In most cases the university doesn't fund the research either, and although they do provide infrastructure, that too is funded by overhead charges on researchers' grants.
Which is how we end up paying so many times over for research: with our tax dollars, with our time and effort, with our time and effort spent on peer review, with our indirects (overhead charges, typically 40-60%) which fund library subscriptions and again when we buy papers the library can't provide.
Explain why future generations would choose not to use expansionary monetary policy to reduce the impact of debt? It's what all the other generations did.
You do realize that Greece doesn't have a central bank, right?
The argument I hear most is that there is no way for China and India to develop without passing through the same industrial stages experienced by the West, therefore the West should reform its energy production and use first, with the developing economies to follow once they are actually developed.
My understanding is that paper recycling is a net energy loss and requires lots of bleach, etc. which can become pollutants, so it should be avoided anyway.
Also, paper comes from trees grown on tree farms for the purpose of making paper. I've heard it argued that using paper actually increases the number of trees due to tree farm expansion.
Aluminum is definitely profitable to recycle (mining and smelting bauxite is incredibly expensive), but there are reasons to recycle even when it isn't profitable in terms of energy expenditure.
For example, if you had severely limited petroleum and no plant-based alternatives, you might recycle plastic at a loss in order to keep using plastic.
obvious that the so-called angry people were really just acting dramatic, for entertainment purposes
Right on. People in the developed world are bored. So, we jump on every littlest thing as a chance to freak out...but we're also jaded so we get bored again soon after.
These kids - young adults, actually - have their own opinions and are *glad* to be able to do something in support of those opinions. Exploitation would be if they themselves had no interest in promulgating their own views.
The forests of the Western U.S., while beautiful, are not that big. The worrying deforestation is of rainforest in South America, and especially of taiga in Northern Russia.
And all that will still leave the system worthless for anything other than emergency response.
Video surveillance is useless for identifying people because (1) compression impacts exactly those spatial frequencies needed for face recognition and (2) humans are bad at identifying faces (unless they are very familiar). Even if a face is not present in a lineup, people say it is 70% of the time.
I understand why a GPL library might be discouraging to some, but what is wrong with a GPL compiler? The GCC runtime library has a linking exception...
Are there a bunch of companies out their whose businesses would be ruined if they had to distribute source for their compiler extensions to their customers?
it must be encoded into the genes and passed to the next generations
That's true, but those changes can probably be acquired in other ways than mutation and crossing over alone. There is a whole field about it.
If you include traits like infection with Wolbachia in insects (which has far-reaching consequences including parthenogenesis in species which otherwise need sexual reproduction), there is actually a fair amount of Lamarckism in the natural world.
the automobile aren't the same as the web, so the learned change wouldn't be of the same kind
Indeed. Probably the impacts from web use will be greater than those from some other sources because an increasing number of young children, with their highly plastic brains, are spending time accessing the Internet. Mostly it is adults who, say, drive an automobile.
Google apps "for education" and "for non-profits" are different packages. The university package is completely free regardless of user base. "For non-profits" is free below 3,000 accounts and has a 40% discount above that limit.
The sad thing is that people devote so much time and energy complaining about, worrying about and fighting pointless hyperbole when there are plenty of serious threats to our health out there. One example is the uproar about PG&E's new meters (which are wireless, and significantly more accurate). It's possible that everyone who claims to be worried about the "radiation" is just trying to prevent their usage from being accurately reported, but it seems like they really are convinced. That effort would be much better spent, say, trying to ban BPA.
Responsible reporting about potentially dangerous compounds means (1) using their correct names and (2) recognizing that similar compounds have similar properties. How many news outlets are really so remote that they can't at least pick up the phone, call a local university's chemistry department and ask them, "Yo what should I call this?"
Slashdot Mirror
In most cases the university doesn't fund the research either, and although they do provide infrastructure, that too is funded by overhead charges on researchers' grants.
Which is how we end up paying so many times over for research: with our tax dollars, with our time and effort, with our time and effort spent on peer review, with our indirects (overhead charges, typically 40-60%) which fund library subscriptions and again when we buy papers the library can't provide.
Fair enough, but the psychological aspects don't depend on the codec.
They certainly have been (subject to control by lawsuits) for longer than modern legislative bodies have existed.
[1] Common Law - Henry II and the Birth of a State http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/british/middle_ages/henryii_law_01.shtml
Explain why future generations would choose not to use expansionary monetary policy to reduce the impact of debt? It's what all the other generations did.
You do realize that Greece doesn't have a central bank, right?
Right now, my thinking is that the "environmental dictatorship" will only become reality if climate change results in massively food shortages.
If it doesn't, we can end up with the "libertarian police state" instead (you can marry whoever you want, but you can't get high).
Because we can screw it up just as bad by trying to fix it than we can by leaving it alone.
But "fixing it" does not mean massive geoengineering projects, it means reducing pollution and energy use.
The argument I hear most is that there is no way for China and India to develop without passing through the same industrial stages experienced by the West, therefore the West should reform its energy production and use first, with the developing economies to follow once they are actually developed.
My understanding is that paper recycling is a net energy loss and requires lots of bleach, etc. which can become pollutants, so it should be avoided anyway.
Also, paper comes from trees grown on tree farms for the purpose of making paper. I've heard it argued that using paper actually increases the number of trees due to tree farm expansion.
Aluminum is definitely profitable to recycle (mining and smelting bauxite is incredibly expensive), but there are reasons to recycle even when it isn't profitable in terms of energy expenditure.
For example, if you had severely limited petroleum and no plant-based alternatives, you might recycle plastic at a loss in order to keep using plastic.
obvious that the so-called angry people were really just acting dramatic, for entertainment purposes
Right on. People in the developed world are bored. So, we jump on every littlest thing as a chance to freak out...but we're also jaded so we get bored again soon after.
Does anyone really believe that any scientist willing to support their cause is really working for free
You must not know any scientists. Maybe you think you do...but they are engineers.
No, it isn't.
These kids - young adults, actually - have their own opinions and are *glad* to be able to do something in support of those opinions. Exploitation would be if they themselves had no interest in promulgating their own views.
Isn't it possible that they actually hold a position, and are not just pawns "being used" by others?
The forests of the Western U.S., while beautiful, are not that big. The worrying deforestation is of rainforest in South America, and especially of taiga in Northern Russia.
Racial profiling, legal or no, will continue as long as we have racists in positions of power.
I think that's what you meant.
And all that will still leave the system worthless for anything other than emergency response.
Video surveillance is useless for identifying people because (1) compression impacts exactly those spatial frequencies needed for face recognition and (2) humans are bad at identifying faces (unless they are very familiar). Even if a face is not present in a lineup, people say it is 70% of the time.
[1] Video Surveillance is Useless (presentation) http://www.csse.uwa.edu.au/~pk/Research/VideoIsUselessANZFSS/
[2] Video Surveillance: Legally Blind? http://www.csse.uwa.edu.au/~pk/Research/pkpapers/legallyblind.pdf
[3] Face Recognition in Poor Quality Video http://pss.sagepub.com/content/10/3/243.short
In the land of Mordor, where the shadows lie.
I understand why a GPL library might be discouraging to some, but what is wrong with a GPL compiler? The GCC runtime library has a linking exception...
Are there a bunch of companies out their whose businesses would be ruined if they had to distribute source for their compiler extensions to their customers?
my download protocol of choice
And, coincidentally, the protocol which is objectively best for large files. I never get tired of this animation.
Pharmaceutical companies still invest in new drugs, at an average investment of $1 billion and 15 years, with less than 5% success rate.
Nevertheless, starships will always be a pipe dream, because it is very unlikely that FTL travel is possible.
it must be encoded into the genes and passed to the next generations
That's true, but those changes can probably be acquired in other ways than mutation and crossing over alone. There is a whole field about it.
If you include traits like infection with Wolbachia in insects (which has far-reaching consequences including parthenogenesis in species which otherwise need sexual reproduction), there is actually a fair amount of Lamarckism in the natural world.
the automobile aren't the same as the web, so the learned change wouldn't be of the same kind
Indeed. Probably the impacts from web use will be greater than those from some other sources because an increasing number of young children, with their highly plastic brains, are spending time accessing the Internet. Mostly it is adults who, say, drive an automobile.
Google apps "for education" and "for non-profits" are different packages. The university package is completely free regardless of user base. "For non-profits" is free below 3,000 accounts and has a 40% discount above that limit.
So we should all be forced to use incredibly shitty in house webmail systems?
Microsoft and Google's "for your domain" packages are both free to universities.
The sad thing is that people devote so much time and energy complaining about, worrying about and fighting pointless hyperbole when there are plenty of serious threats to our health out there. One example is the uproar about PG&E's new meters (which are wireless, and significantly more accurate). It's possible that everyone who claims to be worried about the "radiation" is just trying to prevent their usage from being accurately reported, but it seems like they really are convinced. That effort would be much better spent, say, trying to ban BPA.
Responsible reporting about potentially dangerous compounds means (1) using their correct names and (2) recognizing that similar compounds have similar properties. How many news outlets are really so remote that they can't at least pick up the phone, call a local university's chemistry department and ask them, "Yo what should I call this?"