Maybe we'll use a later version of this rather than busses. With busses you have all of the problems of a road system (traffic accidents, congestion, lane maintenance), just some fuel savings efficiency, which only comes into play once the bus has at least x passangers, about 20% capacity, I believe.
With this rail system, you have an easier time keeping track of packages, don't have to 'associate' with others on a crowded bus. Also, electric engines are efficient even at small sizes, and allow you to eliminate even the emmissions of a bunch of busses. Assuming electric power is mostly from minimally polluting sources (wind, solar, nuclear) by then, it'd be a better solution.
If you look at how amusment rides are built in parks like disney world, they have spots to stick a nonfunctional cart. Have a broken cart? Put it into a "garage" until the repairman comes to fix it or a tow-pod hauls it to the depo.
As long as you have enough pods and the rails are not saturated, it'll deal just fine. Matter of fact, since it's computer controlled, you might be able to flip the direction of some of the grid lines for more capacity.
The capacity of this system comes from the continuous stream of pods. If a station is getting more pods than what it needs to handle outgoing traffic(coming into work in the morning), they're computer controlled, so the excess simply leaves, heading back to stations that aren't getting enough incoming pods.
If you actually have the situation where you have hoards of people who get on a subway that's about 10 cars long, you have to ask, how long were they waiting? With this system, pods are continously leaving. Need more capacity? Make a larger station with more loading docks, able to process more pods. Then add another rail line. Heck, do some research and build some more stations to shorten people's walk and take traffic off that line.
Except that Busses often don't take you where you need to go. In my city, to get to the mall from my house using the bus, you'd need to take a bus all the way downtown, get off, wait 10-20 minutes, then head back on another route to get to the mall. Bicycling was faster. And you really didn't save any wear, because the busses aren't full enough most of the time, and you don't get people riding them if there aren't enough busses.
If you set this up right, you go to the station (5-10 minute walk), ride more or less directly to within a mile of your destination, to another quick 5-10 minute walk.
I agree. A 30+ inch television is a pain to grab, lift, and move. The weight isn't bad, but you can't really get a balanced hold. Having another person makes it more than twice as easy, as you can both hold an end, and put it where you need it. Less chance of dropping it, too.
Yes, these are thinner, but they're still running almost half of a meter for a 30" screen.
If you have an existing CRT, unless you're going to a larger screen or remodeling, you've already made allowance for the depth of the unit, so yeah, you don't need to get rid of your current television or monitor.
Hunting doesn't fall into that category. Sometimes you get the rationale that it's useful to control populations. Aside from the fact that there are better methods,
Better methods? How do you define better? Cheaper? More control? More "humane"? With hunting, you issue tags that people will pay money for. With, say, birth-control laced feed, you have an annual cost, but no income. With releasing natural predators, they've found that the predators will often migrate elsewhere, or target animals that you don't want them too.
it throws the ecosystem into imbalance. Unless you plan on hunting a few thousand species, and have the necessary charts and tables to calculate exactly what number of each you need to zap to keep things in check.
Exactly? You don't need to hunt a few thousand species, you need to hunt those species that we've destroyed/reduced the presence of natural predators. There are buffer areas. If you "overhunt", factors like disease, starvation, and accidents tend to take fewer animals. If you "underhunt", these very same factors tend to take more. Underhunting can actually be worse than overhunting. The extinctions and near extinctions of many species was/is a waste that doesn't need to happen any more. Wildlife management might argue quite a bit, but it seems to work out. There are areas where they want more hunting.
And remember, animals are different from people. Especially the herbivore types. Totally different mindsets.
Some real reasons why the cattle industry wouldn't treat animals "cruely"
Cruelty causes stress Stress leads to:
less weight gain (less money per animal)
"gamey" meat that doesn't taste as good
less resistance to disease (might loose ability to sell meat)
panicky animals (more likely to injure workers, which again, costs money)
Note, I tied it all to the money, which is what they really care about.
A better statement about Hunters with disabilities
on
Internet Hunting
·
· Score: 1
If they lost the ability to move well enough to hunt, there was always plenty of work to be done. Whether that meant grinding grain by hand, preparing skins for leather production, the dressing of game, production of arrows or other weapons.
I've never hunted, BTW, but I will stand up for those who support reasonable hunting practices. Automatic weapons? No, there's no reason for that unless you're hunting something that weighs two tons & you are near starving.
I agree. Full auto weapons are fun at the range, but they aren't really hunting weapons. Though I might go deer hunting with a full-auto AK-47, given: A:Careful ammo selection (NOT FMJ Milsurp) B:Fairly close range (under 200 yards) C:Good quality AK-47(There's a large variance) D:The selector switch remains in the Safe/Single region.
they simply won't kill the animal, only cause it pain
Well, you can kill an elephant with a.22LR, you just have to get the shot placement juuuusssst right. But yes, I wouldn't consider going after most american deer breeds with a.223. It's considered a varmit cartridge for a reason.
On the other hand, a.223 is overkill for squirrel and gopher (except for longer ranges). About right for coyote. I'd want something bigger than a.30-30 for elk hunting. Something like my.300WBY. You have to match your cartidge to your game and hunting style.
They also had to end the prison experiment early because they became so concerned that somebody was going to get hurt or killed.
Makes you wonder about our prison system. There were some fairly major differences between the experiment and our prison systems, but with what happened, I say that A: better experiments, with the shortcomings in the study addressed, and B: close scrutiney of our prison system.
It's not like they'll know that tag # 6165846185385498431837272978435 is a viagra prescription, unless it's a store that's connected to the database (ie you bought it from a walgreens, any walgreens will probably be able to look it up), in which case they know you bought it anyways because it went into the computer when you purchased it.
Or in this case the pickle manufacturers did themselves over.
You can only "make it up in volume" to a certain point. If you don't make your per piece costs, you aren't going to make money. If you can't make enough to cover your static costs, you aren't going to make money.
Lots of small businesses make it locally. Some large national business fail. There are times it's better to be the local specialty shop, sometimes it's better to generalise.
Actually, my district was about third or fourth out of six for education. There were better and worse, but not by much compared to the Mississipi school system.
Talk how you will, it'll eliminate the "tax advantage" to outsourcing jobs.
Reducing the regulatory expenses to opening/operating a business would help too. I'm not talking about eliminating OSHA, but there are lots of spots that governmental interferance increases the cost of doing business.
It sounds like a good deal for outsourcing. You have workers who are: A: Educated B: Available C: Hard working D: Not too expensive (ND is near the bottom for living expenses). E: Safe. One college student went missing. She was on the state news for months.
I've mostly grown up in the Midwest. I spent a few years in the Mississipi school system, and when we moved to Nebraska, they wanted to move me back a year. And jokes about illiterate farmers just isn't true anymore. They're actually some of the toughest people for education going. As for not a lot of jobs, well it's more that there aren't lots of low-skill jobs like factory work. And yes- illiterates are so rare that we would be shocked to find out somebody couldn't read.
17- back a grade level? 6 years older? Now that's bad. I know I had a tough first year in Nebraska, but how bad was that kid?
Having moved around many times while in the school system, my vote is for parental involvment. That makes a bigger difference in school performance than funding, federal funds, or anything else.
In most states if a child skips, parents are called. In Nebraska, you can almost certainly count on the parent taking action. In some states so many parents don't care that they're talking about having to fine parents, take other actions if the children don't attend school.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe we'll use a later version of this rather than busses. With busses you have all of the problems of a road system (traffic accidents, congestion, lane maintenance), just some fuel savings efficiency, which only comes into play once the bus has at least x passangers, about 20% capacity, I believe.
With this rail system, you have an easier time keeping track of packages, don't have to 'associate' with others on a crowded bus. Also, electric engines are efficient even at small sizes, and allow you to eliminate even the emmissions of a bunch of busses. Assuming electric power is mostly from minimally polluting sources (wind, solar, nuclear) by then, it'd be a better solution.
just make it an url.
<a href="http://www.yourlink.com">Your text</a>
If you look at how amusment rides are built in parks like disney world, they have spots to stick a nonfunctional cart. Have a broken cart? Put it into a "garage" until the repairman comes to fix it or a tow-pod hauls it to the depo.
As long as you have enough pods and the rails are not saturated, it'll deal just fine. Matter of fact, since it's computer controlled, you might be able to flip the direction of some of the grid lines for more capacity.
The capacity of this system comes from the continuous stream of pods. If a station is getting more pods than what it needs to handle outgoing traffic(coming into work in the morning), they're computer controlled, so the excess simply leaves, heading back to stations that aren't getting enough incoming pods.
If you actually have the situation where you have hoards of people who get on a subway that's about 10 cars long, you have to ask, how long were they waiting? With this system, pods are continously leaving. Need more capacity? Make a larger station with more loading docks, able to process more pods. Then add another rail line. Heck, do some research and build some more stations to shorten people's walk and take traffic off that line.
Except that Busses often don't take you where you need to go. In my city, to get to the mall from my house using the bus, you'd need to take a bus all the way downtown, get off, wait 10-20 minutes, then head back on another route to get to the mall. Bicycling was faster. And you really didn't save any wear, because the busses aren't full enough most of the time, and you don't get people riding them if there aren't enough busses.
If you set this up right, you go to the station (5-10 minute walk), ride more or less directly to within a mile of your destination, to another quick 5-10 minute walk.
I agree. A 30+ inch television is a pain to grab, lift, and move. The weight isn't bad, but you can't really get a balanced hold. Having another person makes it more than twice as easy, as you can both hold an end, and put it where you need it. Less chance of dropping it, too.
Yes, these are thinner, but they're still running almost half of a meter for a 30" screen.
If you have an existing CRT, unless you're going to a larger screen or remodeling, you've already made allowance for the depth of the unit, so yeah, you don't need to get rid of your current television or monitor.
Sure! It'll be 29.95E6 per month.
Here's your IP: 192.168.1.1.
Or:
Psss... Everybody nullroute MPAA's IP, it's x.x.x.x
So you grind it up, fuse it into glass, and dump it into a subduction trench.
No Fallout, and not likely to spread around very much until it's deep in the earth on it's way past the core.
And people wonder why I say that I'd almost rather go into combat with my M1 Garand, or even my $90 yugoslavian SKS...
Hunting doesn't fall into that category. Sometimes you get the rationale that it's useful to control populations. Aside from the fact that there are better methods,
Better methods? How do you define better? Cheaper? More control? More "humane"? With hunting, you issue tags that people will pay money for. With, say, birth-control laced feed, you have an annual cost, but no income. With releasing natural predators, they've found that the predators will often migrate elsewhere, or target animals that you don't want them too.
it throws the ecosystem into imbalance. Unless you plan on hunting a few thousand species, and have the necessary charts and tables to calculate exactly what number of each you need to zap to keep things in check.
Exactly? You don't need to hunt a few thousand species, you need to hunt those species that we've destroyed/reduced the presence of natural predators. There are buffer areas. If you "overhunt", factors like disease, starvation, and accidents tend to take fewer animals. If you "underhunt", these very same factors tend to take more. Underhunting can actually be worse than overhunting. The extinctions and near extinctions of many species was/is a waste that doesn't need to happen any more. Wildlife management might argue quite a bit, but it seems to work out. There are areas where they want more hunting.
Some real reasons why the cattle industry wouldn't treat animals "cruely"
Cruelty causes stress
Stress leads to:
Note, I tied it all to the money, which is what they really care about.
If they lost the ability to move well enough to hunt, there was always plenty of work to be done. Whether that meant grinding grain by hand, preparing skins for leather production, the dressing of game, production of arrows or other weapons.
Another take:
Some advantages come with disabilities in other areas.
Colorblind individuals often have excellent night vision. Having the Sickle cell gene protects against malaria.
To take this to extreme:
Dolphins gave up manuverability on land for better mobility in water.
I've never hunted, BTW, but I will stand up for those who support reasonable hunting practices. Automatic weapons? No, there's no reason for that unless you're hunting something that weighs two tons & you are near starving.
So you'd be really upset at this guy, who went whitetail hunting with a seven pound mountain howitzer?
I agree. Full auto weapons are fun at the range, but they aren't really hunting weapons. Though I might go deer hunting with a full-auto AK-47, given:
A:Careful ammo selection (NOT FMJ Milsurp)
B:Fairly close range (under 200 yards)
C:Good quality AK-47(There's a large variance)
D:The selector switch remains in the Safe/Single region.
they simply won't kill the animal, only cause it pain
.22LR, you just have to get the shot placement juuuusssst right. But yes, I wouldn't consider going after most american deer breeds with a .223. It's considered a varmit cartridge for a reason.
.223 is overkill for squirrel and gopher (except for longer ranges). About right for coyote. I'd want something bigger than a .30-30 for elk hunting. Something like my .300WBY. You have to match your cartidge to your game and hunting style.
Well, you can kill an elephant with a
On the other hand, a
They also had to end the prison experiment early because they became so concerned that somebody was going to get hurt or killed.
Makes you wonder about our prison system. There were some fairly major differences between the experiment and our prison systems, but with what happened, I say that A: better experiments, with the shortcomings in the study addressed, and B: close scrutiney of our prison system.
It's not like they'll know that tag # 6165846185385498431837272978435 is a viagra prescription, unless it's a store that's connected to the database (ie you bought it from a walgreens, any walgreens will probably be able to look it up), in which case they know you bought it anyways because it went into the computer when you purchased it.
Or in this case the pickle manufacturers did themselves over.
You can only "make it up in volume" to a certain point. If you don't make your per piece costs, you aren't going to make money. If you can't make enough to cover your static costs, you aren't going to make money.
Lots of small businesses make it locally. Some large national business fail. There are times it's better to be the local specialty shop, sometimes it's better to generalise.
Actually, my district was about third or fourth out of six for education. There were better and worse, but not by much compared to the Mississipi school system.
Remember the saying,
;)
The best government is rule by a dictator (when the dictator is good), but is also the worst when corrupt.
Democracy, is merely mediocre. In either case.
And we're not the biggest country. Canada has more land-mass than we do. We're the MOST POWERFUL COUNTRY IN THE WORLD
This is one of the major reasons behind Fairtax
Talk how you will, it'll eliminate the "tax advantage" to outsourcing jobs.
Reducing the regulatory expenses to opening/operating a business would help too. I'm not talking about eliminating OSHA, but there are lots of spots that governmental interferance increases the cost of doing business.
It sounds like a good deal for outsourcing.
You have workers who are:
A: Educated
B: Available
C: Hard working
D: Not too expensive (ND is near the bottom for living expenses).
E: Safe. One college student went missing. She was on the state news for months.
I've mostly grown up in the Midwest. I spent a few years in the Mississipi school system, and when we moved to Nebraska, they wanted to move me back a year. And jokes about illiterate farmers just isn't true anymore. They're actually some of the toughest people for education going. As for not a lot of jobs, well it's more that there aren't lots of low-skill jobs like factory work. And yes- illiterates are so rare that we would be shocked to find out somebody couldn't read.
17- back a grade level? 6 years older? Now that's bad. I know I had a tough first year in Nebraska, but how bad was that kid?
Having moved around many times while in the school system, my vote is for parental involvment. That makes a bigger difference in school performance than funding, federal funds, or anything else.
In most states if a child skips, parents are called. In Nebraska, you can almost certainly count on the parent taking action. In some states so many parents don't care that they're talking about having to fine parents, take other actions if the children don't attend school.