My reaction to reading this was "how do you keep the solar panels clear of snow?"
Then I looked closer at the map and realized that DC is further south than where I've lived. Of course, I'd want supplimental electric heat just in case. But then I live in North Dakota, and want independant extra heat generators anyways.
There are certain requirements for a comfortable area. Lane width. How many times do they have the main lanes so stuffed with extra goods that you can't easily manuever a shopping cart around? Are products stacked so high that a normal sized woman or short guy will need help getting one down without risking a spill?
Many prisons are "over capacity". That doesn't stop them from stuffing more in. It just means that you get crowded.
Brilliant!. I bet nobody has thought of that before. This just goes prove that you are the most insightful person who ever lived. Those fancy pants climatologist would have never thought of that.
Actually, I'm using a term that a climatologist who disagrees about the extent of global warming used. Another poster reminded me of it. As I've lived in less developed area, and commute, I've actually noticed that it suddenly gets colder outside of town.
Stunning!. Two completely innovative ideas in one post. I bet nobody ever figured out that the tempratures are different at different areas of the world. I bet as ships move they probably record different temptratures too!. You my man are a genious!.
And you my man must be an idiot!
A theory is called a theory because it hasn't been subjected to the rigorous testing that it takes to make it to law. The theories about global warming are re-written and adjusted all the time. The theory of evolution will remain a theory, and has actually been "adjusted" much like the law of gravity has had to be adjusted with the theory of relativity. The statement "The fittest tend to survive to pass on their genes/traits" still holds true, but there are more complexities to it than straight inheritance. Climatologists don't get money for saying "everythings fine!" but scream the sky is falling or the earth is heating up and the icecaps are going to melt will get them additional funding.
Actually your premise is wrong. Although every city has a lots of thermometers everywhere the only ones that "count" are the ones from official weather stations. The vast majority of those are either on the airport or on a military base. In both of those circumstances the areas are away from the core of the city.
And you don't think that the transition from propeller planes to jets, the drastic increase in both average size and amount of traffic might have an effect? I say that the "asphalt effect" still holds true. And military bases are effectivly towns of their own. And many bases have been almost "swallowed" by the cities they were originally 15-30 miles away from.
There are also temprature reading taken from ships at sea.
Which tends to be erratic and at different areas.
Finally the entire global warming thesis is not based on JUST air temprature readings. There are also ocean currents, ocean tempratures, CO2 levels, ice core data, rate of melting of glaciers and icebergs, geologic data, and of course tons of theoretical frameworks.
Which is not as accurate for short term trends than actual readings. And theories are just that. You can look at history and see that England was once warm enough for extensive grape cultivation. There are theories that we were in a mini Ice Age, and that temperatures were going to warm no matter what.
My point was that for those models, if you run them for a few thousand years without the supposed "human" inputs still tend to render the equator unhabitable due to heat.
Sure, the models probably do reach equlibrium eventually, but a unreasonable temperatures, indicating that the model is somehow flawed.
longer term temperature measurements, where sombody actually read a thermometer each day (or recorded by a machine) tended to be located in towns and cities. I'm talking more centuries than a couple decades here.
Population centers, because of heating, AC, vehicles and everything else tend to have higher temperatures than undeveloped areas
Over time, these centers have grown on average, making the area where the temperature is being taken more within these locally heated areas.
In the age of industrialization, the average heat produced by humans and their activities has grown. Examples are the deployment of AC, motor vehicles, various electronics.
Even without "human" input, five of the seven climatic models that show global warming show increases in temperature. They have a run-away problem in that they don't eventually stop heating up. A equilibrium point should be reached sometime.
And as far as measuring radiated heat from satellites, don't they comensate for that?
-Oh and I'd replace every coal plant with a nuclear one for the pollution savings. I haven't been convinced that carbon dioxide is a problem.
Me want balance sheet showing relative costs per megawatt and availability for various power systems. Include figures for the costs of waste disposal and penalties for any pollution.
1. Nuclear power with intelligent safety requirements & regulations. Preferably breeder. The certification process needs to be streamlined. 2. Solar (limited areas. At my latitude I get something like a third of the light that florida gets). 3. Wind - Limited areas & seasons 4. Tidal - Coastal, marine life affected by mass deployment? 5. Geo-Thermal- Limited areas 6. Hydro-Electric-Limited areas, already tapped out 7. Natural Gas- Running out faster than oil 8. Oil - Seen the prices lately? 9. Coal - Dirty.
So, these chimps are the equivalent of the people from the Norse region?
If you look at humanity, you find a huge range of adult sizes along with a wide range of colorations. As closely related as apes are, I'd expect the same.
I have a fairly simple explanation for this. Market saturation. I view it like clone radio stations: You get Pop, Rock, and Country. In my area country is the most popular. There's like 8 stations of it. There are only two each pop and rock stations, so they actually end up with more listeners than the country stations. One owner didn't check the market saturation and tried to convert one of the rock stations to country, but it didn't last, as he couldn't get much in the way of listeners. 1/9 of 10 isn't as much as 1/2 of 4.
In my state the insurance company has to inform the state if you drop/don't pay for your insurance. They then have the option of deregistrating your vehicle if you don't obtain new insurance. Had a friend once who had some trouble when changing insurers. The new company was a bit late sending notice of coverage, or the DMV didn't properly do the first notice.
I carry uninsured/underinsured coverage for this exact reason. If I get hit and the driver of the other vehicle doesn't have the coverage, my insurance will take over and help make up the difference.
However, you have your choice of insurance companies. You don't have to have insurance if you don't drive. Some states allow you to escrow funds equal to insurance liabilities if you have the cash, instead of insurance.
I view it as being more along the lines of building codes. A standard is being set. It's like being required to have a smoke detecter. They don't say who you get it from.
Now a question, is this a per-building/home fee that isn't required if you don't own a radio/TV, and now a computer, or is it a per-unit fee? I have 1 TV (DVDs only, I'd be pissed if I was being charged for broadcast TV that I never watch). I probably would of ended up getting a projector or something w/o a tuner and just using my computer to watch my movies. The extra $20-25 a month would pay for a cheaper projector very quickly.
I've had basic accounting. My parents are accountants. There are a number of ways you can do it. It starts out as basic as you keeping a book for each of your accounts, whether positive(cash accounts, assets) or negative(loans, debts). However, the tax laws are "designed" to give you breaks for putting money in "good places". So in order to decrease your tax load, you want to shift money into the "tax shelters". This is what starts the shady bookkeeping and accounting processes.
The fact that the tax code, compiled into a book, is thicker than many phone books is part of the reason that many want to simplify the code. Bang, no more shelters.
I'd tend to say that this is the ultimate control. Something's seriously wrong if a person can gather enough votes from prison to be elected. Remember that the guy who almost made a million votes had his sentence commuted. If nothing else, it sends a sign.
This brings up a question about the media then. The only third party candidate I've heard much on the major news outlets is Ralph Nader, and how's he's going to spoil the democrat's chances. However, he's the second lowest for number of states. Why is the media silent on Badnarik? Looking at the listings, we have two parties that mostly pull from the democrats, one from the republicans, and the libertarians that pull from both. At 49 states plus DC, the libertarian is the 'third party'.
UL labs has the force of government law and insurance companies.
They say that they're a not for profit company. As for insurance companies, they're private companies too. Heck, there's a control. If the underwriter screws up, the insurance companies drop their listing, and consumers stop considering that label, because it'd invalidate their insurance.
As for the 'backing of law', it's mostly an aftermarket phenomenon.
The second question down pulls up a page that says There are no laws specifying that a UL Mark must be used. However, in the U.S. there are many municipalities that have laws, codes or regulations which require a product to be tested by a nationally recognized testing laboratory before it can be sold in their area.
And did you notice that the audit companies went down with them? That Andersen is no longer a company? That all the other auditing companies were scrambling to catch the clients that dropped Andersen?
Problems are going to happen sooner or later no matter what. We might as well try to have a system that'll catch it sooner.
People who had properly diversified holdings weren't hurt too badly. I feel sorry for the employees, but that's a risk you always take, that your employer won't be there in the morning. It could be because of a heart attack in a small business, could be because a hurricane blew away the store, could be the government just made your product illegal. Businesses fail all the time. You just have to keep your resume up to date.
Sounds like me. I'm voting for Badnarik this year. I like a lot of his views, but I wouldn't want him for president at the moment because of his national defense views.
Except: A: He can't afford it. He's been living in donated space on his campaign. B: The press would ignore him, even for free food. He might get a byline in a print paper from a junior probationary reporter.
I think that a major reason that they don't allow the third party candidates up on the debates is that they're afraid that a thrid party will get power.
The minor parties are a distraction from the standard political 'system'. You're either supposed to be a democrat or a republican!
Now, I like many of the libertarian views, a few republican/conservative 'planks', and a couple of democrat/liberal ones. Which party should I join?
I support: less regulation of both market & social.(lib) pro-choice(dem/lib)I don't like it in many situations, but I believe that it's better than the alternate. If the pro-lifers can convince the woman to carry to term and put up for adoption, good for them. But they aren't allowed to force her. easier legal immigration(lib)I'd make legal immigration easy. Quick background/criminal check, take fingerprints/photo/DNA whatnot, "welcome to the USA". If you try to come in illegally, well, I'd have the border mined. the illegal immigration industry helps fuel the illegal drug industry and illicit lines of importation. Strong Pro-Active National Defense(rep) The libertarian position of "We won't annoy anybody, so they won't attack us, and we'll trounce anybody who tries" neglects to account for: Our businesses/economy are global and that offense beats defense. I may not like our people dying in Afganistan and Iraq, but I think that it's better than the alternative. How many lives might of been saved if we'd entered WWII in the beginning? It would of cost more American lives, but how many European lives would it of saved? Strong personal responsability(lib) Legalized drugs&prostitution(lib) I think this would put many many criminals out of business, as well as give those workers legal recorse* Eliminate welfare(lib) Now this one is a little tricky. I'd first replace welfare with a workfare. As in you get a job with the government doing something rather than getting paid to sit on your butt. I'd pay in benefits rather than money mostly. You sleep in a barracks/dorm/minimal apartment, eat in a dining facility(one of the jobs!), and wear issued clothes, and get medical care in designated facilities. Monetary pay: I figure $200-$600** a month would be good. This way as soon as you can find a job where you're better off, you're quitting the gov job and going to the better one. enviroment(???) You can do a lot without messing up either the planet or the economy. One of reasons that we're losing manufacturing jobs is that the pollution controls are so stringent that it's cheaper/easier to do it in another country. I'd switch to a performance based, rather than process based system. I don't really care how they reduce pollution, as long as they do it.
*why shouldn't the dealers adulterate(dilute) their drugs? It's not like the users can report you to the police without risking themselves being arrested. If a client beats on a prostitute, the prostitute often can't report to the police without being arrested. ** when I entered the military an E-1 made ~$500 a month and still lives this way. I think the E1's should be better off. They're expected to fight for their country, after all.
You have got to be joking me. The government prevents me from murdering whomever I please, thus by the law of unintended consequences society would benefit if they just let me go ahead with it.
And you just hit on the point that separates the Libertarian from the anarchist. Libertarians tend to be quite brutal towards violent criminals. They want freedoms, but there's a quote that goes "your freedom to swing your fist stops at my nose".
Anyway, no man is an island and it's okay to seek help from your fellow man once in a while. The fact is that no one has the time to research every product they use (even if a consumer magazine does sum it up for them).
True, and True. There are plenty of private charities that have far more effect per dollar than the ones funded by the public trough.
Now the idea here is that private companies, trading on their reputation, are the ones that do the checks. The IEEE and UL labs, both important safety groups are both private companies. I'd see a number food safety companies come into existance. A maker of a food products would have to prove that their food is safe to the satisfaction of the certifying company in order to be able to put the company's trademark on their product, just as with UL underwriting.
Furthermore I've never seen any evidence that an unregulated market will always serve the interests of consumers. The market has all of the same problems that genetic algorithms do. If initial conditions and constraints aren't properly set, it ends up "cheating" and not giving you what you really want. I cannot take it on faith that the market will always serve the public's interest. This is effectively a matter of religion. I've never seen this assertion backed by anything more than some feeble anecdotes that fail to address the broader issues that might be at play.
Market serving the public's interest? It's a phenomenon of the public. We have seen multiple times that tightly controlled markets tend to do worse than markets that are more free. Russia had a tightly controlled market, and it collapsed. China has let the market become more free, and they're prospering today. The european market is often called stagnent compared to the USA one.
Now I will admit, free markets do tend to be more volitile than regulated ones. But do you think that scandals such as Enron/Worldcom occur because there isn't enough regulation, or because there's so much regulation that 'dubious accounting practices' become the norm?
Under a free market, the inefficient tend to get eliminated, replaced, by the efficeient. Corruption is almost by definition inefficient, so corruption tends to get weeded out.
The military has server 'laptops'. They're for the extremely early/late use for remote bases. Imagine setting up a network with email, firewall and proxied internet, and printing out of a box little bigger than a suitcase. It has server running on ~3-4 laptops. It's only really intended to run for about a week while the planes are still rolling in to drop off more equipment.
The next step up involves a case with a rack and some short (depth wise) 1U blade servers, and a UPS.
In those situations, you have limited bandwidth, and might only have a dozen users. For areas with much larger cargo limits, they have Network control centers in a box. Racks mounted into a Conex with servers.
Solutions are present ranging from what a guy can carry to matching some of the larger fixed bases.
Oh, you mean the one that worked for 40 years?[/i]
He spent less on his program than NASA spends on a single shuttle launch.
[i]How many hours of Rutan's work was spent on failed attempts to achieve space flight?
Wow, he didn't have to spend any because it had already been done.[/i]
I'm pretty sure this is false. Any new design is going to have failures and false starts. It's just that he did it(including failures) for $20-30 million vs. hundreds of millions.
Sure, there are more OTS components available, but I'm willing to bet that a great deal of customization and creative usage of those components goes on. It's research in and of itself.
And the guy has a point. With NASA's current structure, would they be able to come up with a system of SpaceShipOne's capabilities for ~25 million? Nope-They'd spend 25 million before ever creating a draft of a design!
And given NASA's failure to produce something better than the shuttle, the private sector is starting to step in.
It's not a new thing. My Dad used to work for a feed company. They were a medium sized, but profitable company. Their nich: They would custom make feed for special purposes. With them you could test the grass, and have a custom supplimental feed made up. Include medicines, etc. They offered all sorts of standard high-quality feeds as well. They survived by being able to charge more for the feed, but the ranchers/farmers made more too because of superior growth. This was insured because the local managers and sales staff were well qualified, on the ball.
Then they were bought out by a larger company, which proceeded to strip all control away from the local managers & staff, end the custom feed lines. Guess what? They lost customers, and started loosing money just like the parent company. Dad's working for a heating/cooling company now.
Slashdot Mirror
My reaction to reading this was "how do you keep the solar panels clear of snow?"
Then I looked closer at the map and realized that DC is further south than where I've lived. Of course, I'd want supplimental electric heat just in case. But then I live in North Dakota, and want independant extra heat generators anyways.
There are certain requirements for a comfortable area. Lane width. How many times do they have the main lanes so stuffed with extra goods that you can't easily manuever a shopping cart around? Are products stacked so high that a normal sized woman or short guy will need help getting one down without risking a spill?
Many prisons are "over capacity". That doesn't stop them from stuffing more in. It just means that you get crowded.
Degenerated a bit, huh?
Brilliant!. I bet nobody has thought of that before. This just goes prove that you are the most insightful person who ever lived. Those fancy pants climatologist would have never thought of that.
Actually, I'm using a term that a climatologist who disagrees about the extent of global warming used. Another poster reminded me of it. As I've lived in less developed area, and commute, I've actually noticed that it suddenly gets colder outside of town.
Stunning!. Two completely innovative ideas in one post. I bet nobody ever figured out that the tempratures are different at different areas of the world. I bet as ships move they probably record different temptratures too!. You my man are a genious!.
And you my man must be an idiot!
A theory is called a theory because it hasn't been subjected to the rigorous testing that it takes to make it to law. The theories about global warming are re-written and adjusted all the time. The theory of evolution will remain a theory, and has actually been "adjusted" much like the law of gravity has had to be adjusted with the theory of relativity. The statement "The fittest tend to survive to pass on their genes/traits" still holds true, but there are more complexities to it than straight inheritance. Climatologists don't get money for saying "everythings fine!" but scream the sky is falling or the earth is heating up and the icecaps are going to melt will get them additional funding.
Actually your premise is wrong. Although every city has a lots of thermometers everywhere the only ones that "count" are the ones from official weather stations. The vast majority of those are either on the airport or on a military base. In both of those circumstances the areas are away from the core of the city.
And you don't think that the transition from propeller planes to jets, the drastic increase in both average size and amount of traffic might have an effect? I say that the "asphalt effect" still holds true. And military bases are effectivly towns of their own. And many bases have been almost "swallowed" by the cities they were originally 15-30 miles away from.
There are also temprature reading taken from ships at sea.
Which tends to be erratic and at different areas.
Finally the entire global warming thesis is not based on JUST air temprature readings. There are also ocean currents, ocean tempratures, CO2 levels, ice core data, rate of melting of glaciers and icebergs, geologic data, and of course tons of theoretical frameworks.
Which is not as accurate for short term trends than actual readings. And theories are just that.
You can look at history and see that England was once warm enough for extensive grape cultivation. There are theories that we were in a mini Ice Age, and that temperatures were going to warm no matter what.
My point was that for those models, if you run them for a few thousand years without the supposed "human" inputs still tend to render the equator unhabitable due to heat.
Sure, the models probably do reach equlibrium eventually, but a unreasonable temperatures, indicating that the model is somehow flawed.
And as far as measuring radiated heat from satellites, don't they comensate for that?
-Oh and I'd replace every coal plant with a nuclear one for the pollution savings. I haven't been convinced that carbon dioxide is a problem.
Me want balance sheet showing relative costs per megawatt and availability for various power systems.
Include figures for the costs of waste disposal and penalties for any pollution.
1. Nuclear power with intelligent safety requirements & regulations. Preferably breeder. The certification process needs to be streamlined.
2. Solar (limited areas. At my latitude I get something like a third of the light that florida gets).
3. Wind - Limited areas & seasons
4. Tidal - Coastal, marine life affected by mass deployment?
5. Geo-Thermal- Limited areas
6. Hydro-Electric-Limited areas, already tapped out
7. Natural Gas- Running out faster than oil
8. Oil - Seen the prices lately?
9. Coal - Dirty.
So, these chimps are the equivalent of the people from the Norse region?
If you look at humanity, you find a huge range of adult sizes along with a wide range of colorations. As closely related as apes are, I'd expect the same.
I have a fairly simple explanation for this. Market saturation. I view it like clone radio stations: You get Pop, Rock, and Country. In my area country is the most popular. There's like 8 stations of it. There are only two each pop and rock stations, so they actually end up with more listeners than the country stations. One owner didn't check the market saturation and tried to convert one of the rock stations to country, but it didn't last, as he couldn't get much in the way of listeners. 1/9 of 10 isn't as much as 1/2 of 4.
Better yank the tuner then. I think they can nail you just for having the capability- thus the ruckus over computers.
In my state the insurance company has to inform the state if you drop/don't pay for your insurance. They then have the option of deregistrating your vehicle if you don't obtain new insurance. Had a friend once who had some trouble when changing insurers. The new company was a bit late sending notice of coverage, or the DMV didn't properly do the first notice.
I carry uninsured/underinsured coverage for this exact reason. If I get hit and the driver of the other vehicle doesn't have the coverage, my insurance will take over and help make up the difference.
However, you have your choice of insurance companies. You don't have to have insurance if you don't drive. Some states allow you to escrow funds equal to insurance liabilities if you have the cash, instead of insurance.
I view it as being more along the lines of building codes. A standard is being set. It's like being required to have a smoke detecter. They don't say who you get it from.
Now a question, is this a per-building/home fee that isn't required if you don't own a radio/TV, and now a computer, or is it a per-unit fee? I have 1 TV (DVDs only, I'd be pissed if I was being charged for broadcast TV that I never watch). I probably would of ended up getting a projector or something w/o a tuner and just using my computer to watch my movies. The extra $20-25 a month would pay for a cheaper projector very quickly.
I've had basic accounting. My parents are accountants. There are a number of ways you can do it. It starts out as basic as you keeping a book for each of your accounts, whether positive(cash accounts, assets) or negative(loans, debts). However, the tax laws are "designed" to give you breaks for putting money in "good places". So in order to decrease your tax load, you want to shift money into the "tax shelters". This is what starts the shady bookkeeping and accounting processes.
The fact that the tax code, compiled into a book, is thicker than many phone books is part of the reason that many want to simplify the code. Bang, no more shelters.
I'd tend to say that this is the ultimate control. Something's seriously wrong if a person can gather enough votes from prison to be elected. Remember that the guy who almost made a million votes had his sentence commuted. If nothing else, it sends a sign.
This brings up a question about the media then. The only third party candidate I've heard much on the major news outlets is Ralph Nader, and how's he's going to spoil the democrat's chances. However, he's the second lowest for number of states. Why is the media silent on Badnarik? Looking at the listings, we have two parties that mostly pull from the democrats, one from the republicans, and the libertarians that pull from both. At 49 states plus DC, the libertarian is the 'third party'.
UL labs has the force of government law and insurance companies.
They say that they're a not for profit company. As for insurance companies, they're private companies too. Heck, there's a control. If the underwriter screws up, the insurance companies drop their listing, and consumers stop considering that label, because it'd invalidate their insurance.
As for the 'backing of law', it's mostly an aftermarket phenomenon.
The second question down pulls up a page that says
There are no laws specifying that a UL Mark must be used. However, in the U.S. there are many municipalities that have laws, codes or regulations which require a product to be tested by a nationally recognized testing laboratory before it can be sold in their area.
And did you notice that the audit companies went down with them? That Andersen is no longer a company? That all the other auditing companies were scrambling to catch the clients that dropped Andersen?
Problems are going to happen sooner or later no matter what. We might as well try to have a system that'll catch it sooner.
People who had properly diversified holdings weren't hurt too badly. I feel sorry for the employees, but that's a risk you always take, that your employer won't be there in the morning. It could be because of a heart attack in a small business, could be because a hurricane blew away the store, could be the government just made your product illegal. Businesses fail all the time. You just have to keep your resume up to date.
Sounds like me. I'm voting for Badnarik this year. I like a lot of his views, but I wouldn't want him for president at the moment because of his national defense views.
Except:
A: He can't afford it. He's been living in donated space on his campaign.
B: The press would ignore him, even for free food. He might get a byline in a print paper from a junior probationary reporter.
I think that a major reason that they don't allow the third party candidates up on the debates is that they're afraid that a thrid party will get power.
The minor parties are a distraction from the standard political 'system'. You're either supposed to be a democrat or a republican!
Now, I like many of the libertarian views, a few republican/conservative 'planks', and a couple of democrat/liberal ones. Which party should I join?
I support:
less regulation of both market & social.(lib)
pro-choice(dem/lib)I don't like it in many situations, but I believe that it's better than the alternate. If the pro-lifers can convince the woman to carry to term and put up for adoption, good for them. But they aren't allowed to force her.
easier legal immigration(lib)I'd make legal immigration easy. Quick background/criminal check, take fingerprints/photo/DNA whatnot, "welcome to the USA". If you try to come in illegally, well, I'd have the border mined. the illegal immigration industry helps fuel the illegal drug industry and illicit lines of importation.
Strong Pro-Active National Defense(rep) The libertarian position of "We won't annoy anybody, so they won't attack us, and we'll trounce anybody who tries" neglects to account for: Our businesses/economy are global and that offense beats defense. I may not like our people dying in Afganistan and Iraq, but I think that it's better than the alternative. How many lives might of been saved if we'd entered WWII in the beginning? It would of cost more American lives, but how many European lives would it of saved?
Strong personal responsability(lib)
Legalized drugs&prostitution(lib) I think this would put many many criminals out of business, as well as give those workers legal recorse*
Eliminate welfare(lib) Now this one is a little tricky. I'd first replace welfare with a workfare. As in you get a job with the government doing something rather than getting paid to sit on your butt. I'd pay in benefits rather than money mostly. You sleep in a barracks/dorm/minimal apartment, eat in a dining facility(one of the jobs!), and wear issued clothes, and get medical care in designated facilities. Monetary pay: I figure $200-$600** a month would be good. This way as soon as you can find a job where you're better off, you're quitting the gov job and going to the better one.
enviroment(???) You can do a lot without messing up either the planet or the economy. One of reasons that we're losing manufacturing jobs is that the pollution controls are so stringent that it's cheaper/easier to do it in another country. I'd switch to a performance based, rather than process based system. I don't really care how they reduce pollution, as long as they do it.
*why shouldn't the dealers adulterate(dilute) their drugs? It's not like the users can report you to the police without risking themselves being arrested. If a client beats on a prostitute, the prostitute often can't report to the police without being arrested.
** when I entered the military an E-1 made ~$500 a month and still lives this way. I think the E1's should be better off. They're expected to fight for their country, after all.
You have got to be joking me. The government prevents me from murdering whomever I please, thus by the law of unintended consequences society would benefit if they just let me go ahead with it.
And you just hit on the point that separates the Libertarian from the anarchist. Libertarians tend to be quite brutal towards violent criminals. They want freedoms, but there's a quote that goes "your freedom to swing your fist stops at my nose".
Anyway, no man is an island and it's okay to seek help from your fellow man once in a while. The fact is that no one has the time to research every product they use (even if a consumer magazine does sum it up for them).
True, and True. There are plenty of private charities that have far more effect per dollar than the ones funded by the public trough.
Now the idea here is that private companies, trading on their reputation, are the ones that do the checks. The IEEE and UL labs, both important safety groups are both private companies. I'd see a number food safety companies come into existance. A maker of a food products would have to prove that their food is safe to the satisfaction of the certifying company in order to be able to put the company's trademark on their product, just as with UL underwriting.
Furthermore I've never seen any evidence that an unregulated market will always serve the interests of consumers. The market has all of the same problems that genetic algorithms do. If initial conditions and constraints aren't properly set, it ends up "cheating" and not giving you what you really want. I cannot take it on faith that the market will always serve the public's interest. This is effectively a matter of religion. I've never seen this assertion backed by anything more than some feeble anecdotes that fail to address the broader issues that might be at play.
Market serving the public's interest? It's a phenomenon of the public. We have seen multiple times that tightly controlled markets tend to do worse than markets that are more free. Russia had a tightly controlled market, and it collapsed. China has let the market become more free, and they're prospering today. The european market is often called stagnent compared to the USA one.
Now I will admit, free markets do tend to be more volitile than regulated ones. But do you think that scandals such as Enron/Worldcom occur because there isn't enough regulation, or because there's so much regulation that 'dubious accounting practices' become the norm?
Under a free market, the inefficient tend to get eliminated, replaced, by the efficeient. Corruption is almost by definition inefficient, so corruption tends to get weeded out.
The military has server 'laptops'. They're for the extremely early/late use for remote bases. Imagine setting up a network with email, firewall and proxied internet, and printing out of a box little bigger than a suitcase. It has server running on ~3-4 laptops. It's only really intended to run for about a week while the planes are still rolling in to drop off more equipment.
The next step up involves a case with a rack and some short (depth wise) 1U blade servers, and a UPS.
In those situations, you have limited bandwidth, and might only have a dozen users. For areas with much larger cargo limits, they have Network control centers in a box. Racks mounted into a Conex with servers.
Solutions are present ranging from what a guy can carry to matching some of the larger fixed bases.
And I'm hanging around vBulletin sites way too much.
[i]Different than what?
Oh, you mean the one that worked for 40 years?[/i]
He spent less on his program than NASA spends on a single shuttle launch.
[i]How many hours of Rutan's work was spent on failed attempts to achieve space flight?
Wow, he didn't have to spend any because it had already been done.[/i]
I'm pretty sure this is false. Any new design is going to have failures and false starts. It's just that he did it(including failures) for $20-30 million vs. hundreds of millions.
Sure, there are more OTS components available, but I'm willing to bet that a great deal of customization and creative usage of those components goes on. It's research in and of itself.
And the guy has a point. With NASA's current structure, would they be able to come up with a system of SpaceShipOne's capabilities for ~25 million? Nope-They'd spend 25 million before ever creating a draft of a design!
And given NASA's failure to produce something better than the shuttle, the private sector is starting to step in.
It's not a new thing. My Dad used to work for a feed company. They were a medium sized, but profitable company. Their nich: They would custom make feed for special purposes. With them you could test the grass, and have a custom supplimental feed made up. Include medicines, etc. They offered all sorts of standard high-quality feeds as well. They survived by being able to charge more for the feed, but the ranchers/farmers made more too because of superior growth. This was insured because the local managers and sales staff were well qualified, on the ball.
Then they were bought out by a larger company, which proceeded to strip all control away from the local managers & staff, end the custom feed lines. Guess what? They lost customers, and started loosing money just like the parent company. Dad's working for a heating/cooling company now.