meant after the lava stage, initially; but probably should revise that to since plants have been around, after you know, oxygen became a thing, it's been going up and down but down is the general trend. you've got stuff like upwards of 2000 ppm during some of the dino periods.
my point was our, for lack of a better term, evolutionary predecessors didn't choke on it. I don't think we'll choke on it either.
reshape the world, but we won't be dead. May never reach the same level again without easy access to similarly exploitable energy density to grow up with... but that's a problem for future theoretical me and his future friends.
apologies, the stupid was aimed at you, i don't think the average consumer will blink twice about this. i don't think they'll triple the price tag of this thing, because i think they're covering costs and not trying to run a profit.
i don't believe they have any ulterior motives other than to try and make sure that blame is easier to assign to those that do stupid things.
I don't think the drone manufacturers are on board with this proposal because they think it will damage their sales.
i think you're calling it a cash grab in error, because the cost is too low, and they're forgoing the initial registration fee i think if it is a cash grab, then we have bigger things to worry about because that would mean our government's accountants can't fucking add.
you know what the alternative proposal is that i can think of off the top of my head? each property owner decides exactly what can and cannot be in their property up to a height of 500 feet, and you better stick to public streets, because they're in their legal right to shoot your drone out of the sky. If it damages someone else's property, you're on the hook for it, you weren't supposed to be on their property, they got a sign right out front that trespassers will be shot.
registering vehicles on property, it appears as if it is governed by local laws. so yes or no depending on where you live.
a law that is effectively unenforceable and therefore unenforced does not effect you one way or the other. we've all got some pretty stupid legacy laws on the books that nobody enforces. What's the difference between those and a new one that nobody enforces?
you can claim "it's the principle of the thing" but honestly i don't think it will impact anyone that just wants to use it on their property, and anyone that wants to take it out on a joyride, i would like to make it easier to track down who is responsible for property damage if it lands on something breakable.
point is, them jews are real good with the fancy lawyer speak. yeah, it seemed like they were pretty adamant that israel would withdraw from occupied territories, but where they withdrew too would have to be resolved through mutual agreement.
i mean, honestly, there was a time when all that CO2 was in the air... it won't really kill us, it's just we kind of like where are coasts are right now. nothing inherently wrong with fossil fuels, that some cancer cure can't fix... we just need to figure out a way to put that shit back into the ground after we extract all the sweet sweet energy out of it.
i mean. i think david deutsch's point was basically, we gotta science our way out of this one. maybe genetic engineering or something with an economic incentive. the government could try to fund stuff in the "just so crazy awesome it could work" category.
something like, i don't know, make a super hardy algae that produces simple sugars and proliferates like a fucking champ and pair it with fish farms. just gotta make sure we don't jurassic park ourselves.
apparently you're still supposed to register your vehicle regardless. even if you don't require a license.
you know what? i don't think you have to register a drone if you never take it outside your property though. it may not be written anywhere, but who the fuck is going to find out?
I feel this is more of a "if it falls out of the sky and lands on a porsche we know who to go to for damages" kind of deal.
bergdhal was stupid, but i'm not sure if i could have come up with a better resolution you know? It's not like we can leave his ass over there, that said i hope he gets court-martialed, slammed for desertion. Tossed in jail for maybe 3 years to show we mean it and to reinforce that we think he's a dick. Don't think he's a traitor, think he was just a dumbass kid. 5 years + 3 years, should be enough. Was the prisoner swap ideal? no, could we have done better? i don't think so.
muslim vs christian, fact-check seems to feel this is down to lots of things. the sunnis are predominantly the ones fleeing. because assad is trying to shoot them into submission. and a lot of the 10% christian population of syria is assad supporters apparently. more muslims because those are the ones being moved around by being shot at. basically, what they're saying is, you gotta factor in who's being shot at and where are they being shot at. Some of them aren't fleeing because they're not being shot at.
because you're literally talking about just enough money to hire on a couple people per state to run DRONE REGISTRATION!!, which probably means organizing compliance with manufacturers, setting up blah blah blah. organizing with local law enforcement.
I didn't say it was a meaningless impact. while setting up, maintaining, enforcing drone registration don't seem too hard, it must be free right?
Tap water is potable today, i don't see how they can't or won't put poison in it tomorrow.
tripling revenue wouldn't even be out of the question in the case where they need to actually get more people out there because people are found to be non-compliant in staggering numbers because of stupid.
like someone thinking this is at all about money, and taking a fucking stand... for AMERICA.
might as well say how the library card fees are just a scheme by "Big Literacy" to rob you of money. dumbass
It is a historical fact, which nobody has ever attempted to deny, that the negotiations between the members of the Security Council, and with the other interested parties, which preceded the adoption of that resolution, were conducted on the basis of English texts, ultimately consolidated in Security Council document S/8247. [...] Many experts in the French language, including academics with no political axe to grind, have advised that the French translation is an accurate and idiomatic rendering of the original English text, and possibly even the only acceptable rendering into French. [...] [o]n the question of concordance, the French representative [to the 1379th meeting of the Security Council on November 16, 1967] was explicit in stating that the French text was "identical" with the English text.[40] - israeli guy at UN at the time.
looks like the english version, which specified occupied territories as opposed to the french version which could be translated to "the occupied territories" was the binding one, as it was the version actually voted on.
later on the phrase "from territories" appears again, arabic nations had pushed for "from the territories" and "from all territories" to be used, but both of those were explicitly rejected.
it wouldn't have been legally binding to the US government without approval of congress... but it certainly would not have looked good for the US representative to agree to language that he could not deliver.
It would be a PR nightmare for an ambassador to agree to promise more than he's authorized to give, and i think that's exactly what would have happened.
david deutsch at an almost entirely tangential ted-talk made an excellent point.
he felt we're already too far gone at this point. doing nothing would be a catastrophe, stopping emissions today, to the level necessary would also constitute a catastrophe of a different nature. At this point, it may be worth losing sight of the box entirely for a solution.
space mirrors:) or something similarly ludicrous. But we might be at the point where anything reasonable would be even worse.
i'm not sure they're empowered to make empty promises.
where's the money come from? saying we will provide funds to help less developed nations transition to cleaner alternatives sounds nice, but i don't think it's in the constitutional authority of the executive to promise money not budgeted by the legislature. the administrations already on shaky ground with these kinds of deals that sidestep congressional approval to a degree. I don't think they'd have any standing, especially with open-ended commitments.
wait, so 5 dollars for 3 years... they say they project 700000 drones in the coming year, or maybe this year... lets just say, ballpark 2 million individuals subject to this registration fee. fuck it 3 million for easy maths.
makes it 5 million dollars per year...
FAA seems to currently employ something like 50000 permanent employees.
so everybody gets 100 dollars extra a year, or it could cover the salaries of something like 100-150 people in the 30k-50k range. 2-3 people per state, in salary alone.
1) fine, arguable about the value of half a mill, but fine. 2) sure, i don't really care that much, commercial space is probably going to be set aside at some point regardless, and usually in places that recreational use wouldn't really want to operate anyway. 3) ummm..... 4) yes, ok *huge step back* yeah, buddy, that makes perfect sense *step back* oh what's that? i think i hear my oven timer... i gotta go... do.. this thing *full blown retreat from crazy*
i've also gotta buy a drivers license to drive. NOOOOOO BENEFITTTTTTTT LISTTTT.
just uncle sam wants a paycheck right? Fcuk them and their stupid list, who are they to tell me if i can operate a vehicle i own. forget about gas tax and the EPA. no fucking benefit at all.
you can just imagine houston going "now jeb, here's what we're going to need you to do. We're going to tell you when, and you're going to get out of the capsule. line up with the hatch... and push it with your face."
your lander on it's side? easy solve, just power up main thrusts a little, spin and hope for the best.
first block: not the right to take over, but calling it conquest is rife with problems too. they have had a continuous presence, it's not even a return. This is interesting reading for me, not much more, and i'm as far from religious as a reasonable person could be, i am one of those "made so they cannot believe."
I don't care whether or not their rights have been conferred by god or not. I will say though that it is without dispute, largely, that there have been jews in that area tracing back to before the roman empire... so yeah, at least 2000 years. whereas arabs... well, they have a great deal of claim to the arabian peninsula, iran iraq, babylon etc... but their claims to the land are claims of later conquest than the ones of the jews. that's around 700 CE?
second block: not just german sounding, straight-up nazi term meaning "cleansed of jews." There aren't as many succinct ways to say "kill all the jews" in english. And i think that was the express purpose of the 5 army invasion in 1948. And that was the propoganda, "don't get in the way, we'll drive these jews into the sea, come back after we've won. also you might want to flee, the jews are raping all the women and children."
second block: i'm not that heavily invested in this topic, grew up in new jersey, not jewish, we had something like 1/20 jews population-wise,:) i've been to a bar mitzvah before, which is interesting to say the least. anyway, it was not built on conquest for the pretty simple fact that borders hadn't been drawn yet. my point was, the ottomans ruled everybody, pretty damn peacefully... except you know, they kinda wanted to keep those uppity jews down. They imploded as a result of WWI and pressure from the rest of europe, so after WWI the empire got divvied up. Eventually, after WWII the british got tired of getting terrorized by the jews for not keeping their word. So, they decided they'd let the newly formed UN handle the ass-ache.
The UN decided to carve out a tiny chunk of the british mandate for israel, and give the rest to the arabs. meh. the palestinians have a nation of their own, it was called Jordan. the 5 arab nations didn't go to war just to with the nascent israel just to defend their bretheren, they did it also to divvy up who would get what chunks. but the palestinian identity was a convenient fiction.
in this day and age, i've never been issued death threats for mocking moses or christ. and in the same breath, someone that says, "be compassionate and culturally sensitive, blasphemy instigates violence," will say, "safe space safe space" as if they've got a portable "base" in a game of tag. cognitive dissonance at its finest. I'm just going to say, i've a liberal bent, and i'd prefer jewish rule of that area, i certainly know which one i'd rather live under, and if most liberals took a long hard look at their allies, they'd agree.
i'd rather live in israel than jordan. i can call bibi a "f*ckin' c*nt" in israel, if you did that in jordan, about their heads of state, prepare to go to jail and be fined heavily if anyone hears you. also apparently it's illegal to proselytize to muslims.
Slashdot Mirror
i'd rate this higher
meh, bleh, looked it up,
meant after the lava stage, initially; but probably should revise that to since plants have been around, after you know, oxygen became a thing, it's been going up and down but down is the general trend. you've got stuff like upwards of 2000 ppm during some of the dino periods.
my point was our, for lack of a better term, evolutionary predecessors didn't choke on it. I don't think we'll choke on it either.
reshape the world, but we won't be dead. May never reach the same level again without easy access to similarly exploitable energy density to grow up with... but that's a problem for future theoretical me and his future friends.
apologies, the stupid was aimed at you, i don't think the average consumer will blink twice about this.
i don't think they'll triple the price tag of this thing, because i think they're covering costs and not trying to run a profit.
i don't believe they have any ulterior motives other than to try and make sure that blame is easier to assign to those that do stupid things.
I don't think the drone manufacturers are on board with this proposal because they think it will damage their sales.
i think you're calling it a cash grab in error, because the cost is too low, and they're forgoing the initial registration fee
i think if it is a cash grab, then we have bigger things to worry about because that would mean our government's accountants can't fucking add.
you know what the alternative proposal is that i can think of off the top of my head? each property owner decides exactly what can and cannot be in their property up to a height of 500 feet, and you better stick to public streets, because they're in their legal right to shoot your drone out of the sky. If it damages someone else's property, you're on the hook for it, you weren't supposed to be on their property, they got a sign right out front that trespassers will be shot.
registering vehicles on property, it appears as if it is governed by local laws. so yes or no depending on where you live.
a law that is effectively unenforceable and therefore unenforced does not effect you one way or the other. we've all got some pretty stupid legacy laws on the books that nobody enforces. What's the difference between those and a new one that nobody enforces?
you can claim "it's the principle of the thing" but honestly i don't think it will impact anyone that just wants to use it on their property, and anyone that wants to take it out on a joyride, i would like to make it easier to track down who is responsible for property damage if it lands on something breakable.
point is, them jews are real good with the fancy lawyer speak. yeah, it seemed like they were pretty adamant that israel would withdraw from occupied territories, but where they withdrew too would have to be resolved through mutual agreement.
hrm, maybe genetic engineering of super algae.
i mean, honestly, there was a time when all that CO2 was in the air... it won't really kill us, it's just we kind of like where are coasts are right now. nothing inherently wrong with fossil fuels, that some cancer cure can't fix... we just need to figure out a way to put that shit back into the ground after we extract all the sweet sweet energy out of it.
i mean. i think david deutsch's point was basically, we gotta science our way out of this one. maybe genetic engineering or something with an economic incentive. the government could try to fund stuff in the "just so crazy awesome it could work" category.
something like, i don't know, make a super hardy algae that produces simple sugars and proliferates like a fucking champ and pair it with fish farms. just gotta make sure we don't jurassic park ourselves.
apparently you're still supposed to register your vehicle regardless. even if you don't require a license.
you know what? i don't think you have to register a drone if you never take it outside your property though. it may not be written anywhere, but who the fuck is going to find out?
I feel this is more of a "if it falls out of the sky and lands on a porsche we know who to go to for damages" kind of deal.
bergdhal was stupid, but i'm not sure if i could have come up with a better resolution you know? It's not like we can leave his ass over there, that said i hope he gets court-martialed, slammed for desertion. Tossed in jail for maybe 3 years to show we mean it and to reinforce that we think he's a dick. Don't think he's a traitor, think he was just a dumbass kid. 5 years + 3 years, should be enough. Was the prisoner swap ideal? no, could we have done better? i don't think so.
muslim vs christian, fact-check seems to feel this is down to lots of things. the sunnis are predominantly the ones fleeing. because assad is trying to shoot them into submission. and a lot of the 10% christian population of syria is assad supporters apparently. more muslims because those are the ones being moved around by being shot at. basically, what they're saying is, you gotta factor in who's being shot at and where are they being shot at. Some of them aren't fleeing because they're not being shot at.
because you're literally talking about just enough money to hire on a couple people per state to run DRONE REGISTRATION!!, which probably means organizing compliance with manufacturers, setting up blah blah blah. organizing with local law enforcement.
I didn't say it was a meaningless impact. while setting up, maintaining, enforcing drone registration don't seem too hard, it must be free right?
Tap water is potable today, i don't see how they can't or won't put poison in it tomorrow.
tripling revenue wouldn't even be out of the question in the case where they need to actually get more people out there because people are found to be non-compliant in staggering numbers because of stupid.
like someone thinking this is at all about money, and taking a fucking stand... for AMERICA.
might as well say how the library card fees are just a scheme by "Big Literacy" to rob you of money. dumbass
from wikipedia
It is a historical fact, which nobody has ever attempted to deny, that the negotiations between the members of the Security Council, and with the other interested parties, which preceded the adoption of that resolution, were conducted on the basis of English texts, ultimately consolidated in Security Council document S/8247. [...] Many experts in the French language, including academics with no political axe to grind, have advised that the French translation is an accurate and idiomatic rendering of the original English text, and possibly even the only acceptable rendering into French. [...] [o]n the question of concordance, the French representative [to the 1379th meeting of the Security Council on November 16, 1967] was explicit in stating that the French text was "identical" with the English text.[40]
- israeli guy at UN at the time.
looks like the english version, which specified occupied territories as opposed to the french version which could be translated to "the occupied territories" was the binding one, as it was the version actually voted on.
later on the phrase "from territories" appears again, arabic nations had pushed for "from the territories" and "from all territories" to be used, but both of those were explicitly rejected.
it wouldn't have been legally binding to the US government without approval of congress... but it certainly would not have looked good for the US representative to agree to language that he could not deliver.
It would be a PR nightmare for an ambassador to agree to promise more than he's authorized to give, and i think that's exactly what would have happened.
egg on the face and all that.
david deutsch at an almost entirely tangential ted-talk made an excellent point.
he felt we're already too far gone at this point. doing nothing would be a catastrophe, stopping emissions today, to the level necessary would also constitute a catastrophe of a different nature. At this point, it may be worth losing sight of the box entirely for a solution.
space mirrors :) or something similarly ludicrous. But we might be at the point where anything reasonable would be even worse.
i'm not sure they're empowered to make empty promises.
where's the money come from? saying we will provide funds to help less developed nations transition to cleaner alternatives sounds nice, but i don't think it's in the constitutional authority of the executive to promise money not budgeted by the legislature. the administrations already on shaky ground with these kinds of deals that sidestep congressional approval to a degree. I don't think they'd have any standing, especially with open-ended commitments.
delivered to your victims house?
bought in person?
alibi?
if you're going to go to extraordinary lengths to frame someone, i think we should be able to go to extraordinary lengths to investigate no?
wait, so 5 dollars for 3 years... they say they project 700000 drones in the coming year, or maybe this year... lets just say, ballpark 2 million individuals subject to this registration fee. fuck it 3 million for easy maths.
makes it 5 million dollars per year...
FAA seems to currently employ something like 50000 permanent employees.
so everybody gets 100 dollars extra a year, or it could cover the salaries of something like 100-150 people in the 30k-50k range. 2-3 people per state, in salary alone.
I don't think it's a cash cow is what i'm saying.
haven't read the article, but from the comments i gather it's 5 dollars for your number, which you add to everything you own.
correction, just browsed the article, yes, 5 dollars for your number, or 0 in the next month or so, then add to everything you own.
your outrage has no legs.
...
1) fine, arguable about the value of half a mill, but fine.
2) sure, i don't really care that much, commercial space is probably going to be set aside at some point regardless, and usually in places that recreational use wouldn't really want to operate anyway.
3) ummm.....
4) yes, ok *huge step back* yeah, buddy, that makes perfect sense *step back* oh what's that? i think i hear my oven timer... i gotta go... do.. this thing *full blown retreat from crazy*
i think the point is, you can track them down easier and take away their toys so they can't be dicks again.
i've also gotta buy a drivers license to drive. NOOOOOO BENEFITTTTTTTT LISTTTT.
just uncle sam wants a paycheck right? Fcuk them and their stupid list, who are they to tell me if i can operate a vehicle i own. forget about gas tax and the EPA. no fucking benefit at all.
oh wait.
what do you mean i might be the victim?!?!?!??!?!
yeah, put all those fuckers on a list.
well... calculations hard, and my EVA has plenty of delta-V.
:) hey, i'm not letting you go until i got what i want. And i know you have it.
so you give me what i want, or we keep adding coins to this game of whack-a-mole until the mole dies.
i have this wrench, the password is, however hard i need to hit you that's between too-painful and non-fatal.
it's a very difficult game, so i think i'm gonna need a bunch of whacks at it.
Debeers Red, it's not real unless someone has died for your love.
you can just imagine houston going "now jeb, here's what we're going to need you to do. We're going to tell you when, and you're going to get out of the capsule. line up with the hatch... and push it with your face."
your lander on it's side? easy solve, just power up main thrusts a little, spin and hope for the best.
first block:
not the right to take over, but calling it conquest is rife with problems too. they have had a continuous presence, it's not even a return. This is interesting reading for me, not much more, and i'm as far from religious as a reasonable person could be, i am one of those "made so they cannot believe."
I don't care whether or not their rights have been conferred by god or not. I will say though that it is without dispute, largely, that there have been jews in that area tracing back to before the roman empire... so yeah, at least 2000 years. whereas arabs... well, they have a great deal of claim to the arabian peninsula, iran iraq, babylon etc... but their claims to the land are claims of later conquest than the ones of the jews. that's around 700 CE?
second block: not just german sounding, straight-up nazi term meaning "cleansed of jews." There aren't as many succinct ways to say "kill all the jews" in english. And i think that was the express purpose of the 5 army invasion in 1948. And that was the propoganda, "don't get in the way, we'll drive these jews into the sea, come back after we've won. also you might want to flee, the jews are raping all the women and children."
also this dude was spiritual leader of mandatory palestine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
second block: i'm not that heavily invested in this topic, grew up in new jersey, not jewish, we had something like 1/20 jews population-wise, :) i've been to a bar mitzvah before, which is interesting to say the least.
anyway, it was not built on conquest for the pretty simple fact that borders hadn't been drawn yet. my point was, the ottomans ruled everybody, pretty damn peacefully... except you know, they kinda wanted to keep those uppity jews down. They imploded as a result of WWI and pressure from the rest of europe, so after WWI the empire got divvied up. Eventually, after WWII the british got tired of getting terrorized by the jews for not keeping their word. So, they decided they'd let the newly formed UN handle the ass-ache.
The UN decided to carve out a tiny chunk of the british mandate for israel, and give the rest to the arabs. meh. the palestinians have a nation of their own, it was called Jordan. the 5 arab nations didn't go to war just to with the nascent israel just to defend their bretheren, they did it also to divvy up who would get what chunks. but the palestinian identity was a convenient fiction.
in this day and age, i've never been issued death threats for mocking moses or christ. and in the same breath, someone that says, "be compassionate and culturally sensitive, blasphemy instigates violence," will say, "safe space safe space" as if they've got a portable "base" in a game of tag. cognitive dissonance at its finest. I'm just going to say, i've a liberal bent, and i'd prefer jewish rule of that area, i certainly know which one i'd rather live under, and if most liberals took a long hard look at their allies, they'd agree.
i'd rather live in israel than jordan. i can call bibi a "f*ckin' c*nt" in israel, if you did that in jordan, about their heads of state, prepare to go to jail and be fined heavily if anyone hears you. also apparently it's illegal to proselytize to muslims.