However, the density of oil makes it possible to collect it from the top of the ocean without extremely complicated measures.
Yes... but... see, you're making perfect sense here, so that's where you've gone awry.
There are ships that can suck in the oil slicks and ocean water, dump 97% of the oil into the hold and pump the mostly clean water back into the sea, repeating the process as necessary.
However, the EPA demanded that in the Macondo spill they not return that 3% water back to the ocean, but instead made them send out tankers to be filled up with the 3% water, which were then transported back to shore for decon.
The obvious problem there was that the rate of processing of the sea water was limited by how fast those tankers could get out and back and unload, and what the onshore capacity was and what the onshore processing rate was. Being all finite quantities the rate was lowered tremendously from its potential.
So, using dispersants was the next-least-bad. I used to know their names, but one of them was much less toxic than the other two. Still, the oil separating ships operating at full capacity would have been much better for the environment, but the government was here to help.
Tell the whole world about this abrogation of natural rights.
Yes, encourage them to move to the cloud-hosted version of Office that doesn't have these absurd restrictions. It's almost as if... what was that, Admiral Akbar? Oh, wait, I'm not on the ESB story anymore.
Well done! Now do the Enterprise E against an Imperial Star destroyer.
No contest - the Old Republic had way more energy than the Federation. They had a fully galactic Republic/Empire, whereas warp engines take decades to travel across a galaxy. The Rebels rendezvoused at a point far outside their own galaxy to stay hidden at the end of ESB. Which makes sense - the Federation is about 250 years more advanced than we are, while the Old Republic was stable for over a thousand generations.
Add to that the Empire's newly developed technology that allows them to unbind an entire planet - the Enterprise's main phasers can just make fairly narrow holes in a planet's crust. It would take a thousand Enterprises with more firepower... then again, the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force - like the Traveller used for transportation.
then how does it prevent the Rebel ships from leaving
It's an energy dampening field - it would kill the anti-gravity field the ships use for atmospheric navigation, and they have no aerodynamic glide capability so they'd fall like stones.
I just made that up to show that there's always going to be an excuse to move the plot along in a fantasy.
However, it's the visitors to the site who would be the ones being defrauded. Not Ron Paul himself.
That's true, but Paul (or Ford in the example) could still be damaged (have to expend time and money to counter the claims) as a consequence of the fraud.
Doesn't rain much in the middle of a desert and there are these things called "droughts" you have to worry about...
And also the deserts have greatly expanded throughout the recent cold period in human history. Vast regions of Africa were once lush and are now just piles of sand.
It shouldn't be too surprising - there's now a three frikkin mile thick layer of freshwater ice that's been geologically trapped from the atmosphere on Antarctica, with a significant amount of accretion over the same period. But due to ocean current from that cooling Europe has warmed, and the monied interests of Europe are doing everything they can from stopping a reversal of this trend.
A group of my friends once tried to work out whether a tunnel dug with nuclear borers from Antarctica to Africa could be done inside the Earth's crust without running afoul of large-area gravitation/rotational effects. We fell down on the math skills, unfortunately.
So please, to any libertarians -- can you give me a purely libertarian explanation of why cybersquatting is wrong?
If cybersquatters are engaged in fraud ("Welcome to the Ford Motor Company's website. We've filed bankruptcy and have discontinued the site"), that's prior aggression, so it's wrong.
Otherwise it's simply a matter of who holds a potentially valuable asset and what price the market will bear for that asset.
is this site parading around purporting to be the official Ron Paul domain? No? Then what exactly are your allegations?
That's exactly the crux of the matter - Ron Paul is acting, and I believe he is confused into thinking that he is justified in pursing a trademark claim because last time he pursued a claim over his name he was justified. Ah, hell, I'll just copy the article here (click the link if Slashdot's inability to handle basic Unicode is too uncomfortable):
Ron Paul is Confused on RonPaul.com Posted by bill_mcgonigle on 2013/02/12
Ron Paul is seeking to own the RonPaul.com domain name, which has been run by some of his supporters since 2007. Those supporters have proposed a package of the domain name and their mailing list [aside: is that in keeping with their privacy policy?] for $250,000 and in response Ron Paul has filed a complaint with the WIPO which handles domain name disputes.
The trouble with this situation is that the Ron Paul supporters are focusing on WIPOâ(TM)s status as a UN organization, because Ron Paul has been vocally opposed to the UN consistently, and they see him as now being hypocritical on the matter. This is the wrong focus for two reasons: first because WIPO has a monopoly on resolution, but more importantly because the hypocrisy is about the core libertarian value of private property, not the UN.
During the primary campaign, individuals opposed to Ron Paulâ(TM)s nomination uploaded a video to YouTube that was in quite poor taste and slapped Ron Paulâ(TM)s name on it. Ron Paul took the stance that this was fraud (it was) and used the Trademark Law as a means to counter the fraud. This is where Ron Paul became confused â" he associated use of his name with Trademark Law, which is now the basis of the WIPO claims.
The error in logic here is the assumption that any use of the Ron Paul name is justifiably actionable under Trademark Law because itâ(TM)s a case of fraud. This is not the case, clearly, for RonPaul.com. The only argument against RonPaul.com is that the name âoeRon Paulâ is the Intellectual (aka Imaginary) Property of Ron Paul.
So, hereâ(TM)s where it gets dicey â" Imaginary Property is a direct affront on the principle of private ownership of property (it restricts the arrangement of private property of the People to the benefit of the one), which is the foundation of modern Libertarian thought. Now, the Constitution of the United States authorized the use of Imaginary Property monopolies through the Copyrights and Patents process, but this has proven subject to rampant abuse to the degree that it does more harm than good. And it was clear in Ron Paulâ(TM)s farewell address that he had found the Constitution lacking in its ability to restrain the governmentâ(TM)s abuses, if not in its intent. The Constitution doesnâ(TM)t even authorize trademark protection â" that has to be inferred through the Commerce Clause and the minarchist view of governmentâ(TM)s role to prevent fraud.
What Ron Paul is effectively saying here, probably unconsciously, is that the RonPaul.com folks may not organize their articles (their property) in the way that they see fit (under the RonPaul.com label) when they have committed no acts of aggression towards Ron Paul (quite the opposite â" they contributed to his current status in society). Heâ(TM)s literally saying that the RonPaul.com domain belongs to him because he wants it, and the notion of Imaginary Property gives cover to this illusion (it must be remembered that government abuses exist because each individual holds on to that one function of government that they cannot let go of). This is an assault on the private property rights of the people at RonPaul.com (stop being anonymous, guys, it does not help your image), and, yes, he is using government force to back his aggression.
my state uses LandSAT data to estimate water use.. and from this can make fairly accurate predictions of actual water use and resulting draw down of critical reservoirs.
This sounds really important.
This is one of those aspects of government spending that is critical in many ways and will be severely damaged by government spending cuts. The amount of money these programs occupy is miniscule compared against their benefit.
Let's say, hypothetically that nobody shows up for Treasury auctions anymore except for The Fed and that the USD crashes, leaving USG with no real means of payment and therefore Federal satellite dollars dry up. But the former USGS engineers form a company and with SpaceX put up the next satellite.
These guys are asking for the silver bullet to solve any cyber security problem in any system from any threat. The reward:, a measly 20 million.
It's a government contract - you don't actually have to deliver./snark
But, yeah, for $20M my company could coordinate one hell of a automated crypto system (hardware & software) to layer on top of SCADA gear that would protect it from unauthorized use and of course it would be open source. I can think of a dozen grants that need to happen immediately on various open source networking and crypto software packages to make them better suited for the task. It would not be perfect (it cannot be) but it would be tremendously better than the status quo and it would all be free for deployment on commodity hardware or from an ecosystem of willing cooperators.
The trouble is, the requirements for government contracting self-select for companies that can't even do the paperwork for less than $20M.
Not that I'm a libertarian (far from it), but I've never really gotten the impression that they hate trademark laws. This is (arguably) a trademark case.
Ron Paul is a minarchist. He believes in government, and thinks he can keep a leash on it. I thought he'd gotten over the Constitutional fetish with his parting speech before Congress, but apparently he still likes IP.
Libertarians have legitimate debates over whether the use of trademarks are matters of Imaginary Property or measures of fraud/not-fraud.
The problem for Ron Paul in this situation, is that there is no fraud accusation here - RonPaul.com is not trying to pretend that it's Ron Paul.
So this is an intellectual property argument. Somebody needs to lock Ron Paul in a room with Stephan Kinsella for a few days until he's gotten over IP. IP infringes on real property rights, which is the foundation of modern libertarianism. The whole issue of the UN is a red herring (yeah, it's hypocritical, which is scandalous, but not the main issue for libertarian objection).
thanks to the magic of psychology-driven Austrian economics, he can just forget about the economic problems before the Fed existed, because they were just so long ago.
You know, if the government made me pay for a benefit, then I'm damn well going to use it.
They made you pay for somebody else's benefit, not yours. If you demand a benefit, they're just making somebody down the pyramid pay for yours.
That whole schlock about Social Security being a savings or insurance plan was deep-sixed by the Supreme Court more than thirty years ago. It's a tax and spend program, plain and simple (and SCOTUS concurs).
This is almost certainly the result of wanting some latest-and-greatest feature
That's the supposition, but let's hear it - what this feature that's in linux right now that wasn't there a couple years ago that Chrome needs? I guess the next Chromium build will make this clear (and I suspect an easy workaround will be had).
It seems more likely that somebody on the Chrome team got a hair across his ass about Redhat and with the frenetic pace of Chrome releases he was able to convince the whole team that they needed to drop support.
Slashdot Mirror
However, the density of oil makes it possible to collect it from the top of the ocean without extremely complicated measures.
Yes ... but ... see, you're making perfect sense here, so that's where you've gone awry.
There are ships that can suck in the oil slicks and ocean water, dump 97% of the oil into the hold and pump the mostly clean water back into the sea, repeating the process as necessary.
However, the EPA demanded that in the Macondo spill they not return that 3% water back to the ocean, but instead made them send out tankers to be filled up with the 3% water, which were then transported back to shore for decon.
The obvious problem there was that the rate of processing of the sea water was limited by how fast those tankers could get out and back and unload, and what the onshore capacity was and what the onshore processing rate was. Being all finite quantities the rate was lowered tremendously from its potential.
So, using dispersants was the next-least-bad. I used to know their names, but one of them was much less toxic than the other two. Still, the oil separating ships operating at full capacity would have been much better for the environment, but the government was here to help.
the Empire ground forces landed beyond the energy shield - that's from dialogue, not speculation.
those are examples of bad-faith use of the names, which isn't relevant in this case.
Tell the whole world about this abrogation of natural rights.
Yes, encourage them to move to the cloud-hosted version of Office that doesn't have these absurd restrictions. It's almost as if ... what was that, Admiral Akbar? Oh, wait, I'm not on the ESB story anymore.
Well done! Now do the Enterprise E against an Imperial Star destroyer.
No contest - the Old Republic had way more energy than the Federation. They had a fully galactic Republic/Empire, whereas warp engines take decades to travel across a galaxy. The Rebels rendezvoused at a point far outside their own galaxy to stay hidden at the end of ESB. Which makes sense - the Federation is about 250 years more advanced than we are, while the Old Republic was stable for over a thousand generations.
Add to that the Empire's newly developed technology that allows them to unbind an entire planet - the Enterprise's main phasers can just make fairly narrow holes in a planet's crust. It would take a thousand Enterprises with more firepower ... then again, the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of the Force - like the Traveller used for transportation.
then how does it prevent the Rebel ships from leaving
It's an energy dampening field - it would kill the anti-gravity field the ships use for atmospheric navigation, and they have no aerodynamic glide capability so they'd fall like stones.
I just made that up to show that there's always going to be an excuse to move the plot along in a fantasy.
However, it's the visitors to the site who would be the ones being defrauded. Not Ron Paul himself.
That's true, but Paul (or Ford in the example) could still be damaged (have to expend time and money to counter the claims) as a consequence of the fraud.
Ideally they'll integrate a kinetic charger in the device.
Did cavemen use western or English Saddles when they rode dinosaurs?
Neither, duh, they used a howdah.
Doesn't rain much in the middle of a desert and there are these things called "droughts" you have to worry about...
And also the deserts have greatly expanded throughout the recent cold period in human history. Vast regions of Africa were once lush and are now just piles of sand.
It shouldn't be too surprising - there's now a three frikkin mile thick layer of freshwater ice that's been geologically trapped from the atmosphere on Antarctica, with a significant amount of accretion over the same period. But due to ocean current from that cooling Europe has warmed, and the monied interests of Europe are doing everything they can from stopping a reversal of this trend.
A group of my friends once tried to work out whether a tunnel dug with nuclear borers from Antarctica to Africa could be done inside the Earth's crust without running afoul of large-area gravitation/rotational effects. We fell down on the math skills, unfortunately.
So please, to any libertarians -- can you give me a purely libertarian explanation of why cybersquatting is wrong?
If cybersquatters are engaged in fraud ("Welcome to the Ford Motor Company's website. We've filed bankruptcy and have discontinued the site"), that's prior aggression, so it's wrong.
Otherwise it's simply a matter of who holds a potentially valuable asset and what price the market will bear for that asset.
is this site parading around purporting to be the official Ron Paul domain? No? Then what exactly are your allegations?
That's exactly the crux of the matter - Ron Paul is acting, and I believe he is confused into thinking that he is justified in pursing a trademark claim because last time he pursued a claim over his name he was justified. Ah, hell, I'll just copy the article here (click the link if Slashdot's inability to handle basic Unicode is too uncomfortable):
Thank you. I've expanded on the thought a bit here.
They still mail yearly "statements" to show "your" personal benefits to keep up the propaganda.
my state uses LandSAT data to estimate water use .. and from this can make fairly accurate predictions of actual water use and resulting draw down of critical reservoirs.
This sounds really important.
This is one of those aspects of government spending that is critical in many ways and will be severely damaged by government spending cuts. The amount of money these programs occupy is miniscule compared against their benefit.
Let's say, hypothetically that nobody shows up for Treasury auctions anymore except for The Fed and that the USD crashes, leaving USG with no real means of payment and therefore Federal satellite dollars dry up. But the former USGS engineers form a company and with SpaceX put up the next satellite.
Would your State subscribe to their data service?
Now, what programming languages does Steve Ballmer know . . . ?
Oh, he knows Turbo Pascal quite well...
It's all in-band signalling, right? What could possible go wrong.
These guys are asking for the silver bullet to solve any cyber security problem in any system from any threat. The reward:, a measly 20 million.
It's a government contract - you don't actually have to deliver. /snark
But, yeah, for $20M my company could coordinate one hell of a automated crypto system (hardware & software) to layer on top of SCADA gear that would protect it from unauthorized use and of course it would be open source. I can think of a dozen grants that need to happen immediately on various open source networking and crypto software packages to make them better suited for the task. It would not be perfect (it cannot be) but it would be tremendously better than the status quo and it would all be free for deployment on commodity hardware or from an ecosystem of willing cooperators.
The trouble is, the requirements for government contracting self-select for companies that can't even do the paperwork for less than $20M.
management? They work on most meat-based targets
Thar's y'er problem - everybody knows management is entirely made of hot air.
Not that I'm a libertarian (far from it), but I've never really gotten the impression that they hate trademark laws. This is (arguably) a trademark case.
Ron Paul is a minarchist. He believes in government, and thinks he can keep a leash on it. I thought he'd gotten over the Constitutional fetish with his parting speech before Congress, but apparently he still likes IP.
Libertarians have legitimate debates over whether the use of trademarks are matters of Imaginary Property or measures of fraud/not-fraud.
The problem for Ron Paul in this situation, is that there is no fraud accusation here - RonPaul.com is not trying to pretend that it's Ron Paul.
So this is an intellectual property argument. Somebody needs to lock Ron Paul in a room with Stephan Kinsella for a few days until he's gotten over IP. IP infringes on real property rights, which is the foundation of modern libertarianism. The whole issue of the UN is a red herring (yeah, it's hypocritical, which is scandalous, but not the main issue for libertarian objection).
They aren't asking for millions, just a paltry 250K.
I suggested to one of the operators of the site that they host a money bomb. $250K has been less than the first 24 hours of most Ron Paul money bombs.
"Ron Paul needs your help to show him the power of the free market over government solutions." Yeah, I'd be in for $5.
thanks to the magic of psychology-driven Austrian economics, he can just forget about the economic problems before the Fed existed, because they were just so long ago.
Incorrect.
You know, if the government made me pay for a benefit, then I'm damn well going to use it.
They made you pay for somebody else's benefit, not yours. If you demand a benefit, they're just making somebody down the pyramid pay for yours.
That whole schlock about Social Security being a savings or insurance plan was deep-sixed by the Supreme Court more than thirty years ago. It's a tax and spend program, plain and simple (and SCOTUS concurs).
This is almost certainly the result of wanting some latest-and-greatest feature
That's the supposition, but let's hear it - what this feature that's in linux right now that wasn't there a couple years ago that Chrome needs? I guess the next Chromium build will make this clear (and I suspect an easy workaround will be had).
It seems more likely that somebody on the Chrome team got a hair across his ass about Redhat and with the frenetic pace of Chrome releases he was able to convince the whole team that they needed to drop support.
Happy to be proven wrong.
You mean, Mt. Dew wasn't ALREADY a breakfast drink???
If you stay up late enough on it, this becomes a matter of semantics.