I'm fascinated by the distinction that place of birth warrants for someone who is a terrorists, living and operating in a foreign country against the interests of the united states. Especially since they were trying to strip him of those magical papers a year before they finally killed him.
Where is the traditional "Wanted: Dead or Alive" mentality that always rises up in 2nd Amendment supporters when there's a chance to stop a crime that might have only been a robbery of a fast food store or a corner convenience mart? Or is it just that Obama ordered the hit in this sub-human and you don't want to admit that he was right?
Wait, Apple's come with a perpetual Office subscription and Adobe's CC application? Damn, that is a good deal. Unless, of course, you mean Apple's free knock-offs of Office and Adobe's photo group, in which case the only advantage is that they're bundled instead of having to download one of the half-dozen free alternatives available for Windows.
If you think the controls on Metro are unintuitive, you're a certified idiot. It took me no longer to learn all of the swipe gestures and charm bar actions than it took to learn the iOS gestures. Win8 is easier than iOS for anyone with even half a brain. iOS seems determined to add gestures to every version and then completely ignore any information on how to use them. Half the functions seem to be "discovered" by autistic hipsters living on daddy's monthly trust fund check.
I know rice krispies exist, and I may like them okay. But if all I see are frosted flakes and lucky charms, I might forget about my beloved rice krispies. If they're not in front of my eyes when I make a shopping list, I might just replace that box of frosted flakes that's getting low.
More to the point, if I'm looking for a new car -even just thinking about it (or dreaming about it), I might click on an ad for a car I might not normally chose just to see some pretty pictures and feel-good video about how happy people are in their new Foo SUV. And it may not make a difference to me, but it might if I happen to remember that beautiful couple that looks just l like what I want my GF and I too look like in a cool new vehicle with people complimenting us on our taste in fine automobiles, and it's a coin toss between that car and some other car I didn't see beautiful people fawning over in an ad that I've forgotten about but is still in my subconscious.
Because then it's not a decision, it's just a feeling that I like Foo SUVs over everything else 'cause they just feel happier. Yeah. I just like them better. There was never any advertising that influenced me. Sure I saw the ad, but it didn't really make a difference, I just like this one better. And advertising played no role at all, and the money that company spent was clearly wasted because I would have bought that car anyway.
What everyone else gets - money. He/they need funding to continue their lifestyle^wresearch. From wikipedia:
"Due to budget cuts, NOAA ceased funding Aquarius after September 2012, with no further missions scheduled after a July 2012 mission that included pioneering female diver Sylvia Earle in its aquanaut crew. The University of North Carolina Wilmington was also unable to provide funding to continue operations. The Aquarius Foundation was set up in an attempt to keep Aquarius functioning."
Foundations don't run on cool research, they run on dollars. Dollars requires interest, and interest comes from PR/marketing. Hence the stunt.
It's a proper name, not the noun or an acronym. At least, that's what I could gather. Usually a mission is named via acronym (Synchronous Wideband Analysis for Research of Magnetism, or some such), or occasionally after a famous administrator (James Webb Space Telescope, named after the 2nd NASA Administrator) or the (rarely) a famous principal scientist. This seems to be none of those, or at least I couldn't find a reference on the ESA pages. Damned Europeans. They're mocking us with their "no rules" satellite naming conventions.
Truly skilled trades are still in demand, and make what I consider to be "middle class" - i.e. better than the average wage earner. Here's the thing, though - if you're a tool, just doing a rote job, you will not be paid particularly well in the grand scheme of things. Someone who finds and gathers the work for you to do and houses you and invests the capital for your craft will take a larger cut than you will. Example: if you are a welder, you might make $20-25hr by putting on leathers and a helmet each morning and hanging it up when the day ends. If you run a shop - own the building and equipment, get jobs, parcel our work - you'll be billing that $25/hr welder at $80-100/hr. That's no different than an engineer who makes $30-40/hr by showing up in an office vs the firm that bills clients at $125-$150/hour. Or even a fast food worker making $10/hr, but is priced into the cost of a burger at $50/hr.
There are two problems. Middle class, if you believe the standard of living on TV shows and commercials, is closer to the 90-95th percentile earner, not the 50th. That's going to be a problem if you want to be a top 10% or top 5% earner to consider yourself "middle class." And if you want a job where you will never get dirty, or shower *after* a hard day at work, you're going to be very disappointed by going into the trades. Learning a trade and owning your own tools IS a way to hit that 80-90 percentile income, but it means getting dirty for a living and that's not a 95th+ percentile value, and you have to be willing to drive yourself to be the boss - even if it's a one-person operation - and own your equipment and provide your services. Being a cog in a machine that someone else owns does not make you the 10%er that people consider "middle class" these days. (BTW 90th percentile is $65,000/yr for a single person, and is not far from the bottom of most of the "owner" tradespeople who run their own shop/own their own equipment)
The idea is that we reduce carbon emissions to slow the rate of the effects on climate. They're not trying to pick winners and losers; why would you try and make winners and losers out of this?
All of the non-coal fuels each have their own challenges, and this rule doesn't alter that. It's like free market, but with the addition that the cost of altering the climate is factored into regulation because a commodity-priced market is unable to react to a result with a 100 year return period.
You still can't find anybody willing and able to properly store spent nuclear fuel, nor someone looking to invest billions of dollars and a decade of zero income in an industry which has a low-growth potential.
Well, the whole discussion centered around is a ratio (doubling, a 100% increase). If you want to compare the veracity, you should use similar scales. 17-22 years means nothing unless you put it into the same context.
The goal isn't to burn this oil as tribute flames to our inventive manliness. It would replace an equivalent carbon portion of the fuel already burned, so there's no net increase in carbon, just that we would need to pull less out oil of the ground and put less plastic back in. (Okay, that's not quite what happens, oil just gets cheaper if you increase the supply so there is some net increase above the magical unicorn world where everything else stayed the same we would use less oil, but it's not as bad as burning most of the oil *and* burying a bunch of plastic)
If your goal was to turn oil into oil, then yes it's inefficient.
If your goal is to turn a waste product into oil, you need only be net efficient on the collection, conversion, and subsequent waste disposal. If it takes $0.80 of investment (collection, processing, distribution, waste cleanup) to produce a $1.00 worth of marketable product, then you've got a commercial venture. If it costs you up to $1.05 to do it, then you have a government contract possibility as you might be able to charge $0.20-$0.25 to municipalities to take their semi-recyclable plastics rather than landfill them.
It's not meant to be an energy source, per se, but a way to reuse plastics which would otherwise be landfilled.
The age of mortality for non-infants (those living past age 10) has increased by 20-25 years, a 50% increase in life expectancy, in the past century. Even if you look at "adults", or those who make it to age 20, there is still a 17-23 year increase. Again, a 50% increase in longevity for adults.
The heavier the vehicle, (generally) the more wear on the road. The heavier the vehicle (generally), the lower MPG and the more gallons purchased. It's about as close to a proportional use tax as you can get without calculating tire size and pressure, weight, tread style, frontal area, coefficient of drag, and driving style, and total miles driven to come up with a more "accurate" number for wear.
Be careful what you wish for. To make up for lost gas tax revenue, the Virginia GOP led legislature passed a tax on hybrids (which was repealed when the Dems took back over last year).
The average commute is greater than 5 miles, and less than 5% of the population is served by public transit. Unless you expect to have the avergage person spending 4 or more hours a day walking to and from work, and plan on upgrading the sidewalk infrastructure, I don't think this is viable.
Don't make too much noise, or you could end up with what we had in Virginia under the GOP - a Hybrid/electric vehicle tax to "cover road costs" of several hundred dollars per year.
Why would you do that? There're the primary source of targeting data for the 700 Billion we spend every year on the military. It would be like buying a brand new GPS and then not loading it with any maps to save money.
Simpler version: put the data in the safety deposit box.
No need for linux, or command lines, or encryption, or anything else. The only advantage to the encrypted file is that you don't have to get off your ass to make changes (i.e. put the updated data in the SDB).
Because, let's face it, as soon as the SDB is compromised, your entire security system is compromised. It's just a matter of time and computational effort at that point. And the risk is that the person who needs the information will not be able to access your information due to an error, or simple inability to work the technology. Anyone who is "after" your precious data will have the wherewithal to decode your stuff, but Aunt Matilda or cousin Jeb may end up just stuck.
Slashdot Mirror
Oops forgot the link: http://www.foxnews.com/politic...
People murder. Governments execute.
I'm fascinated by the distinction that place of birth warrants for someone who is a terrorists, living and operating in a foreign country against the interests of the united states. Especially since they were trying to strip him of those magical papers a year before they finally killed him.
Where is the traditional "Wanted: Dead or Alive" mentality that always rises up in 2nd Amendment supporters when there's a chance to stop a crime that might have only been a robbery of a fast food store or a corner convenience mart? Or is it just that Obama ordered the hit in this sub-human and you don't want to admit that he was right?
How's the stylus on your MBA working for you? I hear most stylus and screen input tends to be, um, unresponsive.
Wait, Apple's come with a perpetual Office subscription and Adobe's CC application? Damn, that is a good deal. Unless, of course, you mean Apple's free knock-offs of Office and Adobe's photo group, in which case the only advantage is that they're bundled instead of having to download one of the half-dozen free alternatives available for Windows.
If you think the controls on Metro are unintuitive, you're a certified idiot. It took me no longer to learn all of the swipe gestures and charm bar actions than it took to learn the iOS gestures. Win8 is easier than iOS for anyone with even half a brain. iOS seems determined to add gestures to every version and then completely ignore any information on how to use them. Half the functions seem to be "discovered" by autistic hipsters living on daddy's monthly trust fund check.
I know rice krispies exist, and I may like them okay. But if all I see are frosted flakes and lucky charms, I might forget about my beloved rice krispies. If they're not in front of my eyes when I make a shopping list, I might just replace that box of frosted flakes that's getting low.
More to the point, if I'm looking for a new car -even just thinking about it (or dreaming about it), I might click on an ad for a car I might not normally chose just to see some pretty pictures and feel-good video about how happy people are in their new Foo SUV. And it may not make a difference to me, but it might if I happen to remember that beautiful couple that looks just l like what I want my GF and I too look like in a cool new vehicle with people complimenting us on our taste in fine automobiles, and it's a coin toss between that car and some other car I didn't see beautiful people fawning over in an ad that I've forgotten about but is still in my subconscious.
Because then it's not a decision, it's just a feeling that I like Foo SUVs over everything else 'cause they just feel happier. Yeah. I just like them better. There was never any advertising that influenced me. Sure I saw the ad, but it didn't really make a difference, I just like this one better. And advertising played no role at all, and the money that company spent was clearly wasted because I would have bought that car anyway.
What everyone else gets - money. He/they need funding to continue their lifestyle^wresearch. From wikipedia:
"Due to budget cuts, NOAA ceased funding Aquarius after September 2012, with no further missions scheduled after a July 2012 mission that included pioneering female diver Sylvia Earle in its aquanaut crew. The University of North Carolina Wilmington was also unable to provide funding to continue operations. The Aquarius Foundation was set up in an attempt to keep Aquarius functioning."
Foundations don't run on cool research, they run on dollars. Dollars requires interest, and interest comes from PR/marketing. Hence the stunt.
Now we know why the record attempt would be such a feat of mental fortitude.
It's a proper name, not the noun or an acronym. At least, that's what I could gather. Usually a mission is named via acronym (Synchronous Wideband Analysis for Research of Magnetism, or some such), or occasionally after a famous administrator (James Webb Space Telescope, named after the 2nd NASA Administrator) or the (rarely) a famous principal scientist. This seems to be none of those, or at least I couldn't find a reference on the ESA pages. Damned Europeans. They're mocking us with their "no rules" satellite naming conventions.
Truly skilled trades are still in demand, and make what I consider to be "middle class" - i.e. better than the average wage earner. Here's the thing, though - if you're a tool, just doing a rote job, you will not be paid particularly well in the grand scheme of things. Someone who finds and gathers the work for you to do and houses you and invests the capital for your craft will take a larger cut than you will. Example: if you are a welder, you might make $20-25hr by putting on leathers and a helmet each morning and hanging it up when the day ends. If you run a shop - own the building and equipment, get jobs, parcel our work - you'll be billing that $25/hr welder at $80-100/hr. That's no different than an engineer who makes $30-40/hr by showing up in an office vs the firm that bills clients at $125-$150/hour. Or even a fast food worker making $10/hr, but is priced into the cost of a burger at $50/hr.
There are two problems. Middle class, if you believe the standard of living on TV shows and commercials, is closer to the 90-95th percentile earner, not the 50th. That's going to be a problem if you want to be a top 10% or top 5% earner to consider yourself "middle class." And if you want a job where you will never get dirty, or shower *after* a hard day at work, you're going to be very disappointed by going into the trades. Learning a trade and owning your own tools IS a way to hit that 80-90 percentile income, but it means getting dirty for a living and that's not a 95th+ percentile value, and you have to be willing to drive yourself to be the boss - even if it's a one-person operation - and own your equipment and provide your services. Being a cog in a machine that someone else owns does not make you the 10%er that people consider "middle class" these days. (BTW 90th percentile is $65,000/yr for a single person, and is not far from the bottom of most of the "owner" tradespeople who run their own shop/own their own equipment)
I expect them to be as fully reliable as the Russian space program.
The idea is that we reduce carbon emissions to slow the rate of the effects on climate. They're not trying to pick winners and losers; why would you try and make winners and losers out of this?
All of the non-coal fuels each have their own challenges, and this rule doesn't alter that. It's like free market, but with the addition that the cost of altering the climate is factored into regulation because a commodity-priced market is unable to react to a result with a 100 year return period.
You still can't find anybody willing and able to properly store spent nuclear fuel, nor someone looking to invest billions of dollars and a decade of zero income in an industry which has a low-growth potential.
Well, the whole discussion centered around is a ratio (doubling, a 100% increase). If you want to compare the veracity, you should use similar scales. 17-22 years means nothing unless you put it into the same context.
Letting us know that the boys are now insulated is no big deal, but the description of the ear and back hair was particularly disgusting.
The goal isn't to burn this oil as tribute flames to our inventive manliness. It would replace an equivalent carbon portion of the fuel already burned, so there's no net increase in carbon, just that we would need to pull less out oil of the ground and put less plastic back in. (Okay, that's not quite what happens, oil just gets cheaper if you increase the supply so there is some net increase above the magical unicorn world where everything else stayed the same we would use less oil, but it's not as bad as burning most of the oil *and* burying a bunch of plastic)
If your goal was to turn oil into oil, then yes it's inefficient.
If your goal is to turn a waste product into oil, you need only be net efficient on the collection, conversion, and subsequent waste disposal. If it takes $0.80 of investment (collection, processing, distribution, waste cleanup) to produce a $1.00 worth of marketable product, then you've got a commercial venture. If it costs you up to $1.05 to do it, then you have a government contract possibility as you might be able to charge $0.20-$0.25 to municipalities to take their semi-recyclable plastics rather than landfill them.
It's not meant to be an energy source, per se, but a way to reuse plastics which would otherwise be landfilled.
Yeah, don't think so. I suggest this chart: http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/...
The age of mortality for non-infants (those living past age 10) has increased by 20-25 years, a 50% increase in life expectancy, in the past century. Even if you look at "adults", or those who make it to age 20, there is still a 17-23 year increase. Again, a 50% increase in longevity for adults.
I don't know - I think I might prefer to pay the energy penalty for the (now defunct) Aptera two seater and avoid the whole gyro thing.
The heavier the vehicle, (generally) the more wear on the road. The heavier the vehicle (generally), the lower MPG and the more gallons purchased. It's about as close to a proportional use tax as you can get without calculating tire size and pressure, weight, tread style, frontal area, coefficient of drag, and driving style, and total miles driven to come up with a more "accurate" number for wear.
That's not a tax, that's market fluctuations. Those costs go straight into corporate coffers and do nothing for the infrastructure.
Be careful what you wish for. To make up for lost gas tax revenue, the Virginia GOP led legislature passed a tax on hybrids (which was repealed when the Dems took back over last year).
The average commute is greater than 5 miles, and less than 5% of the population is served by public transit. Unless you expect to have the avergage person spending 4 or more hours a day walking to and from work, and plan on upgrading the sidewalk infrastructure, I don't think this is viable.
Don't make too much noise, or you could end up with what we had in Virginia under the GOP - a Hybrid/electric vehicle tax to "cover road costs" of several hundred dollars per year.
Why would you do that? There're the primary source of targeting data for the 700 Billion we spend every year on the military. It would be like buying a brand new GPS and then not loading it with any maps to save money.
Simpler version: put the data in the safety deposit box.
No need for linux, or command lines, or encryption, or anything else. The only advantage to the encrypted file is that you don't have to get off your ass to make changes (i.e. put the updated data in the SDB).
Because, let's face it, as soon as the SDB is compromised, your entire security system is compromised. It's just a matter of time and computational effort at that point. And the risk is that the person who needs the information will not be able to access your information due to an error, or simple inability to work the technology. Anyone who is "after" your precious data will have the wherewithal to decode your stuff, but Aunt Matilda or cousin Jeb may end up just stuck.