Or convention centers, church pulpits, wall mounted information displays, neo-classically designed retro-arcades, computer controlled entertainment centers, etc...
You're certainly right in calling this in-wall mount a "niche" market though;)
It'll accelerate quicker than a Lamborghini LP640, has a greater top speed than a Ferrari 458 Italia, and spews out fewer emissions than a Toyota Prius. Behold, friends, the holy grail of motoring: the Jaguar C-X75.
It's an electric vehicle with micro-turbines powering the electric generators if the car travels past the 68 mi single charge limit... or if you want the extra boost to do 0 to 60 mph in 3.4 seconds.
Oh, and it should be capable of accepting multi-fuels, so we (in the US) don't have to wait for the lift on extremely high EtOH import tarrifs while we also subsidize our corn -> EtOH program or wait for industrial research to fund (and patent) biochemical oil reactors (i.e. algae to diesel), or any of the other promises which trivialize the three laws of thermodynamics (enthalpy, entropy, and politics).
And the fact that some have to do it after the fact just goes to show (once again) the misnomer of calling these films3D. Unless you can walk around the display and see the back of Batman's head - it ain't 3D. The bandwagon is called stereoscopic projection.
I am a pretty left-leaning guy, and I am no huge fan of Gitmo, but there is probably a reason that Gitmo still hasn't been closed. After all, President Obama would have really fired up his base going into these midterm elections if he could check off "closed Gitmo" on his list of to-dos. Therefore, I really, honestly believe that there are some really scary things happening at Gitmo with very few horrible, hardcore killers who have been giving up all sorts of useful intelligence but who cannot be tried in a civilian court because they have been endlessly tortured to obtain that information. Senator Obama made his campaign promises to close down Gitmo not knowing the secret horrors and President Obama has to backtrack because he now knows about the shit going on.
I do not like the "national security" thing but this might be one of the cases where it actually is happening.
Tough. We screwed up in a really big way. How in the world are we supposed to win a war of ideals if our tongue is flapping on about freedom, justice, and human rights while our hands are holding captured (disputable) enemy combatants under water until they think they're drowning - or having our less idealistic allies borrow custody long enough to get answers beaten out? We claim that democracy is the answer to (sustained) atrocities - and we fail to convince on that account too.
We need to let these trials happen so justice can be done. And according to our rules, justice will likely be letting these detainees walk free because we violated their fundamental human rights in the process of arresting their criminal behavior. If we do not have just and open trials now, we lose the chance to redeem an image of integrity in the hearts and minds of those on the other side of this war and if that is the case we will lose the war itself (because you can not ethically win an ideological war with bullets (e.g. genocide is a winning bullet solution, but not so very ethical)).
Turning the other cheek isn't about letting a scumbag beat the snot out of you; it's about teaching the scumbag how to be a better man: not justifying further violence by violence (which is a lesson we'd all like to see that portion of the world learn). I'm not suggesting that we offer ourselves up to a mortal blow - but I like to think we're strong enough of mind, heart and country to handle a bloody nose with integrity and noble character.
I've got a message from your boss: the [complicated work thing] is down and you need to be back at the office right away. The stern lecture about being slow to respond to the [truthfully trivial] emergency that would have been weathered fine without you should heat you up good and plenty.
And you thought mountaineering was a "safe" hobby.
Wireless internet in the wilderness: now making sure work can follow you "home" even when you aren't there.
Maybe not speak (i.e. technically mute (You Insensitive Anonymous Clod)), but citizens should be able to read English (by braille if nothing else). The states are required to provide K-12 education (of which English is a required subject for all 13 years). The state is also required to provide education meeting the needs of any disadvantaged/disabled child which includes special ed, braille, sign language, full time dedicated teacher's aid, and while some of those require parents to go through the court system to force cash-strapped states into their legal obligations - there is almost never any controversy about the provision of English as a Second Language (ESL) accommodations. Typically it is also illegal to drop out of school before acquiring a sophomore level education (or home-school equivalent).
So no. There is no reason that a citizen (naturalized* or born-and-educated) should not be able to read the ballot in the de facto national language of this country. If a local jurisdiction elects (pun intended) to provide that alternate ballot languages as a service - that is their prerogative, but it should not be out of any sense of political correctness or necessity. Assuming a citizen can read English is not a statement with latent racism.
*I believe there are an extremely limited number of cases where a person may be naturalized while having the language requirement waived. They are probably along the lines of asylum-citizenship conversions (for international legal protection), extreme age, or unique disabilities. Each case would likely be able to bring a translator to the polls, or request a special ballot.
First - we should use some sneaky diplomacy to convince them to build a rail-decelerator - otherwise we might be able to shoot them hard, but our invasion force will be part of the kinetic payload.
Re:This is the break through I've been waiting for
on
Programmable Magnets
·
· Score: 1
Laws are only there to make you think before you break them;)
PUBLIC HEALTH PRIZE: Manuel Barbeito, Charles Mathews, and Larry Taylor of the Industrial Health and Safety Office, Fort Detrick, Maryland, USA, for determining by experiment that microbes cling to bearded scientists.
REFERENCE: "Microbiological Laboratory Hazard of Bearded Men," Manuel S. Barbeito, Charles T. Mathews, and Larry A. Taylor, Applied Microbiology, vol. 15, no. 4, July 1967, pp. 899–906.
WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Manuel S. Barbeito was unable to travel, due to health reasons. A representative read his acceptance speech for him.
Let me repeat a small relevant section of the above: Applied Microbiology, vol. 15, no. 4, July 1967, pp. 899–906.
I think these dog guys will be ok on the date count.
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
So how does the punishment fit the crime? How is it even relevant? How is forbidding this kid from using an online bank (or anything else with https, or a physical network with a properly secured wireless connection) not excessive bail, or cruel, or unusual?
Take this on up the chain of justice you bike-thieving scoundrel. I'll fight to have you punished for your crime, but I'm fully in support of prohibiting our law from water-boarding you or forcing you to live in the last century. From a practical standpoint the water-boarding is probably less cruel - outside of the psych damage - it's over when it's done. The other prevents you from becoming a normally functioning member of modern society.
I'd rather not chop any heads off because of "unethical" taxes on coffee. Or gas, or ethanol imports which would destroy the market for our heavily subsidized national crop, etc...
Representative governments are always worth fiddling with (and changing) by its citizens - otherwise stagnation and apathy will lead to a non-representative form of government.
Another option for trying out some of the metagovt philosophies and models is if we write to our representatives and request that they offer grants through USAid (and other US sources) to supply such an infrastructure to the shelled out places we try to help out in after the Revolutions in sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere. That may very well prepare us to accept a dose of the medicine we dole out to others.
Nah - I say we wait for a new frontier to open up and we can implement it as the completion of a settlement pilgrimage to the sea/sea-floor/orbital/lunar/martian/colony-ship/etc...
Not that Britain didn't shape up eventually - but it wasn't until after the bloody nose we gave them they wised up and went for the commonwealth illusion of sovereignty (Technically. If the Queen ever tried ruling Canada with a set of legal iron decrees - I have a feeling that our usually polite neighbors would say something unflattering about where she could put that crown).
"For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs." 1 Tim 6: 10 NASB.
The problem with open source governance is the revolution required to get there. It may be possible through a very long ardent process to get there with the little "r" revolution, but changes that dramatic have a tendency to not happen without the big "R" Revolution where people are shouting about cake eaters and lopping heads off after their coffee shop assignations ("Viva la Starbucks!"). I like their strategy of start small and move up, but it's going to take a while and Skynet might just beat the revolution to the punchline.
I completely agree - the people can do whatever they want whenever they want including a declaration of the government to be invalid and starting a new one (although not lightly nor often - the Roman republic made it 700 years - surely we can beat them). I was just trying to point out that they try so hard to keep the territory through semi-reasonable feelings of entitlement (plus the oldest reason $$$).
The solution is not to tran[s]fer the power from the Corporation (ex. comcast) to the Government (congress). The solution is to transfer the power to the people and give each individual the choice...
See - this is why it seems like we are fighting a losing battle - we've already lost. Let me take the blame: it's my fault (and yours too). The corporations took this power, allowed by the Government acting with our consent. That's how the US works - governmental power is derived from the citizens through the consent of the governed. It may not have been informed consent, in fact it may have been very shady back room (or even smoky darkened closet "I have these compromising pictures") consent - but it's by our consent none the less. The citizen exercises that consent once or twice a year through the vote and continuously through the year by either apathy, contentment, or political activity.
So when we want to take something back (which we allowed through our negligence, allowing loopholes, etc...) it we're reneging on the deal which we had previously given consent to (Net-aneutrality in this case). So that's why corporations (or established governmental organizations) entrench and protect their territory so fiercely - we're taking something of theirs away which we had previously given with our full consent. It's likely that they've invested a large amount of their own resources into the gift - which we may very well also be taking. The method in which our consent was obtained may not have been ethical (seldom properly informed) - but that's a different issue. It's perfectly right for the people to change their mind in terms of which powers they consensually submit to the government, but it should not be with surprise that resistance is received from the group we are reclaiming that fraction of our sovereignty from.
It's unlikely that even if he tried, he could make a disease more lethal than what nature has produced before.
It's not the idea of someone trying to make a disease that worries me. What worries me is the idea of someone moroning it up and accidentally producing something dangerous because they don't know what they're doing. The well-meaning idiot scenario is almost certainly more likely than the evil genius scenario.
Do I hear a case of NIMBY for something other than chemistry or nuclear physics? This is the same sort of arguments that make Erlenmeyer flasks illegal in Texas (Texas Health and Safety Code, Section 481.0621 (b),). Usually in the case of NIMBY the morons are... Well - lets leave that argument alone for right now. The real reason we should object is that some private citizen may wind up with intellectual property rights without a corporation around to claim ownership and assure "ethical" treatment of the resulting patents.
If we want to talk about moronic, here's a list of controlled lab apparatuses in TX(pdf). Oh no! Someone might make drugs (or accidentally teach children about the universe we live in, get them interested in the sciences, which might help them think logically - we can not allow that in our emotion-based voter pool.
A. Condensers
B. Distilling apparatus
C. Vacuum dryers
D. Three-necked flasks
E. Distilling flasks
F. Tableting machines
G. Encapsulating machines
H. Filter funnels, buchner funnels, and
separatory funnels
I. Erlenmyer flasks, two-necked flasks, single
neck flasks, round-bottom flasks, Florence
flasks, thermometer flasks, and filtering flasks
J. Soxhlet extractors
K. Transformers
L. Flask heaters
M. Heating mantles
N. Adapter tubes
Right - it's the PCR and other second hand equipment they pick up with that few thousand dollars that will make this real biology. If there's people out there making fusion reactors in their garage as a hobby, mutating e. coli or dropping a plasmid into yeast is pretty tame by comparison. All you're really got to do to hit it big is to force mutations until you manage to get something which will optimally express an important protein.
Is it more likely to happen in a big biotech firm? Yes. Is it impossible in a garage? No. Especially if the hobbyist happens to be going after some orphan drug with a fair bit of groundwork already done (add +5 motivation if it's personal - like a nephew who'd have a much better life without the side-effects of his current biologic).
At some point the garage guy is going to need a big financial backer just to wade through the CBER FDA clinical trial and licensing process, but a non-drug biologic product could be a pretty easy to get down the R&D road before leaving the garage. You don't need a laminar flow clean room to do aseptic technique - it just makes it easier.
Slashdot Mirror
Or convention centers, church pulpits, wall mounted information displays, neo-classically designed retro-arcades, computer controlled entertainment centers, etc...
You're certainly right in calling this in-wall mount a "niche" market though ;)
Of course there's a few differences from trains - but that's ok - they're all sexy. ;)
You mean like previously discussed here?
Which was reported here.
It's an electric vehicle with micro-turbines powering the electric generators if the car travels past the 68 mi single charge limit... or if you want the extra boost to do 0 to 60 mph in 3.4 seconds.
Oh, and it should be capable of accepting multi-fuels, so we (in the US) don't have to wait for the lift on extremely high EtOH import tarrifs while we also subsidize our corn -> EtOH program or wait for industrial research to fund (and patent) biochemical oil reactors (i.e. algae to diesel), or any of the other promises which trivialize the three laws of thermodynamics (enthalpy, entropy, and politics).
And the fact that some have to do it after the fact just goes to show (once again) the misnomer of calling these films3D. Unless you can walk around the display and see the back of Batman's head - it ain't 3D. The bandwagon is called stereoscopic projection.
I am a pretty left-leaning guy, and I am no huge fan of Gitmo, but there is probably a reason that Gitmo still hasn't been closed. After all, President Obama would have really fired up his base going into these midterm elections if he could check off "closed Gitmo" on his list of to-dos. Therefore, I really, honestly believe that there are some really scary things happening at Gitmo with very few horrible, hardcore killers who have been giving up all sorts of useful intelligence but who cannot be tried in a civilian court because they have been endlessly tortured to obtain that information. Senator Obama made his campaign promises to close down Gitmo not knowing the secret horrors and President Obama has to backtrack because he now knows about the shit going on.
I do not like the "national security" thing but this might be one of the cases where it actually is happening.
Tough. We screwed up in a really big way. How in the world are we supposed to win a war of ideals if our tongue is flapping on about freedom, justice, and human rights while our hands are holding captured (disputable) enemy combatants under water until they think they're drowning - or having our less idealistic allies borrow custody long enough to get answers beaten out? We claim that democracy is the answer to (sustained) atrocities - and we fail to convince on that account too.
We need to let these trials happen so justice can be done. And according to our rules, justice will likely be letting these detainees walk free because we violated their fundamental human rights in the process of arresting their criminal behavior. If we do not have just and open trials now, we lose the chance to redeem an image of integrity in the hearts and minds of those on the other side of this war and if that is the case we will lose the war itself (because you can not ethically win an ideological war with bullets (e.g. genocide is a winning bullet solution, but not so very ethical)).
Turning the other cheek isn't about letting a scumbag beat the snot out of you; it's about teaching the scumbag how to be a better man: not justifying further violence by violence (which is a lesson we'd all like to see that portion of the world learn). I'm not suggesting that we offer ourselves up to a mortal blow - but I like to think we're strong enough of mind, heart and country to handle a bloody nose with integrity and noble character.
Wow - a water park the size of the District of Columbia! :)
I've got a message from your boss: the [complicated work thing] is down and you need to be back at the office right away. The stern lecture about being slow to respond to the [truthfully trivial] emergency that would have been weathered fine without you should heat you up good and plenty.
And you thought mountaineering was a "safe" hobby.
Wireless internet in the wilderness: now making sure work can follow you "home" even when you aren't there.
Maybe not speak (i.e. technically mute (You Insensitive Anonymous Clod)), but citizens should be able to read English (by braille if nothing else). The states are required to provide K-12 education (of which English is a required subject for all 13 years). The state is also required to provide education meeting the needs of any disadvantaged/disabled child which includes special ed, braille, sign language, full time dedicated teacher's aid, and while some of those require parents to go through the court system to force cash-strapped states into their legal obligations - there is almost never any controversy about the provision of English as a Second Language (ESL) accommodations. Typically it is also illegal to drop out of school before acquiring a sophomore level education (or home-school equivalent).
So no. There is no reason that a citizen (naturalized* or born-and-educated) should not be able to read the ballot in the de facto national language of this country. If a local jurisdiction elects (pun intended) to provide that alternate ballot languages as a service - that is their prerogative, but it should not be out of any sense of political correctness or necessity. Assuming a citizen can read English is not a statement with latent racism.
*I believe there are an extremely limited number of cases where a person may be naturalized while having the language requirement waived. They are probably along the lines of asylum-citizenship conversions (for international legal protection), extreme age, or unique disabilities. Each case would likely be able to bring a translator to the polls, or request a special ballot.
I think they should make this into a movie - here's some snappy dialogue that I have a feeling might achieve a timeless immortality in pop culture
Driver: We don't have time to discuss this in a committee"
Passenger: I am not a committee
First - we should use some sneaky diplomacy to convince them to build a rail-decelerator - otherwise we might be able to shoot them hard, but our invasion force will be part of the kinetic payload.
Laws are only there to make you think before you break them ;)
I was trying to fit in with the /. meme ;)
And yes - oopsie
Let me repeat a small relevant section of the above: Applied Microbiology, vol. 15, no. 4, July 1967, pp. 899–906.
I think these dog guys will be ok on the date count.
So how does the punishment fit the crime? How is it even relevant? How is forbidding this kid from using an online bank (or anything else with https, or a physical network with a properly secured wireless connection) not excessive bail, or cruel, or unusual?
Take this on up the chain of justice you bike-thieving scoundrel. I'll fight to have you punished for your crime, but I'm fully in support of prohibiting our law from water-boarding you or forcing you to live in the last century. From a practical standpoint the water-boarding is probably less cruel - outside of the psych damage - it's over when it's done. The other prevents you from becoming a normally functioning member of modern society.
Here we come!!!
I'd rather not chop any heads off because of "unethical" taxes on coffee. Or gas, or ethanol imports which would destroy the market for our heavily subsidized national crop, etc...
Representative governments are always worth fiddling with (and changing) by its citizens - otherwise stagnation and apathy will lead to a non-representative form of government.
Another option for trying out some of the metagovt philosophies and models is if we write to our representatives and request that they offer grants through USAid (and other US sources) to supply such an infrastructure to the shelled out places we try to help out in after the Revolutions in sub-Saharan Africa and elsewhere. That may very well prepare us to accept a dose of the medicine we dole out to others.
Nah - I say we wait for a new frontier to open up and we can implement it as the completion of a settlement pilgrimage to the sea/sea-floor/orbital/lunar/martian/colony-ship/etc...
Not that Britain didn't shape up eventually - but it wasn't until after the bloody nose we gave them they wised up and went for the commonwealth illusion of sovereignty (Technically. If the Queen ever tried ruling Canada with a set of legal iron decrees - I have a feeling that our usually polite neighbors would say something unflattering about where she could put that crown).
"For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs." 1 Tim 6: 10 NASB.
Lets get this right before I mod myself redundant
No - a more accurate translation is: "the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil" 1 Tim 6:10.
The problem with open source governance is the revolution required to get there. It may be possible through a very long ardent process to get there with the little "r" revolution, but changes that dramatic have a tendency to not happen without the big "R" Revolution where people are shouting about cake eaters and lopping heads off after their coffee shop assignations ("Viva la Starbucks!"). I like their strategy of start small and move up, but it's going to take a while and Skynet might just beat the revolution to the punchline.
Maryland was replaced with electronic. I believe that they plan to scrap the electronic system and go back to paper - or at least a paper trail.
I completely agree - the people can do whatever they want whenever they want including a declaration of the government to be invalid and starting a new one (although not lightly nor often - the Roman republic made it 700 years - surely we can beat them). I was just trying to point out that they try so hard to keep the territory through semi-reasonable feelings of entitlement (plus the oldest reason $$$).
The solution is not to tran[s]fer the power from the Corporation (ex. comcast) to the Government (congress). The solution is to transfer the power to the people and give each individual the choice...
See - this is why it seems like we are fighting a losing battle - we've already lost. Let me take the blame: it's my fault (and yours too). The corporations took this power, allowed by the Government acting with our consent. That's how the US works - governmental power is derived from the citizens through the consent of the governed. It may not have been informed consent, in fact it may have been very shady back room (or even smoky darkened closet "I have these compromising pictures") consent - but it's by our consent none the less. The citizen exercises that consent once or twice a year through the vote and continuously through the year by either apathy, contentment, or political activity.
So when we want to take something back (which we allowed through our negligence, allowing loopholes, etc...) it we're reneging on the deal which we had previously given consent to (Net-aneutrality in this case). So that's why corporations (or established governmental organizations) entrench and protect their territory so fiercely - we're taking something of theirs away which we had previously given with our full consent. It's likely that they've invested a large amount of their own resources into the gift - which we may very well also be taking. The method in which our consent was obtained may not have been ethical (seldom properly informed) - but that's a different issue. It's perfectly right for the people to change their mind in terms of which powers they consensually submit to the government, but it should not be with surprise that resistance is received from the group we are reclaiming that fraction of our sovereignty from.
It's unlikely that even if he tried, he could make a disease more lethal than what nature has produced before.
It's not the idea of someone trying to make a disease that worries me. What worries me is the idea of someone moroning it up and accidentally producing something dangerous because they don't know what they're doing. The well-meaning idiot scenario is almost certainly more likely than the evil genius scenario.
Do I hear a case of NIMBY for something other than chemistry or nuclear physics? This is the same sort of arguments that make Erlenmeyer flasks illegal in Texas (Texas Health and Safety Code, Section 481.0621 (b),). Usually in the case of NIMBY the morons are... Well - lets leave that argument alone for right now. The real reason we should object is that some private citizen may wind up with intellectual property rights without a corporation around to claim ownership and assure "ethical" treatment of the resulting patents.
If we want to talk about moronic, here's a list of controlled lab apparatuses in TX(pdf). Oh no! Someone might make drugs (or accidentally teach children about the universe we live in, get them interested in the sciences, which might help them think logically - we can not allow that in our emotion-based voter pool.
A. Condensers B. Distilling apparatus C. Vacuum dryers D. Three-necked flasks E. Distilling flasks F. Tableting machines G. Encapsulating machines H. Filter funnels, buchner funnels, and separatory funnels I. Erlenmyer flasks, two-necked flasks, single neck flasks, round-bottom flasks, Florence flasks, thermometer flasks, and filtering flasks J. Soxhlet extractors K. Transformers L. Flask heaters M. Heating mantles N. Adapter tubes
Right - it's the PCR and other second hand equipment they pick up with that few thousand dollars that will make this real biology. If there's people out there making fusion reactors in their garage as a hobby, mutating e. coli or dropping a plasmid into yeast is pretty tame by comparison. All you're really got to do to hit it big is to force mutations until you manage to get something which will optimally express an important protein.
Is it more likely to happen in a big biotech firm? Yes. Is it impossible in a garage? No. Especially if the hobbyist happens to be going after some orphan drug with a fair bit of groundwork already done (add +5 motivation if it's personal - like a nephew who'd have a much better life without the side-effects of his current biologic).
At some point the garage guy is going to need a big financial backer just to wade through the CBER FDA clinical trial and licensing process, but a non-drug biologic product could be a pretty easy to get down the R&D road before leaving the garage. You don't need a laminar flow clean room to do aseptic technique - it just makes it easier.