The funny thing is that two things would fix most of the issues: Term limits in both houses, and some meaningful campaign finance reform.
Unfortunately, the very people who would need to take action to enact such laws are the same people who benefit from the system the way it is. Congress will never do anything meaningful in this area because it would take power away from them. The people in power are extremely power-hungry, that is why they ran for the office in the first place - there is no way they will voluntarily give up any of that power.
Colorado made a big deal of how much money they would take in by legalizing marijuana. They, the state, predicted they would take in $184 million in the first year and now it looks like they'll be lucky to hit $40 million.
That isn't what the article you linked says, do you have a problem with reading comprehension? The article says that the forecast was for $184 million through middle of 2015, not for 2014. As for increased crime or reduced productivity, citation needed.
The thing with octopi and such is no family or culture to pass on knowledge. They lay eggs and leave them to develop on their own so every generation is starting from scratch. People have been successful due to being tribal, family orientated species that builds on the previous generations knowledge. Intelligence by itself isn't enough to develop technology which is what we mean when talking about intelligence.
Sure, but dolphins and whales live in family groups as well, it's not just our social abilities that made humans as successful as they are. Fire and agriculture were the two big paradigm shifts that made us what we are today.
I don't get why the USA are not copying the way the energy market works in europe. And I also don't get why people like you write so half nonsense articles... the term 'base load' used three times wrong, sigh. In europe power production and power distribution(grids) are handled by seperate entities, on top of that are power traders who do the actual work of making contracts between customers, power producers and grid operators. Bottom line everything is traded via a spot market, power, grid bandwith and reserve and/or regulation energy.
In many places in the USA, it works exactly like that, which is why the price of power is going negative overnight. In fact, the exact same thing is happening in Germany, why doesn't your magic spot market fix that?
Energy storage is nonsense... just upgrade your grid so you can transport excess capacity instead of wasting it.
Transport excess capacity to where? If there isn't a demand, there is nowhere you can send your supply. In the middle of the night, demand is low everywhere. If the coal and nuclear plants that run at a constant output plus the power supplied by the wind is greater than the demand then spot prices will drop to negative. Shipping your power to another locality with negative prices or even slightly positive prices doesn't help economically. If the European model obviates the need for storage, why does this list have so many European projects on it?
Government: "Offender's employer: We're garnishing offender's wages. Give us the next $1000 you were going to pay offender, even if that means he doesn't see a penny for a paycheck for the next two months."
Offender's Employer: "Okay, here's your money, and BTW thanks for letting us know our employee's a thief. We’ll be looking to replace them ASAP.”
Bender the Offender: Hmm, there's no point in working if they take all my earnings, I think I'll just go on the dole.
Taxes will end up paying for the crime no matter if it is jail or fines.
So does Sodium. But do you notice how table salt doesn't burn in water?
There's no lithium metal in lithium/ion/ cells. The whole lithium catching on fire thing is to do with them having a rather volatile solvent as part of the electrolyte (something similar to ether).
That's not necessarily true. When lithium batteries are charged at a low temperature, lithium metal plates the anode. This could certainly be a problem for electric cars, as they may not be in a warm garage as they are charging.
I say fuck beta all the time and have an anti-beta sig and I seem to get mod points at the same rate. You only get 15 if you are at max karma (which is +50 IIRC). You can't gain any points but you can lose points so if you get any downmods you will only get 5 points until you are at 50 again.
Of course an ADK requires that you trust the entity that holds the ADK. In the GP post, he lamented that when people left the company they took their keys with them. If it is company mail produced on company time I don't see the problem with the company holding a key to decrypt it. With PGP, you can also split the ADK into multiple parts so that you would need several people at the company agree to decrypt anything. That way a single employee cannot arbitrarily use the ADK. Of course, if they are using Symantec's key server they can just configure it to keep copies of a user's key or handle all the encryption/decryption on the server itself.
The new canal won't compete with the Panama one, because it's wider. The larger ships will have to take the new one (at full fare) while the smaller ships can choose. Given that it's cheaper to use larger ships that means the Panama canal will see a massive drop in use.
Which is why they are building a new canal in Panama that will handle the large container ships and supertankers. This project has been underway for some time.
The Daily Fail readers will be annoyed with anything that the paper tells them is annoying. If they claim that aliens are lurking in alleyways and eating cats, that is what that demographic will be annoyed with. Their readership is so gullible and stupid that they will believe anything as long as the article has as many pictures as it has words.
The theory of relativity wasn't testable when it was first proposed. Part of the reason Einstein never got a nobel for it was that it wasn't until the 1970's that there was real firm experimental evidence for it.
There's a distinction between something that can never be tested and something that can't be tested now due to technological limitations.
You mean the observations Eddington took in 1919 confirming light bending in accordance with predictions by general relativity didn't take place? From the Wikipedia entry:
"Eddington's observations published the next year[5] confirmed Einstein's theory, and were hailed at the time as a conclusive proof of general relativity over the Newtonian model."
Also, relativity made a number of testable predictions. From the wiki page on the theory of relativity:
"The predictions of special relativity have been confirmed in numerous tests since Einstein published his paper in 1905, but three experiments conducted between 1881 and 1938 were critical to its validation. These are the Michelson–Morley experiment, the Kennedy–Thorndike experiment, and the Ives–Stilwell experiment. Einstein derived the Lorentz transformations from first principles in 1905, but these three experiments allow the transformations to be induced from experimental evidence."
Obviously the testing of the theory still continues as we gather more data from around the universe, but to say there wasn't firm experimental evidence until the 1970s isn't correct.
Until string theory makes some testable predictions it's just mathematical and philosophical wanking.
A Russian scientist turned wild foxes into cute puppies in about 10 generations by breeding for lower adrenaline levels
Not necessarily adrenaline levels, but that may have been the way it worked out. All they bred for was aggression, the more aggressive foxes were not allowed to breed. This resulted in a tamer fox, but also a lot of other traits that we associate with dogs (juvenilization, coloration patterns, vocalization, etc). Just selecting for one thing can have a profound effect on the species.
It's a solid rocket motor, of course it needs to be replaced after every flight.
Actually, it is a hybrid rocket motor which has characteristics of both a solid and liquid motor. Wiki says they are changing the propellant which would explain the motor replacement.
'Major sponsors include Ford, General Motors, IMRA, Michigan Engineering, NYK, Qatar Airways and Siemens PLM Software.'
Why is that unfair? Other teams are permitted to get sponsors. It's their problem if they can't recruit good sponsors. Plus most of those companies hire Michigan engineering graduates so why wouldn't they sponsor the students they are likely to hire?
Sure, I think they should be able to get as much money as they want from sponsors. However, the article made it sound like they were getting engineering help from their sponsors. This is supposed to be a student competition, not a professional contest. In this case, the team that won didn't even build their car, they just drove a car built by previous students and sponsors. I guess they drove it competently, but in an engineering competition I would like to see more engineering on the part of the participants.
Except for the fact that it was the vehicle trials which occurred in the US (california, nevada), trials that demonstrated the safety of these vehicles and which have caused the UK to fully allow them on the roads in Jan 2014, rather than their initial plans for trials to occur by the end of 2013. While the article does not explicitly state this to be the reason for the change, I believe it to be a fair presumption that the 300,000 miles google's cars have driven in Califonia were taken into consideration.
Trials are different than allowing manufacturers to sell driverless cars or allowing the general public to drive them. Even the Nevada law just instructs the DOT to set safety standards for driverless cars, which they have not yet completed. That also doesn't address insurance, which all cars in the US are required to have to drive on public roads. If the insurance companies won't insure the cars because of the litigation-happy Americans, the only way to drive such a car would be to underwrite the insurance yourself (which generally involves posting a large bond).
Obviously the US will not have this for some time ("Oh my god, somebody might sue!"), it's nice to see at least some countries see the advantage of cars that can drive themselves better than humans can drive them, even if the self-driving cars are not perfect. I would expect initially they would require a licensed driver behind the wheel, at least until the technology has proven itself.
There are companies that will not hire you if you have nicotine in your system, if that isn't discrimination I don't know what is. I don't even smoke, but I do chew nicotine gum so I wouldn't be even considered for a position at these companies.
There's certainly hope that we can get another Kennedy/Reagan/Eisenhower* next time. Maybe if we try to choose based on COMPETENCE rather than just whoever most extremely mirrors our favored ideology.
* (Not an actual Kennedy of course, the good one is dead. HW Bush / Bush Jr. should have taught us something about electing a guy because he was related to a decent president.)
Good fucking luck. It's looking like 2016 is going to be Hillary (yet ANOTHER person who's only qualification for president is that she is related to one) and whatever republican manages to out-crazy the rest of them. It's going to be yet another episode of giant douche vs. shit sandwich. You can vote for the corporate tool or the corporate tool.
Why not? I was on a Delta flight the other day and the only way to purchase in-flight cocktails was via credit card. On another flight the same day, the same purchase could only be made in cash. I am not aware of any laws that require businesses to accept a certain form of payment, and why should there be? If a business doesn't accept cash (or credit cards, or chickens, or bitcoin) and their customers prefer that method of payment, it will show up in their bottom line. Why would the government need to intervene in such a transaction?
Slashdot Mirror
The funny thing is that two things would fix most of the issues: Term limits in both houses, and some meaningful campaign finance reform.
Unfortunately, the very people who would need to take action to enact such laws are the same people who benefit from the system the way it is. Congress will never do anything meaningful in this area because it would take power away from them. The people in power are extremely power-hungry, that is why they ran for the office in the first place - there is no way they will voluntarily give up any of that power.
Colorado made a big deal of how much money they would take in by legalizing marijuana. They, the state, predicted they would take in $184 million in the first year and now it looks like they'll be lucky to hit $40 million.
That isn't what the article you linked says, do you have a problem with reading comprehension? The article says that the forecast was for $184 million through middle of 2015, not for 2014. As for increased crime or reduced productivity, citation needed.
The thing with octopi and such is no family or culture to pass on knowledge. They lay eggs and leave them to develop on their own so every generation is starting from scratch.
People have been successful due to being tribal, family orientated species that builds on the previous generations knowledge. Intelligence by itself isn't enough to develop technology which is what we mean when talking about intelligence.
Sure, but dolphins and whales live in family groups as well, it's not just our social abilities that made humans as successful as they are. Fire and agriculture were the two big paradigm shifts that made us what we are today.
"Horses can make other horses. That's a trick that tractor's haven't figured out yet."
-- Heinlein
I doubt Heinlein put an apostrophe in tractors.
I don't get why the USA are not copying the way the energy market works in europe. ... the term 'base load' used three times wrong, sigh.
And I also don't get why people like you write so half nonsense articles
In europe power production and power distribution(grids) are handled by seperate entities, on top of that are power traders who do the actual work of making contracts between customers, power producers and grid operators.
Bottom line everything is traded via a spot market, power, grid bandwith and reserve and/or regulation energy.
In many places in the USA, it works exactly like that, which is why the price of power is going negative overnight. In fact, the exact same thing is happening in Germany, why doesn't your magic spot market fix that?
Energy storage is nonsense ... just upgrade your grid so you can transport excess capacity instead of wasting it.
Transport excess capacity to where? If there isn't a demand, there is nowhere you can send your supply. In the middle of the night, demand is low everywhere. If the coal and nuclear plants that run at a constant output plus the power supplied by the wind is greater than the demand then spot prices will drop to negative. Shipping your power to another locality with negative prices or even slightly positive prices doesn't help economically. If the European model obviates the need for storage, why does this list have so many European projects on it?
Government: "Offender's employer: We're garnishing offender's wages. Give us the next $1000 you were going to pay offender, even if that means he doesn't see a penny for a paycheck for the next two months."
Offender's Employer: "Okay, here's your money, and BTW thanks for letting us know our employee's a thief. We’ll be looking to replace them ASAP.”
Bender the Offender: Hmm, there's no point in working if they take all my earnings, I think I'll just go on the dole.
Taxes will end up paying for the crime no matter if it is jail or fines.
So does Sodium. But do you notice how table salt doesn't burn in water?
There's no lithium metal in lithium /ion/ cells. The whole lithium catching on fire thing is to do with them having a rather volatile solvent as part of the electrolyte (something similar to ether).
That's not necessarily true. When lithium batteries are charged at a low temperature, lithium metal plates the anode. This could certainly be a problem for electric cars, as they may not be in a warm garage as they are charging.
I say fuck beta all the time and have an anti-beta sig and I seem to get mod points at the same rate. You only get 15 if you are at max karma (which is +50 IIRC). You can't gain any points but you can lose points so if you get any downmods you will only get 5 points until you are at 50 again.
Of course an ADK requires that you trust the entity that holds the ADK. In the GP post, he lamented that when people left the company they took their keys with them. If it is company mail produced on company time I don't see the problem with the company holding a key to decrypt it. With PGP, you can also split the ADK into multiple parts so that you would need several people at the company agree to decrypt anything. That way a single employee cannot arbitrarily use the ADK. Of course, if they are using Symantec's key server they can just configure it to keep copies of a user's key or handle all the encryption/decryption on the server itself.
The new canal won't compete with the Panama one, because it's wider. The larger ships will have to take the new one (at full fare) while the smaller ships can choose. Given that it's cheaper to use larger ships that means the Panama canal will see a massive drop in use.
Which is why they are building a new canal in Panama that will handle the large container ships and supertankers. This project has been underway for some time.
He should be happy that he is getting that much, in my state the power company only pays $0.03/kwh
Have you ever considered using heat tape along the eaves rather than the roof rake? That's how many people deal with ice dams.
The Daily Fail readers will be annoyed with anything that the paper tells them is annoying. If they claim that aliens are lurking in alleyways and eating cats, that is what that demographic will be annoyed with. Their readership is so gullible and stupid that they will believe anything as long as the article has as many pictures as it has words.
The cautionary tale has turned into a tragedy.
Don't worry.
Comedy is tragedy plus time. - Various
Somehow it doesn't console me that future generations will be laughing at us,
The theory of relativity wasn't testable when it was first proposed. Part of the reason Einstein never got a nobel for it was that it wasn't until the 1970's that there was real firm experimental evidence for it.
There's a distinction between something that can never be tested and something that can't be tested now due to technological limitations.
You mean the observations Eddington took in 1919 confirming light bending in accordance with predictions by general relativity didn't take place? From the Wikipedia entry:
"Eddington's observations published the next year[5] confirmed Einstein's theory, and were hailed at the time as a conclusive proof of general relativity over the Newtonian model."
Also, relativity made a number of testable predictions. From the wiki page on the theory of relativity:
"The predictions of special relativity have been confirmed in numerous tests since Einstein published his paper in 1905, but three experiments conducted between 1881 and 1938 were critical to its validation. These are the Michelson–Morley experiment, the Kennedy–Thorndike experiment, and the Ives–Stilwell experiment. Einstein derived the Lorentz transformations from first principles in 1905, but these three experiments allow the transformations to be induced from experimental evidence."
Obviously the testing of the theory still continues as we gather more data from around the universe, but to say there wasn't firm experimental evidence until the 1970s isn't correct.
Until string theory makes some testable predictions it's just mathematical and philosophical wanking.
But if it is a US court, they will just rule that they have jurisdiction over servers in other countries.
There is some logic behind
A Russian scientist turned wild foxes into cute puppies in about 10 generations by breeding for lower adrenaline levels
Not necessarily adrenaline levels, but that may have been the way it worked out. All they bred for was aggression, the more aggressive foxes were not allowed to breed. This resulted in a tamer fox, but also a lot of other traits that we associate with dogs (juvenilization, coloration patterns, vocalization, etc). Just selecting for one thing can have a profound effect on the species.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
It's a solid rocket motor, of course it needs to be replaced after every flight.
Actually, it is a hybrid rocket motor which has characteristics of both a solid and liquid motor. Wiki says they are changing the propellant which would explain the motor replacement.
'Major sponsors include Ford, General Motors, IMRA, Michigan Engineering, NYK, Qatar Airways and Siemens PLM Software.'
Why is that unfair? Other teams are permitted to get sponsors. It's their problem if they can't recruit good sponsors. Plus most of those companies hire Michigan engineering graduates so why wouldn't they sponsor the students they are likely to hire?
Sure, I think they should be able to get as much money as they want from sponsors. However, the article made it sound like they were getting engineering help from their sponsors. This is supposed to be a student competition, not a professional contest. In this case, the team that won didn't even build their car, they just drove a car built by previous students and sponsors. I guess they drove it competently, but in an engineering competition I would like to see more engineering on the part of the participants.
Except for the fact that it was the vehicle trials which occurred in the US (california, nevada), trials that demonstrated the safety of these vehicles and which have caused the UK to fully allow them on the roads in Jan 2014, rather than their initial plans for trials to occur by the end of 2013. While the article does not explicitly state this to be the reason for the change, I believe it to be a fair presumption that the 300,000 miles google's cars have driven in Califonia were taken into consideration.
Trials are different than allowing manufacturers to sell driverless cars or allowing the general public to drive them. Even the Nevada law just instructs the DOT to set safety standards for driverless cars, which they have not yet completed. That also doesn't address insurance, which all cars in the US are required to have to drive on public roads. If the insurance companies won't insure the cars because of the litigation-happy Americans, the only way to drive such a car would be to underwrite the insurance yourself (which generally involves posting a large bond).
Obviously the US will not have this for some time ("Oh my god, somebody might sue!"), it's nice to see at least some countries see the advantage of cars that can drive themselves better than humans can drive them, even if the self-driving cars are not perfect. I would expect initially they would require a licensed driver behind the wheel, at least until the technology has proven itself.
Mesa company bans workers from smoking, tests for nicotine
Workplaces ban not only smoking, but smokers themselves
Hospitals Shift Smoking Bans to Smoker Ban
Those are just the first three that came up in a Google search, there are many more.
There is not discrimination against smokers.
There are companies that will not hire you if you have nicotine in your system, if that isn't discrimination I don't know what is. I don't even smoke, but I do chew nicotine gum so I wouldn't be even considered for a position at these companies.
There's certainly hope that we can get another Kennedy/Reagan/Eisenhower* next time. Maybe if we try to choose based on COMPETENCE rather than just whoever most extremely mirrors our favored ideology.
* (Not an actual Kennedy of course, the good one is dead. HW Bush / Bush Jr. should have taught us something about electing a guy because he was related to a decent president.)
Good fucking luck. It's looking like 2016 is going to be Hillary (yet ANOTHER person who's only qualification for president is that she is related to one) and whatever republican manages to out-crazy the rest of them. It's going to be yet another episode of giant douche vs. shit sandwich. You can vote for the corporate tool or the corporate tool.
Why not? I was on a Delta flight the other day and the only way to purchase in-flight cocktails was via credit card. On another flight the same day, the same purchase could only be made in cash. I am not aware of any laws that require businesses to accept a certain form of payment, and why should there be? If a business doesn't accept cash (or credit cards, or chickens, or bitcoin) and their customers prefer that method of payment, it will show up in their bottom line. Why would the government need to intervene in such a transaction?