So they developed a rabbit cancer called Myxomatosis and unleashed it on australian rabbits. Which made its wayt back to europe, ravaging rabbit populations THERE.
They didn't "develop" anything. Myxomatosis is caused by a natural virus in the pox family that was discovered in Uruguay in the 1800s.
It isn't cancer. It doesn't cause cancer. The rabbits develop tumors, yes. But not all tumors are cancer.
It also didn't "make its way back to Europe," it was intentionally introduced in the UK after WWII to control rabbit populations there, which is how it got to Europe.
Hey, I don't think they do either - at least not enough to cause even minor physiological problems. I carry two cell phones and have a ham license.
With apologies to Douglas Adams, I would characterize sane radio transmissions as "mostly harmless".
I *do* like to have an understanding of what the each side thinks, including the people that don't like the idea of my transmissions going through their bodies. I make a conscious decision to subject them to my activities based on my belief that it is mostly harmless. I feel it is important to recognize that we do this to people against their will, harmless or not.
Minor infractions do not require someone from the DA's office to prosecute the case. So the charge will stick and you have to pay or go to court.
Chances are that the police know that the DA will not pursue charges against whoever broke your car window due to lack of budget, because the DA will be prioritizing against cases that involve personal violence, social ills (drugs), or high-level/high-visibility crime. It's not worth the time of the police to do anything more than take a report because they know that the DA will not take the case.
By the way, where do you live that police budgets are still dependent on fine revenue? Some US states have resolved the "quota" issue by having fine revenue go directly to the general fund of the state, not to the local police department which are usually funded by local budgets and non-fine revenue.
Often it's a matter of budget. In my area it was well known that for a time the county couldn't prosecute relatively* minor crimes due to lack of funding for the DA's office.
At that point the police don't bother to enforce, because they spend their budget processing people who are going to get let go anyway.
(*by "relatively minor", basically property crimes and the so-called victimless crimes)
Anybody gets angry and agitated when their stuff gets taken away from them, no matter what that stuff is.
You could substitute cars, television, dishwasher, or any number of things that people typically own for where you said guns, and the rest of your statement is true.
I do speak from experience when I say that a weapon serves no purpose other than to kill.
So you are saying there is no sport in putting tiny objects into the center of a paper circle from a distance?
I assume you will be okay with outlawing darts, javelin throwing, shotput, archery, and other sports that have their roots in the military. After all, they are essentially practice for ways of killing people. Don't forget fencing, wrestling, various eastern martial arts... need I go on?
Linux is often the better choice for desktop usage when security is not an issue.
Security is *always* an issue. Especially on the desktop. One merely needs to look at the large botnets comprised entirely of zombie Windows machines to understand why.
Well, to start we disagree about "backyard"... but I'll go with you for the sake of the argument.
Since you asked for that exclusion, I'd say "backyard" is any land with a dwelling that has space devoted to non-farm and non-ranch purposes that (1) can see the plant or (2) can be directly affected by malfunction, misoperation, or malicious activity at the plant in such a manner as health or wealth (e.g. property value) could be negatively impacted for a significant period of time due to such an event.
I would say that (2) would include being above an aquifer that the plant is also above, being within the exposure area of a theoretical nuclear accident, any increase in background radiation, etc.
Personally, I'd live right next to that plant and be perfectly happy about it. Provided I had water that came from pretty far away.:-)
You can demand, but you need to be willing to have it next door, or be willing to use force against others to have it next door to them if you can't find anyone to volunteer.
I never once said I was against clean power. You here the "dick" here by inventing things that I haven't said.
In fact, I live a few blocks away from a giant paper mill that processes uncounted tons of post-consumer waste into recycled goods. It also supports jobs and the shipping industry so I can buy things that come from thousands of miles away and feel good that less trees are being cut down to support the packaging of said things.
It doesn't bother me.
I have, in the past, also lived less than a mile from a coal power plant. That didn't bother me either. The plant was almost entirely unnoticeable except on rare occasion when they had to unload a hopper, which resulted in a rather loud whoosh as all the coal dumped out.
I'm not anti-solar, just playing devil's advocate.
You still aren't answering the question. Are you willing to locate a solar plant in your own back yard? Or the mine for the raw materials? Or the assembly plant?
It's a 'yes or no' question that I find that most pro-electric, pro-solar people are unwilling to answer because nobody wants that.
It has to be located somewhere, however. So, if you are so supportive of the electric car industry and cleaner power, why won't you volunteer yourself to have the necessary infrastructure located in close proximity to you?
I am saying that most people don't think the electric car utopia through. There is a large contingent of people who think that ecological problems will just disappear when everyone drives an electric car.
Your solar plant is not zero-emission, either. How did the solar plant get manufactured? The raw materials were dug up from the earth with the associated pollution of mining.
Yes, we do share the same air, but there's a difference between living in the same valley as the power plant, or living upwind 100 miles.
Will you be the first to volunteer to have a new power plant of any sort in your back yard?
The extra cost comes with great value, though, because gasoline cars have enormous externalized (i.e. invisible) costs, since they foul the air, the ecosystem, and the political climate.
So you are saying electric cars don't foul up the air or ecosystem?
Just where do you think electricity comes from?
Oh wait... it won't foul up *your* air or *your* ecosystem, just the guy who has to live next to one of the power plants that generates the electricity to run your car....
If it happens that a particular exam question can be solved by going to wolframalpha.com, then what is the problem?
Without being able to solve it yourself, you lack understanding. Without understanding, all that busywork you did is worthless. You have no foundation to build upon.
Despite the fact that most people view college as job training, the primary function of colleges is to create academics, not worker bees. It just so happens that the knowledge base for a well-rounded academic is also useful in the workforce.
Wow. I've heard of stretching things a bit, but most of these are completely ridiculous interpretations of similes, metaphors, and other language patters.
It's like if I wrote down "I have told you innumerable times that the Earth is round" and some idiot 3000 years later assumes I truly spent most of my waking days saying "the Earth is round."
Slashdot Mirror
So they developed a rabbit cancer called Myxomatosis and unleashed it on australian rabbits. Which made its wayt back to europe, ravaging rabbit populations THERE.
They didn't "develop" anything. Myxomatosis is caused by a natural virus in the pox family that was discovered in Uruguay in the 1800s.
It isn't cancer. It doesn't cause cancer. The rabbits develop tumors, yes. But not all tumors are cancer.
It also didn't "make its way back to Europe," it was intentionally introduced in the UK after WWII to control rabbit populations there, which is how it got to Europe.
The problem is that your summary fell into the TL;DR category.
Thanks for the links to the original papers, though.
Hey, I don't think they do either - at least not enough to cause even minor physiological problems. I carry two cell phones and have a ham license.
With apologies to Douglas Adams, I would characterize sane radio transmissions as "mostly harmless".
I *do* like to have an understanding of what the each side thinks, including the people that don't like the idea of my transmissions going through their bodies. I make a conscious decision to subject them to my activities based on my belief that it is mostly harmless. I feel it is important to recognize that we do this to people against their will, harmless or not.
You never addressed any personal right to not be bombarded by unnatural radio emissions.
Wow. The website's language confirms it is the same person.
It claims he is married. Wonder what the wife must be like...
Look out, someone let a 10-year old on Slashdot!
Taking your comment another way...
So what if the cell phone company chooses not to set up shop in your town because it's not profitable?
Are you going to be adolescent and call them names too for not making it less possible for people to die?
Oh... what about my right to not have electromagnetic radiation involuntarily pulsed through my body for your convenience?
(For the record, I don't have a problem with being subject to radio tower emissions, but some people do).
This is the precise situation interpretive dance was invented for. Also, since this is France: mimes!
You missed such an opportunity here.
Interpretive dance + french maids.
There's actually a really simple reason for this:
Minor infractions do not require someone from the DA's office to prosecute the case. So the charge will stick and you have to pay or go to court.
Chances are that the police know that the DA will not pursue charges against whoever broke your car window due to lack of budget, because the DA will be prioritizing against cases that involve personal violence, social ills (drugs), or high-level/high-visibility crime. It's not worth the time of the police to do anything more than take a report because they know that the DA will not take the case.
By the way, where do you live that police budgets are still dependent on fine revenue? Some US states have resolved the "quota" issue by having fine revenue go directly to the general fund of the state, not to the local police department which are usually funded by local budgets and non-fine revenue.
Often it's a matter of budget. In my area it was well known that for a time the county couldn't prosecute relatively* minor crimes due to lack of funding for the DA's office.
At that point the police don't bother to enforce, because they spend their budget processing people who are going to get let go anyway.
(*by "relatively minor", basically property crimes and the so-called victimless crimes)
Anybody gets angry and agitated when their stuff gets taken away from them, no matter what that stuff is.
You could substitute cars, television, dishwasher, or any number of things that people typically own for where you said guns, and the rest of your statement is true.
Undoing mod points for this:
I do speak from experience when I say that a weapon serves no purpose other than to kill.
So you are saying there is no sport in putting tiny objects into the center of a paper circle from a distance?
I assume you will be okay with outlawing darts, javelin throwing, shotput, archery, and other sports that have their roots in the military. After all, they are essentially practice for ways of killing people. Don't forget fencing, wrestling, various eastern martial arts... need I go on?
Linux is often the better choice for desktop usage when security is not an issue.
Security is *always* an issue. Especially on the desktop. One merely needs to look at the large botnets comprised entirely of zombie Windows machines to understand why.
Well, to start we disagree about "backyard"... but I'll go with you for the sake of the argument.
Since you asked for that exclusion, I'd say "backyard" is any land with a dwelling that has space devoted to non-farm and non-ranch purposes that (1) can see the plant or (2) can be directly affected by malfunction, misoperation, or malicious activity at the plant in such a manner as health or wealth (e.g. property value) could be negatively impacted for a significant period of time due to such an event.
I would say that (2) would include being above an aquifer that the plant is also above, being within the exposure area of a theoretical nuclear accident, any increase in background radiation, etc.
Personally, I'd live right next to that plant and be perfectly happy about it. Provided I had water that came from pretty far away. :-)
You can demand, but you need to be willing to have it next door, or be willing to use force against others to have it next door to them if you can't find anyone to volunteer.
That's all I am saying.
I never once said I was against clean power. You here the "dick" here by inventing things that I haven't said.
In fact, I live a few blocks away from a giant paper mill that processes uncounted tons of post-consumer waste into recycled goods. It also supports jobs and the shipping industry so I can buy things that come from thousands of miles away and feel good that less trees are being cut down to support the packaging of said things.
It doesn't bother me.
I have, in the past, also lived less than a mile from a coal power plant. That didn't bother me either. The plant was almost entirely unnoticeable except on rare occasion when they had to unload a hopper, which resulted in a rather loud whoosh as all the coal dumped out.
I'm not anti-solar, just playing devil's advocate.
You still aren't answering the question. Are you willing to locate a solar plant in your own back yard? Or the mine for the raw materials? Or the assembly plant?
It's a 'yes or no' question that I find that most pro-electric, pro-solar people are unwilling to answer because nobody wants that.
It has to be located somewhere, however. So, if you are so supportive of the electric car industry and cleaner power, why won't you volunteer yourself to have the necessary infrastructure located in close proximity to you?
I am saying that most people don't think the electric car utopia through. There is a large contingent of people who think that ecological problems will just disappear when everyone drives an electric car.
Your solar plant is not zero-emission, either. How did the solar plant get manufactured? The raw materials were dug up from the earth with the associated pollution of mining.
Yes, we do share the same air, but there's a difference between living in the same valley as the power plant, or living upwind 100 miles.
Will you be the first to volunteer to have a new power plant of any sort in your back yard?
Where does my family's luggage go?
The extra cost comes with great value, though, because gasoline cars have enormous externalized (i.e. invisible) costs, since they foul the air, the ecosystem, and the political climate.
So you are saying electric cars don't foul up the air or ecosystem?
Just where do you think electricity comes from?
Oh wait... it won't foul up *your* air or *your* ecosystem, just the guy who has to live next to one of the power plants that generates the electricity to run your car....
Wanna know what will happen if we get this all electric car utopia?
Oil companies will sell oil to fuel the power plants you need for your electric cars. You'll still be handing them your money.
Why do only ISPs bear the cost? Because you can't share files without the ISP? Isn't that also the logic behind the media levy?
By the same logic, shouldn't the manufacturers or suppliers of the following things be also required to share part of the cost?
If it happens that a particular exam question can be solved by going to wolframalpha.com, then what is the problem?
Without being able to solve it yourself, you lack understanding. Without understanding, all that busywork you did is worthless. You have no foundation to build upon.
Despite the fact that most people view college as job training, the primary function of colleges is to create academics, not worker bees. It just so happens that the knowledge base for a well-rounded academic is also useful in the workforce.
Wow. I've heard of stretching things a bit, but most of these are completely ridiculous interpretations of similes, metaphors, and other language patters.
It's like if I wrote down "I have told you innumerable times that the Earth is round" and some idiot 3000 years later assumes I truly spent most of my waking days saying "the Earth is round."
Amazing.
bah... not enough sleep... change "aren't" to "are".