Why don't the governments stop pretending. The lottery is intended on a tax for those who can't do math. And most of those people can't do math because the government schools failed to teach them. The government wants to use a lottery so it can get extra money from poor, uneducated people while pretending to have a progressive tax system which doesn't hurt the poor.
I can't believe you're equating the lottery with a tax. Lotteries are entirely optional. It may be more appealing to those who don't see any other recourse for getting more money, but it's not required by law.
I noticed that too. So really he only had 9 gripes about the Galaxy.
The review lacked polish elsewhere too; I know it's nitpicky, but it threw me for a sec where he meant to type "lessens" and spelled it, "lessons", as in, ("It’s a more efficient use of home screen real estate, and it lessons the need for scrolling among multiple screens to locate a desired app" (or he was trying to say it teaches the user of the need to scroll among multiple screens!...naah).
The comparison to the iPad2 itself doesn't interest me all that much, as any comparison between an Apple product and a non-Apple product usually breaks down to an argument between tighter manufacturing and development control vs. decreased restrictions and more flexibility, just like the ancient Mac vs. PC debate. Same ol' same ol'. I'd just wanted to know what it could do, I'd be happy if I could afford either tablet, at this point, but that's not happening anytime soon.
Only in the USA ladies and gents... birth place of all things wrong, including allowing the drop of A-bombs on 340,000 japanese civilians.
Someone could use a bit of a history lesson. The US hardly "invented" such things, as you suggest. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre
In 1937, during the Nanking Massacre, the Japanese murdered in the neighborhood of 200,000 Chinese civilians, and 20,000 were raped.
Carpet bombing was also a standard MO of European nations during WWII, which caused the death of massive numbers of civilians. The US just made it easier and quicker to do with a single bomb- which Germany was also working on.
In any case, I agree that the US patent and copyright system is out of control. What should or could be patented is the process of isolating the gene, not the gene itself, regardless of it's so-called "natural" genesis.
-and it's probably a little of both. It's a shame the newspaper sensationalized the story because they lost credibility for a problem that is nonetheless real, even if badly exaggerated. Tax revenue is like free money to some state workers. I've seen state workers leave their state car running for over 45 minutes while they hobnobbed with a buddy inside an outlying building to the main campus. This happened the last time gas was near $4 USD a gallon.
I'd say yes and no.. the President has to take a large degree of responsibility for the financial situation when he advocates and spends nearly a trillion dollars on a largely failed stimulus package at a time when the deficit was already sky high, and the deficit has more than doubled since he took office. He also got the US involved in the Libyan conflict without congressional approval. If the financial situation was alarming under Bush, it's terrifying now. I think that's why you see all the hubbub. Obama was a senator when he voted yes on several of these big bill items under Bush (TARP, Omnibus, etc.) so he and other Democrats can't say they didn't see it coming either, yet constantly lambasted Bush for his spending; now Obama continues to advocate for expensive programs and outspend all previous administrations by a large margin. Bush pretty much started the current deficit issue with the spending on the wars which he advocated, (of which, one at least I feel was justified and necessary to battle terrorism) but the "hope and change" never happened post 2009; things are looking worse, not better.
But I think this illustrates that the Office of the POTUS does have some direct, if limited, financial impact on the government.
The real problem with government spending will likely never be addressed though - waste. Both parties do it. It's just a culture of waste and excess and unaccountability in not only Washington DC, but most governments, from the state to the local level. To politicians and many government workers alike, tax money is like Doritos.. remember that old '80s Doritos catchphrase, "they'll make more"? - like it's a bottomless cup to draw from. So long as revenue is treated like that, we'll have financial problems looming over us.
Is this article really about anonymity, or the abuse of anonymity? It's another tool like any other. The reason people might act differently, sometimes becoming monsters under anonymity is because there is an inherent personality flaw of some kind. The people are the root of the problem, not the tool. I see it on this board everyday, someone disagrees with your opinion and immediately out come the insults and immature name-calling: "moron", "idiot", "fucktard".. yeah, that'll really get me to see your point of view. (It's why I changed my sig)
Anonymity is a bit like alcohol I suppose: I hate when someone makes an excuse for their poor drunken behavior the night before by saying, "It was the alcohol talking"; alcohol doesn't talk, it only lowers inhibitions that allow the *real* you to come forth unencumbered by a social facade. If you are one of those people who become an asshole when you're drunk, (and most certainly not everyone does) it only means that deep down you're probably really an asshole who most of the time manages to hide it from everyone. The same goes for anonymity. If you can remain civil and respectful behind a pseudonym, then good for you.. all eight of you know who you are.;-p
Don't regulate light bulbs, tax electricity. If you want people to use less electricity, make it more expensive and they will buy better bulbs, turn off unneeded lights, reduce use of air conditioning, whatever it takes. It is absurd to fixate on light bulbs while people air condition their houses to near-refrigerator levels.
Unfortunately, no they won't. Example: the first thing the wife does every morning is immediately turn the TV on. It stays on pretty much all day until she goes to bed (she's a stay-at-home mom). Says she needs the "noise". I suspect it rarely goes off unless she goes out to the store, but if she goes down in the basement to do laundry, or out to water her garden, or to talk to neighbors, etc.. it stays on regardless, (from what I witness on weekends) and that sucks up a lot more electricity than an incandescent or two. And frequently at night every light in the house is on. Oh, and yes, she likes the house to feel like a friggin' butcher shop too, it's freezing in the summertime! (as well as the wintertime) I complain, but since I'm at work during the weekdays, I can't really enforce it.
How would you like it if Republicans added 1,000% tax increase on all abortions while the Democrats add a 1,000% tax increase on all ammunition to neuter the 2nd amendment?
Jeeezus Digi, don't give them any more ideas! They could be listening (..well, reading)
Well said. Where accidents are concerned, it only takes one to tango. If you don't have your eyes and focus on the road at all times, even if you have good control, you're not driving defensively, and you can get taken out by someone who shouldn't be behind a wheel. I know I've had to swerve or slam on the brakes to avoid accidents, one just the other day when someone completely ignored the yield sign they had and kept coming.
It's been a while since I read Frankenstein, but I think electricity had some hand in giving the monster life. After all, Mary Shelley was inspired to write the book from the electrical experiments of Galvani.
Yep, "Galvanism" in biology is the contraction of muscle via electrical current and is what (I think) Shelley generally referred to electricity in the book as. Apparently very similar real life experiments using dead tissue were carried out in the day. A Dr. Wilkinson was one such experimenter, but it might have been a German physician and alchemist by the name of Dippel that Shelley more closely modeled Dr. Frankenstein after.
No wonder some people freaked out about it.
Well, all definitions are delineated at some point, beyond which they are something else. Rebellions are sometimes depicted as "just", terrorism is not. It's largely a matter of perception, but not entirely.
It's also a matter of intent: terrorists are defined by those who deliberately go after innocents and civilians - or at least, those not involved in the war or battle in some direct support capacity or other (like a bomb factory)- simply to induce fear and chaos. (say what you will about "collateral damage", but that is not intentional and therein lies the difference; it works against those causing the damage, not "for" them). Those such as McVeigh, or Al Qaeda, therefore are considered terrorists by all but their supporters. Rebellion, such as depicted in say, Star Wars, ( I know, not the best example) is an attempt to topple the current regime that doesn't necessarily include terrorism. Luke and Han didn't go blasting anyone and everyone, only Stormtroopers, who represent and fight for the Empire. However, if rebels should start deliberately targeting innocents simply to induce fear and chaos, they then become terrorists.
I admit that historically, in reality, it's indeed a very blurry line. I could not argue with someone that the attack on Hiroshima was not terrorism; by a strict definition, it was, as the US was attempting to terrorize the Japan gov't into surrender by leveling an entire city, most of the people of which were not directly involved in the war effort. However, in the first two World Wars, random carpet bombing of cities and thus civilians was a frequent element of war, engaged in by all countries involved, including Japan.
I'm assuming the plug for Vitamin Water was a joke. If not, you're a freakin' retard. Vitamin Water is worse than useless. Think of 12 oz of tap water (less than $0.01) and a vitamin (~ $0.30), and the fact that you piss both of them down the drain. Yes, vitamin pills are worthless compared to just eating healthy food.
Now imagine you buy this water + vitamin pill in a disposable plastic bottle, for FIVE TIMES what the water + vitamin pill cost. Oh, and add in the "crystallized fructose", which is goddamn high fructose corn syrup, the source of most obesity in the U.S.
There you go; you are a retard, and paying for the privilege.
Just wow..here we go again.. such maturity. Troll much?
While I think the bottled water craze is unfathomable, this is not that.
For those not familiar with it: I drink the zero calorie acai-berry vitamin water, not the regular stuff. Until I hear of the FDA cracking down on Glauceau for false advertising, I will take them at their word for it. VW also has electrolytes as does Gatorade, and you can't get that from just vitamins and plain water.
I drink it while I work out, and it hits the spot; it tastes good, far more so than gatorade IMO, and certainly better than plain water; it replenishes lost fluids and salts, and I can get a good size bottle of something that tastes decent and isn't unhealthy, all for a lousy buck. I guess I'm a smart retard.
Frankly I wouldn't be put off if the DEA was just disbanded.
Anyway, losing the Webb telescope is indeed a bummer, but at least not all science programs got cuts, a few space projects actually have a bigger budget this coming year than last; they just didn't get as much as they asked for - yet that's somehow considered a 'cut" too, by many. ( It's funny that even a technical increase can still be deemed "a cut" in politics, but so it goes with budgets and perspectives.)
From TFA:
The draft appropriations bill, which the subcommittee is scheduled to vote on July 7, also includes $1.95 billion for the Space Launch System — the heavy-lift rocket Congress ordered NASA to build for deep space exploration. The proposed 2012 funding level is $150 million more than the heavy lifter got for 2011, but some $700 million below the amount recommended in the NASA Authorization Act of 2010, which became law in October.
The bill also would provide $812 million for the Joint Polar Satellite System, or JPSS, being developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
That amount would be an increase of $430 million from the amount appropriated for the program in 2011 but $258 million less than the agency requested. In total, NOAA would receive $4.49 billion next year, $103 million less than was appropriated for 2011 and $1 billion less than the administration’s request for 2012.
The NOAA did get a net cut there but not nearly as much as it sounds on the surface of it.
Hey now, that's just stereotyping. And funny, I admit. But anyway, I know an awful lot of conservative types who think that the whole dinosaurs 'n' jesus thing is just as wildly ridiculous as any 'liberal pro-science' person does. "A huge swath?" Really?
In fact, at nearly 50 years of age now, having lived in one of the most densely populated states in the nation, I've come across a lot of people, and I've only ever met -in person- one single, solitary person who actually believed that carbon dating was flawed and that the earth was only 6,000 years old, and that was on the basis of his religion, not his political stance. That was in '88.
I think the nutters just get more media attention.
Well, if things pan out for them, that would be awesome- I wish solar tech would take off, I really do; I still have some reservations about any cutting edge tech and the promises and claims that developers or mfgs make regarding it, but obviously from time to time the claims pan out. Please understand that I've been reading about solar in Popular Mechanics since the 70s', they usually made it sound like a revolution was right around the corner, and to date, it's not quite where they suggested it'd be. Solar is due. But why couldn't you have just originally made your point without resorting to the insults and ad-hominem attacks as you did in your first reply? I wasn't trashing solar tech nor claiming to be an expert. Our last two exchanges were so much more productive.
Not to mention that those black hat scumbags who write malicious code in the first place for purely dishonorable intentions, are also to blame in the grand scheme of things. They seem to get a free pass all too often, as though they were some blameless, unavoidable act of nature, like an earthquake or tornado.
It's a 3 way failure: User, OS, cracker.
They aren't dieing. See that's the problem when you have a 2 second attention span. Most of these inventions are being incorporated into viable production lines. From discovery to production is at least 5 years and that's if they already have a factory in place that can utilize the new technology. If they have to build the factory as well it's another 2-3 years. So when you hear about one of these great new ideas do you check back on it in 8 years? Didn't think so.
Bulk solar power is on our door step, otherwise GE wouldn't have just bought one of the most important thin-film solar producers, coincidentally the company in question was already building the largest solar cell production plant in the world. The CdTe panels that this company produces use little of the very expensive rare earths that the other panels do, they can be produced on roll-roll processes (flexible panels as well) and it's expected that they can be produced for significantly less than a $1 a watt (considered the break point for mass acceptance).
Riiight, just because GE -in whom it sounds like you own stock or something, and the same idiots who tried to foist mercury laden CFLs on everyone- bought into some solar tech, the solar future is right around the corner. We've been hearing these promises for far longer than 8 years, it's been more like decades; maybe the 2 second attention span is yours, not mine.
I guess we'll have to wait and see if this tech is viable. Every year it seems some new solar tech comes out with big promises, and quietly dies in whispers.
I haven't given up hope though; long ago I had given up on LED tech as any sort of serious display tech or light source, and suddenly(?), there were: LEDs that make gorgeous displays of all sizes, LEDs that for all colors of the visible spectrum and then some, and LEDs that put out 110 lumens (who'd a thunk?). I just hope there's a similar breakthrough sometime soon in solar cell development, but this probably ain't it.
I'm giving up any opportunity to use mod points here to agree with this too. I'm basically moderate with some conservative leanings, but in this area I lean the other way. It's no kind of life for a kid to grow up hated, neglected, resented, abused, and/or even beaten by his parent(s), and likely in an impoverished environment at that. That creates a twisted mindset and destroys quality of life. It's just cruel. Life without love is hell on earth, and forcing a child on parents who had no intention of said child ruins all their lives, with the likely result of an eventual adult with a broken moral compass.
Though, the video gaming thing might help ease violence too. There's always been the two opposing schools of thought on that: either violent gaming will "get it out of your system" OR "it will incite your kid to violence and desensitize him". I always felt the "desensitize" bit was over the top - really, killing pixels equates with actual violent bloodlust?; besides, movies are just as bad if not worse; and, they depict violence on actual people, not pixels (though CGI may be blurring the line there). But I've played my share of Doom, Quake, and other FPSes and never once did it increase my inclination to harm anyone for real (well.. except for maybe the game developers;-p )
Slashdot Mirror
Why don't the governments stop pretending. The lottery is intended on a tax for those who can't do math. And most of those people can't do math because the government schools failed to teach them. The government wants to use a lottery so it can get extra money from poor, uneducated people while pretending to have a progressive tax system which doesn't hurt the poor.
I can't believe you're equating the lottery with a tax. Lotteries are entirely optional. It may be more appealing to those who don't see any other recourse for getting more money, but it's not required by law.
I noticed that too. So really he only had 9 gripes about the Galaxy.
The review lacked polish elsewhere too; I know it's nitpicky, but it threw me for a sec where he meant to type "lessens" and spelled it, "lessons", as in, ("It’s a more efficient use of home screen real estate, and it lessons the need for scrolling among multiple screens to locate a desired app" (or he was trying to say it teaches the user of the need to scroll among multiple screens!...naah).
The comparison to the iPad2 itself doesn't interest me all that much, as any comparison between an Apple product and a non-Apple product usually breaks down to an argument between tighter manufacturing and development control vs. decreased restrictions and more flexibility, just like the ancient Mac vs. PC debate. Same ol' same ol'.
I'd just wanted to know what it could do, I'd be happy if I could afford either tablet, at this point, but that's not happening anytime soon.
Only in the USA ladies and gents... birth place of all things wrong, including allowing the drop of A-bombs on 340,000 japanese civilians.
Someone could use a bit of a history lesson. The US hardly "invented" such things, as you suggest.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre
In 1937, during the Nanking Massacre, the Japanese murdered in the neighborhood of 200,000 Chinese civilians, and 20,000 were raped. Carpet bombing was also a standard MO of European nations during WWII, which caused the death of massive numbers of civilians. The US just made it easier and quicker to do with a single bomb- which Germany was also working on.
In any case, I agree that the US patent and copyright system is out of control. What should or could be patented is the process of isolating the gene, not the gene itself, regardless of it's so-called "natural" genesis.
-and it's probably a little of both. It's a shame the newspaper sensationalized the story because they lost credibility for a problem that is nonetheless real, even if badly exaggerated. Tax revenue is like free money to some state workers. I've seen state workers leave their state car running for over 45 minutes while they hobnobbed with a buddy inside an outlying building to the main campus. This happened the last time gas was near $4 USD a gallon.
Maybe he should've referred to them as "Ross Perots" instead of hobbits.. although, stature-wise, close enough.
I'd say yes and no.. the President has to take a large degree of responsibility for the financial situation when he advocates and spends nearly a trillion dollars on a largely failed stimulus package at a time when the deficit was already sky high, and the deficit has more than doubled since he took office. He also got the US involved in the Libyan conflict without congressional approval. If the financial situation was alarming under Bush, it's terrifying now. I think that's why you see all the hubbub. Obama was a senator when he voted yes on several of these big bill items under Bush (TARP, Omnibus, etc.) so he and other Democrats can't say they didn't see it coming either, yet constantly lambasted Bush for his spending; now Obama continues to advocate for expensive programs and outspend all previous administrations by a large margin. Bush pretty much started the current deficit issue with the spending on the wars which he advocated, (of which, one at least I feel was justified and necessary to battle terrorism) but the "hope and change" never happened post 2009; things are looking worse, not better.
But I think this illustrates that the Office of the POTUS does have some direct, if limited, financial impact on the government.
The real problem with government spending will likely never be addressed though - waste. Both parties do it. It's just a culture of waste and excess and unaccountability in not only Washington DC, but most governments, from the state to the local level. To politicians and many government workers alike, tax money is like Doritos.. remember that old '80s Doritos catchphrase, "they'll make more"? - like it's a bottomless cup to draw from. So long as revenue is treated like that, we'll have financial problems looming over us.
Is this article really about anonymity, or the abuse of anonymity? It's another tool like any other. The reason people might act differently, sometimes becoming monsters under anonymity is because there is an inherent personality flaw of some kind. The people are the root of the problem, not the tool. I see it on this board everyday, someone disagrees with your opinion and immediately out come the insults and immature name-calling: "moron", "idiot", "fucktard".. yeah, that'll really get me to see your point of view. (It's why I changed my sig) ;-p
Anonymity is a bit like alcohol I suppose: I hate when someone makes an excuse for their poor drunken behavior the night before by saying, "It was the alcohol talking"; alcohol doesn't talk, it only lowers inhibitions that allow the *real* you to come forth unencumbered by a social facade. If you are one of those people who become an asshole when you're drunk, (and most certainly not everyone does) it only means that deep down you're probably really an asshole who most of the time manages to hide it from everyone. The same goes for anonymity. If you can remain civil and respectful behind a pseudonym, then good for you.. all eight of you know who you are.
There will only be cockroaches and lawyers left.
There's a difference?
Don't regulate light bulbs, tax electricity. If you want people to use less electricity, make it more expensive and they will buy better bulbs, turn off unneeded lights, reduce use of air conditioning, whatever it takes. It is absurd to fixate on light bulbs while people air condition their houses to near-refrigerator levels.
Unfortunately, no they won't. Example: the first thing the wife does every morning is immediately turn the TV on. It stays on pretty much all day until she goes to bed (she's a stay-at-home mom). Says she needs the "noise". I suspect it rarely goes off unless she goes out to the store, but if she goes down in the basement to do laundry, or out to water her garden, or to talk to neighbors, etc.. it stays on regardless, (from what I witness on weekends) and that sucks up a lot more electricity than an incandescent or two. And frequently at night every light in the house is on. Oh, and yes, she likes the house to feel like a friggin' butcher shop too, it's freezing in the summertime! (as well as the wintertime) I complain, but since I'm at work during the weekdays, I can't really enforce it.
How would you like it if Republicans added 1,000% tax increase on all abortions while the Democrats add a 1,000% tax increase on all ammunition to neuter the 2nd amendment?
Jeeezus Digi, don't give them any more ideas! They could be listening (..well, reading)
Agreed. I'm quite happy with my little Sansa Fuze. It's much less expensive, smaller, lighter, and still does everything I need it to.
Well said. Where accidents are concerned, it only takes one to tango. If you don't have your eyes and focus on the road at all times, even if you have good control, you're not driving defensively, and you can get taken out by someone who shouldn't be behind a wheel. I know I've had to swerve or slam on the brakes to avoid accidents, one just the other day when someone completely ignored the yield sign they had and kept coming.
It's been a while since I read Frankenstein, but I think electricity had some hand in giving the monster life. After all, Mary Shelley was inspired to write the book from the electrical experiments of Galvani.
Yep, "Galvanism" in biology is the contraction of muscle via electrical current and is what (I think) Shelley generally referred to electricity in the book as. Apparently very similar real life experiments using dead tissue were carried out in the day. A Dr. Wilkinson was one such experimenter, but it might have been a German physician and alchemist by the name of Dippel that Shelley more closely modeled Dr. Frankenstein after.
No wonder some people freaked out about it.
Well, all definitions are delineated at some point, beyond which they are something else. Rebellions are sometimes depicted as "just", terrorism is not. It's largely a matter of perception, but not entirely.
It's also a matter of intent: terrorists are defined by those who deliberately go after innocents and civilians - or at least, those not involved in the war or battle in some direct support capacity or other (like a bomb factory)- simply to induce fear and chaos. (say what you will about "collateral damage", but that is not intentional and therein lies the difference; it works against those causing the damage, not "for" them). Those such as McVeigh, or Al Qaeda, therefore are considered terrorists by all but their supporters. Rebellion, such as depicted in say, Star Wars, ( I know, not the best example) is an attempt to topple the current regime that doesn't necessarily include terrorism. Luke and Han didn't go blasting anyone and everyone, only Stormtroopers, who represent and fight for the Empire. However, if rebels should start deliberately targeting innocents simply to induce fear and chaos, they then become terrorists.
I admit that historically, in reality, it's indeed a very blurry line. I could not argue with someone that the attack on Hiroshima was not terrorism; by a strict definition, it was, as the US was attempting to terrorize the Japan gov't into surrender by leveling an entire city, most of the people of which were not directly involved in the war effort. However, in the first two World Wars, random carpet bombing of cities and thus civilians was a frequent element of war, engaged in by all countries involved, including Japan.
I'm assuming the plug for Vitamin Water was a joke. If not, you're a freakin' retard. Vitamin Water is worse than useless. Think of 12 oz of tap water (less than $0.01) and a vitamin (~ $0.30), and the fact that you piss both of them down the drain. Yes, vitamin pills are worthless compared to just eating healthy food. Now imagine you buy this water + vitamin pill in a disposable plastic bottle, for FIVE TIMES what the water + vitamin pill cost. Oh, and add in the "crystallized fructose", which is goddamn high fructose corn syrup, the source of most obesity in the U.S.
There you go; you are a retard, and paying for the privilege.
Just wow..here we go again.. such maturity. Troll much?
While I think the bottled water craze is unfathomable, this is not that.
For those not familiar with it: I drink the zero calorie acai-berry vitamin water, not the regular stuff. Until I hear of the FDA cracking down on Glauceau for false advertising, I will take them at their word for it. VW also has electrolytes as does Gatorade, and you can't get that from just vitamins and plain water.
I drink it while I work out, and it hits the spot; it tastes good, far more so than gatorade IMO, and certainly better than plain water; it replenishes lost fluids and salts, and I can get a good size bottle of something that tastes decent and isn't unhealthy, all for a lousy buck. I guess I'm a smart retard.
I think I'd honestly rather just drink my piss.
Vitamin Water FTW.
Anyway, losing the Webb telescope is indeed a bummer, but at least not all science programs got cuts, a few space projects actually have a bigger budget this coming year than last; they just didn't get as much as they asked for - yet that's somehow considered a 'cut" too, by many. ( It's funny that even a technical increase can still be deemed "a cut" in politics, but so it goes with budgets and perspectives.)
From TFA:
The draft appropriations bill, which the subcommittee is scheduled to vote on July 7, also includes $1.95 billion for the Space Launch System — the heavy-lift rocket Congress ordered NASA to build for deep space exploration. The proposed 2012 funding level is $150 million more than the heavy lifter got for 2011, but some $700 million below the amount recommended in the NASA Authorization Act of 2010, which became law in October.
The bill also would provide $812 million for the Joint Polar Satellite System, or JPSS, being developed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
That amount would be an increase of $430 million from the amount appropriated for the program in 2011 but $258 million less than the agency requested. In total, NOAA would receive $4.49 billion next year, $103 million less than was appropriated for 2011 and $1 billion less than the administration’s request for 2012.
The NOAA did get a net cut there but not nearly as much as it sounds on the surface of it.
Hey now, that's just stereotyping. And funny, I admit. But anyway, I know an awful lot of conservative types who think that the whole dinosaurs 'n' jesus thing is just as wildly ridiculous as any 'liberal pro-science' person does. "A huge swath?" Really?
In fact, at nearly 50 years of age now, having lived in one of the most densely populated states in the nation, I've come across a lot of people, and I've only ever met -in person- one single, solitary person who actually believed that carbon dating was flawed and that the earth was only 6,000 years old, and that was on the basis of his religion, not his political stance. That was in '88.
I think the nutters just get more media attention.
Well, if things pan out for them, that would be awesome- I wish solar tech would take off, I really do; I still have some reservations about any cutting edge tech and the promises and claims that developers or mfgs make regarding it, but obviously from time to time the claims pan out. Please understand that I've been reading about solar in Popular Mechanics since the 70s', they usually made it sound like a revolution was right around the corner, and to date, it's not quite where they suggested it'd be. Solar is due. But why couldn't you have just originally made your point without resorting to the insults and ad-hominem attacks as you did in your first reply? I wasn't trashing solar tech nor claiming to be an expert. Our last two exchanges were so much more productive.
Not to mention that those black hat scumbags who write malicious code in the first place for purely dishonorable intentions, are also to blame in the grand scheme of things. They seem to get a free pass all too often, as though they were some blameless, unavoidable act of nature, like an earthquake or tornado.
It's a 3 way failure: User, OS, cracker.
You'd probably fry more than just the USB port, you might take out the 5v line in the power supply too, bringing everything to a screeching halt.
They aren't dieing. See that's the problem when you have a 2 second attention span. Most of these inventions are being incorporated into viable production lines. From discovery to production is at least 5 years and that's if they already have a factory in place that can utilize the new technology. If they have to build the factory as well it's another 2-3 years. So when you hear about one of these great new ideas do you check back on it in 8 years? Didn't think so.
Bulk solar power is on our door step, otherwise GE wouldn't have just bought one of the most important thin-film solar producers, coincidentally the company in question was already building the largest solar cell production plant in the world. The CdTe panels that this company produces use little of the very expensive rare earths that the other panels do, they can be produced on roll-roll processes (flexible panels as well) and it's expected that they can be produced for significantly less than a $1 a watt (considered the break point for mass acceptance).
Riiight, just because GE -in whom it sounds like you own stock or something, and the same idiots who tried to foist mercury laden CFLs on everyone- bought into some solar tech, the solar future is right around the corner. We've been hearing these promises for far longer than 8 years, it's been more like decades; maybe the 2 second attention span is yours, not mine.
I guess we'll have to wait and see if this tech is viable. Every year it seems some new solar tech comes out with big promises, and quietly dies in whispers.
I haven't given up hope though; long ago I had given up on LED tech as any sort of serious display tech or light source, and suddenly(?), there were: LEDs that make gorgeous displays of all sizes, LEDs that for all colors of the visible spectrum and then some, and LEDs that put out 110 lumens (who'd a thunk?). I just hope there's a similar breakthrough sometime soon in solar cell development, but this probably ain't it.
would they wind up with Swamp Thing?
I'm giving up any opportunity to use mod points here to agree with this too. I'm basically moderate with some conservative leanings, but in this area I lean the other way. It's no kind of life for a kid to grow up hated, neglected, resented, abused, and/or even beaten by his parent(s), and likely in an impoverished environment at that. That creates a twisted mindset and destroys quality of life. It's just cruel. Life without love is hell on earth, and forcing a child on parents who had no intention of said child ruins all their lives, with the likely result of an eventual adult with a broken moral compass.
;-p )
Though, the video gaming thing might help ease violence too. There's always been the two opposing schools of thought on that: either violent gaming will "get it out of your system" OR "it will incite your kid to violence and desensitize him". I always felt the "desensitize" bit was over the top - really, killing pixels equates with actual violent bloodlust?; besides, movies are just as bad if not worse; and, they depict violence on actual people, not pixels (though CGI may be blurring the line there). But I've played my share of Doom, Quake, and other FPSes and never once did it increase my inclination to harm anyone for real (well.. except for maybe the game developers