I really think a bigger factor is education and how long since they've been in education. Consider the worst cast in the study, a 90 year old. They (on average) graduated from high school 72 years ago in 1941. Statistics and probability curriculum probably wasn't what it is now, especially pre-Sputnick (1957). Not to mention the 72 to years spent not using those skills. That is, if you hypothetically had someone who was locked at 18 and didn't age, you would still expect them to forget those skills after 72 years.
So in the end, I'm sure aging plays a factor, but I suspect other factors play a bigger role.
They way everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike, talk about Assange you'd think he actually broke into the State Department and stole these cables himself. Assange shouldn't be the main focus of this story. It should be how a PFC was given complete access to an entire database of every cable sent from 1966-2010, complete with the ability to save a complete copy of said database. Assuming these cables are really as damaging as a terrorist attack, as everyone seems to be implying, you'd think they'd take better measures to secure it.
For the record, I don't think this leak is as important as anyone, including Assange, have hyped it to be. But if we take the State Department at their word, that people will die as the result of this leak and that our relations with other nations will be significantly damaged, then the responsibility lies with them for their lax and incompetent security procedures.
If you really want to cut or even eliminate CO2 emissions then the last thing you want to do is turn CO2 emissions into a revenue stream for the government. That's just the WORST thing you could do. It's like trying to get rid of cows by eating them.
Why not just make other energy sources more attractive by removing bureaucratic nonsense (nuclear energy) or making investments in R&D (solar and wind)?
Slashdot Mirror
I really think a bigger factor is education and how long since they've been in education. Consider the worst cast in the study, a 90 year old. They (on average) graduated from high school 72 years ago in 1941. Statistics and probability curriculum probably wasn't what it is now, especially pre-Sputnick (1957). Not to mention the 72 to years spent not using those skills. That is, if you hypothetically had someone who was locked at 18 and didn't age, you would still expect them to forget those skills after 72 years. So in the end, I'm sure aging plays a factor, but I suspect other factors play a bigger role.
Unless this "CO2 Harvester" answers to "Audrey II" I fail to see how it could remove more carbon then just planting a tree.
They way everyone, Republicans and Democrats alike, talk about Assange you'd think he actually broke into the State Department and stole these cables himself. Assange shouldn't be the main focus of this story. It should be how a PFC was given complete access to an entire database of every cable sent from 1966-2010, complete with the ability to save a complete copy of said database. Assuming these cables are really as damaging as a terrorist attack, as everyone seems to be implying, you'd think they'd take better measures to secure it. For the record, I don't think this leak is as important as anyone, including Assange, have hyped it to be. But if we take the State Department at their word, that people will die as the result of this leak and that our relations with other nations will be significantly damaged, then the responsibility lies with them for their lax and incompetent security procedures.
One word: Goldschläger.
If you really want to cut or even eliminate CO2 emissions then the last thing you want to do is turn CO2 emissions into a revenue stream for the government. That's just the WORST thing you could do. It's like trying to get rid of cows by eating them. Why not just make other energy sources more attractive by removing bureaucratic nonsense (nuclear energy) or making investments in R&D (solar and wind)?