So how about the 15% payroll tax the Boomers have been paying for the past 40 years? Why shouldn't we expect the next generation to do the same in turn?
You can rant all you want but the demographics and size of the voting population in the Boomer cohort sort of makes it pretty unlikely that you are going to be able to duck this bill.
The Japanese have experience with environmental pollution from cadmium mining.
They call the results itai-itai disease, which is roughly translated into ouch-ouch. Few victims actually die from the disease, they typically commit suicide to get relief from the pain it causes.
Unfortunately the author of the article fudged the units (presumably he couldn't spell the name of the actual unit). The level of contamination is 17,000 picocuries per liter, not parts per liter.
It is still a low level, and is less than the EPA standard for drinking water. But not as low as your calculation.
Science is about providing predictive power. Yes you can publish an article that shows the existing model fails to provide an explanation of xyz if you want, but that is not the same thing as refuting the model if that model continues to explain abcdefghijklmonpprstuvw and you don't have an alternative that explains even a as a replacement candidate.
This is the situation we see in physics all the time. OK so Newton couldn't explain the precession of Mercury. Does that mean we state that Newton's work was wrong and can't be used to predict anything? Hardly. What we do is wait for the model that subsumes all of Newton PLUS explains the precession of Mercury. That turned out to be General Relativity.
So the anti-AGW guys can carp about the holes in AGW all they want, but until they come up with a model that has greater predictive power they are not doing anything to advance the anti-AGW view.
It is a quite different situation than cold fusion. Cold fusion was a claim of an observed data point that contradicted the standard model. This data point could not be reproduced, and as a result the standard model is not in contradiction with observation.
The phone companies in the US are a lot more varied in their policies because they are not under Socialistic (Fascist) regulatory regimes.
If you were to use T-Mobile as your carrier in the US you would find the ability to do everything you described in your post.
Verizon not so much, but then again their business model allows you to get an expensive smart phone without shelling out the full cost up front in exchange for a contract commitment.
Digital distribution does significantly reduce costs. It is a major reason we are seeing a proliferation of IMAX theaters; the 70mm prints they used to use were ungodly expensive.
Depends on the nature of the adjustments. There are two types that I am aware of:
1. Data set trimming. This is essentially throwing away outliers, that is data that is "bad" for various unknown reasons. Generally the criterion is a measurement more than 3 standard deviations from the mean.
2. Adjustments due to systematic variations. For example if a sensor is located near a growing population center the measurements it provides are likely to be changing with time due to this environmental effect. This would be adjusted.
While perhaps data set trimming could generate a random set of corrections the adjustments due to systematic variations would definitely not.
I am not denying that it exists. Logically one cannot prove a negative; that is the claim that no such poll exists cannot be proven.
However since you cannot actually provide evidence of the existence of this poll I am free to apply other logic that make it very apparent that the existence of a poll as you describe is very unlikely.
That's a rather ridiculous statement on the face of it. Science does not "prove" anything. Science is about developing and refining a set of working assumptions that are used to predict future events. If you were to ask a scientist if any basic assumption was proven he should answer no.
I'd really like to see that poll. Do you have a link to the original question that was asked?
Ah yes the Medival Warm Period affecting northern Europe.
Did you know that current temperatures in Greenland are higher than those in the MWP? And oh yes they are farming there now. It isn't a vast ice sheet any more.
Your point 2. seems flawed. There is no "law of averages" as you describe. One way to understand the issue is that if you flip a coin 100 times there is only an 8% chance that the result will be 50% heads. As you increase the number of flips that percentage decreases.
Wikipedia has a discussion of this if you are interested.
As far as cap and trade, I agree that a carbon tax is a lot more sensible. I hope we end up there. Unfortunately it appears that any political efforts to materially reduce the human carbon footprint are doomed due to something akin to the prisoner's dilemma. So we are going to find out if AGW theories are correct or not.
Things are looking good for humanity over the next couple of centuries IMHO.
If he is doing stuff like trying to control what you listen to he will dick you over in countless other ways as well.
You will never be happy working for this worthless creep. Find another job and when you leave be sure that you make it widely known why. Sooner of later senior management will realize what is going on and why they are constantly losing good people.
Most judges will immediately hold you in contempt or bar a defense laywer from the courtroom if they even try to propose the subject. Or declare an immediate mistrial. And any juror who shows an inclination to disregard the law will likely get thrown off the jury by the judge.
Jury nullification is a power of the jury, no question. But it's one that the US legal system tries to suppress as much as it can.
Interesting - it sounds like what the judge did was correct - he instructed the jury on what the law was, that is that possession of the drug made the defendant guilty. What came out of the jury room was jury nullification (nullification of the law), that is the jury declared innocence despite the law. Supposedly this is quite a rare event.
There is a long history of jury nullification, some of it quite ugly during periods where racial discrimination was the way things were.
This one of the most controversial areas of law, and an area that all citizens who go to serve on juries should be aware of because it WONT be brought up in the courtroom. However the roots of it go very deep into English Common Law, and because the court cannot punish the jury for its verdicts and we have protection against double jeopardy, jury nullification is in fact a power of any jury.
The bandwidth necessary for VOIP is insignificant compared to the rest of the internet. There is no reason that voice telephony should not one of the services that is part of your ISP feature set.
Pretty much all carriers backhaul VOIP on their own nets blended with fully depreciated legacy switched circuit equipment is in place. With land line subscriptions dropping 7% per year the old stuff is firmly heading the way of the dodo bird.
Design patents don't cover software. They cover the visual design of something. Like a trash can or a page layout. In this case it happens to be a page layout of the display of a patent.
This is just another instance of the absolute lack of knowledge of the patent system by the editors of slashdot. Nothing to see here, move along.
I've been arguing this since I started reading Slashdot years ago (notice my 5 digit ID). It is utterly appalling how ignorant the editors of Slashdot are on this issue. Yes there are problems with the US Patent system, but you aren't going to constructively address them with this sort of drivel.
Slashdot Mirror
So how about the 15% payroll tax the Boomers have been paying for the past 40 years? Why shouldn't we expect the next generation to do the same in turn?
You can rant all you want but the demographics and size of the voting population in the Boomer cohort sort of makes it pretty unlikely that you are going to be able to duck this bill.
We could pay them to take 'em and still come out ahead on net value.
4th, Japan is still larger. And they are not close to either the EU or US which are 3-4 times larger.
The balance of trade deficit sort of says China needs us a hell of a lot more than we need them.
Because they actually are?
Some times Occam's Razor gives the right answer.
The Japanese have experience with environmental pollution from cadmium mining.
They call the results itai-itai disease, which is roughly translated into ouch-ouch. Few victims actually die from the disease, they typically commit suicide to get relief from the pain it causes.
Unfortunately the author of the article fudged the units (presumably he couldn't spell the name of the actual unit). The level of contamination is 17,000 picocuries per liter, not parts per liter.
It is still a low level, and is less than the EPA standard for drinking water. But not as low as your calculation.
Science is about providing predictive power. Yes you can publish an article that shows the existing model fails to provide an explanation of xyz if you want, but that is not the same thing as refuting the model if that model continues to explain abcdefghijklmonpprstuvw and you don't have an alternative that explains even a as a replacement candidate.
This is the situation we see in physics all the time. OK so Newton couldn't explain the precession of Mercury. Does that mean we state that Newton's work was wrong and can't be used to predict anything? Hardly. What we do is wait for the model that subsumes all of Newton PLUS explains the precession of Mercury. That turned out to be General Relativity.
So the anti-AGW guys can carp about the holes in AGW all they want, but until they come up with a model that has greater predictive power they are not doing anything to advance the anti-AGW view.
It is a quite different situation than cold fusion. Cold fusion was a claim of an observed data point that contradicted the standard model. This data point could not be reproduced, and as a result the standard model is not in contradiction with observation.
The phone companies in the US are a lot more varied in their policies because they are not under Socialistic (Fascist) regulatory regimes.
If you were to use T-Mobile as your carrier in the US you would find the ability to do everything you described in your post.
Verizon not so much, but then again their business model allows you to get an expensive smart phone without shelling out the full cost up front in exchange for a contract commitment.
Your choice.
Digital distribution does significantly reduce costs. It is a major reason we are seeing a proliferation of IMAX theaters; the 70mm prints they used to use were ungodly expensive.
Depends on the nature of the adjustments. There are two types that I am aware of:
1. Data set trimming. This is essentially throwing away outliers, that is data that is "bad" for various unknown reasons. Generally the criterion is a measurement more than 3 standard deviations from the mean.
2. Adjustments due to systematic variations. For example if a sensor is located near a growing population center the measurements it provides are likely to be changing with time due to this environmental effect. This would be adjusted.
While perhaps data set trimming could generate a random set of corrections the adjustments due to systematic variations would definitely not.
I am not denying that it exists. Logically one cannot prove a negative; that is the claim that no such poll exists cannot be proven.
However since you cannot actually provide evidence of the existence of this poll I am free to apply other logic that make it very apparent that the existence of a poll as you describe is very unlikely.
Yes except peer reviewed journals do in fact routinely publish anti-AGW articles.
The problem is that none of these articles have been successful in establishing an alternative model.
So that's a big old FAIL for the anti-AGW guys.
That's a rather ridiculous statement on the face of it. Science does not "prove" anything. Science is about developing and refining a set of working assumptions that are used to predict future events. If you were to ask a scientist if any basic assumption was proven he should answer no.
I'd really like to see that poll. Do you have a link to the original question that was asked?
Ah yes the Medival Warm Period affecting northern Europe.
Did you know that current temperatures in Greenland are higher than those in the MWP? And oh yes they are farming there now. It isn't a vast ice sheet any more.
Your point 2. seems flawed. There is no "law of averages" as you describe. One way to understand the issue is that if you flip a coin 100 times there is only an 8% chance that the result will be 50% heads. As you increase the number of flips that percentage decreases.
Wikipedia has a discussion of this if you are interested.
As far as cap and trade, I agree that a carbon tax is a lot more sensible. I hope we end up there. Unfortunately it appears that any political efforts to materially reduce the human carbon footprint are doomed due to something akin to the prisoner's dilemma. So we are going to find out if AGW theories are correct or not.
Things are looking good for humanity over the next couple of centuries IMHO.
-50, socially irrelevant
If he is doing stuff like trying to control what you listen to he will dick you over in countless other ways as well.
You will never be happy working for this worthless creep. Find another job and when you leave be sure that you make it widely known why. Sooner of later senior management will realize what is going on and why they are constantly losing good people.
Or the company will die.
Most judges will immediately hold you in contempt or bar a defense laywer from the courtroom if they even try to propose the subject. Or declare an immediate mistrial. And any juror who shows an inclination to disregard the law will likely get thrown off the jury by the judge.
Jury nullification is a power of the jury, no question. But it's one that the US legal system tries to suppress as much as it can.
Interesting - it sounds like what the judge did was correct - he instructed the jury on what the law was, that is that possession of the drug made the defendant guilty. What came out of the jury room was jury nullification (nullification of the law), that is the jury declared innocence despite the law. Supposedly this is quite a rare event.
There is a long history of jury nullification, some of it quite ugly during periods where racial discrimination was the way things were.
This one of the most controversial areas of law, and an area that all citizens who go to serve on juries should be aware of because it WONT be brought up in the courtroom. However the roots of it go very deep into English Common Law, and because the court cannot punish the jury for its verdicts and we have protection against double jeopardy, jury nullification is in fact a power of any jury.
The bandwidth necessary for VOIP is insignificant compared to the rest of the internet. There is no reason that voice telephony should not one of the services that is part of your ISP feature set.
Pretty much all carriers backhaul VOIP on their own nets blended with fully depreciated legacy switched circuit equipment is in place. With land line subscriptions dropping 7% per year the old stuff is firmly heading the way of the dodo bird.
OK, but I have the design patent that covers the design of the anonymous display of anonymous comments discussing anonymous patents.
And yes it's anonymous.
Design patents don't cover software. They cover the visual design of something. Like a trash can or a page layout. In this case it happens to be a page layout of the display of a patent.
This is just another instance of the absolute lack of knowledge of the patent system by the editors of slashdot. Nothing to see here, move along.
I've been arguing this since I started reading Slashdot years ago (notice my 5 digit ID). It is utterly appalling how ignorant the editors of Slashdot are on this issue. Yes there are problems with the US Patent system, but you aren't going to constructively address them with this sort of drivel.