I'd be surprised if we didn't at least find some sort of microbial life...if we didn't though we better put some there! Hedge for DNA...humans, meh...we should do everything we can to allow DNA to survive forever. FOREVER.
I read somewhere (maybe on another/. forum) that a lot of garbage dumps now contain more rare-earth elements than high density deposits. Would something like plasma gasification solve two problems at once?
Could be total bunkum...any body with real knowledge care to chip in?
I'm beginning to see the merit of this rube-based business model. Do you think we're in a rube bubble or is there a much larger untapped rube resource waiting to be mined?
We must underfund our schools even more to ensure more rubes!
Totally and truely my good sir. My tone was not of the perennial 'why is this on/.' I had seen the video with that lady about a month ago elsewhere. I suppose during it's initial viral wave. The addition of the spectral analysis to the video was awesome!
Oi, I realize this will woosh right over your partisan-baked brain, but I'll bite:
"What makes you think that anyone is entitled to someone else's money?" How did they get that money in the first place? Through a societal system they are able to take advantage of. Never completely on their own like libertarians are want to believe. Our current monetary system is based on debt leveraged on debt based on a promise. It's purely imaginary, fiat, whatever. The real deal is the cost of energy, resource extraction (also a function of the cost of energy), and labor cost (which is decreasing due to automation/globalization). Money is just a convenient shorthand.
"you're trying to impose your beliefs as facts" I'd like you to meet Kettle, Mr. Pot. Also...notice that I used words like 'could'. It was pretty clear I was speculating, not claiming anything as a fact (otherwise I cite that shit).
"How (who?) defines how much is "basic"? That is a good point. If I'm able to filter out your partisan ObamaPhone/Nike bullshit I can see where you are going (though your mental image of what constitutes a poor person is a hilariously on-message Fox News caricature). Who or what defines a living as basic is a pretty subjective thing. A good place to start is being able to eat real food and have a stable place to live. I'd go so far as to include internet in that mix.
"The problem with Socialism is eventually, you run out of other people's money." Nice quote there Thatcher. Got any good Rand for me?
"you're so useless, we'll pay you to not work so you will go away and we can ignore you" That is not the message. The message is "everybody is worth something, regardless of whether or not you are capable of 'meaningful work'. Mentally ill people, physically disabled people, etc.
The value of meaningful work != the monetary value. With a basic income if somebody wanted to make art baubles and somebody else found value in them...how is that less meaningful than cleaning a bathroom at a movie theater?
So, having said that. I'm sure there would be some negative consequences. Since I'm speculating as much as the next guy, what would some be? If people got a basic income, then they wouldn't be forced to work in a Tobacco field for minimum wage (or less in a lot of cases) to make rent. What would happen O sage of the free market? Would the wages for these shitty jobs raise to meet the demand of the no-longer enslaved lower class? Would that then cause the price of cigarettes or whatever else to go up? Would inflation explode to make the basic income essentially worthless? (a possibility smarter economists than I say is unsupported by evidence...no cite though)
Seriously though, Mr. Libertarian, go fucking live on an island. If you want to say 'I got mine, fuck off' so badly, GTFO.
Good points. However, both the population increase as well as the increase in automation is happening at an exponential rate, not linear as I infer (perhaps incorrectly) your statement to be.
This would also address more than solely unemployment though. It could lead to the abolishment of the minimum wage, which expecting people to live on is sort of a joke anyhow. It could provide a means for a single mother to actually be around enough to raise her kid(s) which has all sorts of positive societal benefits. It could lead to a flourishing of small businesses as they would no longer have to fully support the entrepreneur in addition to employees. It would remove the stigma of welfare on the lower classes and remove the perverse incentive to say unemployed (eg once you start working you lose your welfare and end up bringing in less money than being solely on welfare).
Honestly though, I think it'll remain firmly in fantasy land until we can obtain a cheap and abundant energy source. Either widespread solar/wind + future grid, or next gen fission, or maybe even fusion (one can dream), or some combination of all three. Fossil fuels are clearly not cutting the mustard.
I'm curious to know what your take is on a basic income for all US citizens versus our current 'conditional' welfare system. What do you think short term and long term outcome would be? Would the increased tax burden on the upper classes result in a total collapse rendering a basic income useless? My personal opinion is that it is necessary given the increasing rate of job automation coupled with our increasing population size (not to mention aging). Am I delusional? If so, why?
This has been around for a long time (think 1000s of years). I suspect this particular video became popular due to her attractiveness and plunging neckline. That's not to say she isn't amazingly talented though. She most certainly is!
Say what you will about NC politics (and, shit, there is a lot to be said), we pump out some top-notch research! Wake Forest, Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill, NC State seem to continually be in the science section headlines for some new something or other.
It's also a shame that the NCAA bullshit is putting a cloud over all the hard working researchers at UNC.
Time out! Are you saying I'm in the 'Papa knows best' crowd proudly displaying my new knowledge of the D-K and using it as such to shut down discussion? I feel like there's some irony somewhere in there...perhaps the D-K effect doesn't mean what you think it means? I do like the idea of a self-proclaimed D-K expert though, deliciously recursive. If anything I'd say it is a gauntlet-throw to put up some actual citations or evidence or get off the lawn.
If Koan had a modicum of expertise I'm sure he would have cited it prominently. Then again, he also probably wouldn't have said anything knowing that every cubic cm and milliwatt was accounted for.
I realize that it is frustrating seeing such a badass feat of astrophysics be humbled by a shadow...but...
If wishes and buts were clusters of nuts, we'd all have a bowl of granola! (Jellineck, Geoffrey et al 2000)
"It seems to me the design and/or planning of this mission were poorly thought out"
Is the funniest fucking thing I've heard all day. Do you have any idea how well thought out this mission was? FFS look at the trajectory it took 10 YEARS(!) to get to the comet. And you think they overlooked the fact that the comet is craggly?
Yet plenty of concessions for the AHA were made for Republicans who shunned it *anyway*. The fact that it's essentially RomneyCare with no public option speaks volumes.
The drug addiction and the need to pee come from the same area in the brain. The drug co-opted that neural substructure to warp the person's motivations. There is a shit-ton of neuroscience evidence to back up both of my claims. You can counter with analogies, but the neurological evidence of brain-based consciousness is solid.
Why not? Both examples pretty clearly demonstrate the physical nature of our consciousness. Brain trauma can dramatically alter a person's personality. Addiction is a chemical process that has a clear effect on 'free will'. Did I miss something?
Slashdot Mirror
Ha, all those cows were like "Shit, not again!! CHEESE IT!"
I'd be surprised if we didn't at least find some sort of microbial life...if we didn't though we better put some there! Hedge for DNA...humans, meh...we should do everything we can to allow DNA to survive forever. FOREVER.
"Despite that book being completely true to life"
Sweeping generalizations like that and using the world Feminazis doesn't really undo your attempt at analysis of the book.
Slightly rephrased: "I'm not racist, but god damn I hate $racial_slur. That said, that Arizona sheriff sounds almost purposely racist."
So...then...does this count as an endorsement of chemically induced synesthesia?
LSD: Boost your IQ *and* be convinced you're a snake-monkey who can read the secrets of the universe!
I read somewhere (maybe on another /. forum) that a lot of garbage dumps now contain more rare-earth elements than high density deposits. Would something like plasma gasification solve two problems at once?
Could be total bunkum...any body with real knowledge care to chip in?
I'm beginning to see the merit of this rube-based business model. Do you think we're in a rube bubble or is there a much larger untapped rube resource waiting to be mined?
We must underfund our schools even more to ensure more rubes!
Totally and truely my good sir. My tone was not of the perennial 'why is this on /.' I had seen the video with that lady about a month ago elsewhere. I suppose during it's initial viral wave. The addition of the spectral analysis to the video was awesome!
Oi, I realize this will woosh right over your partisan-baked brain, but I'll bite:
"What makes you think that anyone is entitled to someone else's money?"
How did they get that money in the first place? Through a societal system they are able to take advantage of. Never completely on their own like libertarians are want to believe. Our current monetary system is based on debt leveraged on debt based on a promise. It's purely imaginary, fiat, whatever. The real deal is the cost of energy, resource extraction (also a function of the cost of energy), and labor cost (which is decreasing due to automation/globalization). Money is just a convenient shorthand.
"you're trying to impose your beliefs as facts"
I'd like you to meet Kettle, Mr. Pot. Also...notice that I used words like 'could'. It was pretty clear I was speculating, not claiming anything as a fact (otherwise I cite that shit).
"How (who?) defines how much is "basic"? That is a good point. If I'm able to filter out your partisan ObamaPhone/Nike bullshit I can see where you are going (though your mental image of what constitutes a poor person is a hilariously on-message Fox News caricature). Who or what defines a living as basic is a pretty subjective thing. A good place to start is being able to eat real food and have a stable place to live. I'd go so far as to include internet in that mix.
"The problem with Socialism is eventually, you run out of other people's money."
Nice quote there Thatcher. Got any good Rand for me?
"you're so useless, we'll pay you to not work so you will go away and we can ignore you"
That is not the message. The message is "everybody is worth something, regardless of whether or not you are capable of 'meaningful work'. Mentally ill people, physically disabled people, etc.
The value of meaningful work != the monetary value. With a basic income if somebody wanted to make art baubles and somebody else found value in them...how is that less meaningful than cleaning a bathroom at a movie theater?
So, having said that. I'm sure there would be some negative consequences. Since I'm speculating as much as the next guy, what would some be? If people got a basic income, then they wouldn't be forced to work in a Tobacco field for minimum wage (or less in a lot of cases) to make rent. What would happen O sage of the free market? Would the wages for these shitty jobs raise to meet the demand of the no-longer enslaved lower class? Would that then cause the price of cigarettes or whatever else to go up? Would inflation explode to make the basic income essentially worthless? (a possibility smarter economists than I say is unsupported by evidence...no cite though)
Seriously though, Mr. Libertarian, go fucking live on an island. If you want to say 'I got mine, fuck off' so badly, GTFO.
Good points. However, both the population increase as well as the increase in automation is happening at an exponential rate, not linear as I infer (perhaps incorrectly) your statement to be.
This would also address more than solely unemployment though. It could lead to the abolishment of the minimum wage, which expecting people to live on is sort of a joke anyhow. It could provide a means for a single mother to actually be around enough to raise her kid(s) which has all sorts of positive societal benefits. It could lead to a flourishing of small businesses as they would no longer have to fully support the entrepreneur in addition to employees. It would remove the stigma of welfare on the lower classes and remove the perverse incentive to say unemployed (eg once you start working you lose your welfare and end up bringing in less money than being solely on welfare).
Honestly though, I think it'll remain firmly in fantasy land until we can obtain a cheap and abundant energy source. Either widespread solar/wind + future grid, or next gen fission, or maybe even fusion (one can dream), or some combination of all three. Fossil fuels are clearly not cutting the mustard.
I'm curious to know what your take is on a basic income for all US citizens versus our current 'conditional' welfare system. What do you think short term and long term outcome would be? Would the increased tax burden on the upper classes result in a total collapse rendering a basic income useless? My personal opinion is that it is necessary given the increasing rate of job automation coupled with our increasing population size (not to mention aging). Am I delusional? If so, why?
This has been around for a long time (think 1000s of years). I suspect this particular video became popular due to her attractiveness and plunging neckline. That's not to say she isn't amazingly talented though. She most certainly is!
Seconded! That's why I'm all about striving towards an energy-production-derived basic income for all citizens (ideally all humans)
Anything else seems like a 1-way-ticket to Turmoil Town.
Hah, thanks for the info...I didn't even RTFA ;-) Wake Forest is doing some incredible artificial organ research though.
Say what you will about NC politics (and, shit, there is a lot to be said), we pump out some top-notch research! Wake Forest, Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill, NC State seem to continually be in the science section headlines for some new something or other.
It's also a shame that the NCAA bullshit is putting a cloud over all the hard working researchers at UNC.
Time out! Are you saying I'm in the 'Papa knows best' crowd proudly displaying my new knowledge of the D-K and using it as such to shut down discussion? I feel like there's some irony somewhere in there...perhaps the D-K effect doesn't mean what you think it means? I do like the idea of a self-proclaimed D-K expert though, deliciously recursive. If anything I'd say it is a gauntlet-throw to put up some actual citations or evidence or get off the lawn.
If Koan had a modicum of expertise I'm sure he would have cited it prominently. Then again, he also probably wouldn't have said anything knowing that every cubic cm and milliwatt was accounted for.
I realize that it is frustrating seeing such a badass feat of astrophysics be humbled by a shadow...but...
If wishes and buts were clusters of nuts, we'd all have a bowl of granola!
(Jellineck, Geoffrey et al 2000)
My penetrator always hammers the MUPUS. Wait, what?
"It seems to me the design and/or planning of this mission were poorly thought out"
Is the funniest fucking thing I've heard all day. Do you have any idea how well thought out this mission was? FFS look at the trajectory it took 10 YEARS(!) to get to the comet. And you think they overlooked the fact that the comet is craggly?
Jesus-Dunning-Kruger-Christ.
http://www.esa.int/esatv/Video...
Glad I'm not the only one who thought that. Then again, I just saw Captain America for the first time like 3 days ago.
That, or all the estrogen mimicking compounds in our plastics! YAY BPA (and friends)
Yet plenty of concessions for the AHA were made for Republicans who shunned it *anyway*. The fact that it's essentially RomneyCare with no public option speaks volumes.
The drug addiction and the need to pee come from the same area in the brain. The drug co-opted that neural substructure to warp the person's motivations. There is a shit-ton of neuroscience evidence to back up both of my claims. You can counter with analogies, but the neurological evidence of brain-based consciousness is solid.
Why not? Both examples pretty clearly demonstrate the physical nature of our consciousness. Brain trauma can dramatically alter a person's personality. Addiction is a chemical process that has a clear effect on 'free will'. Did I miss something?
Spot on. Learning just a smidge about brain trauma and/or addiction throws dualism out of the window.
Oh Noes! We've reached peak sand! Our grandchildren will live in a sandless world marked by misery and sharp rocks.
You don't need a test to tell if they come to work stoned or not, it's pretty fucking obvious. And if you can't tell, then why is it a problem?