...how about increasing NASA's budget so it can make the ISS successful and also go to the moon?
I'm sure Senator Glenn would be all in favor, unless it happened to impact whatever pork-barrel project he's supported. Perhaps the "John Glenn Great Lakes Basin" project can be cut in favor of NASA?
I'd love it if Senators really had blogs (instead of paid wonks to respond in their name on their forums). It might make our Democracy a little more responsive if the communication was TWO way.
I dunno. Maybe it is just an American vs European viewpoint thing, but I'd say someone who managed to understand the marketplace so well that they build a product that comes to dominate that market, and offer services that support only that device - well, that's a successful business person.
Yes, if Apple went to music distributors and said something like "distribute your songs exclusively over ipods or we'll ban you" that would be unreasonably using market dominance. But to claim that there's some unreasonable market behavior just because you make your products and services work with each other to the exclusion of others? That's just goofy.
It's a good call. It's the parent's responsibility to keep an eye on their kid, including their internet activity (even if that is inconvenient or time-consuming for the parent).
Suing Myspace is like suing the phone company - they're only the medium, ma'am.
What would be so great about an MMO Half-Life or whatever? As far as I know, the HL dedicated server already allows you to create a server with hundreds of players, but either the server can't handle the load, or people's connections aren't good enough to make everything appear smooth. In RPGs it doesn't matter if you're lagging a bit, but in an FPS, even a slight bit of lag can make the game unplayable. Internet technology isn't quite mature enough for a "real" twitch-skill MMOFPS.
You mean, like Battleground Europe (WW2 MMOFPS - 10k+ players simultaneously on a map 2x the size of Belgium)?
That game is 5 years old, by the way. Buggy release, but an outstanding game now. What they've found is that MMOFPS are extremely sensitive to skill level, moreso than click-to-attack MMORPGs. Hardcore players don't just get better gear (which allows them to accomplish more), hardcore players are MUCH better so much so that newer players have no chance - there are fewer ways to 'handicap' or 'balance' pvp in FPS games.
Yes, even though he claims there are some Republicans around the office, there's no doubt where his sympathies lay.
However, I'd hope that this isn't just a one-sided treatment. It sounds interesting, certainly more thoughtful than killing 1000 more ghosts/vampires/terrorists/bad guys of whatever sort.
His comment "'Wait, what if they are terrorists we helped create? What if the people supporting us in our fight against the terrorists aren't completely clean either? What if they're sending us after them now, but what if 10 years ago it was safe for them to create them?'... So what we have in 'BlackSite' is a delta-force assassination squad hunting down and killing members of an Army training program."
What one can't see - and what then allows the most ridiculous Monday-morning quarterbacking - what WOULD have happened, if that decision hadn't been made 10 years ago? That's what I'd like to see.
In real life, it's rarely 'good choices' vs 'bad choices' - that's the sort of Manichaean superficial crap that all games are built on. Sometimes it's bad choice vs worse choice, or bad choice now vs bad choice later. In their new game, the first time someone cries "why did they create this unit in the first place?" do you get a flashback of what life would have been like if they hadn't been created? It's conceivable that the unhappy current situation - BlackSite hunting down members of this Army-created team - is still the BEST possible outcome.
How about giving the player other moral/ethical dilemmas - they have to decide if they are going to shoot through a crowd of children to kill the insane guy with an automatic weapon approaching the playground? And then have it turn out that the guy has no more ammunition, so the local police, politicians, and newspeople can second guess the player until he dies?
Sadly, this is a case where perception defines reality.
I know of two kids who in the same week both got downgraded on papers because they referenced wikipedia as a source, with the comment (2 different teachers, same school) "Wikipedia is not considered a factual reference" and "Perhaps you should look for a more reliable source than Wikipedia".
These were not for deeply controversial facts. One referenced wiki as a source for the factual statement "Plants need CO2 to live", and the other referenced it for Bill Cosby's birthdate.
Personally, I think this is idiotic. Had the original instructions said not to use it, that's one thing. But to post facto condemn this as a source smacks of knee-jerk - the kind of knee-jerk dismissal that will kill Wiki in the end.
We all know Wiki's weaknesses, and perhaps schools would be better off in using that as a teachable moment regarding 'internet facts' in general. Have one kid write a paragraph about their school without signing their name. Then allow 30 others to edit it freely and anonymously over a week or more. With the class, review the evolution of the 'facts' presented.
Wiki is at its strongest as a very timely resource for general facts; it's best when those facts are footnoted or linked in a useful way to source material. To ignore it as a reference is simply Luddism. To recognize it and use it in context is where value can be found.
If online multiplayer weren't a 'big' thing, games companies would have stopped bothering to code for it long ago.
Is it MORE fun to play in the same room with someone, or against RL friends? Sure, in most cases. But the level of creativity, irrationality, and downright dogged malice you get having a human opponent(s) rather than an AI? No question whatsoever, the games play 100% differently and (usually) better.
I said (sarcastically): Scientists are the only ones who should be allowed to comment.
You said: your statement has *absolutely nothing to do* with what the GP stated.
The GP:So do you really expect anyone to believe that the handful of climate change deniers are more credible than all experts who find the evidence for global warming compelling?
I agree. Scientists are the only ones who should be allowed to comment. Because scientists are never wrong, never 'shade' their information to fit a conclusion, and never EVER have political biases themselves.
In customs law (IAACB - I *am* a customs broker) there is a concept called 'dumping', which is the illegally low pricing of goods. An example usually seen in the US is where Eastern European or Asian companies (which are heavily subsidised by the state) sell ball bearings into the US market at prices far below their cost of manufacture, or even the raw price of the steel included. In response to this, the US applies what are called anti-dumping duties against these specific manufacturers of 100%+ in order to bring the 'cost' of the goods in the US to a comparable level of the US market.
Of course, usually the laws are meant to protect the local market, but in this case creative application would put MS in a difficult spot.
So...if MS is selling Office for $2 in Thailand (and $200 in the USA), isn't that 'dumping'? Either it IS, and MS should see a duty rate applied by Thailand of 10000%, or the 'actual cost of manufacture' in the US is really somewhere around $1.50 and they're gouging US consumers.
People are still little more than hairless (or in Ron Jeremy's case, not-so-hairless) apes where it comes to their sexuality, feelings, etc.
There's a pretty bloody good reason that for centuries sailors considered women 'bad luck' aboard ship. When the crew is mostly men, the presence of a female is CORROSIVE if not explosive. Blah, blah, blah all you want about feminism, how it's unfair to women, 21st century...whatever. In fact, it's not the women, it's the men.
FWIW they are probably better off sending a crew of 100% women. AFAIK women can be downright catty and cruel to each other, but a closed population, kept in close quarters for years - I imagine women could tolerate it better than men, generally.
For that matter, how do nuclear missile submarine crews solve this issue - don't they go to sea for a year at a time? I presume they are co-ed crews in 2007?
To be honest I don't even see how this case went to trial. How can we claim to have freedom of speech if you can't even complain about somebody doing a poor job? If she had knowingly made a factually false claim, then I could see it.
Because that's where, in our system, we determine if her claim was factually valid. It was, so she won. I don't see what's so confusing here: court is where it should have gone and been resolved.
Was it relatively stupid for the doctor to even raise the issue? Yep, now he has MILLIONS of people paying attention where pretty much nobody was before. Idiot. If he knew (and I'm assuming he's not self-deluding enough to really dispute it in his heart of hearts) that indeed it was a crappy job, then his attempt to muzzle her was ill-advised, if not unethical.
But in our civil legal system, anyone can take anyone to court for anything; it's in the COURTROOM that is determined. Personally, I think that we'd be better off with a 'loser pays all' system to weed out the annoyance lawsuits like this one.
However, it might just be their frontpage that's hammered. You can get 'deeper' pages at http://www.dna-rainbow.org/chromosomes/X.html where X is the chromosome number (1-22) or x or y (lowercase).
Great advice! Let's see the places with non-Roman alphabets: Russia...Japan...China....various Middle-Eastern countries....Israel.
Wow, there are SO MANY places on that list where I would feel that my private and personal data is so much secure (particularly from government abuse) than here. LOL.
I see lots of posts about how this portends the US as a totalitarian police state.
Sorry, but that camel's nose is under the tent - you already let him in. You (the public) has begged and begged for a nanny state that watches over you and caters to your every whim. Got a problem with your neighbor? Let the courts decide. Your crop failed this year? Beg the government for disaster assistance. Hurricane wiped out your below-sea-level home? It *must* be the government's fault for not protecting/saving you, and then complain because the government handouts are insufficient or slow.
It goes back to the line from "A man for all seasons" - (IIRC) would you tear down the law to get at the devil? Of course? Then what will you hide behind when he comes back at you with his terrible power? If you demand the government keep you safe, employed, fed, housed, and happy, you're a hypocrite if you don't realize that logically this requires extensive surveillance. Kind of like the parent of a toddler.
Sorry, but we're getting exactly what we've spent at least the last 50 years begging for - government uber alles. Is it such a shock that the government (in order to protect us from stubbing our toe) wants to begin tracking where we are, what we do, and whom we do it with?
I'm a fairly adept power user of MS products; I have no issues with digging around in the guts of anything from WinXP back all the way to DOS (I just showed some young tech support guy that you could pipe a text file to LPT1 on the command line, LOL).
However, I have trepidations about linux. I've run the standalone (knoppix) linuxen and found them pretty nice. However, since 9/10 of my games are WinX based and my corporation would never condone switching to openoffice, I'm stuck generally with Win products.
Now I'm building a stepmania system however, and this is a perfect application for linux - I can use somewhat leftover hardware (a 500MHz system). So it's installing over the weekend (SUSE, based on someone's recommendation that it's reasonably trouble free). But I'm still anxious that the install of stepmania is going to be tedious, buggy, or elsewise troublesome. USB drivers for the dance pad? Video drivers? Will the sound be decent?
All of these things are unknowns, and coupled with the learning curve, I can see why Linux is still marginalized. But some of us unconverted are TRYING, anyway.
According to Greenpeace's 2006 Annual report, they spent 4.3 milliion Euros on their 'climate' campaign.
This is pure advocacy advertising money, by the way, unlike Exxon which actually has to sell a product.
How is it that (Company A) offering $10,000 for proof of one side of an issue is irredeemable evilness, but (Advocacy Group) spending $5.6 million is a justified righteous crusade?
3.The alternatives are hardly tenable at this point: a. Mass transport: Due to the size, shape, and demographic dispersion it is untenable for the majority of American metropolis'.
Never been to NYC, I guess. Millions of people every day use mass transit. A large percentage of city dwellers have no car. Every American metropolis has some mass trasport. As roads become too crowded they are forced to provide more mass transit for immediately practical purposes. Your argument is simply false.
Note sure if you noticed? MOST of the US isn't like NYC. Every American metro area has mass transport. Care to reveal how many of them are break-even or profitable, NOT INCLUDING the heavy subsidies? Your argument is short-sighted, ignorant of 95% of the REST of the country, and thus for pretty much everyone, worthless.
b. Buy everyone new electric cars. For one, manufacturing all those new cars just uses more energy and produces more emissions. So people proposing that are asinine at best.
Electric cars have less parts and are less complex. On a large scale and as technology progresses we will use far less energy to produce them. Your argument ignores progress over time.
Yeah, and fusion power is "only" 30 years away. Sounds like vaporware to me. Produce a better mousetrap (or in this case, electric car) and you won't be able to make them fast enough for the demand. See, capitalism's like that. Your argument ignores that people don't spend their dollars and make their choices TOMORROW, but today. "Hey, can I skip my house payment for the next few months since I bought an electric car? It's a little expensive, but eventually I should save enough to start paying again later...." - um, right.
c. Everyone should bike or walk to work. Sorry, American not as small nor as densely populated as you may believe. See 3a
See China. Not everyone needs to bike or walk, but easily half of the population can as they live in dense areas. You assume this argument is black and white. But if just the SUV drivers in metropolitan areas switched to bikes we'd have less traffic and save a lot of energy.
Again, utterly ignoring the fact that the US's population is NOT CHINA. I know it would be delightful if we could cram everyone into crappy little apartments so that everyone could use Segways or whatever. Hey, I hate to see the highways filled with SUVs with single passengers, that's idiotic. But as long as gas is cheaper than MILK, it's not really going to change.
d.Solar power: Great, spend a crapload of cash and maybe make your money back.
First, protecting the environment isn't about making your money back. It's about having a habitable planet for our kids. Second, you ignore technological progress over time. Every year solar is getting more efficient.
Wait, I thought protecting the environment was about reducing waste and using resources efficiently? PV solar panels cost more to make, create nasty waste by products, and fail after about 10-15 years, requiring replacement. How is that 'wise'?
e. Windmill farms: Even the Greenies are confused on this one. Build'em but can't run them at full capacity because they chop up birds.
You're way behind on this one. The largest, slowest moving turbines do not kill any birds. Problem solved.
...and windpower is NOT competitive on a free-market level with gas-fired power. Granted gas-plants get subsidies in other ways too, but you're missing his point anyway: the contradictions inherent in the "Green" umbrella positions. Simply put: the only way that we would fulfill the Green agenda to reduce resources, not harm the environment, use less power, waste less, etc is if there was a near-genocide of the human race, and the remainders ended up at some subsistence, stone-age existence. (A position certain environmentalists have been so incautious as to actually state.)
By your logic we shouldn't have telephones because it's a lot of work
However, if you're a small business owner that consents to an audit (because you do have licenses for everythin) and then finds out that merely having the original media, license, and certificate of authenticity is INSUFFICIENT and you have to essentially re-buy everything to comply? Would you agree that's somewhat burdensome and/or unfair?
Slashdot Mirror
...how about increasing NASA's budget so it can make the ISS successful and also go to the moon?
I'm sure Senator Glenn would be all in favor, unless it happened to impact whatever pork-barrel project he's supported. Perhaps the "John Glenn Great Lakes Basin" project can be cut in favor of NASA?
I'd love it if Senators really had blogs (instead of paid wonks to respond in their name on their forums). It might make our Democracy a little more responsive if the communication was TWO way.
I dunno. Maybe it is just an American vs European viewpoint thing, but I'd say someone who managed to understand the marketplace so well that they build a product that comes to dominate that market, and offer services that support only that device - well, that's a successful business person.
Yes, if Apple went to music distributors and said something like "distribute your songs exclusively over ipods or we'll ban you" that would be unreasonably using market dominance. But to claim that there's some unreasonable market behavior just because you make your products and services work with each other to the exclusion of others? That's just goofy.
Sweet, now BOTH computers will run linux!
It's a good call.
It's the parent's responsibility to keep an eye on their kid, including their internet activity (even if that is inconvenient or time-consuming for the parent).
Suing Myspace is like suing the phone company - they're only the medium, ma'am.
One note - I agree with you on the overall weakness of secondary sources.
However this was elementary/jr. high level, where referencing Encyc. Britannica IS acceptable, thus my point.
What would be so great about an MMO Half-Life or whatever? As far as I know, the HL dedicated server already allows you to create a server with hundreds of players, but either the server can't handle the load, or people's connections aren't good enough to make everything appear smooth. In RPGs it doesn't matter if you're lagging a bit, but in an FPS, even a slight bit of lag can make the game unplayable. Internet technology isn't quite mature enough for a "real" twitch-skill MMOFPS.
You mean, like Battleground Europe (WW2 MMOFPS - 10k+ players simultaneously on a map 2x the size of Belgium)?
That game is 5 years old, by the way. Buggy release, but an outstanding game now.
What they've found is that MMOFPS are extremely sensitive to skill level, moreso than click-to-attack MMORPGs. Hardcore players don't just get better gear (which allows them to accomplish more), hardcore players are MUCH better so much so that newer players have no chance - there are fewer ways to 'handicap' or 'balance' pvp in FPS games.
Yes, even though he claims there are some Republicans around the office, there's no doubt where his sympathies lay.
... So what we have in 'BlackSite' is a delta-force assassination squad hunting down and killing members of an Army training program."
However, I'd hope that this isn't just a one-sided treatment. It sounds interesting, certainly more thoughtful than killing 1000 more ghosts/vampires/terrorists/bad guys of whatever sort.
His comment "'Wait, what if they are terrorists we helped create? What if the people supporting us in our fight against the terrorists aren't completely clean either? What if they're sending us after them now, but what if 10 years ago it was safe for them to create them?'
What one can't see - and what then allows the most ridiculous Monday-morning quarterbacking - what WOULD have happened, if that decision hadn't been made 10 years ago? That's what I'd like to see.
In real life, it's rarely 'good choices' vs 'bad choices' - that's the sort of Manichaean superficial crap that all games are built on. Sometimes it's bad choice vs worse choice, or bad choice now vs bad choice later. In their new game, the first time someone cries "why did they create this unit in the first place?" do you get a flashback of what life would have been like if they hadn't been created? It's conceivable that the unhappy current situation - BlackSite hunting down members of this Army-created team - is still the BEST possible outcome.
How about giving the player other moral/ethical dilemmas - they have to decide if they are going to shoot through a crowd of children to kill the insane guy with an automatic weapon approaching the playground? And then have it turn out that the guy has no more ammunition, so the local police, politicians, and newspeople can second guess the player until he dies?
Sadly, this is a case where perception defines reality.
I know of two kids who in the same week both got downgraded on papers because they referenced wikipedia as a source, with the comment (2 different teachers, same school) "Wikipedia is not considered a factual reference" and "Perhaps you should look for a more reliable source than Wikipedia".
These were not for deeply controversial facts. One referenced wiki as a source for the factual statement "Plants need CO2 to live", and the other referenced it for Bill Cosby's birthdate.
Personally, I think this is idiotic. Had the original instructions said not to use it, that's one thing. But to post facto condemn this as a source smacks of knee-jerk - the kind of knee-jerk dismissal that will kill Wiki in the end.
We all know Wiki's weaknesses, and perhaps schools would be better off in using that as a teachable moment regarding 'internet facts' in general. Have one kid write a paragraph about their school without signing their name. Then allow 30 others to edit it freely and anonymously over a week or more. With the class, review the evolution of the 'facts' presented.
Wiki is at its strongest as a very timely resource for general facts; it's best when those facts are footnoted or linked in a useful way to source material. To ignore it as a reference is simply Luddism. To recognize it and use it in context is where value can be found.
He's entitled to his opinion, but IMO he's wrong.
If online multiplayer weren't a 'big' thing, games companies would have stopped bothering to code for it long ago.
Is it MORE fun to play in the same room with someone, or against RL friends? Sure, in most cases. But the level of creativity, irrationality, and downright dogged malice you get having a human opponent(s) rather than an AI? No question whatsoever, the games play 100% differently and (usually) better.
I said (sarcastically): Scientists are the only ones who should be allowed to comment.
You said: your statement has *absolutely nothing to do* with what the GP stated.
The GP:So do you really expect anyone to believe that the handful of climate change deniers are more credible than all experts who find the evidence for global warming compelling?
Who didn't read the comment?
I agree. Scientists are the only ones who should be allowed to comment. Because scientists are never wrong, never 'shade' their information to fit a conclusion, and never EVER have political biases themselves.
- Adolf Eichmann.
Is that any stupider than waiting until Al Gore tells you what's right?
At least ONE of them has a serious education.
Interesting.
In customs law (IAACB - I *am* a customs broker) there is a concept called 'dumping', which is the illegally low pricing of goods. An example usually seen in the US is where Eastern European or Asian companies (which are heavily subsidised by the state) sell ball bearings into the US market at prices far below their cost of manufacture, or even the raw price of the steel included. In response to this, the US applies what are called anti-dumping duties against these specific manufacturers of 100%+ in order to bring the 'cost' of the goods in the US to a comparable level of the US market.
Of course, usually the laws are meant to protect the local market, but in this case creative application would put MS in a difficult spot.
So...if MS is selling Office for $2 in Thailand (and $200 in the USA), isn't that 'dumping'?
Either it IS, and MS should see a duty rate applied by Thailand of 10000%, or the 'actual cost of manufacture' in the US is really somewhere around $1.50 and they're gouging US consumers.
Which is it?
People are still little more than hairless (or in Ron Jeremy's case, not-so-hairless) apes where it comes to their sexuality, feelings, etc.
There's a pretty bloody good reason that for centuries sailors considered women 'bad luck' aboard ship. When the crew is mostly men, the presence of a female is CORROSIVE if not explosive. Blah, blah, blah all you want about feminism, how it's unfair to women, 21st century...whatever. In fact, it's not the women, it's the men.
FWIW they are probably better off sending a crew of 100% women. AFAIK women can be downright catty and cruel to each other, but a closed population, kept in close quarters for years - I imagine women could tolerate it better than men, generally.
For that matter, how do nuclear missile submarine crews solve this issue - don't they go to sea for a year at a time? I presume they are co-ed crews in 2007?
To be honest I don't even see how this case went to trial. How can we claim to have freedom of speech if you can't even complain about somebody doing a poor job? If she had knowingly made a factually false claim, then I could see it.
Because that's where, in our system, we determine if her claim was factually valid. It was, so she won. I don't see what's so confusing here: court is where it should have gone and been resolved.
Was it relatively stupid for the doctor to even raise the issue? Yep, now he has MILLIONS of people paying attention where pretty much nobody was before. Idiot. If he knew (and I'm assuming he's not self-deluding enough to really dispute it in his heart of hearts) that indeed it was a crappy job, then his attempt to muzzle her was ill-advised, if not unethical.
But in our civil legal system, anyone can take anyone to court for anything; it's in the COURTROOM that is determined. Personally, I think that we'd be better off with a 'loser pays all' system to weed out the annoyance lawsuits like this one.
However, it might just be their frontpage that's hammered.
You can get 'deeper' pages at http://www.dna-rainbow.org/chromosomes/X.html where X is the chromosome number (1-22) or x or y (lowercase).
Great advice!
Let's see the places with non-Roman alphabets: Russia...Japan...China....various Middle-Eastern countries....Israel.
Wow, there are SO MANY places on that list where I would feel that my private and personal data is so much secure (particularly from government abuse) than here. LOL.
I see lots of posts about how this portends the US as a totalitarian police state.
Sorry, but that camel's nose is under the tent - you already let him in. You (the public) has begged and begged for a nanny state that watches over you and caters to your every whim. Got a problem with your neighbor? Let the courts decide. Your crop failed this year? Beg the government for disaster assistance. Hurricane wiped out your below-sea-level home? It *must* be the government's fault for not protecting/saving you, and then complain because the government handouts are insufficient or slow.
It goes back to the line from "A man for all seasons" - (IIRC) would you tear down the law to get at the devil? Of course? Then what will you hide behind when he comes back at you with his terrible power? If you demand the government keep you safe, employed, fed, housed, and happy, you're a hypocrite if you don't realize that logically this requires extensive surveillance. Kind of like the parent of a toddler.
Sorry, but we're getting exactly what we've spent at least the last 50 years begging for - government uber alles. Is it such a shock that the government (in order to protect us from stubbing our toe) wants to begin tracking where we are, what we do, and whom we do it with?
I'm one of the people you speak of.
I'm a fairly adept power user of MS products; I have no issues with digging around in the guts of anything from WinXP back all the way to DOS (I just showed some young tech support guy that you could pipe a text file to LPT1 on the command line, LOL).
However, I have trepidations about linux. I've run the standalone (knoppix) linuxen and found them pretty nice. However, since 9/10 of my games are WinX based and my corporation would never condone switching to openoffice, I'm stuck generally with Win products.
Now I'm building a stepmania system however, and this is a perfect application for linux - I can use somewhat leftover hardware (a 500MHz system). So it's installing over the weekend (SUSE, based on someone's recommendation that it's reasonably trouble free). But I'm still anxious that the install of stepmania is going to be tedious, buggy, or elsewise troublesome. USB drivers for the dance pad? Video drivers? Will the sound be decent?
All of these things are unknowns, and coupled with the learning curve, I can see why Linux is still marginalized. But some of us unconverted are TRYING, anyway.
1. send men and women together to the moon ...
2. set up webcams around the base
3.
4. PROFIT!
So if I understand, the "open" part of open source means "free to anyone...except you. Because, well, we don't like that jerk you hang around with."
(?)
According to Greenpeace's 2006 Annual report, they spent 4.3 milliion Euros on their 'climate' campaign.
This is pure advocacy advertising money, by the way, unlike Exxon which actually has to sell a product.
How is it that (Company A) offering $10,000 for proof of one side of an issue is irredeemable evilness, but (Advocacy Group) spending $5.6 million is a justified righteous crusade?
3.The alternatives are hardly tenable at this point:
...and windpower is NOT competitive on a free-market level with gas-fired power. Granted gas-plants get subsidies in other ways too, but you're missing his point anyway: the contradictions inherent in the "Green" umbrella positions. Simply put: the only way that we would fulfill the Green agenda to reduce resources, not harm the environment, use less power, waste less, etc is if there was a near-genocide of the human race, and the remainders ended up at some subsistence, stone-age existence. (A position certain environmentalists have been so incautious as to actually state.)
a. Mass transport: Due to the size, shape, and demographic dispersion it is untenable for the majority of American metropolis'.
Never been to NYC, I guess. Millions of people every day use mass transit. A large percentage of city dwellers have no car. Every American metropolis has some mass trasport. As roads become too crowded they are forced to provide more mass transit for immediately practical purposes. Your argument is simply false.
Note sure if you noticed? MOST of the US isn't like NYC. Every American metro area has mass transport. Care to reveal how many of them are break-even or profitable, NOT INCLUDING the heavy subsidies?
Your argument is short-sighted, ignorant of 95% of the REST of the country, and thus for pretty much everyone, worthless.
b. Buy everyone new electric cars. For one, manufacturing all those new cars just uses more energy and produces more emissions. So people proposing that are asinine at best.
Electric cars have less parts and are less complex. On a large scale and as technology progresses we will use far less energy to produce them. Your argument ignores progress over time.
Yeah, and fusion power is "only" 30 years away.
Sounds like vaporware to me. Produce a better mousetrap (or in this case, electric car) and you won't be able to make them fast enough for the demand. See, capitalism's like that. Your argument ignores that people don't spend their dollars and make their choices TOMORROW, but today. "Hey, can I skip my house payment for the next few months since I bought an electric car? It's a little expensive, but eventually I should save enough to start paying again later...." - um, right.
c. Everyone should bike or walk to work. Sorry, American not as small nor as densely populated as you may believe. See 3a
See China. Not everyone needs to bike or walk, but easily half of the population can as they live in dense areas. You assume this argument is black and white. But if just the SUV drivers in metropolitan areas switched to bikes we'd have less traffic and save a lot of energy.
Again, utterly ignoring the fact that the US's population is NOT CHINA. I know it would be delightful if we could cram everyone into crappy little apartments so that everyone could use Segways or whatever. Hey, I hate to see the highways filled with SUVs with single passengers, that's idiotic. But as long as gas is cheaper than MILK, it's not really going to change.
d.Solar power: Great, spend a crapload of cash and maybe make your money back.
First, protecting the environment isn't about making your money back. It's about having a habitable planet for our kids. Second, you ignore technological progress over time. Every year solar is getting more efficient.
Wait, I thought protecting the environment was about reducing waste and using resources efficiently? PV solar panels cost more to make, create nasty waste by products, and fail after about 10-15 years, requiring replacement. How is that 'wise'?
e. Windmill farms: Even the Greenies are confused on this one. Build'em but can't run them at full capacity because they chop up birds.
You're way behind on this one. The largest, slowest moving turbines do not kill any birds. Problem solved.
By your logic we shouldn't have telephones because it's a lot of work
Though I doubt Stonehenge was built because of that. Wolves are extinct in Britain.
Yeah, NOW.
No, that part of the process isn't onerous.
However, if you're a small business owner that consents to an audit (because you do have licenses for everythin) and then finds out that merely having the original media, license, and certificate of authenticity is INSUFFICIENT and you have to essentially re-buy everything to comply? Would you agree that's somewhat burdensome and/or unfair?