Lets not forget bio fuels. Our gasoline, diesel and jet fuel does not need to come from petroleum. It can come from biological processes so that these fuels become carbon neutral.
Internal combustion engines and jet turbine engines are not the problem, its only the *current* source of their fuel.
Computers are computers. Data specific to the use case was not a big deal.
Yes, but those two companies likely had similar development cultures. For example neither probably advocated moving so fast and testing so little that buggy ("broken") software was produced yet *tolerated*.
Many of these facebook employees searching for jobs may now find their utility to potential employers is less than that of an inexperienced recent grad. That their "move fast and break things" experience is considered detrimental and they have to be re-trained.
Nope. Al Queda split from the state/ruling elite supported version of Wahhabism long ago.
Clinton was leading Perot and Bush before Perot dropped out...
Polls that far our from an election are not that reliable and are rather meaningless.
three. hundred. thousand. registered Democrats voted for Bush.
That set the stage for Nader tipping the race to Bush. In the county that decided the election by 500 votes, Nader took away from Gore a net 12K votes. That was a decisive results at the critical time and place. Unlike Buchannon, etc. Sorry, you can't wave away such a decisive single event.
There is no confusion. Both are being opposed, the Al Qaeda backed Sunni jihadists and the Iranian backed Shiite jihadists. That a third group, Wahhabi based Sunni extremists, are being supported does not change the former.
Perot took more from conservatives. Conservatives includes some democrats, democrats that were more inclined to support a Reagon or Bush than a Carter, Mondale or Clinton. There were once these strange creatures called conservative democrats and moderate republicans that leaned conservative on defense and public safety but leaned liberal on social and civil rights.
In short your failure is attempting to break things down by party rather than beliefs.
Be warned, higher resolution is not necessarily better. I had the pleasure of seeing 2001 at a film festival in a good theatre with a nice screen, a good sound system and a good quality print of the film, circa 1990s. Using film in a theatre some things were more clear than on a TV screen at home, even with a large projection screen of the day. For example painted backgrounds were far more obvious. However the theatre environment, screen, sound, sort of compensated and overall it was a net win for the legacy viewing experience.
The home theatre experience may not sufficiently offset the more noticeable visual flaws in legacy films.
At some point someone may pull a mild version of a Lucas and replace the painted backgrounds with digital backgrounds, again a *partial* Lucas. Maybe that would work? I'm getting used to the original Star Trek with its replacement CGI spaces scenes after a period of shock and horror.
Its not as if wall street types on CNBC didn't acknowledge previous massive drops in bitcoins history and conceded a drop to $4-5K was a real possibility.. oh wait. Many knew/know it is a "greater fool" game, they just don't expect to be the greater fool themselves.
The value of a bitcoin has always been, and continues to be, the value a speculator is willing to pay for it.
75% drops in value are somewhat routine. This one is slightly deeper, probably because the non-nerd speculators have recently joined the traditional nerd speculators. Many of the non-nerd speculators were fully away of this and expected a drop to $4-5K, it was something they conceded publicly on CNBC at times during those $10K-15K days.
Any paper currency that you could perfectly counterfeit would quickly fail.
The British pound notes of WW2 suggests otherwise. The British government recalled and replaced notes. Sure it hurt, and the pound was devalued on the continent, but it survived. https://insh.world/history/how...
Not all Cryptocurrencies are doomed, but All cryptocurrencies based on "proof of work" are doomed.
Cryptocurrencies are based on software, they can be changed. They can migrate from proof of work to other methods, Etherium has planned on doing so all along. Bitcoin and other coins could do so if necessary.
Nader had 6x the votes as Buchanan, Buchanan is insignificant numerically. He is only noteworthy in the butterfly ballot controversy sense. A symbol of the f'up that is 2000 Florida.
The friendship you cite is with King Hussein of Jordan, a different family, and a very different ruler. In his later years Hussein was involved in various peacemaking efforts and gave political opponents position in his government. A quite different person than the Iraqi ruler who coincidentally shared the same last name.
Actually it was a career diplomat that made the ambiguous statement, the ambassador, trying to make a point from Secretary of State Baker. And again she had made later statements warning Hussein not to invade about a week before the invasions.
Saddam would have never gotten the idea into his head and the entire disaster would never have happened.
Actually the ambassador briefly had him convinced the US would respond in one of these subsequent meetings, but then Saddam re-convinced himself he could get away with it.
Plus we have the fact that there was an Iraqi military build-up on the border prior to all these statements.
Your hypothesis that Saddam would never have gotten the idea on his own is clearly false.
It's not a conspiracy theory but thanks for using a term popularized by the CIA (yes!) to discredit people. How's it feel, being on their side? I hope it pays well. And if you're not being paid, you should be. You're a sucker to defend them in public for free.
That you for shredding what little credibility you had left and confirming your disposition towards conspiracy theories, hoaxes, etc
And again, you ignore the six months of military build-up and instruction to leave Kuwait before the US led war began.
Apparently you did not read your own citation. You focus on a vague communique and ignore the face to face meeting where she clearly told Hussein not to use military force.
Plus you ignore the 6 months of military build-up and instructions to leave Kuwait that preceded the US led war.
The conspiracy theory based upon the ambiguous communique ignores that face to face meetings with the ambassador where Saddam was repeatedly warned not to invade Kuwait. Plus there is the whole 6 months of military build up and being told to leave Kuwait that also preceded the war.
The Nader lie is empirically untrue: most Nader voters would have not voted. This is just a canard.
No, you are merely ill informed. Nader claimed that exit polls said 25% of his voters would have gone Bush, 38% would have gone Gore and the remaining (37%) would not have voted. That is a net 13% for Gore, and with Nader receiving 97K votes in Florida that is a net gain by Gore of 12K votes in Florida. Bush won Florida by 500.
Nader voters would have otherwise leaned to Gore, as Perot voters would have otherwise leaned to Bush.
Total myth. Perot "took" votes from Democrats as well as Republicans, and Clinton was passing Bush when Perot dropped out of the race before dropping back in.
Perot took more from conservatives. Conservatives includes some democrats, democrats that were more inclined to support a Reason or Bush than a Carter, Mondale or Clinton. There were once these strange creatures called conservative democrats and moderate republicans that leaned conservative on defense and public safety but leaned liberal on social and civil rights.
Polls don't mean crap, especially in such timeframes as between Perot's exit and return.
Perot gave us Clinton. Nader gave us Bush Jr. Sanders gave us Trump.
GHWB was an accomplished athlete, a collegiate level athlete.
GHWB believed in duty and responsibility, not entitlement, he used his father's power and influence to get into a combat unit.
GHWB had the social grace and interpersonal skills to successfully interact with others, even others from different nations and different cultures and who had very different belief systems than he did.
In short he was very little like "us", "us" being the slashdot community in general. Not performing well for the TV cameras is hardly evidence that he was one of "us".
Slashdot Mirror
No need. Just dump the waste materials from orbital industries into orbit around Saturn to replace the lost matter.
In my neighborhood, 23 said Uranus.
And they are correct. That is one of the four with rings.
Lets not forget bio fuels. Our gasoline, diesel and jet fuel does not need to come from petroleum. It can come from biological processes so that these fuels become carbon neutral.
Internal combustion engines and jet turbine engines are not the problem, its only the *current* source of their fuel.
Computers are computers. Data specific to the use case was not a big deal.
Yes, but those two companies likely had similar development cultures. For example neither probably advocated moving so fast and testing so little that buggy ("broken") software was produced yet *tolerated*.
Many of these facebook employees searching for jobs may now find their utility to potential employers is less than that of an inexperienced recent grad. That their "move fast and break things" experience is considered detrimental and they have to be re-trained.
Al Queda is Saudi Wahhabism's foreign legion.
Nope. Al Queda split from the state/ruling elite supported version of Wahhabism long ago.
Clinton was leading Perot and Bush before Perot dropped out ...
Polls that far our from an election are not that reliable and are rather meaningless.
three. hundred. thousand. registered Democrats voted for Bush.
That set the stage for Nader tipping the race to Bush. In the county that decided the election by 500 votes, Nader took away from Gore a net 12K votes. That was a decisive results at the critical time and place. Unlike Buchannon, etc. Sorry, you can't wave away such a decisive single event.
As for confusing Shiites with Sunni jihadists
There is no confusion. Both are being opposed, the Al Qaeda backed Sunni jihadists and the Iranian backed Shiite jihadists. That a third group, Wahhabi based Sunni extremists, are being supported does not change the former.
Perot didn't want to win. He wanted Bush to lose. God only knows why but when Bush was CIA director and Perot ...
Perot was a Vietnam POW conspiracy theorist. Perot believed Bush knowingly left America POWs behind in Vietnam.
... as proven by the trajectory of the race ...
There goes your credibility.
... a much smaller group of people split between Democrats, Republicans and people who would have otherwise stayed home.
Exit polling indicates Nader took about 12K democratic votes away from Gore in a race decided by around 500 votes.
Perot took more from conservatives. Conservatives includes some democrats, democrats that were more inclined to support a Reagon or Bush than a Carter, Mondale or Clinton. There were once these strange creatures called conservative democrats and moderate republicans that leaned conservative on defense and public safety but leaned liberal on social and civil rights.
In short your failure is attempting to break things down by party rather than beliefs.
For iconic visuals the go to's are 2001 and Lawrence of Arabia. I'd lean towards the later but the former is politically safer.
It's like trying to use stone age arrow heads with a carbon fiber compound bow.
That stone age obsidian arrowhead is still highly effective, razor sharp, nicely weighted for penetration (inertia), etc. :-)
Be warned, higher resolution is not necessarily better. I had the pleasure of seeing 2001 at a film festival in a good theatre with a nice screen, a good sound system and a good quality print of the film, circa 1990s. Using film in a theatre some things were more clear than on a TV screen at home, even with a large projection screen of the day. For example painted backgrounds were far more obvious. However the theatre environment, screen, sound, sort of compensated and overall it was a net win for the legacy viewing experience.
The home theatre experience may not sufficiently offset the more noticeable visual flaws in legacy films.
At some point someone may pull a mild version of a Lucas and replace the painted backgrounds with digital backgrounds, again a *partial* Lucas. Maybe that would work? I'm getting used to the original Star Trek with its replacement CGI spaces scenes after a period of shock and horror.
Its not as if wall street types on CNBC didn't acknowledge previous massive drops in bitcoins history and conceded a drop to $4-5K was a real possibility .. oh wait. Many knew/know it is a "greater fool" game, they just don't expect to be the greater fool themselves.
The value of a bitcoin has always been, and continues to be, the value a speculator is willing to pay for it.
75% drops in value are somewhat routine. This one is slightly deeper, probably because the non-nerd speculators have recently joined the traditional nerd speculators. Many of the non-nerd speculators were fully away of this and expected a drop to $4-5K, it was something they conceded publicly on CNBC at times during those $10K-15K days.
Any paper currency that you could perfectly counterfeit would quickly fail.
The British pound notes of WW2 suggests otherwise. The British government recalled and replaced notes. Sure it hurt, and the pound was devalued on the continent, but it survived.
https://insh.world/history/how...
Not all Cryptocurrencies are doomed, but All cryptocurrencies based on "proof of work" are doomed.
Cryptocurrencies are based on software, they can be changed. They can migrate from proof of work to other methods, Etherium has planned on doing so all along. Bitcoin and other coins could do so if necessary.
Nader had 6x the votes as Buchanan, Buchanan is insignificant numerically. He is only noteworthy in the butterfly ballot controversy sense. A symbol of the f'up that is 2000 Florida.
Bush didn't avoid dealing with Hussein because he wanted to avoid mission creep, he did it because BushCO and the Hussein family were buddies.
The friendship you cite is with King Hussein of Jordan, a different family, and a very different ruler. In his later years Hussein was involved in various peacemaking efforts and gave political opponents position in his government. A quite different person than the Iraqi ruler who coincidentally shared the same last name.
And if not for Bush's screw-up,
Actually it was a career diplomat that made the ambiguous statement, the ambassador, trying to make a point from Secretary of State Baker. And again she had made later statements warning Hussein not to invade about a week before the invasions.
Saddam would have never gotten the idea into his head and the entire disaster would never have happened.
Actually the ambassador briefly had him convinced the US would respond in one of these subsequent meetings, but then Saddam re-convinced himself he could get away with it.
Plus we have the fact that there was an Iraqi military build-up on the border prior to all these statements.
Your hypothesis that Saddam would never have gotten the idea on his own is clearly false.
It's not a conspiracy theory but thanks for using a term popularized by the CIA (yes!) to discredit people. How's it feel, being on their side? I hope it pays well. And if you're not being paid, you should be. You're a sucker to defend them in public for free.
That you for shredding what little credibility you had left and confirming your disposition towards conspiracy theories, hoaxes, etc
And again, you ignore the six months of military build-up and instruction to leave Kuwait before the US led war began.
Apparently you did not read your own citation. You focus on a vague communique and ignore the face to face meeting where she clearly told Hussein not to use military force.
Plus you ignore the 6 months of military build-up and instructions to leave Kuwait that preceded the US led war.
The conspiracy theory based upon the ambiguous communique ignores that face to face meetings with the ambassador where Saddam was repeatedly warned not to invade Kuwait. Plus there is the whole 6 months of military build up and being told to leave Kuwait that also preceded the war.
The Nader lie is empirically untrue: most Nader voters would have not voted. This is just a canard.
No, you are merely ill informed. Nader claimed that exit polls said 25% of his voters would have gone Bush, 38% would have gone Gore and the remaining (37%) would not have voted. That is a net 13% for Gore, and with Nader receiving 97K votes in Florida that is a net gain by Gore of 12K votes in Florida. Bush won Florida by 500.
Nader voters would have otherwise leaned to Gore, as Perot voters would have otherwise leaned to Bush.
Because the Saudi's are opposing Al Qaeda militants and Iranian backed Shia militants. That is why both Obama and Trump sell them arms.
Total myth. Perot "took" votes from Democrats as well as Republicans, and Clinton was passing Bush when Perot dropped out of the race before dropping back in.
Perot took more from conservatives. Conservatives includes some democrats, democrats that were more inclined to support a Reason or Bush than a Carter, Mondale or Clinton. There were once these strange creatures called conservative democrats and moderate republicans that leaned conservative on defense and public safety but leaned liberal on social and civil rights.
Polls don't mean crap, especially in such timeframes as between Perot's exit and return.
Perot gave us Clinton. Nader gave us Bush Jr. Sanders gave us Trump.
GHWB was an accomplished athlete, a collegiate level athlete.
GHWB believed in duty and responsibility, not entitlement, he used his father's power and influence to get into a combat unit.
GHWB had the social grace and interpersonal skills to successfully interact with others, even others from different nations and different cultures and who had very different belief systems than he did.
In short he was very little like "us", "us" being the slashdot community in general. Not performing well for the TV cameras is hardly evidence that he was one of "us".