As a person who has spent time behind bars for removing illegal spam (Street Spam), I'm pretty involved in the right to "privacy" in public spaces.
I'm actually surprised the SC has taken this popular, but problematic approach.
I predict that telemarketers will all go into "legitimate" businesses, such as raising money for cancer, communists, boy scouts, lesbian child care co-ops, and in short any tenable proposition.
In failing to insist on full content neutrality, the SC has opened the door on a dual standard - one for ("them") people who earn money the honest way, and one for ("us politicians") who earn money by taxing those in the first group.
This "dual standard" approach is now the standard, and some state laws have been changed today as a result of this ruling. NC law 14-399 for example declares as litter everything except what the SC says is protected speach. The SC has just upheld "Content-Specific" rules for discriminating against certain kinds of speach, so as a result, NC law now supports "Content-Specific" definitiongs for littering - what a headache.
The EBike can help shorted commutes which would otherwise be too long - for exactly the reason you mention.
A peck of wash towels and a clean shirt etc will probably solve the problem if you keep the inbound ride - low key. On the way home feel free to open up.
Another thing. If your roads are not people-centric the extra speed can improve safety by allowing you to cooexist in an occupied lane, rather than pissing of the swarms of SUV moms late for the nail painting appointment who will honk and accelerate past you to prove you're one lousy mother (*&^(*^ son of a bitch for clogging up the damn works with that beastial zero emmissions crap, when they usually scream through this 35 mph neighborhood at just under 55 mph, kids be damned.
Sails are pretty light. Conceptually you stretch a sail using the existing structure so that you can almost always produce as much pressure on the tower as it was meant to hold.
As the wind speed increases, the sail gets taken in until you're left flying the raw propellors.
I think we can agree that low wind speeds are a serious deficiency for windmills.
Those damn lazy Dutch, spent all that energy building those windmills when for half the effort they could have strapped their asses to the grinding wheel and sweated out a few tonnes of grain.
At low wind, it may require a power-up boost before the turbines reach the single fixed speed at which power can be synchronized with local power grid.
So in low wind, connecting to the grid may be a negative power experience.
(Perhaps they have a geared transmission?)
I'd like to hear someone explain why a turbine which allows 98% of the air to escape between the blades is a good idea?
Perhaps it could emply a sail affair which could let out more sail for less wind and v/v ?
The other solution is Kites - they require less power, and can be raised into the jetstream.
The Kite is made to oscillate and the power pulses converted to rotational energy on the ground. (My Design)
there are other more complicated Kite systems, but in terms of power out V. cost and enegy in - a kite is a self erecting tower, minimal risk to birds, an elegant almost artistic symbol for a city, and can scale nicely with multiple kits on a shared cable.
However, Oddly, the energy delta may not matter.
Hydro plants create tons of power in the spring, when people don't need airconditioning, and as a consequence, there is plenty of power available for lifecycle consumption. The real question is whether or not wind power is available when you need heat or AC.
Planes have less traffic, but on the ground at least we know where to look - in the air, you have to be looking for small things far away.
Liability - its a political problem, have we ever absolutely shut down an industry with liability?
(Private planes - almost) But - i think we could recalculate some of that.
Here's the key element - you must protect people on the ground. The Plane must never fly toward population centers. There should be trasit coridors which are parks on the ground, and fly-overs in the air, that is where we fly.
Along these corridors are ample landing sites, such that the vehicle can parachute down to a site at any time.
Landing are somewhat more dangerous because the opportunity to parachute is lost on descent.
You drive in front of a computer system designed to take off your head with an explosive device (airbag) these don't "Fail gracefully" they simply don't fail.
Not sure, but i think its possible to create a computer with known software which doesn't crash often - especially if you can test it under actual conditions. (unlike some spacejunk)
And, if you're going to quote me some scripture written by Paul, you can just shut up now. Paul had rather unique and unsupported-by-anyone-else views about women.
I grew up in a cult in which the pastor believed he was the heir apparent to Paul.
I believe I agree with you on Paul.
Kind David - to be seated at the right hand of God himself is famous for "knowing" every chick he saw, married or not. Divorce, i guess takes too long, so he just ordered the murder of his new loves.
I guess there's a grand morality to it all, but its a stretch to put one's finger on exactly what it is.
Remember that under Old Testament law, the parents of a child are to murder their own children by throwing stones if they misbehave, so I think we can rule out "religious principle" as a matric of this equation.
Additionally the law against terminating a pregnancy by injuring the mother is a civil law, with the payment of a cow being compensation.
Murder of a free-standing person is punishable by death - but note that person likely refers to male of fighting age, and likely never included women (chattel).
So again, at least Biblical principles set out a standard not entirely consistent with the "religious blight", er "right".
In the end, these are moral arguments based more squarly on our expanding notion of individual rights - rights only referentially based on the idea of a God, and largely not based on the cannon of scripture.
The argument given by the Supreme Court in upholding Affirmative Action is not that poor black kids have a disporportionate claim to state resources, but that the state has a compelling state interest in including the full panapoly of humanity in the niches of power. If Universities had all white staff, they could not teach minorities, If courts had all-white benches, they would lack the credibiity needed to keep the peace.
At every level a diverse society performs better with diverse leadership, and - at least as far as education is concerned - this is a compelling reason to take measures intended to ensure a diversity of outcome.
Credit CSPAN J. Breyer Supreme Court - I'm just the messenger here.
1. What if? As a public Figure - you have to expect that stuff.
2. Spanish Inq. I feel you're stretching. In News, before you print something which might be considered scandalous, it is customery to ask the target to respond to the accusation. A no comment is probably considered a pass, especially when the target is legally competant.
They weren't threatened - just consulted.
3. Bush is documented as getting "Favored Son" treatment.
3. The Whitehouse has been ordered to release docs - said it didn't have any - then said it did, the judge ordered the release again. - The WH has not been forthcoming about actual documents.
For the record - I'm biased, I feel that Bush lacks a command of the English language, and with that a command of the concepts for which long words represent the sysnthesis of long and pestering paradoxes and dichotemies which great pains have been made to strike into balance - a delicate balance with nuances Bush cannot possibly understand - given that he is so unfamiliar with the underlying dialectic that his mouth fails to form the foundational terms without sounding them out phonetically from the teleprompter - and as luck would have it - his cocaine addled brain often fails so basic a task as middle school conjugation.
So I'm a Reagan Independant hoping desperately for change - I prefer R. Nader.
There have been several improved image formats since jpeg - all of which have failed because they were closed.
Its easy enough to make a jpeg work well enough - the pressure on outsiders to conform is unrelenting. Their product will mean nothing without Cameras - they'll have to give it to the Camera people - and that's just about everybody - then the software folks will need to use it.
The big markets for Cameras involve speciallized software (Law enforcement, pros, medical, etc)
The Challenger exploded because it was testing the limits of physics to survice what destroys most asteroids.
A High number of small planes would result in accidents for sure - but not arguably more than cars now, and small accidents would result in nominal death count - whereas you 747 goes down its 550 dead.
Self driving car is a bad idea.
Self driving airplane is already a reality - and i think could be quite safe.
Small planes can include parachutes
If the worst tat can happen in a chute landing - maintenance isn't so d*mn critical, cost goes down, and we get out of the sit and pollute cycle.
AIK
Re:Flying Cars - a bad idea.
on
NYT On Flying Cars
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Bullshit.
The Elevator man went the way of the Dodo bird, and elevators have become SAFER - not less safe.
Transportation is a pasttime for which humans are unsuited. Concentrating on the banal is not a human skill - it is the skill of electronic systems.
Air travel is already highly electronic - pilots are feel good actors, more than vehicle controllers these days.
People on the ground are much safer when you create air transport with zero override featuires.
The Road train is so much more expensive than the "Air Train"
Autopilots and "Lanes" for Airplanes are feasible. While Autopilots which can account for Deer, Children, and Alians running into the street, Other Cars which are not "ON System" are all challenges removed by going airborne.
Another point, Airplanes are weapons because we don't have "roads" for Airplanes. Large Airplanes create a massive threat, not only to the Passageners, but to the ground as well,
The FAA has gone overboard - if you look at deaths by car v. death by air - we should be flying more, or spending more money making cars safe - it isn't even close.
A tw thruster design, which is CAPABLE of running on a single thruster would be fail safe.
A "Flight Road" meaning a set aside on the ground for flight would ensure that failures would end in the trees, and autoparachutes would be effective for small planes.
Slashdot Mirror
As a person who has spent time behind bars for removing illegal spam (Street Spam), I'm pretty involved in the right to "privacy" in public spaces.
I'm actually surprised the SC has taken this popular, but problematic approach.
I predict that telemarketers will all go into "legitimate" businesses, such as raising money for cancer, communists, boy scouts, lesbian child care co-ops, and in short any tenable proposition.
In failing to insist on full content neutrality, the SC has opened the door on a dual standard - one for ("them") people who earn money the honest way, and one for ("us politicians") who earn money by taxing those in the first group.
This "dual standard" approach is now the standard, and some state laws have been changed today as a result of this ruling. NC law 14-399 for example declares as litter everything except what the SC says is protected speach. The SC has just upheld "Content-Specific" rules for discriminating against certain kinds of speach, so as a result, NC law now supports "Content-Specific" definitiongs for littering - what a headache.
AIK
The EBike can help shorted commutes which would otherwise be too long - for exactly the reason you mention.
A peck of wash towels and a clean shirt etc will probably solve the problem if you keep the inbound ride - low key. On the way home feel free to open up.
Another thing. If your roads are not people-centric the extra speed can improve safety by allowing you to cooexist in an occupied lane, rather than pissing of the swarms of SUV moms late for the nail painting appointment who will honk and accelerate past you to prove you're one lousy mother (*&^(*^ son of a bitch for clogging up the damn works with that beastial zero emmissions crap, when they usually scream through this 35 mph neighborhood at just under 55 mph, kids be damned.
Been there
AIK
Sails are pretty light. Conceptually you stretch a sail using the existing structure so that you can almost always produce as much pressure on the tower as it was meant to hold.
As the wind speed increases, the sail gets taken in until you're left flying the raw propellors.
I think we can agree that low wind speeds are a serious deficiency for windmills.
AIK
The transfer IS the string.
(Oscillate the lift, draw in the cable, let the kite (array) pull it out again.
They should use kites.
A Long strink of kites would be pretty
and much more effecient (benefit over initial cost)
AIK
Kites would be safer - drastic colors would help - but who wantc orange towers.
Birds breathe the same air we do - i should think fewer would die from the reduced emmissions. Cars kill more birds and everything else.
That Assumes a fixed design.
I gather this is adjustable pitch, but for squizing the most out of slow air - you need more surface area.
Perhaps they don't have a dead season - not sure.
But thanks.
AIK
So why not Kites.
They can get up to higher windspeeds without all the hassle of a tower?
AIK
Those damn lazy Dutch, spent all that energy building those windmills when for half the effort they could have strapped their asses to the grinding wheel and sweated out a few tonnes of grain.
At low wind, it may require a power-up boost before the turbines reach the single fixed speed at which power can be synchronized with local power grid.
So in low wind, connecting to the grid may be a negative power experience.
(Perhaps they have a geared transmission?)
I'd like to hear someone explain why a turbine which allows 98% of the air to escape between the blades is a good idea?
Perhaps it could emply a sail affair which could let out more sail for less wind and v/v ?
AIK
AIK
The other solution is Kites - they require less power, and can be raised into the jetstream.
The Kite is made to oscillate and the power pulses converted to rotational energy on the ground. (My Design)
there are other more complicated Kite systems, but in terms of power out V. cost and enegy in - a kite is a self erecting tower, minimal risk to birds, an elegant almost artistic symbol for a city, and can scale nicely with multiple kits on a shared cable.
However, Oddly, the energy delta may not matter.
Hydro plants create tons of power in the spring, when people don't need airconditioning, and as a consequence, there is plenty of power available for lifecycle consumption. The real question is whether or not wind power is available when you need heat or AC.
Planes have less traffic, but on the ground at least we know where to look - in the air, you have to be looking for small things far away.
Liability - its a political problem, have we ever absolutely shut down an industry with liability?
(Private planes - almost) But - i think we could recalculate some of that.
Here's the key element - you must protect people on the ground. The Plane must never fly toward population centers. There should be trasit coridors which are parks on the ground, and fly-overs in the air, that is where we fly.
Along these corridors are ample landing sites, such that the vehicle can parachute down to a site at any time.
Landing are somewhat more dangerous because the opportunity to parachute is lost on descent.
You drive in front of a computer system designed to take off your head with an explosive device (airbag) these don't "Fail gracefully" they simply don't fail.
Not sure, but i think its possible to create a computer with known software which doesn't crash often - especially if you can test it under actual conditions. (unlike some spacejunk)
AIK
And, if you're going to quote me some scripture written by Paul, you can just shut up now. Paul had rather unique and unsupported-by-anyone-else views about women.
I grew up in a cult in which the pastor believed he was the heir apparent to Paul.
I believe I agree with you on Paul.
Kind David - to be seated at the right hand of God himself is famous for "knowing" every chick he saw, married or not. Divorce, i guess takes too long, so he just ordered the murder of his new loves.
I guess there's a grand morality to it all, but its a stretch to put one's finger on exactly what it is.
AIK
they should put an RFID tag on every car in IRAQ yesturday - then we'd know who was kidnapping these people etc ...
AIK
Infrastructure is a relationship between the vehicle and the medium, you really need both.
Whhat's needed is kids smart enough to stay out of the way of dingbat cars "avoiding" fixed objects.
AIK
Remember that under Old Testament law, the parents of a child are to murder their own children by throwing stones if they misbehave, so I think we can rule out "religious principle" as a matric of this equation.
Additionally the law against terminating a pregnancy by injuring the mother is a civil law, with the payment of a cow being compensation.
Murder of a free-standing person is punishable by death - but note that person likely refers to male of fighting age, and likely never included women (chattel).
So again, at least Biblical principles set out a standard not entirely consistent with the "religious blight", er "right".
In the end, these are moral arguments based more squarly on our expanding notion of individual rights - rights only referentially based on the idea of a God, and largely not based on the cannon of scripture.
AIK
You're close.
The argument given by the Supreme Court in upholding Affirmative Action is not that poor black kids have a disporportionate claim to state resources, but that the state has a compelling state interest in including the full panapoly of humanity in the niches of power. If Universities had all white staff, they could not teach minorities, If courts had all-white benches, they would lack the credibiity needed to keep the peace.
At every level a diverse society performs better with diverse leadership, and - at least as far as education is concerned - this is a compelling reason to take measures intended to ensure a diversity of outcome.
Credit CSPAN J. Breyer Supreme Court - I'm just the messenger here.
AIK
My experiencce in places with lax gun laws - is that the point of having a gun is not to call the police.
You have the right to remain silent.
42,000 people die in car crashes every year. 0 people die in laser induced headaches.
Lasers represent a threat matrix position of 0.00000% relative to the highest threat.
In fact by all accounts Lasers are less deadly than peanut butter.
AIK
1. What if?
As a public Figure - you have to expect that stuff.
2. Spanish Inq.
I feel you're stretching. In News, before you print something which might be considered scandalous, it is customery to ask the target to respond to the accusation. A no comment is probably considered a pass, especially when the target is legally competant.
They weren't threatened - just consulted.
3. Bush is documented as getting "Favored Son" treatment.
3. The Whitehouse has been ordered to release docs - said it didn't have any - then said it did, the judge ordered the release again. - The WH has not been forthcoming about actual documents.
For the record - I'm biased, I feel that Bush lacks a command of the English language, and with that a command of the concepts for which long words represent the sysnthesis of long and pestering paradoxes and dichotemies which great pains have been made to strike into balance - a delicate balance with nuances Bush cannot possibly understand - given that he is so unfamiliar with the underlying dialectic that his mouth fails to form the foundational terms without sounding them out phonetically from the teleprompter - and as luck would have it - his cocaine addled brain often fails so basic a task as middle school conjugation.
So I'm a Reagan Independant hoping desperately for change - I prefer R. Nader.
AIK
There have been several improved image formats since jpeg - all of which have failed because they were closed.
Its easy enough to make a jpeg work well enough - the pressure on outsiders to conform is unrelenting. Their product will mean nothing without Cameras - they'll have to give it to the Camera people - and that's just about everybody - then the software folks will need to use it.
The big markets for Cameras involve speciallized software (Law enforcement, pros, medical, etc)
AIK
The Challenger exploded because it was testing the limits of physics to survice what destroys most asteroids.
A High number of small planes would result in accidents for sure - but not arguably more than cars now, and small accidents would result in nominal death count - whereas you 747 goes down its 550 dead.
Self driving car is a bad idea.
Self driving airplane is already a reality - and i think could be quite safe.
Small planes can include parachutes
If the worst tat can happen in a chute landing - maintenance isn't so d*mn critical, cost goes down, and we get out of the sit and pollute cycle.
AIK
Bullshit.
The Elevator man went the way of the Dodo bird, and elevators have become SAFER - not less safe.
Transportation is a pasttime for which humans are unsuited. Concentrating on the banal is not a human skill - it is the skill of electronic systems.
Air travel is already highly electronic - pilots are feel good actors, more than vehicle controllers these days.
People on the ground are much safer when you create air transport with zero override featuires.
AIK
The Road train is so much more expensive than the "Air Train"
Autopilots and "Lanes" for Airplanes are feasible. While Autopilots which can account for Deer, Children, and Alians running into the street, Other Cars which are not "ON System" are all challenges removed by going airborne.
AIK
The critical technology is redundancy.
Most airplanes cannot survive a mistake.
Another point, Airplanes are weapons because we don't have "roads" for Airplanes. Large Airplanes create a massive threat, not only to the Passageners, but to the ground as well,
The FAA has gone overboard - if you look at deaths by car v. death by air - we should be flying more, or spending more money making cars safe - it isn't even close.
A tw thruster design, which is CAPABLE of running on a single thruster would be fail safe.
A "Flight Road" meaning a set aside on the ground for flight would ensure that failures would end in the trees, and autoparachutes would be effective for small planes.
AIK