What is being offered by Microsoft and Intel is an inferior, but more expensive product. And your problem is? If it's more expensive and inferior then it'll be unsuccessful.
They have to figure out agriculture first!!! They can't figure out agriculture till the USA and EU stop dumping their subsidised agricultural overproduction on their markets and open their own agricultural markets to competition.
Answer me that and I'll get down on my knees and worship him. The bigger one that is... Our god would obviously just be a little godling in comparison... I like to think of him as a Mini-Me god.
As far as I know, about 13 billion of the 24 billion is actually a direct loan from the Treasury, which last time I looked wasn't a central bank. You don't know. That makes no sense at all.
When the BoE can create money at the "flick of a pen", why would the treasury loan out tax revenues?
how long until they come standard with warp drives? It's about as close to warp drive as you're ever going to see. Even jumping out of a plane doesn't have quite the same effect where there are no objects nearby to relate your speed to.
Hell, even the initial electric vehicles like the Tesla are sub 4 seconds for acceleration.
My job is studying transport projects. So, if it's your job... How come you didn't notice the difference between a corridor solution which transports groups and a network solution which transports individuals?
This one is crap. Take my word. Thanks but your word is rather suspect given the above.
Self Sterering vehicle = trains. The future is mine! No, trains transport groups. Self steering vehicles need not transport groups and therefore are not trains.
On their own guide-way network, which means not road. We already have something like this. It's called "train". Ah, no.
There's a crucial difference between Ultra and a train. Ultra transports individuals, a train transports groups.
That means that Ultra can drive non stop directly to your destination, or as near as damnit. A train, because it transports groups, cannot do that. Ultra is on demand, you go to an Ultra stop and there's one waiting there for you. A train cannot do that because it's transporting groups.
Basically, a network of ultra stops is faster than a car while a train is a corridor solution which can't take you directly where you want to go, necessitating changes. The only common factor is that neither run on the road, and this is another advantage for Ultra. It isn't stopped by congestion, there is no congestion. There are no traffic lights, there are no junctions.
It is just a battery-operated-concrete-track-train. SLOW battery-operated-concrete-track-train. Sure, it has a top speed of just 25mph... However, because it doesn't stop for congestion, it doesn't stop for intermediate stations, it doesn't stop for traffic lights, it doesn't stop for junctions it's average speed is also 25mph. The average speed of a train in London is 11mph. The average speed of a car in London is 9mph. This system is nearly 3 times faster than virtually all other forms of transport.
About in 2025 nobody steering any vehicles anymore, I'm still waiting for my year 2000 flying car, good luck with your self steered 2025 car. Truth is, we are still VERY far from having those type of cars, and will probably never happen They're being implemented, now in the UK. http://www.atsltd.co.uk/media/pictures/
But for the moment we are quite far from letting the car drive itself, as it's really difficult to control all variables and preview all unexpected things that could go wrong. Which is why the other way to do it is to remove the variables. You then get the additional benefit of eliminating traffic congestion as well which actually makes it faster than a traditional car.
In the case of Northern Rock, the creation of 24 billion quid is small potatoes compared to the amount of money already in the system The 24 billion largely replaces loans which Northern Rock had already taken on the money markets. You have to remember the fractional reserve system though. That 24 billion basically acts as reserve for their own loan operation. The reserve ratio is something like 3% in the UK which means there's potential for around 700 billion worth of loans. In fact NR have generated around 100 billion worth of loans.
Surely the "creation" of money with little effort devalues the cash which I and everyone else have to hand. Yes. Yes it does exactly that. However, this is exactly how almost all of our money is created (95% in the US, around 97% in the UK). Every time someone takes out a loan at any bank, for any reason, new money is created, devaluing all the existing money.
That said, you'd have to have rocks in your head to believe you will be able to average 10% investment returns over (roughly) the next two years. Well.. The money supply here is barely increasing as of last month and some banks are offering 12% on a 1 year notice account. Clearly they're desperate for deposits.
I'm sorry, but yes you are. Given the context of the discussion, it's pretty ridiculous to bring up calories from sources we can't digest. No, you are wrong. This discussion is largely being predicated on the statement that any one calorie is just like any other calorie. That weight gain is a simple matter of calories consumed minus calories burned. Clearly this isn't the case. I've just given an example where the chirality of an otherwise identical molecule with determines the usefulness to the body.
The same is true for fats, proteins etc, it isn't a simple case of calories in and calories out, they all push specific chemical processes which have specific effects on the body and it's function. If the balance is wrong, people become malnutritioned. Replace calories supplied by sugar with calories supplied by proteins and there is an entirely different effect on the body.
I'm not splitting hairs at all. Left handed sugars for example are not metabolised, but otherwise carry identical amounts of energy as regular right handed sugars which are metabolised readily.
That's because our bodies have specific nutritional requirements. You can push one chemical pathway by loading up with one set of energy carrying fuels and the body will respond in one way. You can push an entirely different set of pathways by using different fuels and attain a different response from the body.
Enlighten me please The Bank of England simply created the money as an entry in a ledger. Then gave it to Northern Rock, they took NR's mortgages as collateral for the associated debt. This is what banks do.
They can just 'print' it of course but that's just devaluing the currency currently in circulation. Yes, basically, that's what loans do. These £24 billion loans would be inflationary if they weren't primarily replacing already existing loans from other banks which are no longer willing to lend on the money markets.
At no point did any of this money pass through the government coffers, the taxpayer didn't contribute a penny, in any form.
Slashdot Mirror
http://search.ebay.com/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=OLPC&category0=
You'll find the OLPC is basically just a financial subsidy to the poor in the developing world...
What's the average annual wage in Bangladesh?
http://www.ad.com/
An attempt to emulate a brain on a network of computers.
So. Who created god?
Answer me that and I'll get down on my knees and worship him. The bigger one that is... Our god would obviously just be a little godling in comparison... I like to think of him as a Mini-Me god.
When the BoE can create money at the "flick of a pen", why would the treasury loan out tax revenues?
To one significant digit he's correct.
You're kidding right? Pussies in shite old cars? Lol. No. Try this instead.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74hvJc2tKpU
Hell, even the initial electric vehicles like the Tesla are sub 4 seconds for acceleration.
http://www.teslamotors.com/performance/acceleration_and_torque.php
Mwhahahahahaha... I want one...
There's a crucial difference between Ultra and a train. Ultra transports individuals, a train transports groups.
That means that Ultra can drive non stop directly to your destination, or as near as damnit. A train, because it transports groups, cannot do that. Ultra is on demand, you go to an Ultra stop and there's one waiting there for you. A train cannot do that because it's transporting groups.
Basically, a network of ultra stops is faster than a car while a train is a corridor solution which can't take you directly where you want to go, necessitating changes. The only common factor is that neither run on the road, and this is another advantage for Ultra. It isn't stopped by congestion, there is no congestion. There are no traffic lights, there are no junctions. It is just a battery-operated-concrete-track-train. SLOW battery-operated-concrete-track-train. Sure, it has a top speed of just 25mph... However, because it doesn't stop for congestion, it doesn't stop for intermediate stations, it doesn't stop for traffic lights, it doesn't stop for junctions it's average speed is also 25mph. The average speed of a train in London is 11mph. The average speed of a car in London is 9mph. This system is nearly 3 times faster than virtually all other forms of transport.
http://www.atsltd.co.uk/media/pictures/ But for the moment we are quite far from letting the car drive itself, as it's really difficult to control all variables and preview all unexpected things that could go wrong. Which is why the other way to do it is to remove the variables. You then get the additional benefit of eliminating traffic congestion as well which actually makes it faster than a traditional car.
Sorry, no. Credit makes up 95% of the US money supply. It's literally impossible for everyone to remain out of debt.
What if the fat also stops you feeling hungry for 2 hours and the carbohydrates only stop you feeling hungry for 30 minutes?
The same is true for fats, proteins etc, it isn't a simple case of calories in and calories out, they all push specific chemical processes which have specific effects on the body and it's function. If the balance is wrong, people become malnutritioned. Replace calories supplied by sugar with calories supplied by proteins and there is an entirely different effect on the body.
Really, large organisations like the government should have global file systems (not GFS) in place. DFS, AFS etc.
Irrelevant. Cane sugar is equivalent to HFCS 50.
I'm not splitting hairs at all. Left handed sugars for example are not metabolised, but otherwise carry identical amounts of energy as regular right handed sugars which are metabolised readily.
That's because our bodies have specific nutritional requirements. You can push one chemical pathway by loading up with one set of energy carrying fuels and the body will respond in one way. You can push an entirely different set of pathways by using different fuels and attain a different response from the body.
All calories are NOT equal.
At no point did any of this money pass through the government coffers, the taxpayer didn't contribute a penny, in any form.
From the pen of the governor of the Bank of England. He created the money. From nothing. By writing it down in a ledger...
Or rather, these days, he typed it into a computer screen, so literally, from his finger tips.
Cos there are some carbohydrates for instance that the body just can't metabolise. They show up as calories when you burn them in a lab though.