I feel your pain. I'm over 50 and got laid off in Dec. I am done with high tech. I've started my own business that has nothing to do with anything that can be outsourced to China, India, Vietnam, etc. Thank goodness I took enough accounting to run a small business and accumulated enough capital to get started.
Actually, my point is quite germane to the topic. You imply that motor vehicles are a net negative for humanity. Nothing could be further from the truth. You can fantasize about hydrogen/electric vehicles all you want, but they are unsafe, generating hydrogen takes a huge amount of energy, and electric vehicles are no different from coal/nuclear/hydro/natural gas fired vehicles. If you think this is not the case, feel free to invest your own capital in hydrogen vehicles capable of transporting the needs of society. You'll be firmly in the upper echelons of the top.001% if you are successful.
You'll be happy to know that these truck drivers are all (1) white, strike one, (2) male, strike two, and (3) working class, strike three. They're pretty much everything that's hated by the Sanders/Clinton/BLM/Republican establishment axis. Do you harbor some kind of illusion you're in favor of these people? Allow me to remind you of some keywords to put your mind in the right place: NASCAR, Jesus, American patriot, redneck. There, now we are all on the same page!
You won't be crying about these people being put out of work and thrust into poverty, you're going to be clenching your fist and saying, "FUCK YEAH!"
Really?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
For those too lazy to click on the links, these are two black truck drivers with their own youtube channels, one male and one female. I see *lots* of non-white truck drivers. But for morons who live behind a screen and keyboard, you need to get out more. PS. I have even heard of blacks who enjoy *gasp* NASCAR!
More so or less so than forcing someone to sit behind the wheel on ludicrously long journeys stopping only to eat, shit, drink coffee, and maybe a 15min power nap because otherwise they can't keep their eyes open?.
DOT hours of service rules say a driver can only drive for 11 hours in 24, can only drive for 8 hours straight, then must take a 30 minute break. You can only drive 60 hours in a week, which only resets after a minimum of 34 hours off duty. Staying awake under these conditions is pretty straightforward.
Trucks will *never* match the efficiency per-pound of bulk goods carried by rail. However, rail can never match the speed and flexibility of trucks to make smaller point-to-point deliveries.
Two trends are working to move more freight to trucks away from rail. First is that businesses are more aggressively managing their working capital. Nobody carries inventory anymore. When I worked at a top 5 contract manufacturer in supply chain, we were expected to turn our working capital at least 9X a year. The only way to do that is to have trucks show up every day. Lots of businesses are managed this way. Restaurants, grocery stores, auto parts stores, clothing, etc. The more expensive the item, the less you want on your shelf. Second is e-commerce. When people order off Amazon Prime, the item has to come from a warehouse to a shipper to a conveyance, to a freight yard, and out to the customer's neighborhood. Waiting for a train to ship a book is not going to make for happy customers. This is why the big shippers like UPS and FedEx have trucks and airplanes.
So River Rat, tell me which scientific paper convinced *you* that AGW is "true". Don't yammer on about body of work or overwhelming evidence, I want an actual paper, in a refereed journal. I will review the paper and get back to you. I will warn you that unlike you, I have an actual degree in physics, with a minor in math. I will read your paper, find 1) least squares curve fitting, 2) cooked computer models, and 3) copious amounts of hand waving. Then I will point out that none of these things ever was accepted as scientific proof pre-AGW hysteria, and still don't among serious scientists. Begin.
I think the oil companies should get together and only sell oil and gas to people who believe that AGW is an unproven theory. If you are a true believer, you shouldn't be putting gasoline in an internal combustion engine. You get to walk, bicycle, ride a horse, etc. No electric cars unless you can prove that no hydrocarbons were used to move those electrons. Maybe the Amish would sell you a buggy.
For this we can thank Madeline HalfBright and BJ Clinton. Thanks guys! In about ten years, we will be having the same conversation, except about Iran , Hillary, and BHO.
Well, if you really believe that the government is doing exhaustive vetting of would-be immigrants, this should be a fairly easy determination to make. If you believe that the vetting is synonymous with rubber-stamping, maybe this would be a good reason to shut down *all* immigration. Lots of very successful countries do this. Japan, for instance. http://www.infowars.com/islami...
You might have a point. Illegal alien Mexicans are culturally Christian and they kill way more people in the US than do Muslims. I am not sure how to compare criminal acts like gang-related murder, robbery and rape to acts of terrorism like the Boston bombing and the shooting in CA last week. There were long periods in US history where there was no immigration. Maybe that is the answer.
I've thought Trump was a clown, but the Muslim comment was absolutely chilling- "top polling GOP candidate vows to repeal first amendment" is how I read that. Clearly, Republicans will address this issue, but holy crap. The internet thing would have soured my already poor opinion of him, but it came after the "ban the Muslims" comment. That's straight frightening.
The first amendment does not apply to foreigners on foreign soil. In this context, immigration, it is helpful if you consider Islam to be not merely a religion, but also a political ideology. And a scary one at that. The problem is that we cannot tell religious Muslims from political ones since there is most definitely a wide spectrum, and religions followers sometimes migrate toward the political side, then they start blowing things up or shooting people. The risk profile is not favorable to allowing immigration of Muslims. Sure, most won't turn violent, but every one that does will lead to a number of dead Americans. I would rather see a million Muslims turned away than a single American lying in a pool of blood. ISIS has publicly stated that they intend to seed terrorists into the pool of immigrants
I will also note that a democrat signed into law the following:
"8 U.S. Code 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
It's good to see VW representatives surfing Slashdot to try and repair VW's shattered reputation.:)
I had a 2011 Jetta TDI that regularly got between 6 and 10 MPG more than the EPA estimates. The only time it didn't was doing 80 into a strong head wind. When the lease was up I should have bought it but diesel was outrageous at the time.
First of all, probably unlike you, I actually have a degree in physics, with minors in math and chemistry. The math associated with thermodynamics is among the most complex that mankind attempts. The real world is almost never linear and straightforward. The "basic greenhouse effect" is laughably simplified compared to what actually happens in the atmosphere. If your assertion were true, the fossil record going back hundreds of millions of years would show CO2 and temperatures in lockstep. It does not. Not even close. What you are saying is that there exists a massive non-linear partial differential equation that determines how hot it will be tomorrow, and the only driving factor we need concern ourselves with is the concentration of a trace gas that responds to the same wavelengths of radiation as water vapor. Only you can't show me the equation and want me to take your assertion on faith. This does not even pass the laugh test.
Their "theory" seems to be that if it is indeed getting hotter (note there is no consensus on this point), the only possible explanation is CO2 from human activity. This is essentially an appeal to correlation to prove causation. Correlation never proved causation. Ever. This is junk science, pure and simple. Experimentation on a global scale is technologically impossible. So we are left with modeling. Without a proven model, correlation is fundamentally incapable of proving causation. The model needs to be far more sophisticated than the current weather models that use partial differential equations and are good for pretty much three days then blow up due to not knowing initial conditions well enough. Laymen somehow think it is easier to model climate than weather. This is nonsense. Climate is nothing more or less than the integral of weather, and if you cannot solve for a function, you cannot solve for its integral except in trivial linear systems. Weather and climate are chaotic. Let's face the fact that some things are simply unknowable with our current technology.
You are missing the point of the law. The whole purpose of the law is to ensure that everyone is guilty of something.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.” Ayn Rand
Thinking back on my chemistry classes, I seem to remember that the partial pressure of a gas over a liquid is proportional to the temperature of the liquid. Cold pop holds more CO2 than warm. It seems obvious that as the water in the oceans warms, CO2 is released into the atmosphere. Then for some reason the water cools, which sucks CO2 back in. Today, the oceans hold over 90% of all CO2 on the planet.
For me, Warp was a love-hate thing. I loved it compared to Win 3.11 for how it ran multiple programs and made good use of memory. I hated it because of the Matrox video card driver and having so many problems with networking. Hand editing net.cfg was so fun! I worked at HP at the time, and running OS/2 at work was an exercise in courage.
One Second After was a sobering read. In this scenario, two nukes go off way up in the atmosphere, high enough that nobody really notices them, but everything with micro-electronics in them stop working instantly. A massive percentage of the population dies off, far more than if the weapons had been set off in the largest cities. I hope this never happens. This is why we must never allow the mad mullahs to get nukes and ballistic missiles.
Slashdot Mirror
I feel your pain. I'm over 50 and got laid off in Dec. I am done with high tech. I've started my own business that has nothing to do with anything that can be outsourced to China, India, Vietnam, etc. Thank goodness I took enough accounting to run a small business and accumulated enough capital to get started.
Actually, my point is quite germane to the topic. You imply that motor vehicles are a net negative for humanity. Nothing could be further from the truth. You can fantasize about hydrogen/electric vehicles all you want, but they are unsafe, generating hydrogen takes a huge amount of energy, and electric vehicles are no different from coal/nuclear/hydro/natural gas fired vehicles. If you think this is not the case, feel free to invest your own capital in hydrogen vehicles capable of transporting the needs of society. You'll be firmly in the upper echelons of the top .001% if you are successful.
You could always use the "trucker bomb" method: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/7912...
You'll be happy to know that these truck drivers are all (1) white, strike one, (2) male, strike two, and (3) working class, strike three. They're pretty much everything that's hated by the Sanders/Clinton/BLM/Republican establishment axis. Do you harbor some kind of illusion you're in favor of these people? Allow me to remind you of some keywords to put your mind in the right place: NASCAR, Jesus, American patriot, redneck. There, now we are all on the same page!
You won't be crying about these people being put out of work and thrust into poverty, you're going to be clenching your fist and saying, "FUCK YEAH!"
Really? https://www.youtube.com/watch?... https://www.youtube.com/watch?... For those too lazy to click on the links, these are two black truck drivers with their own youtube channels, one male and one female. I see *lots* of non-white truck drivers. But for morons who live behind a screen and keyboard, you need to get out more. PS. I have even heard of blacks who enjoy *gasp* NASCAR!
More so or less so than forcing someone to sit behind the wheel on ludicrously long journeys stopping only to eat, shit, drink coffee, and maybe a 15min power nap because otherwise they can't keep their eyes open?.
DOT hours of service rules say a driver can only drive for 11 hours in 24, can only drive for 8 hours straight, then must take a 30 minute break. You can only drive 60 hours in a week, which only resets after a minimum of 34 hours off duty. Staying awake under these conditions is pretty straightforward.
Trucks will *never* match the efficiency per-pound of bulk goods carried by rail. However, rail can never match the speed and flexibility of trucks to make smaller point-to-point deliveries.
Two trends are working to move more freight to trucks away from rail. First is that businesses are more aggressively managing their working capital. Nobody carries inventory anymore. When I worked at a top 5 contract manufacturer in supply chain, we were expected to turn our working capital at least 9X a year. The only way to do that is to have trucks show up every day. Lots of businesses are managed this way. Restaurants, grocery stores, auto parts stores, clothing, etc. The more expensive the item, the less you want on your shelf. Second is e-commerce. When people order off Amazon Prime, the item has to come from a warehouse to a shipper to a conveyance, to a freight yard, and out to the customer's neighborhood. Waiting for a train to ship a book is not going to make for happy customers. This is why the big shippers like UPS and FedEx have trucks and airplanes.
And pollution from motor vehicles kills 20 times more than road accidents, this is something that rarely gets a mention.
And food delivered by trucks keeps 100% of us alive. Something that rarely gets a mention.
So River Rat, tell me which scientific paper convinced *you* that AGW is "true". Don't yammer on about body of work or overwhelming evidence, I want an actual paper, in a refereed journal. I will review the paper and get back to you. I will warn you that unlike you, I have an actual degree in physics, with a minor in math. I will read your paper, find 1) least squares curve fitting, 2) cooked computer models, and 3) copious amounts of hand waving. Then I will point out that none of these things ever was accepted as scientific proof pre-AGW hysteria, and still don't among serious scientists. Begin.
I think the oil companies should get together and only sell oil and gas to people who believe that AGW is an unproven theory. If you are a true believer, you shouldn't be putting gasoline in an internal combustion engine. You get to walk, bicycle, ride a horse, etc. No electric cars unless you can prove that no hydrocarbons were used to move those electrons. Maybe the Amish would sell you a buggy.
CAFE standards have cost the lives of between 41,600 to 124,800 people. VW are strictly amateurs compared to the US government.
For this we can thank Madeline HalfBright and BJ Clinton. Thanks guys! In about ten years, we will be having the same conversation, except about Iran , Hillary, and BHO.
Well, if you really believe that the government is doing exhaustive vetting of would-be immigrants, this should be a fairly easy determination to make. If you believe that the vetting is synonymous with rubber-stamping, maybe this would be a good reason to shut down *all* immigration. Lots of very successful countries do this. Japan, for instance. http://www.infowars.com/islami...
You might have a point. Illegal alien Mexicans are culturally Christian and they kill way more people in the US than do Muslims. I am not sure how to compare criminal acts like gang-related murder, robbery and rape to acts of terrorism like the Boston bombing and the shooting in CA last week. There were long periods in US history where there was no immigration. Maybe that is the answer.
DiFi was the one who wanted to reclassify your Ruger 10/22 as an NFA weapon (i.e. machine gun). She is evil.
I've thought Trump was a clown, but the Muslim comment was absolutely chilling- "top polling GOP candidate vows to repeal first amendment" is how I read that. Clearly, Republicans will address this issue, but holy crap. The internet thing would have soured my already poor opinion of him, but it came after the "ban the Muslims" comment. That's straight frightening.
The first amendment does not apply to foreigners on foreign soil. In this context, immigration, it is helpful if you consider Islam to be not merely a religion, but also a political ideology. And a scary one at that. The problem is that we cannot tell religious Muslims from political ones since there is most definitely a wide spectrum, and religions followers sometimes migrate toward the political side, then they start blowing things up or shooting people. The risk profile is not favorable to allowing immigration of Muslims. Sure, most won't turn violent, but every one that does will lead to a number of dead Americans. I would rather see a million Muslims turned away than a single American lying in a pool of blood. ISIS has publicly stated that they intend to seed terrorists into the pool of immigrants
I will also note that a democrat signed into law the following:
"8 U.S. Code 1182 - Inadmissible aliens
(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate."
It's good to see VW representatives surfing Slashdot to try and repair VW's shattered reputation. :)
I had a 2011 Jetta TDI that regularly got between 6 and 10 MPG more than the EPA estimates. The only time it didn't was doing 80 into a strong head wind. When the lease was up I should have bought it but diesel was outrageous at the time.
I never said ours wasn't. Preferably I should be able to buy a full auto, short barreled rifle, at the corner store with no nanny state interference.
Before 1934 you could do just that. Amazing how much of our freedom we have relinquished for the undelivered promise of safety.
First of all, probably unlike you, I actually have a degree in physics, with minors in math and chemistry. The math associated with thermodynamics is among the most complex that mankind attempts. The real world is almost never linear and straightforward. The "basic greenhouse effect" is laughably simplified compared to what actually happens in the atmosphere. If your assertion were true, the fossil record going back hundreds of millions of years would show CO2 and temperatures in lockstep. It does not. Not even close. What you are saying is that there exists a massive non-linear partial differential equation that determines how hot it will be tomorrow, and the only driving factor we need concern ourselves with is the concentration of a trace gas that responds to the same wavelengths of radiation as water vapor. Only you can't show me the equation and want me to take your assertion on faith. This does not even pass the laugh test.
Their "theory" seems to be that if it is indeed getting hotter (note there is no consensus on this point), the only possible explanation is CO2 from human activity. This is essentially an appeal to correlation to prove causation. Correlation never proved causation. Ever. This is junk science, pure and simple. Experimentation on a global scale is technologically impossible. So we are left with modeling. Without a proven model, correlation is fundamentally incapable of proving causation. The model needs to be far more sophisticated than the current weather models that use partial differential equations and are good for pretty much three days then blow up due to not knowing initial conditions well enough. Laymen somehow think it is easier to model climate than weather. This is nonsense. Climate is nothing more or less than the integral of weather, and if you cannot solve for a function, you cannot solve for its integral except in trivial linear systems. Weather and climate are chaotic. Let's face the fact that some things are simply unknowable with our current technology.
Um, fat is not harmful. In fact, it is highly nutritious in moderation. You did get the memo about cholesterol not being unhealthy, right?
Isn't most of the protein in a soy bean locked up in a cellulose matrix where it is essentially indigestable?
You are missing the point of the law. The whole purpose of the law is to ensure that everyone is guilty of something.
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.” Ayn Rand
Thinking back on my chemistry classes, I seem to remember that the partial pressure of a gas over a liquid is proportional to the temperature of the liquid. Cold pop holds more CO2 than warm. It seems obvious that as the water in the oceans warms, CO2 is released into the atmosphere. Then for some reason the water cools, which sucks CO2 back in. Today, the oceans hold over 90% of all CO2 on the planet.
For me, Warp was a love-hate thing. I loved it compared to Win 3.11 for how it ran multiple programs and made good use of memory. I hated it because of the Matrox video card driver and having so many problems with networking. Hand editing net.cfg was so fun! I worked at HP at the time, and running OS/2 at work was an exercise in courage.
One Second After was a sobering read. In this scenario, two nukes go off way up in the atmosphere, high enough that nobody really notices them, but everything with micro-electronics in them stop working instantly. A massive percentage of the population dies off, far more than if the weapons had been set off in the largest cities. I hope this never happens. This is why we must never allow the mad mullahs to get nukes and ballistic missiles.