Of course. But if a political fanatic movement to take us back to the stone age exists, it's easy for them to manipulate the bureaucracy to express their own motives. To see what I mean, contrast the nuclear industry and how it's regulated with commercial aviation and how it's regulated.
A whole rant in "response" to a post in which I made no assertions about the validity of AGW. All I said was that it has become a political pet project of the left, like man-hating feminocracy. Just as any criticism of the latter is "rape culture," any criticism of AGW is called "denialism."
I'm personally neutral on AGW, because I trust the scientific process to eventually come up with the truth on Arrhenius' venerable hypothesis.The outcome will be either:
1. AGW will turn out to be nonexistent or (more likely) overhyped as just one cause of climate change among many natural ones. We will get some melting ice here and there and some shifting of weather patterns, but mankind will survive. Since those who politicized the problem insist that only their favorite doomsday scenario is the only valid one, the left will lose all credibility at making scientific pronouncements. Nobody will ever listen to you again. Your heads explode. OR... 2. AGW will be proven out, and will be as apocalyptic as you claim. We will have to immediately stop using fossil fuel and rebuild the world's baseload power in nuclear, including in Germany. We will also have to geoengineer away existing CO2 by seeding millions of square miles of open ocean with iron to promote algal blooms, which will in dying carry large amounts of carbon with them to abyssal depths. Your heads explode.
Nuclear is not competitive in places that have bureaucracy, and where lawyers are powerful. This is why the impending big buildout is taking place in China.
I for one welcome our Truckatron overlords...
on
Autonomous Trucking
·
· Score: 1
...because of the lack of concern an automaton has with penis size. In those long upgrades where trucks are grinding slowly up the hill, we will no longer have to sit behind that 20 mph truck ignoring the 'Trucks use right lane' signage in vainly attempting to get past the 19.5 mph truck operating in the designated lane.
There is one exception to the double-checking rule though: climatology. Since the discipline went political, questioning a researcher's work in the field is 'denialism'.
Standard astronomical procedure now is to confirm detection of an expoplanet using toe or more detection methods before trumpeting the existence of MyWorld.
In Duolingo, I keep fixing those poorly written translations and then being overruled by the originL crappy writer. It's like editing Wikipedia in Spanish.
What you mean is that there was a brief kerfluffle circa 2010 about the early, clumsy use of HDR. Today it has settled down to being as much a professional technique as any other. It can be used for artistic effect or to bring life to cloudy and rainy dats.
And if you have ever faced a canyon headwall that requires nine wide-angle shots to get the whole thing in, you're going to want the ability to compose a magnificent, 50GB stitched and blended image.
Lightroom doesn't have to keep track of multiple-shot HDR's. I have Photomatix set up as my second alternative editor in LR, to be called when needed. My first alternative editor is the last cloudless version of Photoshop.
But are you happy with the way that iPhoto pulls all your images into one gigantic database, which (a) gradually swallows up your entire computer and (b) a corrupt library means you have lost ALL your images.
Choosing a photo editor is not as simple as many in here think. It happens that Adobe is shooing its customers into the cloud even faster than Apple is. I went with the one Adobe product, Lightroom, that still runs on one's own computer.
Openly film the cops with one camera. Have the other one set up in an inconspicuous location, where it can see them them beating the crap out of you and smashing the first camera. Do not inform anyone about the second camera until its footage is safely on YouTube.
And why do you think that every one of our infrastructure projects costs triple what we thought it was going to? Because the default mode of the very Democrats who proposed and approved the train is BANANA: build absolutely nothing, anywhere, near anyone. They tie it up in court until the costs balloon out of proportion to all sanity. Then they crow - "See - too expensive!"
I live right next to one of our town's eleven recent-vintage roundabouts, and the only people I see stopping are occasional clueless tourists. My intersection used to be a pretty busy signal serving traffic coming off the Interstate six miles away, with a residential cross street. The roundabout gets traffic through in all directions much more efficiently than the signal did. Bonus: late at night, the constant gunning of engines when the light changed used to disturb us late at night. Now, late-night traffic just glides through and we don't hear a thing.
Because you will be among people who won't object if you spend a whole convention week solving a jigsaw puzzle of all one color, or if you point out that it's "hoi polloi", not "the hoi polloi."
To use locally, though. Water from space will never be more economical than desalinated seawater, which becomes economical even with present-day reverse osmosis at 2 x the current California water price.
Slashdot Mirror
And what if someone rootkits the device? Would she suddenly start having dozens of children?
Of course. But if a political fanatic movement to take us back to the stone age exists, it's easy for them to manipulate the bureaucracy to express their own motives. To see what I mean, contrast the nuclear industry and how it's regulated with commercial aviation and how it's regulated.
Enjoy using your million-dollar taxi medallion as a coaster from now on.
A whole rant in "response" to a post in which I made no assertions about the validity of AGW. All I said was that it has become a political pet project of the left, like man-hating feminocracy. Just as any criticism of the latter is "rape culture," any criticism of AGW is called "denialism."
I'm personally neutral on AGW, because I trust the scientific process to eventually come up with the truth on Arrhenius' venerable hypothesis.The outcome will be either:
1. AGW will turn out to be nonexistent or (more likely) overhyped as just one cause of climate change among many natural ones. We will get some melting ice here and there and some shifting of weather patterns, but mankind will survive. Since those who politicized the problem insist that only their favorite doomsday scenario is the only valid one, the left will lose all credibility at making scientific pronouncements. Nobody will ever listen to you again. Your heads explode.
OR...
2. AGW will be proven out, and will be as apocalyptic as you claim. We will have to immediately stop using fossil fuel and rebuild the world's baseload power in nuclear, including in Germany. We will also have to geoengineer away existing CO2 by seeding millions of square miles of open ocean with iron to promote algal blooms, which will in dying carry large amounts of carbon with them to abyssal depths. Your heads explode.
Nuclear is not competitive in places that have bureaucracy, and where lawyers are powerful. This is why the impending big buildout is taking place in China.
...because of the lack of concern an automaton has with penis size. In those long upgrades where trucks are grinding slowly up the hill, we will no longer have to sit behind that 20 mph truck ignoring the 'Trucks use right lane' signage in vainly attempting to get past the 19.5 mph truck operating in the designated lane.
This does explain Slate, though.
There is one exception to the double-checking rule though: climatology. Since the discipline went political, questioning a researcher's work in the field is 'denialism'.
Standard astronomical procedure now is to confirm detection of an expoplanet using toe or more detection methods before trumpeting the existence of MyWorld.
That if you REALLY want to eliminate fossil fuel usage, the big spending is going to have to be on dams and nuclear reactors.
In Duolingo, I keep fixing those poorly written translations and then being overruled by the originL crappy writer. It's like editing Wikipedia in Spanish.
I'm a Duikingi user myself. The mic is optional. There is also an iOS app for maintaining practice on the road.
What you mean is that there was a brief kerfluffle circa 2010 about the early, clumsy use of HDR. Today it has settled down to being as much a professional technique as any other. It can be used for artistic effect or to bring life to cloudy and rainy dats.
And if you have ever faced a canyon headwall that requires nine wide-angle shots to get the whole thing in, you're going to want the ability to compose a magnificent, 50GB stitched and blended image.
Lightroom doesn't have to keep track of multiple-shot HDR's. I have Photomatix set up as my second alternative editor in LR, to be called when needed. My first alternative editor is the last cloudless version of Photoshop.
But are you happy with the way that iPhoto pulls all your images into one gigantic database, which (a) gradually swallows up your entire computer and (b) a corrupt library means you have lost ALL your images.
Choosing a photo editor is not as simple as many in here think. It happens that Adobe is shooing its customers into the cloud even faster than Apple is. I went with the one Adobe product, Lightroom, that still runs on one's own computer.
He supplies power to Germany on days when the wind drops.
Coal usage will drop as soon as the political winds shift yet again and a new generation of politicians reopens the nuclear plants.
The word exists. It's just uncommon.
Openly film the cops with one camera. Have the other one set up in an inconspicuous location, where it can see them them beating the crap out of you and smashing the first camera. Do not inform anyone about the second camera until its footage is safely on YouTube.
And why do you think that every one of our infrastructure projects costs triple what we thought it was going to? Because the default mode of the very Democrats who proposed and approved the train is BANANA: build absolutely nothing, anywhere, near anyone. They tie it up in court until the costs balloon out of proportion to all sanity. Then they crow - "See - too expensive!"
I live right next to one of our town's eleven recent-vintage roundabouts, and the only people I see stopping are occasional clueless tourists. My intersection used to be a pretty busy signal serving traffic coming off the Interstate six miles away, with a residential cross street. The roundabout gets traffic through in all directions much more efficiently than the signal did. Bonus: late at night, the constant gunning of engines when the light changed used to disturb us late at night. Now, late-night traffic just glides through and we don't hear a thing.
I could buy some needy obstetrician a malpractice policy for that amount.
someone forgot to slap an iFind tag on the patent application they were about to file.
Because you will be among people who won't object if you spend a whole convention week solving a jigsaw puzzle of all one color, or if you point out that it's "hoi polloi", not "the hoi polloi."
To use locally, though. Water from space will never be more economical than desalinated seawater, which becomes economical even with present-day reverse osmosis at 2 x the current California water price.