A good idea, were there not the possible consequence of the rocket exploding at/near takeoff, and spewing all of the waste into the atmosphere/water supply. That, the cost, and the people who oppose "polluting space" with our junk... the exploding part and cost are the real worrys, though. --
The US Domain
Here you go. There are links to each individual spot from this page. The registries are controlled in a strong hierarchy for the.us - you usually end up at your local city.
At this page you can find most of the local contacts.
--
I usually get points after I don't post/read for a few days, following a flurry of activity. If I keep posting, I don't get points...
As for that cap... it's the constant glass ceiling effect. Say you are at 50. Have a few posts modded up for a total of (+4). You are now at 50. Then, one of the posts gets modded down twice with overrated. Back to 48. The day's net gain was +2, with a -2 result. It doesn't ever really matter, but the order of moderation has more effect when you are capped than the moderation itself. Just a funny thing that seems to happen. [/offtopic]
I still don't understand why our country/government has a responsibility to feed parts of the world that can't fend for themselves. Granted, I give to charities to help poor conditions (mostly at home, but some abroad), and I am taken in with the "fight for our fellow man" as much as anyone, but it just doesn't make sense to make statements about starvation in other countries when we have problems here at home. I also don't consider it sacrificing human lives to make golfs clubs or come up with the new technologies. There are long term advantages to technologies, even though for some it may come too late. A lot of medical equipment wouldn't be possible without the research and funding in metalurgy and computing that was done by NASA and the defence industry.
Natural Selection can be societal, as well as physical. Whether or not the Republic of the USA is anywhere near the final step in that evolutionary chain is quite debatable, but on a smaller scale societies also go through this, too. It is wonderfully idealistic to think that we can help everyone to wonderful lives, even in areas of the world that have extremely high rates of various fatal diseases (i.e. HIV) and land that has trouble supporting basic food needs, but we live in a world of harsh realities. Many people have suffered throughout the course of humanity, and many more will. We can try, but we can't help them all.
I was in third grade, sitting in the elementary school library, watching it with my classmates. Scary then, and scary now. Quite a moment in the life of a youngster that can't quite comprehend all of what just happened...
Quoth c_monster:
"nuclear waste, which even Tower would probably balk at storing in his backyard for a few hundred thousand years."
Gee, my backyard is pretty small - the garage takes up a lot of it... it'd be tough. That and I'm planning on selling the house in few years - don't know if the potential buyer(s) would take as kindly to it as I... (balk - you win)
The processing is a nasty step, and as I've mentioned in another post somewhere, fission power isn't the greatest solution, it just happens to be a good one for right now. Cost somewhat aside, we can take further steps to use up more the fuel and reduce the danger of the waste, and we certainly could do a better job of storing it. I'd love to see more renewable sources in wide use, but I think for now, we have the ability to safely (...) use fission power until we convert over to other methods.
Remember that processing costs for solar power are high, and the chemicals and costs of the storage baterries aren't the greatest either. Great gains are being made, but it's not a full time solution yet. I like the PC/mainframe analogy - the power situation we're in corresponds more to the early days of personal computing, when we still had a long way to go... though I doubt we'll fit the same exponential curve to home power generation that we did to home processing power;-)
I'd also list aircraft carriers on the list with subs and starships...
I had said "They should realize that despite their good intentions, they are eventually making things worse... " and you remarked (unsurprisingly): "In a word, bullshit."
That last line was a little bit (or more) of a troll - guess it worked. Didn't mean to (seriously) offend anyone with the adjectives - just painting a picture of a 'typical' CA Green activist (non-CA activists don't eat nearly as much tofu, from what I'm told)... My post did come off a little more pro-nuclear than I even wanted to sound. Given the choice of a nuclear plant or a coal plant 15 miles from my house, I'd choose the nuclear plant. I agree that the system at the moment is not optimal, but there is still a lot of potential in fission power that can provide for a relatively long time before we can sustain our power needs with other sources.
Thought: The Linux Router Project has a configured Linux system all on a floppy (1.4MB). Now, that doesn't include a lot more than the base kernel and a network driver or two... It could be done... it all depends on your definition of "system".
Yes, Chernobyl was a huge disaster, but it was a very poorly designed system, and (intentional) human stupidity lead to the meltdown. The CANDU reactors are a very good example of how not to screw up.
Mining of coal is very polluting, too. So is the mining of aluminium (aluminum) and many other things. I am not shrugging off the waste issues - there are things we need to improve on, and bad things we need to deal with, but the waste from almost any type of fuel is Not A Good Thing(tm).
Renewable is great... most aren't ready for prime-time yet. The manufacture of solar cells can be very damaging to the enviornment, and uses many poisonous chemicals. The cost of each cell compared with the output doesn't make these attractive yet, either. Wind power isn't ready for full-scale use. Hydro is a great thing, except for the people who claim that you destroy an eco-system when you flood all of that land... A sane person would love to use nothing but renewable sources, but has those occasional pangs of reality, too. --
True, there are costs (both monetary and enviornmental) for storage and handling of nuclear waste, but the storage of waste doesn't have to be nearly as bad as we (the US) have made it. The subject of reprocessing is a very controversial one, but there are some potential gains. This also leads to much more transportation of nuclear waste (and more total waste), so it is certainly not very attractive from that standpoint. And, of course, the only thing more scary than the word "Nuclear" is the word "Plutonium" (or maybe "Richard Simmons", but I digress), and since reprocessing is the best way to get plutonium for nuclear weapons... well, there you have it, a Bad Thing(tm).
I agree that we need to rework the various methods that we use for storage of nuclear waste, but the amount of waste that a fission plant produces and the total enviornmental impact that is has in comparison with a coal plant make it very attractive. The waste products from a coal plant are not attractive in the least, and the amount of coal that needs to be mined and transported can cause a problem (lots of people dislike lots of big, huge trains carrying coal rumbling through their commute even more than they hate a fission plant outside of town.
Fission power is certainly not the be all and end all of electrical generation, and I don't know very many people who think that, but there are a lot of things that make it more attractive than other forms of power generation. Until we get cheap, sustainable fusion we will continue to argue the cost/benefit ratio of the different power generation methods, and even then...
Sorry, I was making a broad stereotype to get the point across. I don't have a desire to own any fur (neither does my fiancee, AFAIK), happen to enjoy eating meat quite a bit (I've only had tofu once, and I wasn't impressed - I eat for taste as well as nutrition), and am a big proponent of preserving nature whenever possible... The amount of radiation released into the environment from a coal power plant *far* exceeds that of a nuclear plant, and obviously the soot and gasses are a nice addition, too.
Sorry if I came across a little harsh, but the point is that the radical activists in CA caused most of the problem before deregulation ever hada chance. --
Most of the problem is that the (and I say this with the utmost respect) stupid tree-hugging, nuke-fearing, tofu-eating, fur coat-painting enviornmentalists won't let anyone build the safest and cleanest method of power generation... nuclear plants. They should realize that despite their good intentions, they are eventually making things worse...
from http://www.civicsandpolitics.com/power.html
"To begin with, radical environmentalists have caused such onerous regulation of the state's power industry, that no new power plants have been built in quite a few years. Additionally, these same regulations have forced certain older power plants to shut down because they have reached the maximum amount of pollution that they are allowed to emit in a given year. Of course, there's nuclear power, which is clean, but unreasonable fears have caused the closure of several nuclear power plants."
The deregulation also screwed things up royally, but it woudn't be nearly as bad if people could build new, efficient power plants... --
_my mind is DYING_!!!!
mod both of my posts down appropriately...
it has been a long day.
That's what happens when you try to do simple math while debugging code... --
Well, as they mentioned on the site, this counts as a game of skill rather than a game of chance, so it is not a form of gambling. Think of it as a laser-tag tournament - definitely more of a skill than chance game...
as most, IANAL... --
I have a several year old Velodyne F-1500R (15"). Gotta love it - there's nothing like *feeling* the movie, and it does a great job with music, too (jazz, classical, rock, etc...).
I'd like to put in a word for Rotel for the electronics section. The amps and integrated amps have really impressed me (I've owned a Rotel 2-channel system for about four years now). They rank with NAD and Adcom on my list for amps (well below the Krells, but hey, the FBP-600 is a little out of my price range...). I've found the Rotel amps to have quite a bit of heft and they are conservatively rated - my 60W/channel integrated can put about 100W/ch into 8ohms, and certainly sounds better at higher listening levels than the 100W/channel Technics and 150W/ch JunkValleyCrap(JVC).
I'm running with some Polk RT7s for my 2-channel. I love B&W (the 302s are a much better deal than the 602s... the expensive ones are heavenly). My Polks were about the same price as the 302s, and performed quite well in my listening sessions (the 302s had a slightly better image and soundstage, but the range of the Polks was better, and they (quite frankly) sound better than the 602s).
I'm still waiting on my Vandersteen 2ce's (mmmmmm). A nice amp with those (along with the Rotel CD front end), and let's just say - ahhhhh.
The best component in my surround system is probably the Velodyne F-1500R. Does its job rather well.
As always, listen, listen, listen. No point in buying what other people think sounds good if it doesn't to you. --
Slashdot Mirror
A good idea, were there not the possible consequence of the rocket exploding at/near takeoff, and spewing all of the waste into the atmosphere/water supply. That, the cost, and the people who oppose "polluting space" with our junk... the exploding part and cost are the real worrys, though.
--
Spiced Milk Tea? I don't get it...
--
The US Domain .us - you usually end up at your local city.
Here you go. There are links to each individual spot from this page. The registries are controlled in a strong hierarchy for the
At this page you can find most of the local contacts.
--
I usually get points after I don't post/read for a few days, following a flurry of activity. If I keep posting, I don't get points...
As for that cap... it's the constant glass ceiling effect. Say you are at 50. Have a few posts modded up for a total of (+4). You are now at 50. Then, one of the posts gets modded down twice with overrated. Back to 48. The day's net gain was +2, with a -2 result. It doesn't ever really matter, but the order of moderation has more effect when you are capped than the moderation itself. Just a funny thing that seems to happen. [/offtopic]
--
The envelopes are prepaid - they don't charge on what actually gets used, just on the number initially purchased/permit-stamped.
--
IHBT, but...
I still don't understand why our country/government has a responsibility to feed parts of the world that can't fend for themselves. Granted, I give to charities to help poor conditions (mostly at home, but some abroad), and I am taken in with the "fight for our fellow man" as much as anyone, but it just doesn't make sense to make statements about starvation in other countries when we have problems here at home. I also don't consider it sacrificing human lives to make golfs clubs or come up with the new technologies. There are long term advantages to technologies, even though for some it may come too late. A lot of medical equipment wouldn't be possible without the research and funding in metalurgy and computing that was done by NASA and the defence industry.
Natural Selection can be societal, as well as physical. Whether or not the Republic of the USA is anywhere near the final step in that evolutionary chain is quite debatable, but on a smaller scale societies also go through this, too. It is wonderfully idealistic to think that we can help everyone to wonderful lives, even in areas of the world that have extremely high rates of various fatal diseases (i.e. HIV) and land that has trouble supporting basic food needs, but we live in a world of harsh realities. Many people have suffered throughout the course of humanity, and many more will. We can try, but we can't help them all.
Sucks, doesn't it?
--
I was in third grade, sitting in the elementary school library, watching it with my classmates. Scary then, and scary now. Quite a moment in the life of a youngster that can't quite comprehend all of what just happened...
--
Well, there's the big "Site Based on Slash" gif/link at the bottom of the front page...
--
Quoth c_monster:
;-)
"nuclear waste, which even Tower would probably balk at storing in his backyard for a few hundred thousand years."
Gee, my backyard is pretty small - the garage takes up a lot of it... it'd be tough. That and I'm planning on selling the house in few years - don't know if the potential buyer(s) would take as kindly to it as I... (balk - you win)
The processing is a nasty step, and as I've mentioned in another post somewhere, fission power isn't the greatest solution, it just happens to be a good one for right now. Cost somewhat aside, we can take further steps to use up more the fuel and reduce the danger of the waste, and we certainly could do a better job of storing it. I'd love to see more renewable sources in wide use, but I think for now, we have the ability to safely (...) use fission power until we convert over to other methods.
Remember that processing costs for solar power are high, and the chemicals and costs of the storage baterries aren't the greatest either. Great gains are being made, but it's not a full time solution yet. I like the PC/mainframe analogy - the power situation we're in corresponds more to the early days of personal computing, when we still had a long way to go... though I doubt we'll fit the same exponential curve to home power generation that we did to home processing power
I'd also list aircraft carriers on the list with subs and starships...
I had said "They should realize that despite their good intentions, they are eventually making things worse... " and you remarked (unsurprisingly): "In a word, bullshit."
That last line was a little bit (or more) of a troll - guess it worked. Didn't mean to (seriously) offend anyone with the adjectives - just painting a picture of a 'typical' CA Green activist (non-CA activists don't eat nearly as much tofu, from what I'm told)... My post did come off a little more pro-nuclear than I even wanted to sound. Given the choice of a nuclear plant or a coal plant 15 miles from my house, I'd choose the nuclear plant. I agree that the system at the moment is not optimal, but there is still a lot of potential in fission power that can provide for a relatively long time before we can sustain our power needs with other sources.
--
Thought: The Linux Router Project has a configured Linux system all on a floppy (1.4MB). Now, that doesn't include a lot more than the base kernel and a network driver or two... It could be done... it all depends on your definition of "system".
--
Yes, Chernobyl was a huge disaster, but it was a very poorly designed system, and (intentional) human stupidity lead to the meltdown. The CANDU reactors are a very good example of how not to screw up.
Mining of coal is very polluting, too. So is the mining of aluminium (aluminum) and many other things. I am not shrugging off the waste issues - there are things we need to improve on, and bad things we need to deal with, but the waste from almost any type of fuel is Not A Good Thing(tm).
Renewable is great... most aren't ready for prime-time yet. The manufacture of solar cells can be very damaging to the enviornment, and uses many poisonous chemicals. The cost of each cell compared with the output doesn't make these attractive yet, either. Wind power isn't ready for full-scale use. Hydro is a great thing, except for the people who claim that you destroy an eco-system when you flood all of that land... A sane person would love to use nothing but renewable sources, but has those occasional pangs of reality, too.
--
True, there are costs (both monetary and enviornmental) for storage and handling of nuclear waste, but the storage of waste doesn't have to be nearly as bad as we (the US) have made it. The subject of reprocessing is a very controversial one, but there are some potential gains. This also leads to much more transportation of nuclear waste (and more total waste), so it is certainly not very attractive from that standpoint. And, of course, the only thing more scary than the word "Nuclear" is the word "Plutonium" (or maybe "Richard Simmons", but I digress), and since reprocessing is the best way to get plutonium for nuclear weapons... well, there you have it, a Bad Thing(tm).
I agree that we need to rework the various methods that we use for storage of nuclear waste, but the amount of waste that a fission plant produces and the total enviornmental impact that is has in comparison with a coal plant make it very attractive. The waste products from a coal plant are not attractive in the least, and the amount of coal that needs to be mined and transported can cause a problem (lots of people dislike lots of big, huge trains carrying coal rumbling through their commute even more than they hate a fission plant outside of town.
Fission power is certainly not the be all and end all of electrical generation, and I don't know very many people who think that, but there are a lot of things that make it more attractive than other forms of power generation. Until we get cheap, sustainable fusion we will continue to argue the cost/benefit ratio of the different power generation methods, and even then...
--
Sorry, I was making a broad stereotype to get the point across. I don't have a desire to own any fur (neither does my fiancee, AFAIK), happen to enjoy eating meat quite a bit (I've only had tofu once, and I wasn't impressed - I eat for taste as well as nutrition), and am a big proponent of preserving nature whenever possible... The amount of radiation released into the environment from a coal power plant *far* exceeds that of a nuclear plant, and obviously the soot and gasses are a nice addition, too.
Sorry if I came across a little harsh, but the point is that the radical activists in CA caused most of the problem before deregulation ever hada chance.
--
Most of the problem is that the (and I say this with the utmost respect) stupid tree-hugging, nuke-fearing, tofu-eating, fur coat-painting enviornmentalists won't let anyone build the safest and cleanest method of power generation... nuclear plants. They should realize that despite their good intentions, they are eventually making things worse...
from http://www.civicsandpolitics.com/power.html
"To begin with, radical environmentalists have caused such onerous regulation of the state's power industry, that no new power plants have been built in quite a few years. Additionally, these same regulations have forced certain older power plants to shut down because they have reached the maximum amount of pollution that they are allowed to emit in a given year. Of course, there's nuclear power, which is clean, but unreasonable fears have caused the closure of several nuclear power plants."
The deregulation also screwed things up royally, but it woudn't be nearly as bad if people could build new, efficient power plants...
--
No, it's the kind of competition that Banyan Vines gives SMB...
--
_my mind is DYING_!!!!
mod both of my posts down appropriately...
it has been a long day.
That's what happens when you try to do simple math while debugging code...
--
Did you just read what you wrote?
1 cent for 5 minutes, not 1 dollar.
320 credits = $3.20 = $.01/credit.
Cheap(ish).
--
Well, as they mentioned on the site, this counts as a game of skill rather than a game of chance, so it is not a form of gambling. Think of it as a laser-tag tournament - definitely more of a skill than chance game...
as most, IANAL...
--
Back pocket would be safer, especially for the more weighty folk - plenty of padding as protection.
:-)
As for the chest, we put our hearts through enough strain as it is (what, with all that American fast-food and all)
--
No, you forget - Evil will always win, because good is dumb!
--
or "project Alderaan", more likely...
--
Yeah, just think of how many punchcards that would be to enter all of that data. That must have taken quite a long time...
--
I have a several year old Velodyne F-1500R (15"). Gotta love it - there's nothing like *feeling* the movie, and it does a great job with music, too (jazz, classical, rock, etc...).
--
I'd like to put in a word for Rotel for the electronics section. The amps and integrated amps have really impressed me (I've owned a Rotel 2-channel system for about four years now). They rank with NAD and Adcom on my list for amps (well below the Krells, but hey, the FBP-600 is a little out of my price range...). I've found the Rotel amps to have quite a bit of heft and they are conservatively rated - my 60W/channel integrated can put about 100W/ch into 8ohms, and certainly sounds better at higher listening levels than the 100W/channel Technics and 150W/ch JunkValleyCrap(JVC).
I'm running with some Polk RT7s for my 2-channel. I love B&W (the 302s are a much better deal than the 602s... the expensive ones are heavenly). My Polks were about the same price as the 302s, and performed quite well in my listening sessions (the 302s had a slightly better image and soundstage, but the range of the Polks was better, and they (quite frankly) sound better than the 602s).
I'm still waiting on my Vandersteen 2ce's (mmmmmm). A nice amp with those (along with the Rotel CD front end), and let's just say - ahhhhh.
The best component in my surround system is probably the Velodyne F-1500R. Does its job rather well.
As always, listen, listen, listen. No point in buying what other people think sounds good if it doesn't to you.
--
The tubes are in the AMPS, not the SPEAKERS.
There are tube microphones, pre-amps, phono-stages, amps, etc., but I have yet to see a tube speaker...
--