a student was given in school suspension for writing a opinion paper comparing our administration to nazi germany and the gestapo.
Unfortunately, I don't believe that the school has any obligation to allow you to use their own newspaper to criticize it.
Are you joking? While I agree with you in principle, it's just twisted that they would punish students for writing articles critical of the school. And if fucking high schools regularly censor their own student media, what does that say for the rest of America?
The student was expelled from school for writing six words on a graphing calcualtor without even showing it to anybody.
Did you miss that sentence? Do you know what it means? Do you know what the word "threat" means?
Sorry, but you won't find "freedom of dress" in the bill of rights
You should re-read the Bill of Rights. This time, try to make it all the way to the end.
You would have to be an absolute retard to think "Let's get that guy fired" means "Let's get that guy killed".
Because, as you put it, "fired" has a strong connotation. It conjures up images of a "firing squad", and "firing a gun", and, christ, I can't even go on. You're an idiot.
The reason there is no Creative Commons license for software is that there would need to be two, basically equivalent to the BSD license and the GPL. Because software can be distributed in both easily-modifiable and not-easily-modifiable forms, any software license must take special notice of this.
Just to reiterate, Watts are a dynamic measurement. Watt-hours is a static measurement. What you're really asking is how many Watts this design is able of producing.
That figure is most dependent upon location, average windspeed, and the size of the unit. You can use maps such as the Wind Resource Atlas of the US to determine available wind power in Watts/Meter^2. Multiply that figure by the area of the unit, in square Meters, and multiply by the unit's efficiency (40%), and you get average power output in Watts.
Just to have something to go by, as others have said, a small unit can put out around 100 Watts in average winds.
Who needs GE Energy? They only cater to big power producers. This design is more suited to small producers. Adding middlemen won't make this design any better.
You could put a flywheel in your refrigerator. When the wind is blowing, it spins up. When the fridge needs to come on, it rotates the compressor.
But in reality there's little difference whether its in the refrigerator or someplace else on the grid. Electric conversion and distribution over small distances is quite efficient. It's storage that is the problem.
Your post is mostly correct, but slightly confused. The Constitution as originally written referred to citizens without defining who citizens were.
While it most certainly provided for the equality of all citizens, not all people were citizens. It never distinguished between "free" citizens and "non-free" citizens, just citizens and "people" or "residents".
When born, you were a citizen of your state. US citizens were something else entirely. It wasn't until the Civil War and the 14th Amendment that this issue became confused and the privileges of US citizenship were extended to anyone "born or naturalized in the United States".
Sustainable development is about much more than just organic foods. It's about whether you want your children to have a better or worse life than you have. Period.
We are slowly waking to the reality that our entire economy, and its metrics of success, are based on a lie of perpetual growth. In order for us to have a better standard of living, more things, more energy, less pollution controls, our children must have a worse standard of living, less things, less energy, more pollution controls.
If they don't want to have worse standards of living, our children had better get to work coming up with miraculous technological solutions to the problems we are passing on to them. And with each generation, the resources get fewer and the problems get bigger. Eventually, there will be a crunch, unless we act to prevent it.
If we remain on the point of the cost/benefit curve that promotes maximum profits, we hasten the depletion of easily available natural resources and do long term damage to the prospects of future generations obtaining any natural resources at all.
So, yes, it is more expensive. Or it seems that way, at least. In reality, the economics of sustainable development are more about making sense of resource usage over large time scales instead of quarterly profits. Right now, many of the costs of production are not accurately reflected in the price of things. Unfortunately the way we produce many things today won't make economic sense even 20 years from now. We can either bury our heads in the sand and cry "It's more expensive," or we can make a wise investment in conserving resources today for the "poor people" of tomorrow.
Now that you've discovered the difference between Left and Right, you can discover what it really is you're (both) mad about: http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html
Re:It's a leftist's dream come true
on
Chinese Eco-Cities
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Most of the planning in NYC has been done after the fact. For most of its history, it was a "libertarian shithole" much like Houston is now. In fact, that probably had a lot to do with its phenomenal growth.
Most planned cities, Brasilia, Washington DC, end up being little more than monuments to their creators. Anyone who has anything to do with these cities and has any sense lives in suburbs.
Successful cities create themselves. People move to be closer to some resource, such as a trade route or mine or otherwise strategic location. If there's time for some authority to do any planning at all, there's not really any strategic resource nearby. Most attempts to create successful, self-sustaining cities have been failures.
Look at the location planned here, for instance, "farmland", the absolute worst place to put a city unless you're a government looking to herd citizens into factory jobs.
To be fair, the GP mentioned population growth. The fact is that having more than two kids produces far more pollution than almost anything else you can do in your lifetime.
They won't believe you because you're dumber than them.
they, dumber than they
Overall good advice, though. I'd add that, regardless of the geek, paying them regularly, and at least slightly more than the average employee is also a good idea.
Essentially, but they are not zero. And that's the difference. If they were zero, (which they easily could be) do you think the waiter would still wait tables?
Perhaps I didn't put a fine enough point on it, but the distinction I was making was between actual limits and artificial limits.
As you pointed out, actual limits prevent there from being a "service" class at all. Artificial limits create it.
Actual limits are caused by things like overpopulation and lack of technology. Artificial limits are caused by controlled access to centralized resources such as Tokamak reactors.
It looks like you have plenty of space for panels. Or were you using that grass for something important?
I suppose I can accept your arguments over better performance in cloudy conditions. But I think more efficient storage is *much* more important considering we'll never be able to do away with storage completely.
By the way, have you considered that grass might be a more economical way of meeting your energy needs than solar panels?
Why couldn't we just give a $50M grant to homeowners to buy solar panels?
Welcome to the real world. First of all, there's no "we" involved. There's "the pentagon".
Since you're just joining us here on planet Earth, "the pentagon" is not interested in Americans being energy-independent. They are interested in waging war every few years. That's their job. They do a fine job of it. And in order to keep doing their jobs, it's in their interests to ensure that Americans are insecure and frightened enough to keep paying them to do their jobs.
Now, a seemingly miraculous opportunity for continued warfare (and funding) has arisen for the pentagon, in the Middle East. It just so happens that a large portion of our energy comes from the Middle East. And it just so happens that the pentagon does a great job waging war in the Middle East to secure that energy that we desperately need (or, at least, they did until recently).
So, I hope you can see that Americans being independent of energy from the Middle East is not in the pentagon's interests. In the future, when you see that the pentagon has funded something, instead of thinking "why didn't they fund something useful?" you can think "those brass sure are doing a heckuva job!"
Solar powered lighting is about the dumbest idea possible. Most lights are on utility poles, or near right-of-ways, with power lines at hand. And the electricity used at night costs pretty close to nothing because it's part of the utilities' base load anyways. Not to mention, you need batteries, which are still somewhat expensive, to run nighttime loads as opposed to just connecting to the grid to run loads like, say, peak air conditioning that return a greater benefit.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you know that, or is it just propaganda in preparation for the next invasion?
Physicists in American universities don't create anything that doesn't have primarily a military purpose.
I can almost see the headlines now
I see those already.
a student was given in school suspension for writing a opinion paper comparing our administration to nazi germany and the gestapo.
Unfortunately, I don't believe that the school has any obligation to allow you to use their own newspaper to criticize it.
Are you joking? While I agree with you in principle, it's just twisted that they would punish students for writing articles critical of the school. And if fucking high schools regularly censor their own student media, what does that say for the rest of America?
The student was expelled from school for writing six words on a graphing calcualtor without even showing it to anybody.
Did you miss that sentence? Do you know what it means? Do you know what the word "threat" means?
Sorry, but you won't find "freedom of dress" in the bill of rights
You should re-read the Bill of Rights. This time, try to make it all the way to the end.
Hmm... is there a MMORPG that allows one to enslave other players and put them to work building pyramids?
For viewing embedded videos on sites that refuse to support web standards, MediaPlayerConnectivity is a must-have extension.
Actually, the correct answer was:
It's not a preposition, it's an implied infinitive.
But the slashbots don't know, so really anything informative will get you modded up.
You would have to be an absolute retard to think "Let's get that guy fired" means "Let's get that guy killed".
Because, as you put it, "fired" has a strong connotation. It conjures up images of a "firing squad", and "firing a gun", and, christ, I can't even go on. You're an idiot.
The reason there is no Creative Commons license for software is that there would need to be two, basically equivalent to the BSD license and the GPL. Because software can be distributed in both easily-modifiable and not-easily-modifiable forms, any software license must take special notice of this.
Just to reiterate, Watts are a dynamic measurement. Watt-hours is a static measurement. What you're really asking is how many Watts this design is able of producing.
That figure is most dependent upon location, average windspeed, and the size of the unit. You can use maps such as the Wind Resource Atlas of the US to determine available wind power in Watts/Meter^2. Multiply that figure by the area of the unit, in square Meters, and multiply by the unit's efficiency (40%), and you get average power output in Watts.
Just to have something to go by, as others have said, a small unit can put out around 100 Watts in average winds.
Who needs GE Energy? They only cater to big power producers. This design is more suited to small producers. Adding middlemen won't make this design any better.
You could put a flywheel in your refrigerator. When the wind is blowing, it spins up. When the fridge needs to come on, it rotates the compressor.
But in reality there's little difference whether its in the refrigerator or someplace else on the grid. Electric conversion and distribution over small distances is quite efficient. It's storage that is the problem.
But first there has to be the government to assign ownership. Before that, all there is, is possession.
But who decides what is a government? And how does the government obtain land if not by possession?
Your post is mostly correct, but slightly confused. The Constitution as originally written referred to citizens without defining who citizens were.
While it most certainly provided for the equality of all citizens, not all people were citizens. It never distinguished between "free" citizens and "non-free" citizens, just citizens and "people" or "residents".
When born, you were a citizen of your state. US citizens were something else entirely. It wasn't until the Civil War and the 14th Amendment that this issue became confused and the privileges of US citizenship were extended to anyone "born or naturalized in the United States".
Neither Dinkins nor Giuilani are liberal
Oops, I mean neither are conservative
Sounds like you're ready for the quiz also.
Sustainable development is about much more than just organic foods. It's about whether you want your children to have a better or worse life than you have. Period.
We are slowly waking to the reality that our entire economy, and its metrics of success, are based on a lie of perpetual growth. In order for us to have a better standard of living, more things, more energy, less pollution controls, our children must have a worse standard of living, less things, less energy, more pollution controls.
If they don't want to have worse standards of living, our children had better get to work coming up with miraculous technological solutions to the problems we are passing on to them. And with each generation, the resources get fewer and the problems get bigger. Eventually, there will be a crunch, unless we act to prevent it.
If we remain on the point of the cost/benefit curve that promotes maximum profits, we hasten the depletion of easily available natural resources and do long term damage to the prospects of future generations obtaining any natural resources at all.
So, yes, it is more expensive. Or it seems that way, at least. In reality, the economics of sustainable development are more about making sense of resource usage over large time scales instead of quarterly profits. Right now, many of the costs of production are not accurately reflected in the price of things. Unfortunately the way we produce many things today won't make economic sense even 20 years from now. We can either bury our heads in the sand and cry "It's more expensive," or we can make a wise investment in conserving resources today for the "poor people" of tomorrow.
Now that you've discovered the difference between Left and Right, you can discover what it really is you're (both) mad about:
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html
Most of the planning in NYC has been done after the fact. For most of its history, it was a "libertarian shithole" much like Houston is now. In fact, that probably had a lot to do with its phenomenal growth.
Most planned cities, Brasilia, Washington DC, end up being little more than monuments to their creators. Anyone who has anything to do with these cities and has any sense lives in suburbs.
Successful cities create themselves. People move to be closer to some resource, such as a trade route or mine or otherwise strategic location. If there's time for some authority to do any planning at all, there's not really any strategic resource nearby. Most attempts to create successful, self-sustaining cities have been failures.
Look at the location planned here, for instance, "farmland", the absolute worst place to put a city unless you're a government looking to herd citizens into factory jobs.
Benefit of Planned Economics
Imagine the US if the govt didn't give businesses money for jobs and everything else?
You mean, like a free market?
To be fair, the GP mentioned population growth. The fact is that having more than two kids produces far more pollution than almost anything else you can do in your lifetime.
Why per capita? Why not per square foot?
They won't believe you because you're dumber than them.
they, dumber than they
Overall good advice, though. I'd add that, regardless of the geek, paying them regularly, and at least slightly more than the average employee is also a good idea.
H with electrons orbiting closer would make fusion that much easier.
I had that exact thought yesterday. But I'm still not sure I believe it.
food and energy prices are essentially zero
Essentially, but they are not zero. And that's the difference. If they were zero, (which they easily could be) do you think the waiter would still wait tables?
Perhaps I didn't put a fine enough point on it, but the distinction I was making was between actual limits and artificial limits.
As you pointed out, actual limits prevent there from being a "service" class at all. Artificial limits create it.
Actual limits are caused by things like overpopulation and lack of technology. Artificial limits are caused by controlled access to centralized resources such as Tokamak reactors.
http://clab.mystarband.net/Efficient_generator.htm
It looks like you have plenty of space for panels. Or were you using that grass for something important?
I suppose I can accept your arguments over better performance in cloudy conditions. But I think more efficient storage is *much* more important considering we'll never be able to do away with storage completely.
By the way, have you considered that grass might be a more economical way of meeting your energy needs than solar panels?
Why couldn't we just give a $50M grant to homeowners to buy solar panels?
Welcome to the real world. First of all, there's no "we" involved. There's "the pentagon".
Since you're just joining us here on planet Earth, "the pentagon" is not interested in Americans being energy-independent. They are interested in waging war every few years. That's their job. They do a fine job of it. And in order to keep doing their jobs, it's in their interests to ensure that Americans are insecure and frightened enough to keep paying them to do their jobs.
Now, a seemingly miraculous opportunity for continued warfare (and funding) has arisen for the pentagon, in the Middle East. It just so happens that a large portion of our energy comes from the Middle East. And it just so happens that the pentagon does a great job waging war in the Middle East to secure that energy that we desperately need (or, at least, they did until recently).
So, I hope you can see that Americans being independent of energy from the Middle East is not in the pentagon's interests. In the future, when you see that the pentagon has funded something, instead of thinking "why didn't they fund something useful?" you can think "those brass sure are doing a heckuva job!"
Solar powered lighting is about the dumbest idea possible. Most lights are on utility poles, or near right-of-ways, with power lines at hand. And the electricity used at night costs pretty close to nothing because it's part of the utilities' base load anyways. Not to mention, you need batteries, which are still somewhat expensive, to run nighttime loads as opposed to just connecting to the grid to run loads like, say, peak air conditioning that return a greater benefit.