Y'know just 4 or 5 degrees would do it. It'd have no effect on food, I don't know where you get that one.
The Africa problem BTW has bugger all to do with global warming. US/EU agricultural subsidies and trade tariffs are the cause and at least the EU is changing it's agricultural policies so that farmers are paid for doing nothing instead of being paid for producing. It has also pretty much zero rated African imports.
You guessed incorrectly. Which is an especially poor guess because you could have clicked on my URL to find out exactly where I come from.
"we should research the planet as thoroughly as possible"
That argument is one for never doing anything. Perfect knowledge is impossible, a futile quest and a fearful excuse for stagnation. Life on Mars will offer no more insight to the genesis of life itself than life on Earth which is many orders of magnitude more abundant. Terraforming Mars using life from earth on the other hand would offer many insights into the evolution and colonisation of the planet.
Via and Transmeta do commodity boards and CPUs for low power systems. No fans, minimal cooling needed and yet still with decent performance. This article is *just* *plain* *dumb*.
"Not at least until we know more about mars's previous biosphere and if one currently exists."
Bugger Mars's previous biosphere.
Have you never seen a lion eat a gazelle? How about a chimpanzee tear apart a monkey. Sharks eating seals, starfish eating coral, ladybirds eating aphids.
Life kills and eats other life *all* the time. If you can't survive, your genes aren't good enough to exist. Any existing life on Mars doesn't deserve to live if it can't compete with Earth microbes.
If everyone worried about what future generations might think, nothing would ever happen.
"Sorry mindlessly eating and reproducing until there are no resouces left and you die only qualify as a very limited form of life for most people"
I've heard of anthormorphising but with *bacteria*?
Like it or not, life forms expand to fill their environment. That *is* life. Look at the red deer population in Scotland. The only predators now are man and their numbers have increased to the point that, yes, when they are not culled they die of starvation.
Frankly I don't particularly care if bacteria die of starvation and a food chain has to start somewhere.
We should be doing this *now* with *every* mission to mars. Planting bacteria, microbes anything that can survive in the environment. If necessary doing a bit of genetic manipulation to create species which can survive there.
You know this means another round of mass spamming, don't you. V1@gra and 0xyT0c1N only $15.99.
So who makes the stuff
on
Trust in a Bottle
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Cos I can see the sales of this compound going through the roof as well as sales of piezoelectric vaporizers.
Nightclubs, sales offices, news conferences, shops, sprays, deodourants, perfumes etc etc etc. Actually it doesn't really matter if the specific delivery mechanism works, only that the person buying it has read the science and believes it does.
Deposits are an OK idea, but they don't encourage economic development. If the recycling companies are making a bundle of money out of recycling and doing lots of it, at some point their natural resource, (the junk) is going to start to become scarce. They'll have to start buying the junk off of people.
These'd make electric cars extremely cost effective. An electric vehicle needs bugger all maintenance compared to an internal combustion engine largely due to the few moving parts, N*1000 charges on the battery lifetime would be millions of miles rather than around 150,000 miles for current li-ions. Then there's the high fuel vs low electricity cost.
I'm not saying give people money to recycle things. I should probably have been clearer. I'm saying get rid of taxes on recycling companies, like the aluminium can recycling companies. Reduce their tax burden and costs by what? 20%, 30%. Recycling companies then keep much more of the money from the products they've sold and have a good reason to go out and scavenge more.
No, simply give recycling companies a *big* tax advantage on any sales they can make. A PC for instance has a power supply, disks, copper wires, PCBs, gold, lead etc. It isn't worth chopping the things up to get at that stuff at the moment. Zero the taxes the company pays though and you have an economic reason to go out, pick up old kit, break it down into useful products and sell them.
Junk or trash then becomes the recycler's raw materials.
It isn't even as if you wouldn't get most of the tax back through income taxes of the employees of the recycling companies anyway.
You're all talking as if recycling stuff is a burden rather than an opportunity.
For a start, pull scales better than push so instead of making people recycle what you want are people going around scavenging old kit to use for other stuff. At the moment the economics are such that it isn't worth doing this but what if you made it extremely tax friendly for those who do the scavenging? After all, they are providing a social service by taking this unwanted kit.
Slashdot Mirror
"Crops become harder to grow"
Evidence? Where I live, warmer weather increases the length of the growing season. Crops are easier to grow.
Y'know just 4 or 5 degrees would do it. It'd have no effect on food, I don't know where you get that one.
The Africa problem BTW has bugger all to do with global warming. US/EU agricultural subsidies and trade tariffs are the cause and at least the EU is changing it's agricultural policies so that farmers are paid for doing nothing instead of being paid for producing. It has also pretty much zero rated African imports.
You can barely cope with Iraq, what make you think you can police the other 95% of the planet?
"Let me guess... you're american."
You guessed incorrectly. Which is an especially poor guess because you could have clicked on my URL to find out exactly where I come from.
"we should research the planet as thoroughly as possible"
That argument is one for never doing anything. Perfect knowledge is impossible, a futile quest and a fearful excuse for stagnation. Life on Mars will offer no more insight to the genesis of life itself than life on Earth which is many orders of magnitude more abundant. Terraforming Mars using life from earth on the other hand would offer many insights into the evolution and colonisation of the planet.
Via and Transmeta do commodity boards and CPUs for low power systems. No fans, minimal cooling needed and yet still with decent performance. This article is *just* *plain* *dumb*.
Cos by buying a 1U system with a slower CPU in the first place you could have saved money as well as reducing the temperature and power requirements.
I read the article and basically decided that the authors were a bunch of overpaid muppets with too much time on their hands.
l
e.g.
http://www.transmeta.com/success/desktop.html
http://www.transmeta.com/success/workstations.htm
http://www.transmeta.com/success/sbc.html
http://www.transmeta.com/success/server.html
etc etc etc.
I want a big house on Mars, somewhere to go on holiday. You might care but I really don't care about bacteria, Martian or not.
Look it up on Google, you could have a near silent server room today. AMD and Intel suck, literally (power & AC).
The point is.....?
If you want low power you can buy systems specifically designed to perform well on low power supply.
"Not at least until we know more about mars's previous biosphere and if one currently exists."
Bugger Mars's previous biosphere.
Have you never seen a lion eat a gazelle? How about a chimpanzee tear apart a monkey. Sharks eating seals, starfish eating coral, ladybirds eating aphids.
Life kills and eats other life *all* the time. If you can't survive, your genes aren't good enough to exist. Any existing life on Mars doesn't deserve to live if it can't compete with Earth microbes.
If everyone worried about what future generations might think, nothing would ever happen.
"Sorry mindlessly eating and reproducing until there are no resouces left and you die only qualify as a very limited form of life for most people"
I've heard of anthormorphising but with *bacteria*?
Like it or not, life forms expand to fill their environment. That *is* life. Look at the red deer population in Scotland. The only predators now are man and their numbers have increased to the point that, yes, when they are not culled they die of starvation.
Frankly I don't particularly care if bacteria die of starvation and a food chain has to start somewhere.
"little eating machines with no guarantee they will do anything except consume all the resources they can."
Yes, that's pretty much what life is. The next stage is to add something that consumes the bacteria.
"do we want to seed mars with life before we are certain that there is no native microbial life?"
Um, sorry but f*ck the native microbial life. Survival of the fittest.
We should be doing this *now* with *every* mission to mars. Planting bacteria, microbes anything that can survive in the environment. If necessary doing a bit of genetic manipulation to create species which can survive there.
Come on people, keep up.
Oh and you can put my name instead of the CowboyNeal option.
I take it that they didn't add on the time it takes the recipient of the morse code to go:
WTF is this?
The twat is sending morse code on a F*cking mobile.
FFS! I'm going to have to look this crap up on Google.
Got a converter. Lets see dot dot dash dot dash. Damnit missed the place.
(Phones Morse sender) FFS Bill can't you just send an SMS like normal people?
You know this means another round of mass spamming, don't you. V1@gra and 0xyT0c1N only $15.99.
Cos I can see the sales of this compound going through the roof as well as sales of piezoelectric vaporizers.
Nightclubs, sales offices, news conferences, shops, sprays, deodourants, perfumes etc etc etc. Actually it doesn't really matter if the specific delivery mechanism works, only that the person buying it has read the science and believes it does.
Deposits are an OK idea, but they don't encourage economic development. If the recycling companies are making a bundle of money out of recycling and doing lots of it, at some point their natural resource, (the junk) is going to start to become scarce. They'll have to start buying the junk off of people.
1000 charges and negligible loss of capacity. They also charge up to 80% in 60 seconds.
i -ion_battery/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/03/29/toshiba_l
These'd make electric cars extremely cost effective. An electric vehicle needs bugger all maintenance compared to an internal combustion engine largely due to the few moving parts, N*1000 charges on the battery lifetime would be millions of miles rather than around 150,000 miles for current li-ions. Then there's the high fuel vs low electricity cost.
"Why should we offer people money to recycle"
I'm not saying give people money to recycle things. I should probably have been clearer. I'm saying get rid of taxes on recycling companies, like the aluminium can recycling companies. Reduce their tax burden and costs by what? 20%, 30%. Recycling companies then keep much more of the money from the products they've sold and have a good reason to go out and scavenge more.
No, simply give recycling companies a *big* tax advantage on any sales they can make. A PC for instance has a power supply, disks, copper wires, PCBs, gold, lead etc. It isn't worth chopping the things up to get at that stuff at the moment. Zero the taxes the company pays though and you have an economic reason to go out, pick up old kit, break it down into useful products and sell them.
Junk or trash then becomes the recycler's raw materials.
It isn't even as if you wouldn't get most of the tax back through income taxes of the employees of the recycling companies anyway.
You're all talking as if recycling stuff is a burden rather than an opportunity.
For a start, pull scales better than push so instead of making people recycle what you want are people going around scavenging old kit to use for other stuff. At the moment the economics are such that it isn't worth doing this but what if you made it extremely tax friendly for those who do the scavenging? After all, they are providing a social service by taking this unwanted kit.
On recycling companies.