national Fox news network piggybacks trust off of the thousands of local fox stations that are so reputable. Older people tend to trust groups or entities as if the name Fox actually meant an equal quality throughout.
You want real news? Watch something that can actually run for 30 seconds without failing every fact check you put it through, unlike fox. CNN, they show good, accurate shit, at times it is boring and dull, but at least it is not sensationalist bullshit.
That is not about fear, it is about anger and outrage at the actions of certain wealthy, rich people in America destroying the things we hold most dear as a country, and have since the days of our founding.
That is not at all insightful, as somebody else said, it is utterly ridiculous. Palin and Fox are scary without liberal news sources because they set forth a precedent where it is ok to lie to millions of people in order to put public support behind legislation that will kill jobs, kill our economy, and make a few rich people richer. Palin is scary because if she were actually in a position of substantial power, we would be utterly fucked. Also, I eat meat and don't know anyone who shops at whole foods or owns a prius. And for that matter, I don't know anyone stupid enough to subscribe to the noble savage theory either.
Really, that was absolutely downright douche-baggery.
But really, I wouldn't give a damn about politics if it weren't for my stake in survival. If I was rich, I would happily watch America fuck itself with an explosive spiked pinapple with serrated edges by giving republicans power. Watch them cut all welfare spending and instead give it to the rich in the form of subsidies, and due to the lack of market demand for any product at all, watch the markets plummet and the economy crash for real while a few hundred people get disgustingly rich, and can make the American people do whatever they want, as they control the "spice."
Sure it was a scare tactic to a point, but the ice caps have shrank extensively in recent years, and at the current rate the arctic ocean will be devoid of ice during the summer of 2050. Plus, to get idiots excited about making intelligent decisions for things like efficiency, which make our lives better, reduce our power consumption and make life rock, is not always easy.
On the other hand, telling a bunch of old people that the country they have lived in and loved their whole life is falling at the hands of satanic secular stalin hitler's who want to steal all your money and subject you to death panels is scary, especially when you trust the source that is saying it.
Fear mongering is easier when a group has more solid principles, and is more set in their ways.
Yes, perfectly reasonable for a town like pyongyang, NK or perhaps any city in China, or even living under the asshole Mubarak. Your post ignores so many facets of society, so many issues, so many reasons why quitting is not an option, and just ignores all of it so that you can run around and spout nonsensical bullshit about how freedoms are stupid and people should stfu and take it up the ass. Go move to a fucking communist dictatorship, and leave the freedom loving countries alone.
What is truly pathetic is the government and university websites that still don't support chrome. Nothing like completing 4 hours of forms just for the last page to flip a shit and say "YOUR NOT ON I E YOU BASTARD" and have to repeat it in a shitty ass browser while freaking out about virii.
you're confusing monopolistic behaviors as something that could possible be something besides as unethical as you can get without whipping your workers and selling their bodies for sex.
Thats not constructive at all. I use windows because it is compatible with the engineering software I have to run for my profession, and for the wide versatility win7 ult x64 offers, and frankly I rarely have problems with it. But at the same time I hate IE with a passion and am a strong supporter in google chrome for the same reason I love windows on my box. I mean, that whole thing was just a terrible oversimplified comment that makes ridiculous assumptions as to the character of anyone that isn't as gung ho everything anti-microsoft as you. Mind you, I too think they are evil, but not nearly a few percent as evil as Apple or Sony, but their OS itself holds enormous use for anyone that does more than just surf the web, and edit basic documents, especially for engineers of all kinds, I personally run about a dozen Autodesk products that run on Windows only, not to mention gaming and such.
First thing I do when I am done installing win7 ult. x64: Download chrome. IE is a fucking virus. I have uninstalled it 30 times now from this computer, even erased every last file involving it from my box, and stopped all updates containing it, then BAM there it is again. It may exist on my computer, but I am sure as hell not a user.
Clearly you didn't read the article, and your condescending tone is not just obnoxious, it is pathetic. Come off it.
The importance of this discovery is held a lot higher than other discoveries precisely because it lacks the various problems of certain materials. First of all, it is just another layer added to silicon chips, the silicon is going to do much work that it already does. Second, it has a high voltage gap that makes it much more efficient and avoids the issues that graphene has in this area, but still has a very, very tight structure very conducive of smaller manufacturing processes.
Also, unlike materials like gallium arsenide, molybdenum disulfide has a long history of use in other industries, its properties and methods for handling it properly are quite developed, significantly reducing the turnaround time. I would venture to wager that this material will be integrated into existing manufacturing processes within the next few years. Not to mention the on chip fiber optic converters, which are in significant development and could seriously blast through many existing bottlenecks for speed.
But go ahead, sit their with your unrealistically excessive pessimism and ride around on your high horse, everyone loves people like that.
Most transistors are idle most of the time, and any electron gap below 1.6 eV is going to leak like a an old ladies bladder. Silicon has a gap of 1.1, allowing electrons to cross it with relative ease. Molybdenum disulfide has a gap of 1.8 eV, higher than the charge of a single electron, making it orders of magnitude more difficult to leak any power.
Think about some basic gates, like the nand, nor, not, and, xor, and, or, the different kinds of flip flops, and think about what percentage of the transistors is idle even when the circuit is active. In many circuits, you will have less than half the transistors active, and even then it is likely that a large portion of your circuitry is dormant at any given time. So figure if a totally idle processor uses about 50 watts, while active as possible is only like 130, it is a vast amount of power being consumed. You could cut the power consumption of server farms by more than 50%, maybe even 75-85% on the far side of peak usage hours.
I toured a facility that produced micro-chips with a 70 nm process a couple years ago, it was a student facility, hence the out of date machinery, but it could successfully deposit layers of all kinds of different materials on the chip dyes with relative ease. I'm sure it won't take a few engineers more than a couple months to figure out how, and then put it into an industrial machine.
Replacing a gigawatt server farm with one that uses watts is such a substantial energy savings, that it is difficult to imagine. It would be like replacing a factory with the power usage of a lightbulb and producing just as much. This is a difference of 100,000 times less energy. That is worth it.
I might add, if you read the article, you would see that it is indeed Molybdenum disulfide on a silicon substrate.
Fuck Yea.
Lets totally get this ball rolling, and replace as many current devices and server farms as possible. So many people advocate cleaner energy solutions, but neglect the possibility of ridiculously increased efficiency. I say, if we can make retarded huge increases in efficiency, we can significantly reduce our power consumption. Plus, can you image a goddamn smart phone with a week long battery life?? Or a laptop that runs for days without needing to recharge? A server farm that could be powered by solar power and a few large battery power storage units? Plus, how much less cooling will be required with such an efficient system. We could all afford to power smart dwellings, and increase our use of technology in our everyday lives.
So like I said: Fuck Yea.