I was going to suggest that, but you beat me to it. I agree with you on that, and it makes it easier to locate the server when it has a problem or crashes.
Here Bush is upset over flawed intelligence and the findings show that the Intelligence was flawed, and it was a mistake and not an intentional lie. US Intelligence has always been flawed and Johnson and Clinton didn't get impeached for wars or military strikes that killed people based on flawed intelligence. In fact Clinton's impeachment trial was over Monica Lewinsky not Sudan, and he won his appeal.
What it means is that we need to improve intelligence gathering and learn from mistakes so we don't repeat them. If Bush repeated his mistakes we'd already be at war with Iran and North Korea, and good thing we are not.
Assuming of course that entropy does not exist, and creating Q provides more energy or as much energy that it uses to create Q in the first place out of alternative matter and/or energy to power the machines to manufacture Q, so that F isn't needed anymore.
The article on the American revolution cites history books that say "The issues with the colonists were both that the taxes were high and that the colonies had no representation in the Parliament which passed the taxes."
and
"The phrase 'No taxation without representation' became popular in many American circles. London argued that the Americans were represented 'virtually'; but most Americans rejected the theory that men in London, who knew nothing about their needs and conditions, could represent them."
Americans are already claiming that representatives in government know nothing about their needs and conditions and that gas and oil are already too high. Since for the past 30 years both Democrats and Republicans promised to make the USA energy independent and at least find an alternative to oil, citizens are getting skeptical and as bankruptcies are on the rise and mortgages are not being paid off, how do you think they will react to even higher gas and oil prices due to carbon credits and cap and trade? If oil alternatives cost less than $2 gallon to drive a truck or car, things will be alright. But can you prove to me that oil alternatives that do not emit CO2 will cost $2/gallon or cheaper and be in abundant supply so poor people need not use gas and oil anymore?
Oh yeah, cigarette sales are down because global deaths from cigarette smoking are up and consumers are dying off faster of cancer than being saved from quitting smoking. When the consumer dies, yeah demand will go down. That was my point.
So for the people that cannot afford alternatives to fossil fuels like those who are sick or on disability or poor and living on a fixed income, we just let die off and don't even bother to help them afford greener technology. Better to just let 3 billion people world wide die off because they cannot afford to buy food or live because they are poor. Basically you claim it is ethical and moral to do so, because it saves the planet? The ends justify the means? Anyone who cares about human lives of poor people like me are foolish?
So then you support 100% the upcoming holocaust because you care about the environment more than human lives?
Yeah I have heard of those things, but after someone didn't get one of my jokes even when I used a smiley face. I made me forget those things for a moment. Like using a smiley face to show I was joking about Norad and playing on your joke.
Which is why I said "reasonable doubt" instead of "proof that Saddam had nuclear weapons", even if Saddam was one step towards nuclear weapons manufacture it could prove reasonable doubt that the Intelligence was flawed, and not based on lies, because mistakes got made.
But then what do I know, you use a personal attack on me saying I never managed to graduate from third grade.
So then you ignore the calutron link and since I don't agree with you, I "could have" a lack of reasoning skills? Which is not the basis of a sound argument, according to you.
I seem to have a tendency not to admit that there is such a thing as a tendency. But for tendency's sake I will admit that I don't fit the tendency by admitting that there is such a thing as a tendency. Sometimes I have a tendency to botch jokes on Slashdot and they get rated as troll by people who don't understand the joke as it has a tendency to go over their head.
The world needs to work together to solve problems by thinking about solutions instead of just blaming each other. If governments won't work together, people can and will and should.
Well when combined to independent research from Switzerland that Saddam had calutron technology than can enrich yellowcake uranium to weapon's grade, and documents that the UN has ignored such reports, might well bring about reasonable doubt that Saddam had plans to enrich the uranium to weapon's grade had he been left alone. But then I used to work for lawyers, so what do I know?
Also from the original article: "The yellowcake wasn't the only dangerous item removed from Tuwaitha.
Earlier this year, the military withdrew four devices for controlled radiation exposure from the former nuclear complex. The lead-enclosed irradiation units, used to decontaminate food and other items, contain elements of high radioactivity that could potentially be used in a weapon, according to the official. Their Ottawa-based manufacturer, MDS Nordion, took them back for free, the official said."
Shows that Saddam could have made weapons out of them.
But then I've had a personal attack on me that I lack basic reasoning skills, by someone named Fjandr that didn't seem to notice that part of the article. So I guess it dismisses all of that, because that is what fallacy based personal attacks are designed to do.
Well it is enough to create "reasonable doubt" in any impeachment trial. I think I said that before on Slashdot when many claimed Saddam didn't even have yellow cake uranium, but in the end the truth comes out.
Proof that Saddam had calutrons that could be used to enrich yellow cake uranium to weapons grade. Someone in Switzerland tried to tell the UN about it, and cites independent research as well.
Wikipedia claims that Iraq having yellowcake is a lie and any evidence that Iraq has yellowcake was a forgery and part of fraud. Oops, guess they missed 550 metric tons of that stuff. Saddam must have hidden in in 'dat CIA napkin, so the UN couldn't find it.:)
I guess you don't understand how a business works.
When it gets higher taxes it passes the costs on to the consumer.
For example if XYZ Corp makes widgets, and it costs $1 to make a widget and they sell it for $2, with a $1 profit and $1 in expenses, but then the government decides that widgets are bad and puts a $5 sin tax for each widget, then XYZ Corp changes prices to $7 a widget to cover the $5 tax, and after deducting $5 for the tax, and $1 for their expenses, they are still left with a $1 profit. Does XYZ Corp get harmed, or does the consumer get harmed instead? With that in mind carbon credits and global warming is being used as a bat to hit poor people with, and I guess you just don't care how many lives are going to get ruined or how many people will die or lose their homes as a result, as long as the people and companies selling carbon credits get really really wealthy in this Enron engineered scam of the century. But then it has always been about the money, rather than helping out the poor and underprivileged on both the left and right side of the political compass?
It don't work for cigarettes either, governments keep raising that sin tax on cigarettes to try and get people to quit smoking so they can be healthier and not die of cancer, but smokers still buy cigarettes even if the price of cigarettes has gone insanely high.
You just cannot throw money at a problem and hope it goes away, that never works. You have to actually solve a problem to make it go away. You also cannot just willy nilly tax things and think that people will accept the higher taxes and not rebel in some way, how did you think the USA got started in the first place? Taxes where way too high, so they protested by throwing tea into Boston harbor. King George the III thought he could control the English colonies by raising taxes on them for certain items, if it didn't work back then, what makes you think it will work in the future?
Canals use locks or boat lifts or inclined planes to move boats through the canals.
Yes it will be slower to move the boats than the trucks, and yes we would have to use more land to make the canals, but it is a small price to pay compared to the higher price if we continue to burn fossil fuels like there is no tomorrow.
We could use wind sails to move boats, but only if the wind blows in the right direction. Possible we could adapt wind turbines to boats instead of sails to power an engine, and use solar cells when the sun is shining. If not for moving the boat, then for refrigeration power for food so it does not spoil on a slow moving boat. With the right engineering cooling food might not use as much power as moving the boat if the refrigeration unit is modern technology. You could also put in stationary bikes and pay someone to peddle them to provide power if the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine. I am sure with capacitors and batteries to hold charge people can peddle for 15 minutes, take a 15 minute break, let someone else peddle, etc. It would be good exercise.
The box is part of a practical joke that Richard Branson had planned for his engineers.
When someone opens it, fake snakes made out of cloth and springs jump out of it, like those fake peanut brittle cans.
Then Richard Branson comes out, and points his finger at them and laughs, and then points to a hidden camera, and said he is going to submit it to World's Funniest Videos to win a $50,000 grand prize to help pay off the cost of production.
It is a very sexist statement, it implies that grandmothers are stupid and cannot understand complex things like computers or aircraft, and they have to be "dumbed down" in order for grandmothers to use them.
If it was phrased like this "The Macintosh is a computer that is so easy to use that even a grandmother can use it." she would take offense at that as well. I've known plenty of Mac geeks that said that very thing and then didn't seem to understand why grandmothers found it so offensive. Try taking the word "grandmother" and replacing it with a certain racial group or some other group, and that group would find it offensive as well.
magazine and comic book companies are creating digital versions of the old magazines and comic books.
This might prove to be a business opportunity for a savvy geek that finds out what underwriting company owns the rights to defunct magazines like the Compute! series, and then buy the rights to them to reproduce them digitally. Usually some accountants and/or lawyers play the role of a corporate undertaker and buy out IP of failed companies. Then just scan the old magazines into PDF format, and sell them online for like $3 a copy to download the PDF version.
Some companies did that for the old 8 bit computers and game consoles, and made things like the Atari Flashback console or the Commodore 64 joystick by buying the IP rights to the games and the computer/console BIOS so an emulator can run inside of a tiny computer that fits inside of a game system or game controller hooked up to a modern TV set. Some companies also sell the ROMs online by buying out the IP for Atari arcade ROMs and other things.
That makes about as much sense as a church selling sin credits to stop people from sinning. Which is why some people think that global warming is just another religion.
Did you know that the whole cap and trade system of carbon credits was invented by Enron? Does that name ring a bell?
Only people like that can make it all okay by buying carbon credits and then continue to drive black SUVs and chat on a cellphone to go 15 blocks to buy a $5 cup of coffee.
Viacom wants the logs of the people that watched every Youtube video, but not the logs of the people that uploaded videos that violate Viacom IP? Which means that even people who didn't watch videos that didn't violate Viacom IP like stuff people create via webcameras or video cameras and then upload to Youtube will become part of some Anti-Piracy lawsuit by Viacom?
This all sounds like more MAFIAA scams like suing grandmothers and 13 year old girls because they happened to get a dynamic IP assigned to them that someone had used to pirate songs or movies and then disconnected from the Internet and it got reassigned to an innocent person? Sorry Grandma even if you use a Mac and it cannot run Kazaa, you are still going to have to go to jail or pay a heavy fine because some pirate with a Windows PC that ran Kazaa happened to use the same dynamic IP a day or shorter than before you got it assigned to your Mac.
Hard to say as people cut down trees quicker than they can plant them.
It seems like folly to use carbon credits to plant trees that will be cut down as soon as someone has a need for paper or wood or some other product they use trees for.
Common sense says don't drive short distances to get that $5 cup of coffee and instead invest in a Mr. Coffee machine and brew your own coffee or just quit drinking coffee and drink water instead.
It would actually make more sense to just build canals and use them to transport food and products than using trucks that burn gas and contribute to the CO2 levels in global warming. Many people forget that it was George Washington who was one of the founding fathers for building canals in the colonies before the USA was formed. That the USA got rid of canals as soon as the coal burning railroads got started.
I mean it would make better common sense to just stop using technology that puts CO2 in the atmosphere, than to keep using technology that puts CO2 in the atmosphere and then buy carbon credits and hope it just goes away magically because Al Gore said so.
Slashdot Mirror
I was going to suggest that, but you beat me to it. I agree with you on that, and it makes it easier to locate the server when it has a problem or crashes.
Here Bush is upset over flawed intelligence and the findings show that the Intelligence was flawed, and it was a mistake and not an intentional lie. US Intelligence has always been flawed and Johnson and Clinton didn't get impeached for wars or military strikes that killed people based on flawed intelligence. In fact Clinton's impeachment trial was over Monica Lewinsky not Sudan, and he won his appeal.
What it means is that we need to improve intelligence gathering and learn from mistakes so we don't repeat them. If Bush repeated his mistakes we'd already be at war with Iran and North Korea, and good thing we are not.
Assuming of course that entropy does not exist, and creating Q provides more energy or as much energy that it uses to create Q in the first place out of alternative matter and/or energy to power the machines to manufacture Q, so that F isn't needed anymore.
The article on the American revolution cites history books that say "The issues with the colonists were both that the taxes were high and that the colonies had no representation in the Parliament which passed the taxes."
and
"The phrase 'No taxation without representation' became popular in many American circles. London argued that the Americans were represented 'virtually'; but most Americans rejected the theory that men in London, who knew nothing about their needs and conditions, could represent them."
Americans are already claiming that representatives in government know nothing about their needs and conditions and that gas and oil are already too high. Since for the past 30 years both Democrats and Republicans promised to make the USA energy independent and at least find an alternative to oil, citizens are getting skeptical and as bankruptcies are on the rise and mortgages are not being paid off, how do you think they will react to even higher gas and oil prices due to carbon credits and cap and trade? If oil alternatives cost less than $2 gallon to drive a truck or car, things will be alright. But can you prove to me that oil alternatives that do not emit CO2 will cost $2/gallon or cheaper and be in abundant supply so poor people need not use gas and oil anymore?
Oh yeah, cigarette sales are down because global deaths from cigarette smoking are up and consumers are dying off faster of cancer than being saved from quitting smoking. When the consumer dies, yeah demand will go down. That was my point.
So for the people that cannot afford alternatives to fossil fuels like those who are sick or on disability or poor and living on a fixed income, we just let die off and don't even bother to help them afford greener technology. Better to just let 3 billion people world wide die off because they cannot afford to buy food or live because they are poor. Basically you claim it is ethical and moral to do so, because it saves the planet? The ends justify the means? Anyone who cares about human lives of poor people like me are foolish?
So then you support 100% the upcoming holocaust because you care about the environment more than human lives?
Yeah I have heard of those things, but after someone didn't get one of my jokes even when I used a smiley face. I made me forget those things for a moment. Like using a smiley face to show I was joking about Norad and playing on your joke.
Which is why I said "reasonable doubt" instead of "proof that Saddam had nuclear weapons", even if Saddam was one step towards nuclear weapons manufacture it could prove reasonable doubt that the Intelligence was flawed, and not based on lies, because mistakes got made.
But then what do I know, you use a personal attack on me saying I never managed to graduate from third grade.
So then you ignore the calutron link and since I don't agree with you, I "could have" a lack of reasoning skills? Which is not the basis of a sound argument, according to you.
I seem to have a tendency not to admit that there is such a thing as a tendency. But for tendency's sake I will admit that I don't fit the tendency by admitting that there is such a thing as a tendency. Sometimes I have a tendency to botch jokes on Slashdot and they get rated as troll by people who don't understand the joke as it has a tendency to go over their head.
Maybe I should have linked this article instead? I wrote jokes on the Internet you know. Sometimes they get rated as funny here. :)
LOL, you took me seriously, even after I used a smiley face to show I was joking?
I guess you ignored the smiley face that showed it was a joke?
let us work together. You can read my previous post on the subject and see if you agree or disagree with it.
The world needs to work together to solve problems by thinking about solutions instead of just blaming each other. If governments won't work together, people can and will and should.
Well when combined to independent research from Switzerland that Saddam had calutron technology than can enrich yellowcake uranium to weapon's grade, and documents that the UN has ignored such reports, might well bring about reasonable doubt that Saddam had plans to enrich the uranium to weapon's grade had he been left alone. But then I used to work for lawyers, so what do I know?
Also from the original article:
"The yellowcake wasn't the only dangerous item removed from Tuwaitha.
Earlier this year, the military withdrew four devices for controlled radiation exposure from the former nuclear complex. The lead-enclosed irradiation units, used to decontaminate food and other items, contain elements of high radioactivity that could potentially be used in a weapon, according to the official. Their Ottawa-based manufacturer, MDS Nordion, took them back for free, the official said."
Shows that Saddam could have made weapons out of them.
But then I've had a personal attack on me that I lack basic reasoning skills, by someone named Fjandr that didn't seem to notice that part of the article. So I guess it dismisses all of that, because that is what fallacy based personal attacks are designed to do.
Could be because Canada is a part of NORAD and is a full partner to the United States? Ever heard of NORAD before?
Well it is enough to create "reasonable doubt" in any impeachment trial. I think I said that before on Slashdot when many claimed Saddam didn't even have yellow cake uranium, but in the end the truth comes out.
Proof that Saddam had calutrons that could be used to enrich yellow cake uranium to weapons grade. Someone in Switzerland tried to tell the UN about it, and cites independent research as well.
Bill Clinton said the same thing in 1998 so this is not made up.
Wikipedia claims that Iraq having yellowcake is a lie and any evidence that Iraq has yellowcake was a forgery and part of fraud. Oops, guess they missed 550 metric tons of that stuff. Saddam must have hidden in in 'dat CIA napkin, so the UN couldn't find it. :)
I guess you don't understand how a business works.
When it gets higher taxes it passes the costs on to the consumer.
For example if XYZ Corp makes widgets, and it costs $1 to make a widget and they sell it for $2, with a $1 profit and $1 in expenses, but then the government decides that widgets are bad and puts a $5 sin tax for each widget, then XYZ Corp changes prices to $7 a widget to cover the $5 tax, and after deducting $5 for the tax, and $1 for their expenses, they are still left with a $1 profit. Does XYZ Corp get harmed, or does the consumer get harmed instead? With that in mind carbon credits and global warming is being used as a bat to hit poor people with, and I guess you just don't care how many lives are going to get ruined or how many people will die or lose their homes as a result, as long as the people and companies selling carbon credits get really really wealthy in this Enron engineered scam of the century. But then it has always been about the money, rather than helping out the poor and underprivileged on both the left and right side of the political compass?
It don't work for cigarettes either, governments keep raising that sin tax on cigarettes to try and get people to quit smoking so they can be healthier and not die of cancer, but smokers still buy cigarettes even if the price of cigarettes has gone insanely high.
You just cannot throw money at a problem and hope it goes away, that never works. You have to actually solve a problem to make it go away. You also cannot just willy nilly tax things and think that people will accept the higher taxes and not rebel in some way, how did you think the USA got started in the first place? Taxes where way too high, so they protested by throwing tea into Boston harbor. King George the III thought he could control the English colonies by raising taxes on them for certain items, if it didn't work back then, what makes you think it will work in the future?
Canals use locks or boat lifts or inclined planes to move boats through the canals.
Yes it will be slower to move the boats than the trucks, and yes we would have to use more land to make the canals, but it is a small price to pay compared to the higher price if we continue to burn fossil fuels like there is no tomorrow.
We could use wind sails to move boats, but only if the wind blows in the right direction. Possible we could adapt wind turbines to boats instead of sails to power an engine, and use solar cells when the sun is shining. If not for moving the boat, then for refrigeration power for food so it does not spoil on a slow moving boat. With the right engineering cooling food might not use as much power as moving the boat if the refrigeration unit is modern technology. You could also put in stationary bikes and pay someone to peddle them to provide power if the wind does not blow and the sun does not shine. I am sure with capacitors and batteries to hold charge people can peddle for 15 minutes, take a 15 minute break, let someone else peddle, etc. It would be good exercise.
The box is part of a practical joke that Richard Branson had planned for his engineers.
When someone opens it, fake snakes made out of cloth and springs jump out of it, like those fake peanut brittle cans.
Then Richard Branson comes out, and points his finger at them and laughs, and then points to a hidden camera, and said he is going to submit it to World's Funniest Videos to win a $50,000 grand prize to help pay off the cost of production.
It is a very sexist statement, it implies that grandmothers are stupid and cannot understand complex things like computers or aircraft, and they have to be "dumbed down" in order for grandmothers to use them.
If it was phrased like this "The Macintosh is a computer that is so easy to use that even a grandmother can use it." she would take offense at that as well. I've known plenty of Mac geeks that said that very thing and then didn't seem to understand why grandmothers found it so offensive. Try taking the word "grandmother" and replacing it with a certain racial group or some other group, and that group would find it offensive as well.
magazine and comic book companies are creating digital versions of the old magazines and comic books.
This might prove to be a business opportunity for a savvy geek that finds out what underwriting company owns the rights to defunct magazines like the Compute! series, and then buy the rights to them to reproduce them digitally. Usually some accountants and/or lawyers play the role of a corporate undertaker and buy out IP of failed companies. Then just scan the old magazines into PDF format, and sell them online for like $3 a copy to download the PDF version.
Some companies did that for the old 8 bit computers and game consoles, and made things like the Atari Flashback console or the Commodore 64 joystick by buying the IP rights to the games and the computer/console BIOS so an emulator can run inside of a tiny computer that fits inside of a game system or game controller hooked up to a modern TV set. Some companies also sell the ROMs online by buying out the IP for Atari arcade ROMs and other things.
That makes about as much sense as a church selling sin credits to stop people from sinning. Which is why some people think that global warming is just another religion.
Did you know that the whole cap and trade system of carbon credits was invented by Enron? Does that name ring a bell?
Hey yeah and I agree with you.
Only people like that can make it all okay by buying carbon credits and then continue to drive black SUVs and chat on a cellphone to go 15 blocks to buy a $5 cup of coffee.
Viacom wants the logs of the people that watched every Youtube video, but not the logs of the people that uploaded videos that violate Viacom IP? Which means that even people who didn't watch videos that didn't violate Viacom IP like stuff people create via webcameras or video cameras and then upload to Youtube will become part of some Anti-Piracy lawsuit by Viacom?
This all sounds like more MAFIAA scams like suing grandmothers and 13 year old girls because they happened to get a dynamic IP assigned to them that someone had used to pirate songs or movies and then disconnected from the Internet and it got reassigned to an innocent person? Sorry Grandma even if you use a Mac and it cannot run Kazaa, you are still going to have to go to jail or pay a heavy fine because some pirate with a Windows PC that ran Kazaa happened to use the same dynamic IP a day or shorter than before you got it assigned to your Mac.
Hard to say as people cut down trees quicker than they can plant them.
It seems like folly to use carbon credits to plant trees that will be cut down as soon as someone has a need for paper or wood or some other product they use trees for.
Common sense says don't drive short distances to get that $5 cup of coffee and instead invest in a Mr. Coffee machine and brew your own coffee or just quit drinking coffee and drink water instead.
It would actually make more sense to just build canals and use them to transport food and products than using trucks that burn gas and contribute to the CO2 levels in global warming. Many people forget that it was George Washington who was one of the founding fathers for building canals in the colonies before the USA was formed. That the USA got rid of canals as soon as the coal burning railroads got started.
I mean it would make better common sense to just stop using technology that puts CO2 in the atmosphere, than to keep using technology that puts CO2 in the atmosphere and then buy carbon credits and hope it just goes away magically because Al Gore said so.