Every time I hurt, my wife suggests I go to a chiropractor. But I don't -- because I don't know who I can trust. How do I know it's not some quack? How do you find that "really skilled person" and know you have one of those "very specific problems in the back?"
For me it was a case of some good personal recommendations. I found people were travelling hundreds of miles to see this particular guy and although he was a bit expensive in the end in my desperation I gave it a go. It is a problem though...how to find someone who is not a total quack.
They are. A massage therapist could helped you more and with less hocus-pocus.
I had a bad back problem a few years ago after doing martial arts. The regular doctor told me I would never be able to do sports again, gave me some drugs for the pain and I was given some massage session. One year later, I was still in pain. Although it did come and go but at the worst points I couldn't do simple things like lift the kids into the car or push a shopping trolley. I used to take pain killers and tried various different massage techniques.
I went to two chiros. The first was bogus. He pulled and pushed me around and I didn't feel any better afterwards. A few months later I went to a second one at had a greatly different experience. He was very methodical and explained exactly what he was doing and where the problems in my body where. Many clicks later and a few sesssions later I felt much better. I could stand straight again with ease - no pulling pain sensation like before.
Now it has been a good few years and I have no back problems anymore. I even play sport again normally.
My conclusion was that there are a lot of bogus people out their practising these types of techniques but perhaps with a really skilled person and with very specific problems in the back, their techniques really can help.
To extend the question a bit....I want to develop an application to encrypt and authenticate calls via an external PKI system. Do any of these phones have APIs suitable for accessing the voice stream?
OpenMoko seems the only obvious choice.
With ethanol being produced in such large quantities, such as in Brazil, I don't understand how this is subject to debate.
The debate being that working on a Sugar plantation producing ethanol, like where I am working, we can produce Ethanol with a positive ERORI.....BUT, there is so much of the infrastructure, resources, supply chain and distribution network that still relies on fossil fuels that the whole measurement of the EROEI is a bit misleading. Yes, we have a positive ERORI while we have fossil fuels to support it but it is unclear what would be the situation in a post carbon world. With present technology it seems that bio-fuel production would not have a positive ERORI without fossil fuel support.
Well that sounds like a nice project, but still far from a 'zero' claim due to the supply chain issue. All this says is that the first level of the supply chain e.g. he panel factory uses a renewable source. However, at the end of the day the supply chain is still heavily relying on fossil fuels for agricutural equipment, distrubition, raw material extraction and other equipments and proceses.
Anyway my point is not to be argumentative about the definition of 'zero' but rather to highlight that even with the most promising renewable sources we are still stuck relying on a supply chain and distrubution network that relies on fossil fuels. So the idea of a transistion to a complete reweable structure is a bit of a pipe dream at the moment and it is unclear weather with exisitng technology it can be carried out at mass scale with a positive EROEI.
In Germany there are several different projects and ways found to build a 'zero emission' house.
I don't think that it is fair to say there is such thing as a 'zero emission' house. Most of the equipment used in such houses such as turbines, solar panels etc are all built in factories and from materials extracted and manufacturered from processes that are using fossil fuels.
In fact, most of the green fuels we have today are in fact products of fossil fuel because their supply chains rely on fossil fuels. For example, Brazil has successful ethanol production where the ethanol is produced from sugar with a positive energey returned on energy invested (EROEI) ratio. However, the claims on the EROEI forget to mention that the distribution vechicles and agricutural vechicles used to produce the ethanol are using fossil fuels. If they were not the EROEI would be considerably lower and perhaps even negative.
This might work in some places where there is a large difference in temperature from day to night. Where I am living on the edge of the Saharah desert we have hot temperatures all year around but the temperature does drop considerably at night. However, the places like this that have such differences generally need the electricity during the day for cooling rather than at night for heating. So the system would need a good way of storing the energy for day time use and I am not sure of the best way of doing that.
What ever problems there are in Darfur - they are not religious. In fact, the problems are to do with nomadic tribes taking their livestock onto lands which are owned by non-nomadic farming tribes. The conflict has been going on for generations - with both sides claiming right to the land. Both sides are Muslim so there it has nothing to do with religion or religious freedom. The situation is also greatly exagerated by the West for political purpose (mainly oil, gold and uranium which are all present in Darfur). I am not saying there is not a problem - just that living here and knowing many people from Darfur - the problem isn't the one portrayed in the West and is defintely nothing to do with religion as you claim.
In fact, if you visit Sudan you will see there are many churches with a large Christian popuplation. There is also generally repect amongst the Muslim and Christian communities - especially in Khartoum. There are a number of Christians working in our company and many have attested their peaceful co-existance with Muslims to me.
Considering the US and the UK are the countries trying to shove their lifestyle, through a barrel of a gun, down the throats of the rest of the world....it is interesting that so many people feel they need to leave. Why is that? It seems to me that if the US and the UK have so many problems then perhaps they should fix their problems first before forcing others to follow their way.
I come from a different angle....perhaps not many here would understand where I am coming from....but here goes. I am a British Muslim. I left the UK after being fed up of being hassled because apparently being a Muslim working in IT Security fits a particular profile. After being hassled a few times by the police including being held for 3 days (without charge) for questioning and being scared who I talk to when I go to the Mosque (you don't know who is a gov. agent spying on you). I decided that I should move to a country where I can pratice my religion freely without being harrassed. I now live in Sudan, which I know is not everyones cup of tea, but I can now go to the Mosque every day, study my religion etc. without being harrassed. I still work in IT security without special branch bursting into my office and making me out to be a terrorist in front of my co-workers.
My advise to Muslims living in the West is to get out. Go and live in a country where you can pratice your religion and don't fall for the false "freedom" that is put forward by Western propaganda. Out of my fellow Muslims collegues from my time at University in London..... I think now over half have left the UK due to similar reasons to me. That should say something about the false freedoms of the West.
Unfortunately the dumber you are the more kids you have, all the dumb people I know have multiple kids, all the smart successful ones have none.
Surely it depends on your definition of success and not everyone works towards the same goals in life. If sucess is having a big house, international holidays and a fast car....then you might want to forget about the kids. However, for me success is having a happy family. I much prefer to spend days playing with my children than staying in some luxury resort. So in that way when I have children I am successful as I am achieving my goals.
I have a friend who has 12 children in the UK. It seems extreme but I have never seen a family who are as happy, polite, well mannered and as educated. I don't think it is true that the dumber you are the more kids you have. The parents of these children are like walking encyclopedias and have knowledge of so many things in life. They are also generous and peaceful. I would say they have been successful in life. But the father drives a mini-bus rather than a sports car (he has to with 12 kids).
If what it takes to be "responsible" or "mature" is starvation, child labour, and so on then please, sign me up for immaturity. I would also point out that in that "mature" environment we have more crimes against humanity than, well, proably anywhere in the modern world. Ethnic clensing, tribal warfare, brutal torture, etc. Seems that perhaps having the weight of the world thrust on your shoulders as a kid and haivng to mature fast is perhaps not the best method for a stable and successful future.
I think you are missing my point. It is not about the poverty but about the responsiblity. Socially here people have to be responsible from a young age but in the West they don't. Also, it is unfair to paint all of Africa with one brush. Africa is a massive place and has diverse cultures. To think that it is all "Ethnic clensing, tribal warfare and brutal tortue" shows a complete lack of understanding of what Africa is like. Sure these things do exist in Africa but not everywhere. They also exist in all other parts of the world. Some of the worst Ethnic cleansing the world has seen has been in Europe. Also horrific tortue is carried out in many parts of the world (including by the US) and is not something particular to Africa or even the norm. in Africa.
The point though is taking responsiblity. Having to be responsible for yourself and other makes you more mature at a younger age. It might not always be a good thing but it is a factor.
If you look at the rate of war, murder, and general chaos, you'll find that those regions of the world where children are not allowed to mature before being forced to act like adults are far worse off than places like the west. While I won't argue that western children are "spoiled" far more often than their african counterparts -- I think I'd rather my children be spoiled than broken.
I don't think that is true - at least not universally. Where I am there is obious poverty and hardship wherever you look however the city is thousdands of times safer than most Western cities. Crime is very low here (virtually unheard of) and most of the crime that might happen is very small petty theft.
It is of course true that hardship can lead to desperation and desperation could lead to violence. So if you point is Africa is more violent than Western Europe then that might be true. However, there are other factors involved rather than just poverty and hardship. However, I would hardly say the US is a non-violent nation it is just the type of fighting undertaken by the US is usually more distant. Long range missles rather than street to street. The visual impact is therefore different and people mistakenly think that dropping cruise missles is somehow more humane.
However, my point is not directly about hardship but about responsibility. People here (in Africa) generally have to act responsible from a young age where socially they are required to look after themselves and their families from a younger age. In the West the children are generally spoilt and don't even have to look after themselves.
Also, I am not saying that one way is better than the other. I think childhood is great time and it is a shame that many children here in Africa miss out on being children. I am just highlighting what might be a potential cause of the alleged increase in immaturity.
I think part of the problem might be that people are not forced to grow up and take responsibility at such a young age as they were before. I am now living in Africa but comparing my experiences to when I was living in the West I see this every day. Many children here have to take serious responsibilities in life from a young age. Perhaps they have to look after whole families or simply go out and find food every day for themselves. Regardless, when speaking to some of the young people you find that they are relatively mature.
Perhaps in the West people are too protected and hence don't need to grow up. Many people by the age of 18 have never gone to bed with hunger pains. They have probably never had a real job. They are probably given an allowance from their parents that they can go and waste on useless luxuries. The kids in the West are pampered and spoilt. No wonder there is a trend towards immaturity.
That is not quite correct. Allah is the Arabic proper name of God. Illah is the Arabic word for god. Hence there could be many false gods (illah) but Allah is the one and only true god. The Arabic speaking Christains and Jews also use the word Allah and it is used in Arabic translations of the bible. The Arabic speaking Christians make the same distinction between Allah being the name and illah referring to god's in general.
Sure, I am not saying it will happen overnight. What I am saying is that if governments don't act quickly it is going to make it more and more difficult to adjust as the whole new infrastructure is going to cost bucks and the higher the oil price the higher the cost of moving from oil.
It is quite realistic to think that within 5 years the oil price could be $300 a barrel and may be with in 10 years a lot more than that. We need to move now otherwise the road ahead will be very bumpy.
Also, you are right in the last 10 years oil hasn't been scare. Hence the low oil prices. However, things are about to change rapidly and we are already seeing the beginning of it. There are a couple of new major oil projects coming online this year and I think one or two next year but after that there are no more. Yet many of the major oil fields in the world are in permenant decline. From now on any relatively small gains in production are going to be less then the loss from other fields. So the net effect is less oil and therefore less energy. All this at a time when China and India have deman soaring.
The economists would like us to think of this in terms ore normal economics. But this is not a normal demand/supply curve senario. Why? Because the term "oil production" is a falacy. We don't produce oil - we extract it from finite deposits in the earth. Once they are running out no amount of money is going to make them come back.
The faster we use up all of the economically obtainable oil, the sooner people can stop whining about using it all up and the sooner we can get on with whatever is next.
The trouble is it doesn't work like that and the sooner people reaslise the better. Moving to any new system first of all takes years but secondly takes energy. For example, how many cars and gas stations in the US? How long would it take to convert all of those so that they can fuel hydrogen cars and to change all the gas stations to be hydrogen ready? What about the new facilities for producing the hydrogen and transporting it to the gas station?
Obviously this all take time and energy yet these are the two things we don't have. If we really have crossed the peak we can expect to see energy prices start rising dramatically. The existing oil, which will be there for some time, will cost more and more to extract. It will also eventually take more energy to extract than is gained from it as a fuel, thus no longer making it a fuel source even though there is oil left in the ground.
Cars are just the start of the problem. There is also electricity generation, fertilisers, plastics and many other products that are hydrocarbon based products. These also have the same problems of high energy and financial costs for moving to a new system.
What is really needed is urgent action and a cut back on life style. This may be a hard decision go make (and not something that will make politicians popular) but if we don't do it. Nature might just force a change in life style upon us.
I don't think that that is the case. I am living here in East Africa and travel to many different cities within East Africa and I can tell you that it simply isn't in the culture. I am not saying it dosen't happen but it is not commonly heard of. I think also largely deaths here are recorded.
Comparing that to when I lived in Europe. There I knew of several people who had committed suicide and loads more who had attempted suicide. In my University it was an annual occurence for a couple of people to commit suicide.
I think perhaps there is less social pressure on people in Africa. Life here is simple and please are pleased and satisfied with simple things.
If you want reliability for the disk you had better check what the manufacturer claims for the MTBF (mean time between failure).
Many SATA drivers have a MTBF of around 0.6 to 1 where as SCSI have between 1 and 2. Your SCSI disk therefore has about twice the life expectancy. If you couple this with the speed of the SCSI I guess for the moment if your budget allows for it then go for SCSI
If your budget doesn't allow for it...just make sure you have good redundancy in your RAID with at least 2 redundant disks
China's Internet policy is not directly related to having democray. A democratic governement could choose to filter and a non-democratic governement could be totally unfiltered. The problem in China is freedom of speech and freedom of expression. That is what they need more than democracy. And anyway, democracy is not proven to work in all places in the world. Freedom should be universal.
The first half of this quote concerns pallets in a warehouse, something with no conceivable privacy implications of any kind. The second half of this quite asks how anyone could approve of this given its "obvious privacy flaws".
Uhhhhhhh... right.
I agree with your point. The biggest use of RFID for supply chain management is not going to have any privacy concerns for the general population. The company I am working for are using planning to use it to track the 1 million sacks of produce we manufacturer each year. We have something like 25 distribution points around the country and it would be very useful to be able to track every single sack and know exactly where it came from and which factury batch just by a using a scanner. At the moment it is very hard to track every single sack and its whole history. This will not affect consumers though as they are not buying our product by the sack load.
Slashdot Mirror
"Free"...Damn,.... I am going to have to change my neighbours w/lan password again otherwise everyone will be uisng it.
I think they confused it here because the top line here mentions Stallman and Emacs where 'free' means freedom.
Yeah, it is not the paper - it the machines - like printers!
Every time I hurt, my wife suggests I go to a chiropractor. But I don't -- because I don't know who I can trust. How do I know it's not some quack? How do you find that "really skilled person" and know you have one of those "very specific problems in the back?"
For me it was a case of some good personal recommendations. I found people were travelling hundreds of miles to see this particular guy and although he was a bit expensive in the end in my desperation I gave it a go. It is a problem though...how to find someone who is not a total quack.
> So yeah, I used to think they're bogus.
They are. A massage therapist could helped you more and with less hocus-pocus.
I had a bad back problem a few years ago after doing martial arts. The regular doctor told me I would never be able to do sports again, gave me some drugs for the pain and I was given some massage session. One year later, I was still in pain. Although it did come and go but at the worst points I couldn't do simple things like lift the kids into the car or push a shopping trolley. I used to take pain killers and tried various different massage techniques.
I went to two chiros. The first was bogus. He pulled and pushed me around and I didn't feel any better afterwards. A few months later I went to a second one at had a greatly different experience. He was very methodical and explained exactly what he was doing and where the problems in my body where. Many clicks later and a few sesssions later I felt much better. I could stand straight again with ease - no pulling pain sensation like before.
Now it has been a good few years and I have no back problems anymore. I even play sport again normally.
My conclusion was that there are a lot of bogus people out their practising these types of techniques but perhaps with a really skilled person and with very specific problems in the back, their techniques really can help.
To extend the question a bit....I want to develop an application to encrypt and authenticate calls via an external PKI system. Do any of these phones have APIs suitable for accessing the voice stream? OpenMoko seems the only obvious choice.
With ethanol being produced in such large quantities, such as in Brazil, I don't understand how this is subject to debate.
The debate being that working on a Sugar plantation producing ethanol, like where I am working, we can produce Ethanol with a positive ERORI.....BUT, there is so much of the infrastructure, resources, supply chain and distribution network that still relies on fossil fuels that the whole measurement of the EROEI is a bit misleading. Yes, we have a positive ERORI while we have fossil fuels to support it but it is unclear what would be the situation in a post carbon world. With present technology it seems that bio-fuel production would not have a positive ERORI without fossil fuel support.
Well that sounds like a nice project, but still far from a 'zero' claim due to the supply chain issue. All this says is that the first level of the supply chain e.g. he panel factory uses a renewable source. However, at the end of the day the supply chain is still heavily relying on fossil fuels for agricutural equipment, distrubition, raw material extraction and other equipments and proceses.
Anyway my point is not to be argumentative about the definition of 'zero' but rather to highlight that even with the most promising renewable sources we are still stuck relying on a supply chain and distrubution network that relies on fossil fuels. So the idea of a transistion to a complete reweable structure is a bit of a pipe dream at the moment and it is unclear weather with exisitng technology it can be carried out at mass scale with a positive EROEI.
In Germany there are several different projects and ways found to build a 'zero emission' house.
I don't think that it is fair to say there is such thing as a 'zero emission' house. Most of the equipment used in such houses such as turbines, solar panels etc are all built in factories and from materials extracted and manufacturered from processes that are using fossil fuels.
In fact, most of the green fuels we have today are in fact products of fossil fuel because their supply chains rely on fossil fuels. For example, Brazil has successful ethanol production where the ethanol is produced from sugar with a positive energey returned on energy invested (EROEI) ratio. However, the claims on the EROEI forget to mention that the distribution vechicles and agricutural vechicles used to produce the ethanol are using fossil fuels. If they were not the EROEI would be considerably lower and perhaps even negative.
This might work in some places where there is a large difference in temperature from day to night. Where I am living on the edge of the Saharah desert we have hot temperatures all year around but the temperature does drop considerably at night. However, the places like this that have such differences generally need the electricity during the day for cooling rather than at night for heating. So the system would need a good way of storing the energy for day time use and I am not sure of the best way of doing that.
What ever problems there are in Darfur - they are not religious. In fact, the problems are to do with nomadic tribes taking their livestock onto lands which are owned by non-nomadic farming tribes. The conflict has been going on for generations - with both sides claiming right to the land. Both sides are Muslim so there it has nothing to do with religion or religious freedom. The situation is also greatly exagerated by the West for political purpose (mainly oil, gold and uranium which are all present in Darfur). I am not saying there is not a problem - just that living here and knowing many people from Darfur - the problem isn't the one portrayed in the West and is defintely nothing to do with religion as you claim.
In fact, if you visit Sudan you will see there are many churches with a large Christian popuplation. There is also generally repect amongst the Muslim and Christian communities - especially in Khartoum. There are a number of Christians working in our company and many have attested their peaceful co-existance with Muslims to me.
Considering the US and the UK are the countries trying to shove their lifestyle, through a barrel of a gun, down the throats of the rest of the world....it is interesting that so many people feel they need to leave. Why is that? It seems to me that if the US and the UK have so many problems then perhaps they should fix their problems first before forcing others to follow their way.
I come from a different angle....perhaps not many here would understand where I am coming from....but here goes. I am a British Muslim. I left the UK after being fed up of being hassled because apparently being a Muslim working in IT Security fits a particular profile. After being hassled a few times by the police including being held for 3 days (without charge) for questioning and being scared who I talk to when I go to the Mosque (you don't know who is a gov. agent spying on you). I decided that I should move to a country where I can pratice my religion freely without being harrassed. I now live in Sudan, which I know is not everyones cup of tea, but I can now go to the Mosque every day, study my religion etc. without being harrassed. I still work in IT security without special branch bursting into my office and making me out to be a terrorist in front of my co-workers.
My advise to Muslims living in the West is to get out. Go and live in a country where you can pratice your religion and don't fall for the false "freedom" that is put forward by Western propaganda. Out of my fellow Muslims collegues from my time at University in London..... I think now over half have left the UK due to similar reasons to me. That should say something about the false freedoms of the West.
Free as in speech...not beer.
Unfortunately the dumber you are the more kids you have, all the dumb people I know have multiple kids, all the smart successful ones have none.
Surely it depends on your definition of success and not everyone works towards the same goals in life. If sucess is having a big house, international holidays and a fast car....then you might want to forget about the kids. However, for me success is having a happy family. I much prefer to spend days playing with my children than staying in some luxury resort. So in that way when I have children I am successful as I am achieving my goals.
I have a friend who has 12 children in the UK. It seems extreme but I have never seen a family who are as happy, polite, well mannered and as educated. I don't think it is true that the dumber you are the more kids you have. The parents of these children are like walking encyclopedias and have knowledge of so many things in life. They are also generous and peaceful. I would say they have been successful in life. But the father drives a mini-bus rather than a sports car (he has to with 12 kids).
If what it takes to be "responsible" or "mature" is starvation, child labour, and so on then please, sign me up for immaturity. I would also point out that in that "mature" environment we have more crimes against humanity than, well, proably anywhere in the modern world. Ethnic clensing, tribal warfare, brutal torture, etc. Seems that perhaps having the weight of the world thrust on your shoulders as a kid and haivng to mature fast is perhaps not the best method for a stable and successful future.
I think you are missing my point. It is not about the poverty but about the responsiblity. Socially here people have to be responsible from a young age but in the West they don't. Also, it is unfair to paint all of Africa with one brush. Africa is a massive place and has diverse cultures. To think that it is all "Ethnic clensing, tribal warfare and brutal tortue" shows a complete lack of understanding of what Africa is like. Sure these things do exist in Africa but not everywhere. They also exist in all other parts of the world. Some of the worst Ethnic cleansing the world has seen has been in Europe. Also horrific tortue is carried out in many parts of the world (including by the US) and is not something particular to Africa or even the norm. in Africa.
The point though is taking responsiblity. Having to be responsible for yourself and other makes you more mature at a younger age. It might not always be a good thing but it is a factor.
If you look at the rate of war, murder, and general chaos, you'll find that those regions of the world where children are not allowed to mature before being forced to act like adults are far worse off than places like the west. While I won't argue that western children are "spoiled" far more often than their african counterparts -- I think I'd rather my children be spoiled than broken.
I don't think that is true - at least not universally. Where I am there is obious poverty and hardship wherever you look however the city is thousdands of times safer than most Western cities. Crime is very low here (virtually unheard of) and most of the crime that might happen is very small petty theft.
It is of course true that hardship can lead to desperation and desperation could lead to violence. So if you point is Africa is more violent than Western Europe then that might be true. However, there are other factors involved rather than just poverty and hardship. However, I would hardly say the US is a non-violent nation it is just the type of fighting undertaken by the US is usually more distant. Long range missles rather than street to street. The visual impact is therefore different and people mistakenly think that dropping cruise missles is somehow more humane.
However, my point is not directly about hardship but about responsibility. People here (in Africa) generally have to act responsible from a young age where socially they are required to look after themselves and their families from a younger age. In the West the children are generally spoilt and don't even have to look after themselves.
Also, I am not saying that one way is better than the other. I think childhood is great time and it is a shame that many children here in Africa miss out on being children. I am just highlighting what might be a potential cause of the alleged increase in immaturity.
I think part of the problem might be that people are not forced to grow up and take responsibility at such a young age as they were before. I am now living in Africa but comparing my experiences to when I was living in the West I see this every day. Many children here have to take serious responsibilities in life from a young age. Perhaps they have to look after whole families or simply go out and find food every day for themselves. Regardless, when speaking to some of the young people you find that they are relatively mature.
Perhaps in the West people are too protected and hence don't need to grow up. Many people by the age of 18 have never gone to bed with hunger pains. They have probably never had a real job. They are probably given an allowance from their parents that they can go and waste on useless luxuries. The kids in the West are pampered and spoilt. No wonder there is a trend towards immaturity.
Allah is just the Arabic word for God.
That is not quite correct. Allah is the Arabic proper name of God. Illah is the Arabic word for god. Hence there could be many false gods (illah) but Allah is the one and only true god. The Arabic speaking Christains and Jews also use the word Allah and it is used in Arabic translations of the bible. The Arabic speaking Christians make the same distinction between Allah being the name and illah referring to god's in general.
That's the difference between us and them. In our society, we can protest all we want, but in the end we're still civilized about it.
There is a big difference between protest and critique and being abusive. Islam invites critique and honest open debate. Abuse is another matter.
Sure, I am not saying it will happen overnight. What I am saying is that if governments don't act quickly it is going to make it more and more difficult to adjust as the whole new infrastructure is going to cost bucks and the higher the oil price the higher the cost of moving from oil.
It is quite realistic to think that within 5 years the oil price could be $300 a barrel and may be with in 10 years a lot more than that. We need to move now otherwise the road ahead will be very bumpy.
Also, you are right in the last 10 years oil hasn't been scare. Hence the low oil prices. However, things are about to change rapidly and we are already seeing the beginning of it. There are a couple of new major oil projects coming online this year and I think one or two next year but after that there are no more. Yet many of the major oil fields in the world are in permenant decline. From now on any relatively small gains in production are going to be less then the loss from other fields. So the net effect is less oil and therefore less energy. All this at a time when China and India have deman soaring.
The economists would like us to think of this in terms ore normal economics. But this is not a normal demand/supply curve senario. Why? Because the term "oil production" is a falacy. We don't produce oil - we extract it from finite deposits in the earth. Once they are running out no amount of money is going to make them come back.
The faster we use up all of the economically obtainable oil, the sooner people can stop whining about using it all up and the sooner we can get on with whatever is next.
The trouble is it doesn't work like that and the sooner people reaslise the better. Moving to any new system first of all takes years but secondly takes energy. For example, how many cars and gas stations in the US? How long would it take to convert all of those so that they can fuel hydrogen cars and to change all the gas stations to be hydrogen ready? What about the new facilities for producing the hydrogen and transporting it to the gas station?
Obviously this all take time and energy yet these are the two things we don't have. If we really have crossed the peak we can expect to see energy prices start rising dramatically. The existing oil, which will be there for some time, will cost more and more to extract. It will also eventually take more energy to extract than is gained from it as a fuel, thus no longer making it a fuel source even though there is oil left in the ground.
Cars are just the start of the problem. There is also electricity generation, fertilisers, plastics and many other products that are hydrocarbon based products. These also have the same problems of high energy and financial costs for moving to a new system.
What is really needed is urgent action and a cut back on life style. This may be a hard decision go make (and not something that will make politicians popular) but if we don't do it. Nature might just force a change in life style upon us.
I don't think that that is the case. I am living here in East Africa and travel to many different cities within East Africa and I can tell you that it simply isn't in the culture. I am not saying it dosen't happen but it is not commonly heard of. I think also largely deaths here are recorded.
Comparing that to when I lived in Europe. There I knew of several people who had committed suicide and loads more who had attempted suicide. In my University it was an annual occurence for a couple of people to commit suicide.
I think perhaps there is less social pressure on people in Africa. Life here is simple and please are pleased and satisfied with simple things.
If you want reliability for the disk you had better check what the manufacturer claims for the MTBF (mean time between failure).
Many SATA drivers have a MTBF of around 0.6 to 1 where as SCSI have between 1 and 2. Your SCSI disk therefore has about twice the life expectancy. If you couple this with the speed of the SCSI I guess for the moment if your budget allows for it then go for SCSI
If your budget doesn't allow for it...just make sure you have good redundancy in your RAID with at least 2 redundant disks
China's Internet policy is not directly related to having democray. A democratic governement could choose to filter and a non-democratic governement could be totally unfiltered. The problem in China is freedom of speech and freedom of expression. That is what they need more than democracy. And anyway, democracy is not proven to work in all places in the world. Freedom should be universal.
The first half of this quote concerns pallets in a warehouse, something with no conceivable privacy implications of any kind. The second half of this quite asks how anyone could approve of this given its "obvious privacy flaws".
Uhhhhhhh... right.
I agree with your point. The biggest use of RFID for supply chain management is not going to have any privacy concerns for the general population. The company I am working for are using planning to use it to track the 1 million sacks of produce we manufacturer each year. We have something like 25 distribution points around the country and it would be very useful to be able to track every single sack and know exactly where it came from and which factury batch just by a using a scanner. At the moment it is very hard to track every single sack and its whole history. This will not affect consumers though as they are not buying our product by the sack load.