Industrialized nations are 'used to' a higher level of power consumption, and this is what makes it so hard for them to change over. It will take generations to change attitudes and patterns of usage.
In the meen time we, for humanitarian reasons, need to elevate the standard of living in the '3rd world'. But if they grow up, to be just like us, they will pay a heavier price in having to cut back again. Better to get them 'adicted' to distributed renewable power sources. If a house or community can't make it's own power, it doesn't get it. You will need industrialized nations to manufacture the tools these developing countries will need. These new power sources require manufacturing, witch makes polution. Wind mills and batteries are complicated things to build, and produce waste that needs to be dealt with.
It's better to cap new growth in Industrial nations, forceing them to tighter emission and disposal regulations on NEW power. This will give breathing room, and allow for a more gradual transition into cleaner power. Changing over old power, and cutting back will take a long time.
remeber that giant german windmill? the one wit the 15Mw capacity. Cool huh?! They have a 120Gw daily consumption. And have to replace 10% of that within the next 5 years; pluss they are starting do decommision nuclear power plants, under public preasure.
That's allot of windmills. Especialy with each one costing some $18 million.
And solar is just not practicle. (solar impact at sea level is 600W/m^2 at the equator on a cloudless summer day. it's half that in Germany, and maximum current thermal efficiency without boilers is 35%)
Coal in the USA and in Europe still makes up 80% of the power generation. And that's the monster Kyoto is trying to kill.
sorry but there is no sustainable plan. There is no majick pill. all the windmills and tidal generators you can build will barely account for current demand. But the fact is that modern countries counsume some 10-15Kw per household. That's allot of power! And much of it is taken up by silly things, like running the water heater all day (.8kw), ovens running an average of 4hrs per day (1.5kw for a small toaster oven), Airconditioning, and cloths dryers. All these have at least partial solutions that could cut their anual consumption in half, but cloths lines just aren't trendy.
The problem, in the present, is the rate of consumsumption. And while drasticaly increaseing power costs may have the effect of lowering them, it also has the tendency to slam the brakes on the economy. Serious education has to be put into changeing public attitudes, it can be done look too the "crying indian" (now that was an offensive ad, but it did work)
Eventually though, no amount of renewables will account for total demand. Nuclear, fission or fusion, may be our only hope. Both are fairly clean, and hopefully safe. And are ultimately not dependent on 'solar' input into the system.
The US is not the #1 poluter. It's not just consumption, it's a ratio of productive output. Given our ratio of waste to GNP, the US stands as one of the most efficient nations on earth. China stacking much lower, as does the former soviet union (gotta find out there 'new' name already), and yes Europe
In fact there are only two countries on earth that have ended the 20th century with more forest than when they started the century. That's the USA and Israel (Israel also stands as the only country reversing desertification and gaining in productive land ratio)
The US shouldn't sign a treaty that lays unnecesary burden and blame at her feet.
Yes, the bill would cost millions of jobs, because it would DRAMATICALY increase the cost of energy, and there for production. That meens MORE over seas jobs, especialy in the blue colar work force. But we all know how much the Slashdot crowd cried when "labor" workers lost there jobs. So quit with the crocodile tears on the tech outsourceing. Bush has been extreamly conisistant on this issue, and outsourcing. His solution to outsourcing is to make America a better place to produce, and the Kyoto Acords will make it worse.
BTW: Can we stop atributing G_d like powers to the president. His actuall ability to stop intelectual outsourcing is extreamly limited. And you don't need tax breaks to justify buying a programer in India that costs 1/10 as much. NO amount of tax reliefe can drasticaly change those figures.
Lastly, while the science of the Kyoto is debatable it's policies are absured. It sets unreasonable time limits for technologicaly and industrialy advanced countries to convert over their power sources, while allowing developing nations to develop the same unhealthy and destructive energy dependency levels while developing. No number of windmills or magic solar panels will solve our energy requirements as they stand.
The Kyoto fails entirly at reducing our energy demand (wich already reaches 10% of the daily bruto solar energy added to our system every day), while focusing entirly on restricting our means of production. It stinks of kneejerk statesmenship, and fanaticle chicken litteling. It treats smaller issues like CO2 cycles as the core issue, instead of dealing with systemic solutions.
Not even Clinton would sign this rag, and infact I remember the media blaming him too for not even bothering to negotiate. And given the attitude twoards the USA of the authors of this accord, I don't blame him.
Why do people find it so absolutly necesary to make everyone else think like they do? Honestly, it's the wort kind of religion, wheter you call it Baptist, Budist, or Secularist.
In the mean time, this doesn't answere the complexity of design question. It does show an intresting form a transition from one type of nerve cell to another, and demostrates the power of a new method of research. But if your looking to find G_d's corps in it, your way off course.
Creationists fall into allot of categories, none of witch would respond to this in there argument. Mostly because this is limited to example of only one feature (yes which suggests others), and not an all encompasing, testable, hypothosis about the formation of complex structures without intermediate benefit. The case of the eye, while classic, is a bad analogy, since as Darwin pointed out "any eye is benefit". There are also dozens of question left unanswered, all much bigger than this, though it's always nice to see a classic one solved.
Also because THEY DON'T CARE! People rarely become religious because they looked into microscope and sayed "By Scott, none of it makes sense! Quick dunk me in some water!" More often then not, religion is the result of upbringing, or a long series of 'growths' that bring you to a place where you feel your life has most focus.
Personaly I agree that taking Genisis litteraly is more than a bit silly. But even still the story it's self is powerfull and brings us to profound insite, and personal growth.
Normally I don't respond to 'Anonymous Coward's. But there is one thing I want very much to point out:
This while i believe Bush will continue to increase debt of US economy amd would sodomize the US futher, meaning EU becomes stronger. I see advantages in both.
I think you just missed the last 30 years of global economics. This is NOT a zero sum game. That's the reason for NAFTA the reason for the EU, and the reason why no US politician can get a major tarif bill passed to save their life, and isolationism has become a dirty word.
It's also the reason why Outsourcing is not the end of the world (there goes my karma). As the world economy evolves it's only necesary to stay involved, stay adaptive, and stay competative. As the world turns, new oppourtunities will arise, and the more dynamic and entreprenurial economies will prevail.
This isn't a win or loose situation. Our money will get all tangled up (it is already really), and in the end we will all win.
But small thinking like this is what causes wars. When one thinks he has more to gain by controling all the chips. You win not by having all the chips, but by having strong aliances (buisness) and entering into new markets. American and European buisnesses are everywhere, and with the internet this will hopefully spread even to small buisnesses. We all go up together, we just have to hold on tight.
A valid point. But you have to ask yourself why? For me at least, and all the people I knew, it was for the hope of getting somewhere. I wasn't working just to pay the rent, I was saving for goals, and to start my own buisness (btw: an American co-worker of mine just came to my office to tell me good-bye. His home buisness just took off!! Way to go!)
The long work weeks and low vacation time, exist because people want to get ahead. And the only way to do that is to take matters into their own hands and work harder.
btw: Let's not that 4day work weak nightmare France got themselves into. Working less and having all the leasure time is not always such a great idea.
spend with their families and children, making sure they dont grow up to be criminals,
My parrents each worked 80hrs a week. And other than turning out a Republican, I grew up just fine;) Honestly though, I can not remember a moment of want to see my parents as a child, they were always there for me no matter what. Now if I can just get them to vote for Bush the circle will be complete...
here, in Germany, a university graduate starts with SIX weeks of vacation per year
No complaints here. I left the country too. And despite loving my adopted home, there is no greater Country on Earth than the USA. I love the idea of the vacation time I get here, I just ask for time off and get it. (can you imagine that?!)
i might point out that for at least the last year the euro/dollar exchange rate has been going to hell (for me anyway, all my money is still in the US). not a good sign.
The Euro's health has been in serious question too. Europe has gotten a huge boost out of the economic efficiencies of a unified Europe, but those efficiencies are begining to wane. Even Europe is outsourceing these days. Without continued expansion of the EU, there competative advantage may be lost.
Also the next 5 years of the Kyoto protocols may have a telling impact on their ability to cope. Germany alone has 120GW capacity to acount for, and is no where near fulfilling it.
But you never know with these things. 3 years ago everyone said India would be the next economic super power, now their population is more or less tapped for IP workers, and they are running out of good english speakers.
And it's not entirely certain that he would have stayed in power without US interference (and there was that). The guy held majority by 0.5% in a 3 way split! He ran the place like he had a mandate, and he DID NOT. Granted from the guys record it seems that he was genuinly motivated to help people, but not everyone wanted that help (some 64% of the country). And when things went south I seriously doubt he retained even that that marginal level of aproval.
Oh, a small tip, if you should ever come into power of a small south american country suseptible to revolt: Don't make HUGE changes in the local politics, piss off every major land owner, fail to actually get support to the little guy like you planned, then align yourself with Cuba and Russia (gee why would that freak out a guy like Nixon?)
Yes the US goverment screwed around. But they had good reason to be worried, and Allende was playing the game way to dangerous. While the CIA probably did all it could to push the country to revolution, and was more than a little instremental installing that lunatic Pinochet, there is not sufficient evidence to say they asasinated Allende, or if they even had too.
On a personaly note: Allende is one of the ugliest communists I've ever seen. Usually there such charasmatic bunch, with chiseled features. You know the kind that look good on a tee-shirt
And don't forget the genocide! That's the real lesson. To become like the US, find a large territory of land with abundant resources inhabited by a civilization with a large technological disadvantage, and murder them.
Britan is conqured territory. Not hardly a Celt left. No major resources to speak of in it's early history. They were, and largley still are, the eminent power.
Japan has neither concqued teritory, genocidal or amassed of resources. They are also dangerously close to the Chinese, who I'm sure haven't forgotten the land of the rising sun.
The Greeks were quite wealthy up untill the Roman conquest, and much of that time they kept to them selves, on shores that grew little more than olives, grapes, and sheep.
Austrailia has abundent resources and is further seperated from the rest of the world than North America, and while they are by no means poor, they've yet to see the economic boon of the USA.
Canada, Mexico, and South America all share our oceanic borders and resources, yet they have not accelled nearly as far militarily or economicaly as the USA.
I appolgize but I do not see any consistancy to the logic you put forward. While most of the places I listed are excelent places to live, they all varry widely within the catagorical advantages you listed.
Anyone can achieve to the capacity of their will, intelect, and desire in America. There has never been a limitation on that (except if you were Indian, Black, or a Woman but we're 99% past that now, thank G_d), and that is what sets the USA apart from all the places I listed.
BTW: The endless canard of racism agains the USA is tiresome. Old Europe still carries more racism in it's most civilized circles than you would find in some of the lowest class pubs in America. Racism is in America at the point where groups like the KKK are litteraly at the fringes of society, and not the least bit welcome inside. See if you find cafes of France, or the sands of Saudi Arabia so tolerant.
the US is a world leader because it came out of WWII relatively unscathed, while most of its competitors were devestated by war
The wonders of a monoscopic education! The US was a major world industry leader long before WW2. (though a better case for your point could be made for WW1) As refrence look at Japans demand for US Steel (partly 'cause we forced them to modernize, woops). Or Winston Churchils comments regarding the USA's industrial capacity.
Going futher back look twoards the Monro Doctrine, and the implementation of the first Iron Clads and submarines. Pre-civil war norther industrialism is given as one of the major reasons behidn the civil war.
It was before WW1 & WW2 that america invented everything from manufacturing to the modern electrical grid. The greatest iconoclasts of the last 2 centuries were largely American born or imagrents.
Our advantges resulting from the ending of ww2 not withstanding, it is has always been our inherent, obnoxious, cowboy attitude that has won us our place in this world, not random chance.
G_d does not play dice with the universe. And random luck soon runs out. 228 years and counting...
Let me spell it out (cause as is painfully obvious at this point it's the only think I can spell;)
Kill one 'world leader' to keep a country from sliding into a war?
Kill 300 inocent people to keep them from crashing into a tower and killing thousands?
I think the reason why you saw it as non-sequiter is you assume the motivation behind hypothetical assasinations is monetary. And I see it as the result of conflicting end goals of 'inocent' world leaders, that may eventually lead to war.
Right now it's heavily debated. Unless, of course, you watch Fox "News" and think Iraq orchestrated 9/11 (sadly, there are plenty of people who believe this).
The UN actually passed a resotion stating that Iraq had failed to meat the requirements of the armistace, and encouraged former members of the 91 Gulf war to act militarily to remove the suspected WMD from Iraq. And the fear was less that they created 9/11 and more that they would 'encourage' another. Let's try to keep in mind there that Alqueda (sp?!) isn't an organaziation, so much as an ideology. All they require is a region of support, for training and weapons. (Iran is less of a threat in *that* regard as Alqueda is racialy oriented, and Iranians are not Arab)
genocide on the Native Americans after 1812
Not one of the USA's prouder moments. Let's be honest... There isn't a nation on earth (present day) not built on the ashes of another. It's not justificatin, but it should lend some perspective.
US has assassinated democratically elected leaders and installed America-friendly dictators
If the decision ever came to it, to shoot down the next 9/11 plain, filed with 300+ people, what would your decision be? Sometimes you have to do the cold math.
How is visiting one candidate website "interferes".
A good refrence is Slashdot, a month ago (aprox) someone distributed a tool to aid in attacking the Bush website. You know what they say about finding a cockaroach in your living room?
See, stop trying to be the world's sheriff. Then we'll start ignoring your politics.
It's amazing, the everyone throws a tizzy that the USA won't sign the Kyoto protocols, because were such a small world and we all need to share it (no arguments there). But never mind the millions dieing right next door, or the lunatic with an arsenal (Even the UN sanctioned action, due to suspician of Nukes, and we DID find bioweapons). We wouldn't find it necesary to do this stuff if the rest of the world would just do something about it! Strangely, we don't like sending our children to strange places to die any more than you do. BTW: No one was complaining when we were fighting the comunist expansion were they? Now were just inconvienent. There comes a time when you have to act, and waiting for the aproval of corrupt billionare world leaders on the take is just going to make things worse. You have to act before theres a crisis.
The US is where it is, because we believe in individual responsibility. We make our own destiny. In the USA or abroad.
But aparently you never got the memo. So you wander around waiting for someone else to make/brake you. Wondering when the elites that be, will grace you with their civilized kindness. Europe has no need for G_d anymore, because they replace him/her/it with nobility long ago.
If the USA is one of your countries problems it's one of three categories:
1) Your the proud recipient of a infantry devision and your taking fire. It's a debatable point that the USA hasn't entered into an unprovoked conflict since 1812 (sorry to the canadians, that one was our fault). It may be time to start rethinking your ledership options. (Hint: not the guy with the wild eyes and the rifle.)
2) Your economy is dependent on America. Don't like it fine. Get off our teet. You do have the option not to watch our movies, buy our products, or sell us your cr@p; that meens you, personaly.
3) Your one of the millions of people who recieve USA aid. In the form of food, protection, shelter, aid workers, education, rescue workers, or outright financing. Congradulations! You still don't get a vote.
We already voted. Most of us anyway. Absentee ballots are either mailed in or delivered to our local embassy.
Besides, I'm so sick of the locals here acting like they have a say in the US elections. So good for Bush, it's nice to see someone with a grasp of reality.
PS. To anyone who may be offended by saying that that I'm sick of your comments on the US election (you know who you are): DEAL WITH IT! I don't get to vote in your petty little elections so stay out of mine. My country, my vote; I don't care what you or the rest of the world thinks. After you solve all of your problems then you can comment on ours.
I can't imagine what they are attempting to gain from this. If your dead set on reading this online you can get it with or without the help of TGP. And if your like me and dislike the eye strain of reading online, you can always go to a used book store and buy it for $2USD. In any of the above cases the estate doesn't see one cent.
The only case I'd imagine the suit has merits, to lost revenue, is as mandetory reading material for school children. Such as mass purchases by schools for the students (who should be buying it used anyway, but that's not relevent here). In that case there really just gouging schools. Way to go!
Can anyone else think of a ligitimate reason why this law suit should matter to the estate holders?
Most men do not stygmatize people on this, but they're subconciously aware of what would provoke those who do stygmatize.
I had no idea I was such a subconsious bigot!
why is it hard?
Me. In spandex? Yes. I'm not even sure how to put it on. Do you have to heat it up first?
Why do you get funny looks?
Pink spandex? Most women would get funny looks. I would positivly bring down the house with laughter.
Why don't you have pink in your wardrobe?
Because blue is my color. It brings out my eyes. That and my color blind mother spent most of my childhood trying to get me to wear pink. Why do we let her shop? 11 years after highschool and I'm still a nerd 'cause of that woman. Ho hum.. It pays well at least.
whereas a business man regularly getting his shoes polished on his lunch break would not.
Yes, but if he shows up in your pink spandex all bets are off. Same goes for makeup, tweasing, or any other personal grooming habit that may border on vanity.
Ahh.. there it is. The kernel of the issue is vanity, and that it is not expected of men. That diferentiation may be a tad archaic. Since it used to be a womans job, such to attract a man. In theory we are beyond the point where a woman seeks a husband as a provider, and his earning potential is more important than his grooming (she fixes that anyway). In practice it just isn't usually the case.
So a cheap, short haircut, jeans and a T-shirt is generally not fashion, it's conforming. There are social pressures on men not to deviate...
Women in the workforce tend to have shorter fingernails and shorter haircuts. Their cloths are often designed for pragmitisim or to intimidate, not attract (obvious exceptions exempted). And this is all considering the fact that most young women are still raised with beuty raised to a primary virtue! Never the less they still take on a more pragmatic apearance.
The opposite is true too... I can't say how much women strive to appear womanly, and how much they'd be ostracized for going around everywhere with a cheap, efficient hair cut, jeans and a t-shirt.
That's probably because men (97%-90% of the time) find WOMEN attractive. And that includes all of the normative social signals that we have been conditioned to think of as womanly. By the same token men try to apear manly, such as to attract women. The fact that it's easier to look manly (thanx to testasterone, and a derth of mens fasion magazines) than womanly is NOT MY FAULT! I didn't make up the rules, I just play by them.
Your probably right that most men are boring dressers. And that we are over proud of ourselves for simply matching shoes and belts (FYI that's one of the 'rules'). But there is a HUGE difference between concern for ones appearance and vanity.
"The Superman of the 21'st century is metrosexual you insensitive clod!."
So help me, I think I just felt the Duke, Sinatra, and Clint Eastwood (this is how rumors get started) crawling out of their graves to kick your @ss for saying that. Good fricken grief!
WTF is the big deal with this "metrosexual" cr@p? Seriously; other than "Will & Grace" being on TV nothing has changed. Men have ALWAYS been concerned with how they looked, because women always were. Different segments of society just have different ideas of attractiveness. Some consider blue jeans and a T-shirt attractive, others find men with WAY to much time on their hands attractive (ex: "The English Gentleman", Fop, excreta)
"metrosexual Function: noun Definition: a young, urban and usually heterosexual male who is concerned with fashion, food and grooming Etymology: Coined by Mark Simpson in 1994 article for The Independent "
Fashion: addressed above. This is subjective. The fact that men are inclined to dress more femininely is culturally transient, and irrelevant to phrases such as "21'st century".
Food: Male is the traditional gender for Chef's. Julia Childs (RIP/ztzal) aside almost every major cook in HISTORY has been a man. No offence to my sisters out there, but men are just generally more preoccupied by food.
Grooming: see the Fonz for reference. Warning: I can not be held responsible for what I might do to you if you refer to Alfredo Fonzerely as metrosexual.
I should be careful to note here, that I am not passing judgment on anyone. Not for their mode of dress, and certainly not for how they choose to live their lives. This is strictly meant as pop social commentary, and my personal belief that anyone who applies this label to himself, or others, is just rather fond of labels and trends. (me I'm just fond of run on sentences)
The advantage of USB Mass Storage drivers are A) they are universal B) They are already applied to a WIDE variety of storage devices. So you can add any kind of memory your want, including SD,CF and Sony Memmory stick, depending on what you already have on hand, and what your power/storage requirements are. C) The thing's I value most in any electronics I by are modularity and customizablity. Ex. Batteries should always be of a standard form factor, regardless of advanges of custom batterys. It's my only quam about iPods and modern mp3 players. In a years time I want to be able to replace the batteries anywhere, not just my original vendor.
I don't know how the Neuros stacks up. I don't own one. I have an ULTRA CHEAP JumpGear. Which I like allot, but it's far from perfect (and far from an iPod).
Removable hard drive standard. Which could fit anything from a USB Flash Drive to a clam shell HD unit of your choosing.
Granted the power consumption would be awsome, but there is room for a "Little" more weight here considering that the cam is toughted at the size of a cell phone.
Slashdot Mirror
Solar energy impact on the surface of the Earth, averages 83Tw daily. Current world wide consumption is 10Tw and growing.
Maximum theoretical conversion from heat to energy is 50% (in a sealed system, not sure on pure boilers).
I round up, because some energy is trapped in the atmosphere on it's way down and creates convection wind currents.
In any case, were not capable of tapping the full amount.
Time to start building nuclear reactors.
Industrialized nations are 'used to' a higher level of power consumption, and this is what makes it so hard for them to change over. It will take generations to change attitudes and patterns of usage.
In the meen time we, for humanitarian reasons, need to elevate the standard of living in the '3rd world'. But if they grow up, to be just like us, they will pay a heavier price in having to cut back again. Better to get them 'adicted' to distributed renewable power sources. If a house or community can't make it's own power, it doesn't get it. You will need industrialized nations to manufacture the tools these developing countries will need. These new power sources require manufacturing, witch makes polution. Wind mills and batteries are complicated things to build, and produce waste that needs to be dealt with.
It's better to cap new growth in Industrial nations, forceing them to tighter emission and disposal regulations on NEW power. This will give breathing room, and allow for a more gradual transition into cleaner power. Changing over old power, and cutting back will take a long time.
Europe ISNT managing it!
remeber that giant german windmill? the one wit the 15Mw capacity. Cool huh?! They have a 120Gw daily consumption. And have to replace 10% of that within the next 5 years; pluss they are starting do decommision nuclear power plants, under public preasure.
That's allot of windmills. Especialy with each one costing some $18 million.
And solar is just not practicle. (solar impact at sea level is 600W/m^2 at the equator on a cloudless summer day. it's half that in Germany, and maximum current thermal efficiency without boilers is 35%)
Coal in the USA and in Europe still makes up 80% of the power generation. And that's the monster Kyoto is trying to kill.
sorry but there is no sustainable plan. There is no majick pill. all the windmills and tidal generators you can build will barely account for current demand. But the fact is that modern countries counsume some 10-15Kw per household. That's allot of power! And much of it is taken up by silly things, like running the water heater all day (.8kw), ovens running an average of 4hrs per day (1.5kw for a small toaster oven), Airconditioning, and cloths dryers. All these have at least partial solutions that could cut their anual consumption in half, but cloths lines just aren't trendy.
The problem, in the present, is the rate of consumsumption. And while drasticaly increaseing power costs may have the effect of lowering them, it also has the tendency to slam the brakes on the economy. Serious education has to be put into changeing public attitudes, it can be done look too the "crying indian" (now that was an offensive ad, but it did work)
Eventually though, no amount of renewables will account for total demand. Nuclear, fission or fusion, may be our only hope. Both are fairly clean, and hopefully safe. And are ultimately not dependent on 'solar' input into the system.
The US is not the #1 poluter. It's not just consumption, it's a ratio of productive output. Given our ratio of waste to GNP, the US stands as one of the most efficient nations on earth. China stacking much lower, as does the former soviet union (gotta find out there 'new' name already), and yes Europe
In fact there are only two countries on earth that have ended the 20th century with more forest than when they started the century. That's the USA and Israel (Israel also stands as the only country reversing desertification and gaining in productive land ratio)
The US shouldn't sign a treaty that lays unnecesary burden and blame at her feet.
Yes, the bill would cost millions of jobs, because it would DRAMATICALY increase the cost of energy, and there for production. That meens MORE over seas jobs, especialy in the blue colar work force. But we all know how much the Slashdot crowd cried when "labor" workers lost there jobs. So quit with the crocodile tears on the tech outsourceing. Bush has been extreamly conisistant on this issue, and outsourcing. His solution to outsourcing is to make America a better place to produce, and the Kyoto Acords will make it worse.
BTW: Can we stop atributing G_d like powers to the president. His actuall ability to stop intelectual outsourcing is extreamly limited. And you don't need tax breaks to justify buying a programer in India that costs 1/10 as much. NO amount of tax reliefe can drasticaly change those figures.
Lastly, while the science of the Kyoto is debatable it's policies are absured. It sets unreasonable time limits for technologicaly and industrialy advanced countries to convert over their power sources, while allowing developing nations to develop the same unhealthy and destructive energy dependency levels while developing. No number of windmills or magic solar panels will solve our energy requirements as they stand.
The Kyoto fails entirly at reducing our energy demand (wich already reaches 10% of the daily bruto solar energy added to our system every day), while focusing entirly on restricting our means of production. It stinks of kneejerk statesmenship, and fanaticle chicken litteling. It treats smaller issues like CO2 cycles as the core issue, instead of dealing with systemic solutions.
Not even Clinton would sign this rag, and infact I remember the media blaming him too for not even bothering to negotiate. And given the attitude twoards the USA of the authors of this accord, I don't blame him.
Why do people find it so absolutly necesary to make everyone else think like they do? Honestly, it's the wort kind of religion, wheter you call it Baptist, Budist, or Secularist.
In the mean time, this doesn't answere the complexity of design question. It does show an intresting form a transition from one type of nerve cell to another, and demostrates the power of a new method of research. But if your looking to find G_d's corps in it, your way off course.
Creationists fall into allot of categories, none of witch would respond to this in there argument. Mostly because this is limited to example of only one feature (yes which suggests others), and not an all encompasing, testable, hypothosis about the formation of complex structures without intermediate benefit. The case of the eye, while classic, is a bad analogy, since as Darwin pointed out "any eye is benefit". There are also dozens of question left unanswered, all much bigger than this, though it's always nice to see a classic one solved.
Also because THEY DON'T CARE! People rarely become religious because they looked into microscope and sayed "By Scott, none of it makes sense! Quick dunk me in some water!" More often then not, religion is the result of upbringing, or a long series of 'growths' that bring you to a place where you feel your life has most focus.
Personaly I agree that taking Genisis litteraly is more than a bit silly. But even still the story it's self is powerfull and brings us to profound insite, and personal growth.
Normally I don't respond to 'Anonymous Coward's. But there is one thing I want very much to point out:
This while i believe Bush will continue to increase debt of US economy amd would sodomize the US futher, meaning EU becomes stronger. I see advantages in both.
I think you just missed the last 30 years of global economics. This is NOT a zero sum game. That's the reason for NAFTA the reason for the EU, and the reason why no US politician can get a major tarif bill passed to save their life, and isolationism has become a dirty word.
It's also the reason why Outsourcing is not the end of the world (there goes my karma). As the world economy evolves it's only necesary to stay involved, stay adaptive, and stay competative. As the world turns, new oppourtunities will arise, and the more dynamic and entreprenurial economies will prevail.
This isn't a win or loose situation. Our money will get all tangled up (it is already really), and in the end we will all win.
But small thinking like this is what causes wars. When one thinks he has more to gain by controling all the chips. You win not by having all the chips, but by having strong aliances (buisness) and entering into new markets. American and European buisnesses are everywhere, and with the internet this will hopefully spread even to small buisnesses. We all go up together, we just have to hold on tight.
Americans work their f#cking asses off.
;) Honestly though, I can not remember a moment of want to see my parents as a child, they were always there for me no matter what. Now if I can just get them to vote for Bush the circle will be complete...
A valid point. But you have to ask yourself why? For me at least, and all the people I knew, it was for the hope of getting somewhere. I wasn't working just to pay the rent, I was saving for goals, and to start my own buisness (btw: an American co-worker of mine just came to my office to tell me good-bye. His home buisness just took off!! Way to go!)
The long work weeks and low vacation time, exist because people want to get ahead. And the only way to do that is to take matters into their own hands and work harder.
btw: Let's not that 4day work weak nightmare France got themselves into. Working less and having all the leasure time is not always such a great idea.
spend with their families and children, making sure they dont grow up to be criminals,
My parrents each worked 80hrs a week. And other than turning out a Republican, I grew up just fine
here, in Germany, a university graduate starts with SIX weeks of vacation per year
No complaints here. I left the country too. And despite loving my adopted home, there is no greater Country on Earth than the USA. I love the idea of the vacation time I get here, I just ask for time off and get it. (can you imagine that?!)
i might point out that for at least the last year the euro/dollar exchange rate has been going to hell (for me anyway, all my money is still in the US). not a good sign.
The Euro's health has been in serious question too. Europe has gotten a huge boost out of the economic efficiencies of a unified Europe, but those efficiencies are begining to wane. Even Europe is outsourceing these days. Without continued expansion of the EU, there competative advantage may be lost.
Also the next 5 years of the Kyoto protocols may have a telling impact on their ability to cope. Germany alone has 120GW capacity to acount for, and is no where near fulfilling it.
But you never know with these things. 3 years ago everyone said India would be the next economic super power, now their population is more or less tapped for IP workers, and they are running out of good english speakers.
Only time will tell.
See you on Nov 2.
Salvador Allende is a good, debatable point.
And it's not entirely certain that he would have stayed in power without US interference (and there was that). The guy held majority by 0.5% in a 3 way split! He ran the place like he had a mandate, and he DID NOT. Granted from the guys record it seems that he was genuinly motivated to help people, but not everyone wanted that help (some 64% of the country). And when things went south I seriously doubt he retained even that that marginal level of aproval.
Oh, a small tip, if you should ever come into power of a small south american country suseptible to revolt: Don't make HUGE changes in the local politics, piss off every major land owner, fail to actually get support to the little guy like you planned, then align yourself with Cuba and Russia (gee why would that freak out a guy like Nixon?)
Yes the US goverment screwed around. But they had good reason to be worried, and Allende was playing the game way to dangerous. While the CIA probably did all it could to push the country to revolution, and was more than a little instremental installing that lunatic Pinochet, there is not sufficient evidence to say they asasinated Allende, or if they even had too.
On a personaly note: Allende is one of the ugliest communists I've ever seen. Usually there such charasmatic bunch, with chiseled features. You know the kind that look good on a tee-shirt
And don't forget the genocide! That's the real lesson. To become like the US, find a large territory of land with abundant resources inhabited by a civilization with a large technological disadvantage, and murder them.
Britan is conqured territory. Not hardly a Celt left. No major resources to speak of in it's early history. They were, and largley still are, the eminent power.
Japan has neither concqued teritory, genocidal or amassed of resources. They are also dangerously close to the Chinese, who I'm sure haven't forgotten the land of the rising sun.
The Greeks were quite wealthy up untill the Roman conquest, and much of that time they kept to them selves, on shores that grew little more than olives, grapes, and sheep.
Austrailia has abundent resources and is further seperated from the rest of the world than North America, and while they are by no means poor, they've yet to see the economic boon of the USA.
Canada, Mexico, and South America all share our oceanic borders and resources, yet they have not accelled nearly as far militarily or economicaly as the USA.
I appolgize but I do not see any consistancy to the logic you put forward. While most of the places I listed are excelent places to live, they all varry widely within the catagorical advantages you listed.
Anyone can achieve to the capacity of their will, intelect, and desire in America. There has never been a limitation on that (except if you were Indian, Black, or a Woman but we're 99% past that now, thank G_d), and that is what sets the USA apart from all the places I listed.
BTW: The endless canard of racism agains the USA is tiresome. Old Europe still carries more racism in it's most civilized circles than you would find in some of the lowest class pubs in America. Racism is in America at the point where groups like the KKK are litteraly at the fringes of society, and not the least bit welcome inside. See if you find cafes of France, or the sands of Saudi Arabia so tolerant.
Fine, just as soon as you provide a list of leaders we've secretly assasinated.
Warning: Tinfoil hat answeres will be ignored.
the US is a world leader because it came out of WWII relatively unscathed, while most of its competitors were devestated by war
The wonders of a monoscopic education! The US was a major world industry leader long before WW2. (though a better case for your point could be made for WW1) As refrence look at Japans demand for US Steel (partly 'cause we forced them to modernize, woops). Or Winston Churchils comments regarding the USA's industrial capacity.
Going futher back look twoards the Monro Doctrine, and the implementation of the first Iron Clads and submarines. Pre-civil war norther industrialism is given as one of the major reasons behidn the civil war.
It was before WW1 & WW2 that america invented everything from manufacturing to the modern electrical grid. The greatest iconoclasts of the last 2 centuries were largely American born or imagrents.
Our advantges resulting from the ending of ww2 not withstanding, it is has always been our inherent, obnoxious, cowboy attitude that has won us our place in this world, not random chance.
G_d does not play dice with the universe. And random luck soon runs out. 228 years and counting...
Let me spell it out (cause as is painfully obvious at this point it's the only think I can spell ;)
Kill one 'world leader' to keep a country from sliding into a war?
Kill 300 inocent people to keep them from crashing into a tower and killing thousands?
I think the reason why you saw it as non-sequiter is you assume the motivation behind hypothetical assasinations is monetary. And I see it as the result of conflicting end goals of 'inocent' world leaders, that may eventually lead to war.
Hence the Spock 'needs of the many..' logic.
Right now it's heavily debated. Unless, of course, you watch Fox "News" and think Iraq orchestrated 9/11 (sadly, there are plenty of people who believe this).
The UN actually passed a resotion stating that Iraq had failed to meat the requirements of the armistace, and encouraged former members of the 91 Gulf war to act militarily to remove the suspected WMD from Iraq. And the fear was less that they created 9/11 and more that they would 'encourage' another. Let's try to keep in mind there that Alqueda (sp?!) isn't an organaziation, so much as an ideology. All they require is a region of support, for training and weapons. (Iran is less of a threat in *that* regard as Alqueda is racialy oriented, and Iranians are not Arab)
genocide on the Native Americans after 1812
Not one of the USA's prouder moments. Let's be honest... There isn't a nation on earth (present day) not built on the ashes of another. It's not justificatin, but it should lend some perspective.
US has assassinated democratically elected leaders and installed America-friendly dictators
If the decision ever came to it, to shoot down the next 9/11 plain, filed with 300+ people, what would your decision be? Sometimes you have to do the cold math.
How is visiting one candidate website "interferes".
A good refrence is Slashdot, a month ago (aprox) someone distributed a tool to aid in attacking the Bush website. You know what they say about finding a cockaroach in your living room?
See, stop trying to be the world's sheriff. Then we'll start ignoring your politics.
It's amazing, the everyone throws a tizzy that the USA won't sign the Kyoto protocols, because were such a small world and we all need to share it (no arguments there). But never mind the millions dieing right next door, or the lunatic with an arsenal (Even the UN sanctioned action, due to suspician of Nukes, and we DID find bioweapons). We wouldn't find it necesary to do this stuff if the rest of the world would just do something about it! Strangely, we don't like sending our children to strange places to die any more than you do. BTW: No one was complaining when we were fighting the comunist expansion were they? Now were just inconvienent. There comes a time when you have to act, and waiting for the aproval of corrupt billionare world leaders on the take is just going to make things worse. You have to act before theres a crisis.
Comment? yes.
Make demands upon? No.
Interfere? No. The Guardians attempts were insulting to say the least.
But thank you for not posting as an anonymous troll. I can respect that.
Ironic little loop isnt it?
The US is where it is, because we believe in individual responsibility. We make our own destiny. In the USA or abroad.
But aparently you never got the memo. So you wander around waiting for someone else to make/brake you. Wondering when the elites that be, will grace you with their civilized kindness. Europe has no need for G_d anymore, because they replace him/her/it with nobility long ago.
If the USA is one of your countries problems it's one of three categories:
1) Your the proud recipient of a infantry devision and your taking fire. It's a debatable point that the USA hasn't entered into an unprovoked conflict since 1812 (sorry to the canadians, that one was our fault). It may be time to start rethinking your ledership options. (Hint: not the guy with the wild eyes and the rifle.)
2) Your economy is dependent on America. Don't like it fine. Get off our teet. You do have the option not to watch our movies, buy our products, or sell us your cr@p; that meens you, personaly.
3) Your one of the millions of people who recieve USA aid. In the form of food, protection, shelter, aid workers, education, rescue workers, or outright financing. Congradulations! You still don't get a vote.
Wow, a world with free choice, aint it a wonder.
We already voted. Most of us anyway. Absentee ballots are either mailed in or delivered to our local embassy.
Besides, I'm so sick of the locals here acting like they have a say in the US elections. So good for Bush, it's nice to see someone with a grasp of reality.
PS. To anyone who may be offended by saying that that I'm sick of your comments on the US election (you know who you are): DEAL WITH IT! I don't get to vote in your petty little elections so stay out of mine. My country, my vote; I don't care what you or the rest of the world thinks. After you solve all of your problems then you can comment on ours.
I can't imagine what they are attempting to gain from this. If your dead set on reading this online you can get it with or without the help of TGP. And if your like me and dislike the eye strain of reading online, you can always go to a used book store and buy it for $2USD. In any of the above cases the estate doesn't see one cent.
The only case I'd imagine the suit has merits, to lost revenue, is as mandetory reading material for school children. Such as mass purchases by schools for the students (who should be buying it used anyway, but that's not relevent here). In that case there really just gouging schools. Way to go!
Can anyone else think of a ligitimate reason why this law suit should matter to the estate holders?
Most men do not stygmatize people on this, but they're subconciously aware of what would provoke those who do stygmatize.
I had no idea I was such a subconsious bigot!
why is it hard?
Me. In spandex? Yes. I'm not even sure how to put it on. Do you have to heat it up first?
Why do you get funny looks?
Pink spandex? Most women would get funny looks. I would positivly bring down the house with laughter.
Why don't you have pink in your wardrobe?
Because blue is my color. It brings out my eyes. That and my color blind mother spent most of my childhood trying to get me to wear pink. Why do we let her shop? 11 years after highschool and I'm still a nerd 'cause of that woman. Ho hum.. It pays well at least.
whereas a business man regularly getting his shoes polished on his lunch break would not.
Yes, but if he shows up in your pink spandex all bets are off. Same goes for makeup, tweasing, or any other personal grooming habit that may border on vanity.
Ahh.. there it is. The kernel of the issue is vanity, and that it is not expected of men. That diferentiation may be a tad archaic. Since it used to be a womans job, such to attract a man. In theory we are beyond the point where a woman seeks a husband as a provider, and his earning potential is more important than his grooming (she fixes that anyway). In practice it just isn't usually the case.
So a cheap, short haircut, jeans and a T-shirt is generally not fashion, it's conforming. There are social pressures on men not to deviate...
Women in the workforce tend to have shorter fingernails and shorter haircuts. Their cloths are often designed for pragmitisim or to intimidate, not attract (obvious exceptions exempted). And this is all considering the fact that most young women are still raised with beuty raised to a primary virtue! Never the less they still take on a more pragmatic apearance.
The opposite is true too... I can't say how much women strive to appear womanly, and how much they'd be ostracized for going around everywhere with a cheap, efficient hair cut, jeans and a t-shirt.
That's probably because men (97%-90% of the time) find WOMEN attractive. And that includes all of the normative social signals that we have been conditioned to think of as womanly. By the same token men try to apear manly, such as to attract women. The fact that it's easier to look manly (thanx to testasterone, and a derth of mens fasion magazines) than womanly is NOT MY FAULT! I didn't make up the rules, I just play by them.
Your probably right that most men are boring dressers. And that we are over proud of ourselves for simply matching shoes and belts (FYI that's one of the 'rules'). But there is a HUGE difference between concern for ones appearance and vanity.
"The Superman of the 21'st century is metrosexual you insensitive clod!."
So help me, I think I just felt the Duke, Sinatra, and Clint Eastwood (this is how rumors get started) crawling out of their graves to kick your @ss for saying that. Good fricken grief!
WTF is the big deal with this "metrosexual" cr@p? Seriously; other than "Will & Grace" being on TV nothing has changed. Men have ALWAYS been concerned with how they looked, because women always were. Different segments of society just have different ideas of attractiveness. Some consider blue jeans and a T-shirt attractive, others find men with WAY to much time on their hands attractive (ex: "The English Gentleman", Fop, excreta)
"metrosexual Function: noun Definition: a young, urban and usually heterosexual male who is concerned with fashion, food and grooming Etymology: Coined by Mark Simpson in 1994 article for The Independent "
Fashion: addressed above. This is subjective. The fact that men are inclined to dress more femininely is culturally transient, and irrelevant to phrases such as "21'st century".
Food: Male is the traditional gender for Chef's. Julia Childs (RIP/ztzal) aside almost every major cook in HISTORY has been a man. No offence to my sisters out there, but men are just generally more preoccupied by food.
Grooming: see the Fonz for reference. Warning: I can not be held responsible for what I might do to you if you refer to Alfredo Fonzerely as metrosexual.
I should be careful to note here, that I am not passing judgment on anyone. Not for their mode of dress, and certainly not for how they choose to live their lives. This is strictly meant as pop social commentary, and my personal belief that anyone who applies this label to himself, or others, is just rather fond of labels and trends. (me I'm just fond of run on sentences)
such a thing should also be possible on IR equiped, programable cell phones.
h
The advantage of USB Mass Storage drivers are
A) they are universal
B) They are already applied to a WIDE variety of storage devices. So you can add any kind of memory your want, including SD,CF and Sony Memmory stick, depending on what you already have on hand, and what your power/storage requirements are.
C) The thing's I value most in any electronics I by are modularity and customizablity. Ex. Batteries should always be of a standard form factor, regardless of advanges of custom batterys. It's my only quam about iPods and modern mp3 players. In a years time I want to be able to replace the batteries anywhere, not just my original vendor.
I don't know how the Neuros stacks up. I don't own one. I have an ULTRA CHEAP JumpGear. Which I like allot, but it's far from perfect (and far from an iPod).
Removable hard drive standard. Which could fit anything from a USB Flash Drive to a clam shell HD unit of your choosing.
Granted the power consumption would be awsome, but there is room for a "Little" more weight here considering that the cam is toughted at the size of a cell phone.
Now when can I expect to be able to write my own code for this thing?
were I dating someone of such 'caliber' it would not be her conversation I would be interested in.
Fortunately I set my goals higher.