Carbon fiber is made from fossil fuels, bamboo is a fairly efficient agricultural product. Recycling between them may be similar, I don't know about that, but that isn't the whole story.
No kidding. Wacom's patents and their resulting monopoly are the only reason why they can charge two freaking thousand dollars for something that might go for six hundred in a competitive market.
They didn't even port idtech5 to directX (hence the dreadful problems the current Wolfenstein game is having running on current PCs).
I realize that this wasn't the point of your rant, but this bit is off. "Didn't even" are not words that you use to describe migrating a graphics engine from OpenGL to DirectX. That's an enormous project. It also isn't necessary - there's nothing wrong with OpenGL. idtech5 may not be so great, but this is not the reason.
Between this, horse armor, claiming all rights to the use of the word "scrolls," the extended lawsuit with Interplay over Fallout Online: Zenimax is a terrible company.
People should not buy their stuff, but as always seems to happen in the games industry - if people like your games, you can get away with anything. Blizzard, Activision, Sony, Microsoft... remember this? That picture is the reason I gave up on fighting against DRM. I still don't buy games that require activation, but I realize now that I'm always going to be in the minority.
According to Politifact, it's only mostly false. The candidate who spends the most money wins 80+% of the time (98% for the house in 2004), but exactly how often they win varies by election.
Adding external GPUs is a pretty niche application though
Not for laptops it isn't. I'm sure you can see how valuable that is for a thin/light laptop, and there have been quite a few successful DIY projects doing this. Though it hasn't taken off commercially yet, that may just be due to the fact that thunderbolt is really only ubiquitous on Apple laptops.
There are already so many kids there that it will happen and nothing - especially AIDS - can stop it.
Well you're right about AIDS, but your fatalism isn't needed. Ultimately you're probably right, the population in Africa (and elsewhere) will probably balloon out of control, but that doesn't mean that nothing can stop it and that we should just give up.
You piss me off a lot less than the people here who adamantly insist that everything is corrupt and voting is worthless and we should all go and live in caves, or go on killing sprees, or whatever. There are an awful lot of nihilists on Slashdot... At least you're mostly right, it will be very difficult to rein in the population at this point, but giving up is not the right answer when a problem gets difficult. Education can go a long way towards combating that sort of thing, and Africans, especially in the poorer areas, put a high value on education.
Knowing what the government is capable of (Gulf of Tonkin incident and others), I'm wondering how unlikely it would be for the FAA to have sent one of their own or someone from another 3 letter agency in the government out with an RC plane and purposely flew it in a manner to create this situation just for the purpose of justifying their stance on drones.
Pretty dang unlikely. We're not talking about anything that really has much at all to do with national security, or anything that will make a politician look good, or anything that will make some rich person or large company a little more money, so concocting a conspiracy theory for this seems a little far fetched.
I realize / hope that you're joking, but to be abundantly clear: the US Government doesn't sell guns to individuals. Not during the Fast & Furious operation or ever. They do sell guns to states sometimes - e.g. Iran / Contra.
Divestment as a prod for inducing responsible behavior is famous mainly for it's role in ending apartheid, and university endowments were a big part of what made it work. In fact, Standford was one of the first universities to do apartheid divestment.
People have called into question just how much of the effectiveness of that campaign came from the financial impact and how much came from the increased publicity, but I think its pretty widely considered to have played a non-trivial role in ending apartheid.
So yes, it is certainly possible that this campaign will prevent some environmental damage. Additionally, let me point out that Standford is not impoverishing themselves here. Money currently invested in coal can be invested in other things, with minimal opportunity loss - coal stocks aren't exactly skyrocketing right now. So the idea that the environmental gains could out way the financial losses is completely plausible.
I could take some self-debasing humor, but I just can't stand the Penny character. I find it a little hard to describe why, but she just doesn't belong there. I end up avoiding the show for that reason alone.
It's too bad, some of the scenes without her can be really funny and I've consistently impressed that they seem to nail all of their science references (to bring this back to TFA), but she really grates.
Almost everything you said there is wrong. Broccoli has more protein per calorie than steak does, and there are plenty of plants with tons of fat. In fact, healthier fats (mono and poly unsaturated) mostly all come from plants. Try some nuts or an avocado if you don't think you're getting enough fat. This is exceedingly unlikely though, since you don't really need much fat to get by. The recommended minimum is 15% of your calories, but it's not like you're going to die within three months if you don't eat any fat - this guy didn't consume any calories at all, including fat, for 382 days with no ill-effects.
Your statements about carbs are a little difficult to deal with, "one of the main contributors" is a hard statement to disprove. Really, type 2 diabetes is (mostly) caused by obesity and certainly you can get fat by eating carbs. But you can get fat by eating too much of anything. It's how much you eat (calories), not how you eat it, that determines how much weight you loose. Fad diets, like a low carb diet, do work, but they work by restricting your calories, not by some special voodoo.
Dozens of what? Bankruptcies in the program that helped fund Solyndra? Where on earth are you getting that from?
The real number is five, and that's between two programs, the one that gave funding to Solyndra and another similar one. That is an excellent failure rate, beating the market. As I said, the program that funded Solyndra wound up beating it's own expectation by $2 billion.
No, the salt isn't there any more. Salt water doesn't have salt in it - salt water has ions in it. It's the components of the salt, the sodium mostly, that your body uses.
One company that went bankrupt which had received a subsidized loan, out of forty such companies, is exemplary of the whole program? A successful program which beat it's own return expectations by $2 billion?
Okay, let's suppose that that's true. And let's suppose that some story about nepotism for Harry Reid's son (I've never heard of this) is just as bad as the Koch brothers buying our government, and let's suppose that corruption is exactly equal on both sides of the D / R line, all exactly as you say. So what? All things being equal then, I'd much rather have the clean energy than the dirty.
You seem to be lending credence to the hypothesis in the article: the less affluent you are, the more chances you're forced to take in order to get by.
Anecdotally, I've had a number of friends who had to go this route with AirBNB. All of them love the money, none of them love the strangers in their apartments. (Though it isn't all bad - they're generally nice people.)
Slashdot Mirror
Ah, neat. Didn't know that about rayon, thanks.
Carbon fiber is made from fossil fuels, bamboo is a fairly efficient agricultural product. Recycling between them may be similar, I don't know about that, but that isn't the whole story.
Huh. Good to know, thanks. Last time I checked there weren't any other alternatives at all, other than tablets.
No kidding. Wacom's patents and their resulting monopoly are the only reason why they can charge two freaking thousand dollars for something that might go for six hundred in a competitive market.
They didn't even port idtech5 to directX (hence the dreadful problems the current Wolfenstein game is having running on current PCs).
I realize that this wasn't the point of your rant, but this bit is off. "Didn't even" are not words that you use to describe migrating a graphics engine from OpenGL to DirectX. That's an enormous project. It also isn't necessary - there's nothing wrong with OpenGL. idtech5 may not be so great, but this is not the reason.
Between this, horse armor, claiming all rights to the use of the word "scrolls," the extended lawsuit with Interplay over Fallout Online: Zenimax is a terrible company.
People should not buy their stuff, but as always seems to happen in the games industry - if people like your games, you can get away with anything. Blizzard, Activision, Sony, Microsoft... remember this? That picture is the reason I gave up on fighting against DRM. I still don't buy games that require activation, but I realize now that I'm always going to be in the minority.
According to Politifact, it's only mostly false. The candidate who spends the most money wins 80+% of the time (98% for the house in 2004), but exactly how often they win varies by election.
It might be a little excessive for people in general, but not for children.
Amazon employees are not soon-to-be-billionaires.
Adding external GPUs is a pretty niche application though
Not for laptops it isn't. I'm sure you can see how valuable that is for a thin/light laptop, and there have been quite a few successful DIY projects doing this. Though it hasn't taken off commercially yet, that may just be due to the fact that thunderbolt is really only ubiquitous on Apple laptops.
There are already so many kids there that it will happen and nothing - especially AIDS - can stop it.
Well you're right about AIDS, but your fatalism isn't needed. Ultimately you're probably right, the population in Africa (and elsewhere) will probably balloon out of control, but that doesn't mean that nothing can stop it and that we should just give up.
You piss me off a lot less than the people here who adamantly insist that everything is corrupt and voting is worthless and we should all go and live in caves, or go on killing sprees, or whatever. There are an awful lot of nihilists on Slashdot... At least you're mostly right, it will be very difficult to rein in the population at this point, but giving up is not the right answer when a problem gets difficult. Education can go a long way towards combating that sort of thing, and Africans, especially in the poorer areas, put a high value on education.
Ugh. I modded you up, but then I misclicked on another comment so now I have to undo it. Thanks for the informative post.
Knowing what the government is capable of (Gulf of Tonkin incident and others), I'm wondering how unlikely it would be for the FAA to have sent one of their own or someone from another 3 letter agency in the government out with an RC plane and purposely flew it in a manner to create this situation just for the purpose of justifying their stance on drones.
Pretty dang unlikely. We're not talking about anything that really has much at all to do with national security, or anything that will make a politician look good, or anything that will make some rich person or large company a little more money, so concocting a conspiracy theory for this seems a little far fetched.
If outlaws are the only thing that's outlawed, then only outlaws will be outlaws.
What is the point of this? It's a tautology. It brings nothing to the conversation.
I realize / hope that you're joking, but to be abundantly clear: the US Government doesn't sell guns to individuals. Not during the Fast & Furious operation or ever. They do sell guns to states sometimes - e.g. Iran / Contra.
Bah! I must not have closed the quotes on my link... Here's the bit on the university endowment role during the apartheid campaign:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Divestment as a prod for inducing responsible behavior is famous mainly for it's role in ending apartheid, and university endowments were a big part of what made it work. In fact, Standford was one of the first universities to do apartheid divestment.
People have called into question just how much of the effectiveness of that campaign came from the financial impact and how much came from the increased publicity, but I think its pretty widely considered to have played a non-trivial role in ending apartheid.
So yes, it is certainly possible that this campaign will prevent some environmental damage. Additionally, let me point out that Standford is not impoverishing themselves here. Money currently invested in coal can be invested in other things, with minimal opportunity loss - coal stocks aren't exactly skyrocketing right now. So the idea that the environmental gains could out way the financial losses is completely plausible.
One group of people identify with Penny
I could take some self-debasing humor, but I just can't stand the Penny character. I find it a little hard to describe why, but she just doesn't belong there. I end up avoiding the show for that reason alone.
It's too bad, some of the scenes without her can be really funny and I've consistently impressed that they seem to nail all of their science references (to bring this back to TFA), but she really grates.
If you're trying to lose weight it's the most important method of measuring intake.
Almost everything you said there is wrong. Broccoli has more protein per calorie than steak does, and there are plenty of plants with tons of fat. In fact, healthier fats (mono and poly unsaturated) mostly all come from plants. Try some nuts or an avocado if you don't think you're getting enough fat. This is exceedingly unlikely though, since you don't really need much fat to get by. The recommended minimum is 15% of your calories, but it's not like you're going to die within three months if you don't eat any fat - this guy didn't consume any calories at all, including fat, for 382 days with no ill-effects.
Your statements about carbs are a little difficult to deal with, "one of the main contributors" is a hard statement to disprove. Really, type 2 diabetes is (mostly) caused by obesity and certainly you can get fat by eating carbs. But you can get fat by eating too much of anything. It's how much you eat (calories), not how you eat it, that determines how much weight you loose. Fad diets, like a low carb diet, do work, but they work by restricting your calories, not by some special voodoo.
Dozens of what? Bankruptcies in the program that helped fund Solyndra? Where on earth are you getting that from?
The real number is five, and that's between two programs, the one that gave funding to Solyndra and another similar one. That is an excellent failure rate, beating the market. As I said, the program that funded Solyndra wound up beating it's own expectation by $2 billion.
No, the salt isn't there any more. Salt water doesn't have salt in it - salt water has ions in it. It's the components of the salt, the sodium mostly, that your body uses.
One company that went bankrupt which had received a subsidized loan, out of forty such companies, is exemplary of the whole program? A successful program which beat it's own return expectations by $2 billion?
Okay, let's suppose that that's true. And let's suppose that some story about nepotism for Harry Reid's son (I've never heard of this) is just as bad as the Koch brothers buying our government, and let's suppose that corruption is exactly equal on both sides of the D / R line, all exactly as you say. So what? All things being equal then, I'd much rather have the clean energy than the dirty.
You seem to be lending credence to the hypothesis in the article: the less affluent you are, the more chances you're forced to take in order to get by.
Anecdotally, I've had a number of friends who had to go this route with AirBNB. All of them love the money, none of them love the strangers in their apartments. (Though it isn't all bad - they're generally nice people.)