You'll lose some of that playing relay-games dropping off one kid at a time to school, plus three or four trips to the grocery store. Calculate the extra time spent vs. the value of your time.
This is too expensive to be a practical solution. It might be a nice solution for areas like Los Angeles (where people routinely drive 60+ miles to work -- alone in their car), but it's a hell of a lot easier on the average worker's car budget to lease a modest economy car which gets 30+mpg.
Something like this would be useful as a single-person commuter car at half the price. Otherwise, it's an expensive "toy" that someone with a lot of money can buy to show off how "eco-friendly" they are.
See. There you lost me. I think both are crap, but this statement of yours is whacked as far as accuracy goes. McCain is the only one who's even seriously TRIED to limit money coming in to campaigns and politicians. Obama blew off his oath to not seek private funds and will now be in the pocket of every major interest group.
Is it? We've not engaged in any real new offshore drilling in decades. Pretty much every other nation that can afford it *HAS* kept up on it. Now they're looking to drill closer to our shorelines than we're allowed to? That's "bullshit fear mongering"? I guess my smoke alarm is a "bullshit fear mongering" device as well. Maybe I should wait until I have 3rd degree burns before I take heed of my smoke alarm?
it's hyperbole,
I don't think you understand what that word means.
it's a lie,
It must likewise be a lie when I say "it rained in Northridge" when it really rained in Van Nuys (those two towns are adjacent). You think Cheney was deliberatly trying to fool the American people with something which could and would EASILY be reviewed for accuracy? Or would a more reasonable person believe that he was mistaken. Because China *IS* interested in drilling in the area, they HAVE a lease with Cuba (just not for the Florida Strait) and have already done preliminary testing -- just not drilling yet.
and we cannot allow comments we know are false to shape our energy position as in
You mean, like totally dismissing the obvious "alarm bells" going off by refering to ANY reference to non-US offshore florida drilling as "bullshit fear mongering"?
"We know this because the Chinese are trying to tap into it off the coast of Cuba pretty much as close to FL as you can get."
Actually, this is interesting. You claim the quote above is false, but it is in fact mostly accurate. The Chinese ARE trying to tap into it but on shore, and their lease is NOT the Florita Strait.
have a hard time believing we dont' have the ability to get out there and drill off CA anytime soon.
That's because you aren't familiar with how offshore drilling works.
I live in NOLA, and know many in the field of oil...they're designing rigs and dropping them left and right out there....
You may want to ask them when the prep work for those "drops" took place. You may also want to ask them WHAT goes in to "dropping" a rig. It's not just moving a platform over a pretty spot and starting to drill.
I can't imagine why it would take as long as you profess to explore for oil out off the coast of CA.
You cant imagine it because you are unfamiliar with it.
Why are ya'll so opposed to it?
Are you talking to me? Because I'm not opposed to it. I'm also not opposed to Robert Heinlein crawling out from his grave for one more Lazarus Long book. I just don't think either are likely to happen.
We do it in the gulf with no problems....
I believe those are pre-existing oil field. Not the same thing.
why won't you in CA and FL pull your own weight with regard to harvesting natural resources our whole country needs?
NIMBY mindset? You've got a few coastal states. Pretty much all of them are left of center (some very much so, like California). Even those that aren't, there's a huge lobby of conservationists and environmentalists with packs of lawyers who will cause huge delays in getting anything started. Oil/Gas is going to need to get a hell of a lot more expensive before state governments are willing to pay for the court costs, expensive delays, and whatnot before they try and fight the oppoisition.
Beside...think of the extra jobs and tax income it will bring to California...which is a bit strapped for cash, no?
Sadly, it appears my state isn't interested in creating a friendly enviornment for businesses and employment. It's gotten a bit better over the last 5 years or so (with regards to workmans comp ins), but it's still pretty negative.
Also, here's a NYTimes article which will help explain why offshore drilling will take so long.
In recent years, this global shortage of drill-ships has created a critical bottleneck, frustrating energy company executives and constraining their ability to exploit known reserves or find new ones. Slow growth in oil supplies, at a time of soaring demand, has been a major factor in the spike of oil and gasoline prices.
lets try to think long term NOW and start drilling
That's the problem. You CAN'T start drilling now -- at least with off-shore. My state (California) appears to be ready to fight any federal mandate to want it. That aside, it'll be a while before we CAN drill IF there's no fight. There's no available OUTFITS to start drilling. We'd have to build our own ship(s) to do the prelim stuff -- all the others in the world are booked for the next 5 years or so.
I agree we NEED to -- I'm just very skeptical it will happen. Too many road-blocks are built in the system. Maybe it will happen when there are tens of thousands without power on a regular basis, and gas is over $6/gal.
Dells were slowly replaced with REAL AMERICAN BUSNISSMAN'S Compaqs!
My experience with low-end dells has been horrible. High failure rate of hard drives and motherboards. With one order of 14, all but 3 had failed hard drives within 6 months.
However, our company still has 15 (out of an original 20) Win2k Compaq low-end workstations in production circa 2001. Of the other 5, 4 were retired -- replaced by more powerful PCs where needed) and one failed motherboard. Which failed in June 2006 (I just looked it up). The 15 serve out their lives as data entry workstations. Happily turning on and off and running smartterm. Our oldest dell workstation still in service is from 2005.
That said, I think dell server hardware is solid (in that I've had zero problems with it and their highest tier support is fantastic). We've got two. We also have an old compaq server (which I hate to the ends of the earth) that still hosts our old billing department database.
Let's not dismiss alarming news because it wasn't EXACTLY accurate.
From your citation:
Jorge Pinon, a senior energy fellow at the University of Miami specializing in Latin America, said Cuba has awarded offshore oil leases, or concessionary blocs, in its offshore waters to six oil companies -- none of them Chinese -- and soon may announce an agreement with Brazil's state oil company, Petrobras
So... The Chinese aren't currently drilling -- but OTHER countries WILL be drilling in the not-too-distant future. Closer to US shorelines than US companies are allowed to drill.
At the same time, get drilling and getting new oil capacity online
Sadly, if the "green light" came on for off-shore drilling, and nobody tried to stop it, it STILL wouldn't happen for at least 5 years. There are a limited number of ships used in the exploration, testing and setup of off-shore drilling. Those are booked by other countries interests for the next 5 years. Those ships are only manufactured in Asia -- and currently cost over half a billion bucks.
We barely have any private ship building capacity in the US (thank you Sen. Lott for the little we have left) -- be nice if we could build a few here. But it's not that simple either.
We've not invested in infrastructer in the last 30 or 40 years and now we are reaping what we sowed. Other countries are much better poised to utilize resources (both oil and alternative) than we are. If we had at least maintained our capacity to meet our needs we'd be in better shape.
Expect oil, gas and electricity prices to rise over the next 5 years. Expect $6+ dollars a gallon within a year. Hell, I had to pay $4.91/gal recently (Los Angeles).
Why are we one of the only countries that are not exploring domestically for oil?
Simple. It costs to much.
Not the exploring, not the actual drilling or processing, but actually getting past the bad PR and all the legal road-blocks put up by conservationists and environmentalst. It simply costs too much in time and effort.
So. As a nation, the US has essentially decided not to build refineries, drill for oil, build power plants for 2 or 3 decades because we want to protect the enviornment.
I think it's hogwash. The US has basically decided that it would rather import much of it's energy needs. Let OTHER countries build refineries, drill and build power plants. Just so long as we don't dirty OUR backyard. Feh.
I would have paid $50 to have Win98 installed over ME a number of years ago. It's somehow comforting to know that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
e-mail was VERY much in widespread use prior to the 1990s
I think your definition of "widespread" differs quite a lot from mine.
Faxing was in "wide use" with businesses and press in the 1940s. Hell, faxing was used to transmit maps, charts and orders during WW II.
In the 1930's a number of private homes received fax machines as part of a failed business model (fax delivery of the daily news paper).
With regards to email being in "wideuse" in the 80s, just because you (and me) and a fairly small percentages of businesses and private citizens used some type of email -- I wouldn't call that being in "wideuse". At the very least, I think we can both agree that FAXing was in much wider use far earlier than email. By a decade or 10, depending on what your standard is for "wideuse".
TECHNICALLY, the "fax machine" was invented in the 19th century. It became WIDELY used in the 1970s. While the first EMAIL may have been keyed in 1965, it could HARDLY have been considered to have been in WIDE use.
Davis acknowledged in an interview with The Associated Press that his stunt has led to at least 87 instances in which people have tried to steal his identity, and one succeeded: a guy in Texas who duped an online payday loan operation last year into giving him $500 using Davis' Social Security number.
One out of 87 -- and that guy only succedded in getting $500.
Davis learned about the fraud in Texas when the payday-loan outfit called to collect on the loan, he said. He didn't get an alert beforehand because the company didn't go through one of the three major credit bureaus before approving the transaction.
Ok... so it's not perfect -- but it sounds like the service would stop major ID theft attempts...
In the same way Moore presents his arguments are often "bald face lies". I wouldn't call them directly "lies", but highly biased one-sided arguements. Which is what it sounds like Stein is presenting.
Based on your report, I doubt Stein will be much better than Moore has been. And an utter waste of my time to view. Still, I can have no real opinion on Stein until I see it for myself.
Really? Care to tell me what part of Sicko was a lie? It was his best film to date, you may want to revise your opinion.
Really? Care to tell me what part of my post claimed anything in Sicko -- or that anything Moore has done was a "lie"?
Lie? No. Blatant one-sided arguments -- totally ignoring any argument/evidence to the contrary, yes. Some might call this a "lie", but I haven't. Certainly it's often misleading. As I claimed, this type of stuff is not worth my time. This type of stuff nothing but a Windex commercial -- showing how great his "product" is. I've little doubt Stein will be different, but I'll watch and see.
If this is a quality of Moore/Sicko you like, you may want to revise your opinion of your critical thinking skills.
Moore-izing? I've yet to see the movie, but if it's what I epect it to be then it's no better or no worse than what Moore has one. And other than Roger and Me, not of Moore's films were worth my time -- I doubt Stein's will be either.
Actually, I think this would complement video quite well. You use this system to see WHATS happening -- click a button -- and see WHO is making it happen.
...and you think owning a gun is going to allow you to defend yourself against the US military ? This is the attitude I find bizarre.
Why do you find it bizarre? It allowed the populace to defend itself against and repulse the UK military in the 18th century. It nearly allowed the southern states to fend off/repell the US military in the 19th century.
It allowed a small group in Waco, TX to fend off the federal government for nearly 2 months.
If you mean that a SINGLE person cant defend itself against the military, you are correct. But who ever suggested that was the case?
I'm for gun control and no huge fan of Jefferson, but any American who believes in the idea of a separation between church and state (which derived from a non-official letter between Jefferson and the Danbury Baptists Association) should at least acknowldge his beliefs on an armed populace:
"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty.... And what country can preserve its liberties, if it's rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
Personally, I find it bizzare how you easily misunderstand things.
Slashdot Mirror
You must not be aware of how public transportation works in Los Angeles.
You'll lose some of that playing relay-games dropping off one kid at a time to school, plus three or four trips to the grocery store. Calculate the extra time spent vs. the value of your time.
This is too expensive to be a practical solution. It might be a nice solution for areas like Los Angeles (where people routinely drive 60+ miles to work -- alone in their car), but it's a hell of a lot easier on the average worker's car budget to lease a modest economy car which gets 30+mpg.
Something like this would be useful as a single-person commuter car at half the price. Otherwise, it's an expensive "toy" that someone with a lot of money can buy to show off how "eco-friendly" they are.
Because Korea is as large as the US and Canada, right? And Korea has the same terrain as the US and Canada... and the same right-of-way issues, right?
Because the US can put a man on the moon, so should Uzbekistan. Because they have the same resources as the US, right?
Yup. Agreed.
Yup. Agreed.
See. There you lost me. I think both are crap, but this statement of yours is whacked as far as accuracy goes. McCain is the only one who's even seriously TRIED to limit money coming in to campaigns and politicians. Obama blew off his oath to not seek private funds and will now be in the pocket of every major interest group.
I think this was more like what you were trying to come up with.
And people die in car accidents every year. But we don't stop building cars. We just try to make the safer.
Is it? We've not engaged in any real new offshore drilling in decades. Pretty much every other nation that can afford it *HAS* kept up on it. Now they're looking to drill closer to our shorelines than we're allowed to? That's "bullshit fear mongering"? I guess my smoke alarm is a "bullshit fear mongering" device as well. Maybe I should wait until I have 3rd degree burns before I take heed of my smoke alarm?
I don't think you understand what that word means.
It must likewise be a lie when I say "it rained in Northridge" when it really rained in Van Nuys (those two towns are adjacent). You think Cheney was deliberatly trying to fool the American people with something which could and would EASILY be reviewed for accuracy? Or would a more reasonable person believe that he was mistaken. Because China *IS* interested in drilling in the area, they HAVE a lease with Cuba (just not for the Florida Strait) and have already done preliminary testing -- just not drilling yet.
You mean, like totally dismissing the obvious "alarm bells" going off by refering to ANY reference to non-US offshore florida drilling as "bullshit fear mongering"?
Actually, this is interesting. You claim the quote above is false, but it is in fact mostly accurate. The Chinese ARE trying to tap into it but on shore, and their lease is NOT the Florita Strait.
That's because you aren't familiar with how offshore drilling works.
You may want to ask them when the prep work for those "drops" took place. You may also want to ask them WHAT goes in to "dropping" a rig. It's not just moving a platform over a pretty spot and starting to drill.
You cant imagine it because you are unfamiliar with it.
Are you talking to me? Because I'm not opposed to it. I'm also not opposed to Robert Heinlein crawling out from his grave for one more Lazarus Long book. I just don't think either are likely to happen.
I believe those are pre-existing oil field. Not the same thing.
NIMBY mindset? You've got a few coastal states. Pretty much all of them are left of center (some very much so, like California). Even those that aren't, there's a huge lobby of conservationists and environmentalists with packs of lawyers who will cause huge delays in getting anything started. Oil/Gas is going to need to get a hell of a lot more expensive before state governments are willing to pay for the court costs, expensive delays, and whatnot before they try and fight the oppoisition. Sadly, it appears my state isn't interested in creating a friendly enviornment for businesses and employment. It's gotten a bit better over the last 5 years or so (with regards to workmans comp ins), but it's still pretty negative.
Also, here's a NYTimes article which will help explain why offshore drilling will take so long.
That's the problem. You CAN'T start drilling now -- at least with off-shore. My state (California) appears to be ready to fight any federal mandate to want it. That aside, it'll be a while before we CAN drill IF there's no fight. There's no available OUTFITS to start drilling. We'd have to build our own ship(s) to do the prelim stuff -- all the others in the world are booked for the next 5 years or so.
I agree we NEED to -- I'm just very skeptical it will happen. Too many road-blocks are built in the system. Maybe it will happen when there are tens of thousands without power on a regular basis, and gas is over $6/gal.
However, our company still has 15 (out of an original 20) Win2k Compaq low-end workstations in production circa 2001. Of the other 5, 4 were retired -- replaced by more powerful PCs where needed) and one failed motherboard. Which failed in June 2006 (I just looked it up). The 15 serve out their lives as data entry workstations. Happily turning on and off and running smartterm. Our oldest dell workstation still in service is from 2005.
That said, I think dell server hardware is solid (in that I've had zero problems with it and their highest tier support is fantastic). We've got two. We also have an old compaq server (which I hate to the ends of the earth) that still hosts our old billing department database.
Go figure...
Let's not dismiss alarming news because it wasn't EXACTLY accurate.
From your citation:
So... The Chinese aren't currently drilling -- but OTHER countries WILL be drilling in the not-too-distant future. Closer to US shorelines than US companies are allowed to drill.
Sadly, if the "green light" came on for off-shore drilling, and nobody tried to stop it, it STILL wouldn't happen for at least 5 years. There are a limited number of ships used in the exploration, testing and setup of off-shore drilling. Those are booked by other countries interests for the next 5 years. Those ships are only manufactured in Asia -- and currently cost over half a billion bucks.
We barely have any private ship building capacity in the US (thank you Sen. Lott for the little we have left) -- be nice if we could build a few here. But it's not that simple either.
We've not invested in infrastructer in the last 30 or 40 years and now we are reaping what we sowed. Other countries are much better poised to utilize resources (both oil and alternative) than we are. If we had at least maintained our capacity
to meet our needs we'd be in better shape.
Expect oil, gas and electricity prices to rise over the next 5 years. Expect $6+ dollars a gallon within a year. Hell, I had to pay $4.91/gal recently (Los Angeles).
Simple. It costs to much.
Not the exploring, not the actual drilling or processing, but actually getting past the bad PR and all the legal road-blocks put up by conservationists and environmentalst. It simply costs too much in time and effort.
So. As a nation, the US has essentially decided not to build refineries, drill for oil, build power plants for 2 or 3 decades because we want to protect the enviornment.
I think it's hogwash. The US has basically decided that it would rather import much of it's energy needs. Let OTHER countries build refineries, drill and build power plants. Just so long as we don't dirty OUR backyard. Feh.
I would have paid $50 to have Win98 installed over ME a number of years ago. It's somehow comforting to know that the more things change, the more they stay the same.
I think your definition of "widespread" differs quite a lot from mine.
Faxing was in "wide use" with businesses and press in the 1940s. Hell, faxing was used to transmit maps, charts and orders during WW II.
In the 1930's a number of private homes received fax machines as part of a failed business model (fax delivery of the daily news paper).
With regards to email being in "wideuse" in the 80s, just because you (and me) and a fairly small percentages of businesses and private citizens used some type of email -- I wouldn't call that being in "wideuse". At the very least, I think we can both agree that FAXing was in much wider use far earlier than email. By a decade or 10, depending on what your standard is for "wideuse".
TECHNICALLY, the "fax machine" was invented in the 19th century. It became WIDELY used in the 1970s. While the first EMAIL may have been keyed in 1965, it could HARDLY have been considered to have been in WIDE use.
So, YES, the fax machine is OLDER. Much older.
Cute... but poor analogy. In this case, there were at least 86 tigers who tried to bite, but failed to find flesh.
Because I really want to pay $80 for the LED equivalent of a 40 watt bulb.
What would YOU pay for 2 million social security numbers?
In the same way Moore presents his arguments are often "bald face lies". I wouldn't call them directly "lies", but highly biased one-sided arguements. Which is what it sounds like Stein is presenting.
Based on your report, I doubt Stein will be much better than Moore has been. And an utter waste of my time to view. Still, I can have no real opinion on Stein until I see it for myself.
Really? Care to tell me what part of my post claimed anything in Sicko -- or that anything Moore has done was a "lie"?
Lie? No. Blatant one-sided arguments -- totally ignoring any argument/evidence to the contrary, yes. Some might call this a "lie", but I haven't. Certainly it's often misleading. As I claimed, this type of stuff is not worth my time. This type of stuff nothing but a Windex commercial -- showing how great his "product" is. I've little doubt Stein will be different, but I'll watch and see.
If this is a quality of Moore/Sicko you like, you may want to revise your opinion of your critical thinking skills.
Moore-izing? I've yet to see the movie, but if it's what I epect it to be then it's no better or no worse than what Moore has one. And other than Roger and Me, not of Moore's films were worth my time -- I doubt Stein's will be either.
Actually, I think this would complement video quite well. You use this system to see WHATS happening -- click a button -- and see WHO is making it happen.
It allowed a small group in Waco, TX to fend off the federal government for nearly 2 months.
If you mean that a SINGLE person cant defend itself against the military, you are correct. But who ever suggested that was the case?
I'm for gun control and no huge fan of Jefferson, but any American who believes in the idea of a separation between church and state (which derived from a non-official letter between Jefferson and the Danbury Baptists Association) should at least acknowldge his beliefs on an armed populace:
Personally, I find it bizzare how you easily misunderstand things.
Will they sell the hand-helds? Or give them away like Cheese in the 80's?