That's not at all what they're doing here. The article is intentionally misleading.
No, you are the one who is being misleading. The article refers to an ammendment to HR 1, the FY 2011 appropriations bill. It's an earmark plain and simple. They know this is the only chance they will get with the current senate/president to pass this. I'll note that the last time repubs tried this, the pres vetoed the CR and made the repubs look bad.
The SS system is and was designed to be a direct transfer of income from the young to the old. Not in and of itself a terrible idea, but due to changes in life expectancy and demographics it just doesn't work any more.
-- SS was designed as a trust fund that congress subsequently made vulnerable to federal spending.
-- The SSA has increased the retirement age to account for increased life expectancy.
-- You left out 25% of the federal budget for corporate welfare, which they should cut completely before they even think about threatening the trust fund.
Premature not because the rules haven't been published, but because the FCC probably has no intention of enforcing them, and even if they attempted to, they would probably fail in the courts, again. Despite what the FCC says publicly, there is now certainty in the market, which is why we're now seeing more companies than just Comcast jump on the bandwagon to stovepipe the net.
Comcast has a large presence in the DC area and they are the largest cable provider in the country. Now the people that get internet service from a company that has a worse customer service reputation than the IRS can look forward to all the liberal media bias they can handle. There's more incentive for the republocrats to become even more homogeneous.
Hey, never underestimate the power of "Has never covered up a massive multinational paedophilia ring" on your CV...
Yeah, apparently "Cheated on his wife and lie to everyone about it." would have worked much better!
As for the pope, he admitted the problem and gave pedophile priests the smack down. He also addressed the root of the problem at the seminary level.
As for the top 3 on that list, only one is physically capable of admitting fault, and I don't think any of them honestly do anything to fix the messes they create.
At least the pope didn't preside over an institution that sunk the world into a multinational crisis; the pope's constituency is still quite healthy. Did they restrict this poll to members of wall street, or is this country really becoming a mental institution?
I find myself rolling my eyes at these partisan political posts. The modern democratic party is slyly vacuous. To prove that every administration is equally capable of rewarding its own economic beneficiaries in short order, watch as Slick barack and julius genouchie sell out the public with smiles on their faces by refusing to regulate the internet by pulling what slim foundation that still exists out from under themselves and blaming someone other than themselves (the courts or republicans, whatever, it doesn't matter) for the resulting disaster.
People need to realize that politics in this country is all about money vs money where competitive interests are at work. When it comes to money vs the people, there is no competition, the people don't have any money.
So the real question is why American broadband was redefined to a low number like 4 Mbit/s?
Probably because the FCC doesn't want to have to regulate the internet under the net neutrality rules it adopts. The FCC has to at least appear to make an effort to regulate the net in fullfillment of it's responsibility to protect consumers. However, the latest (and probably last) proposal the chairman has drawn up is weaker than what was promised by both the chairman and the president. Among other glaring problems, the latest proposal rests ambiguously on the same basis that the court has already ruled against and ignores the court's advice on how to go about creating rules that the FCC can legally enforce: ammori.org/2010/12/01/fcc-chairman-proposes-garbage-calls-it-net-neutrality.
An embryo from in vitro fertilisation will absolutely never become a person unless it is placed inside a human womb.
The point is it has the potential to become a person, and should be considered as a person, and not a means to profit.
Please provide links to back up your facts. Don't take this wrong, I am not saying you are wrong, but providing links is a valuable way of sharing your knowledge because simply stating something as a fact does not make it a fact. Help us out.
You don't have to look far, a google search would have provided multiple hits. From the wiki, read the section on adult stem cells: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell
Agreed. I also suspect that the AC is not in fact a doctor, or they would know about the lax requirements in other countries for obtaining a medical degree and certificate, and particularly, the unscrupulous work that some 'clinics' do WRT stem cell treatment. There is a reason it's labeled "stem cell tourism". In fact IIRC, CBS recently did a documentary on the problem of snake oil stem cell clinics operating in South/Central America that lure desperate unknowning individuals to their clinics without any intention of providing them a cure, but sell their treatment as such anyway. The article certainly didn't seem like FUD to me.
If you ever experience a nocturnal emission or go through a menstrual cycle without producing offspring then you are the same type of baby killer as the embryonic stem cell researchers.
I can't believe you would say something like this and imply that the poster you replied to was irrational. Sperm and egg individually will never become a person, but an embryo will be (and should be considered as) a person.
The fact is that you can derive pluripotent stem cells from sources other than embryo's (like the lining of an umbillical cord). The poster you replied to was correct, support for research using human embryos would drive an industry for their harvesting, just as there is a market for sperm and eggs. It should be noted that abortion is bad both physically and emotionally for a woman, which is why manyt physicians refuse to perform the procedure. We already are finding it difficult to keep those who worship money from killing babies that are partially born, and you don't think there is reason for concern?
The only thing that I'm unsure of is whether you can concentrate the light in nano-confined cells as much as you can in bulk material cells.
I would think that quantum dots might be ideal for use in a grid array of something like the dye-sensitized collectors that have recently been developed. I don't think that current saturation would be an issue, as the leads will be distributed evenly at each quantum dot. The problem I see is that increasing the area used for contact wiring will mean increased non-radiative losses. The article states that the wire contacts will be made of semi-conductor material as well, and semi-conductors typically have lower conductivity/higher loss than conductors. Supposedly they are trying to overcome those losses by using a partially generative material as an intermediate between the conducting leads and PbSe cells?
Secondly it isn't just about stats at something like the world cup where there are very few second chances and It is a game where you can completely dominate the opposition and still lose to a single error or bad ref decision.
When I was in college, my buddies and I would frequently bet our money on the dog races. They published detailed stats for every race and you could compile a statistical profile of each performer. In fact, I wrote a program that attempted to predict the position of each dog in the race as the race progressed. However, what was not provided and could not be predicted is what dog would lose it's footing and go tumbling to the far rail and which part of the pack he would take with him.
If the FCC has the authority to classify ISPs as "telecommunications providers" instead of "information providers" it should do so regardless of what Congress says
According to the SCOTUS Brand X descision, the FCC does indeed have the authority to make this classification. So, yeah, the FCC should tell those pol's to stuff it were the sun don't shine. I can't believe those pol's would be so stupid as to actually put their names to these letters.
Quoting from the republican letter:
"And tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars have been invested in broadband networks in reliance on the classification of broadband services as information services [as opposed to a telecommunications service]"
I couldn't figure out if these congresscritters were trying to say they gave industry all this money in return for promising they could work in a regulatory environment favorable to the industry, or wether the industry gave the pol's all this money in return for the same assurance!!!
The letter was signed with a bunch of scribbled signatures with no associated typed names.
Optical media are still much cheaper than flash. This new tech would do two things:
1. Reduce the cost of the media and,
2. assuming the laser can switched to scale, increase bandwidth likewise.
Dailytech ran an article a few days ago that said some researchers used a scanning electron microscope to precisely place dots in a latice at about 4nm a side to create what looked like optically switched transistors. It sounds like these people are using the same tech to create a higher density re-writable disk.
A 1x DVD drive transfers data at about 10Mb/s, A 1x Blueray drive currently tranfers data at about 36Mb/sec. If they can increase the density 1000x over Blueray, then assuming the transfer rate can be scaled similarly, then theoretically the transfer rate of such a drive would be ~25920Mb/sec or 3200MB/s!
Of course, the overall storage market will drive when and if this tech becomes available.
If life is just an evolved entity composed of randomly assembled machines, as some biologists claim, then it begs the question of wether or not there might be 'life' out there that is not water based, but based on say, sand -- or silicon.
Btw, Net Neutrality is quite desirable *until* we have more choices of Internet Providers.
While this might help in the short term, I think that history has shown that companies tend to form monopolies and arrangements with each other with the purpose of controling prices to their advantage. IMO the need for regulation and consumer protections especially in markets as important as this will always exist.
Agreed, I subscribe to the Free Presses mailing list and though they do seem to have liberal political interests that I don't always agree with, according to what they say in their mailings they are interested in policy that will make it hard for private conglomerates to control too much of the spectrum and in ensuring that local interests have access to spectrum as well.
The GP presented a fairly accurate representation of the history of the internet's development, but seems to overlook the fact that the modems that formed the internet operated over a publicly regulated infrastructure of telcoms for which net neutrality was the rule. That changed with the advent of the new telcom rules in '96. Now the fight is over broadband, which traditonally has not been regulated as the telco's have and which most people connect to the internet through.
With reference to net neutrality, Kagan appears to be arguing on behalf of cable companies in private writings when saying: that the "Buckley principle" states that government may not "restrict the speech of some elements of our society [think: powerful corporations] in order to enhance the relative voice of others [think: average individuals]." Her viewpoint on the Buckley principle is almost the opposite of what Obama said: "powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens.". Kagan suggested that the Buckley principle "could summarize the view" of the Turner dissenters, who sided with the cable companies. This also would seem to at odds with the president's public statements in support of net neutrality.
If you want a nerd angle, consider the word "cyberterror."
You can do far better than that actually. With reference to net neutrality, Kagan appears to be arguing on behalf of cable companies in private writings when saying: that the "Buckley principle" states that government may not "restrict the speech of some elements of our society [think: powerful corporations] in order to enhance the relative voice of others [think: average individuals]." Her Buckley principle is almost the opposite of the Obama statement that "powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens." and then saying that the Buckley principle "could summarize the view" of the Turner dissenters, who sided with the cable companies. This also would seem to at odds with the president's public statements in support of net neutrality. More info here: http://balkin.blogspot.com/2010/05/does-elena-kagan-disagree-with-justice.html
Kagan also appears to be a corporatist, which is probably why our corprate media is predicting that she will be confirmed without much republican protest despite the fact that she is a social liberal. If you read the material in the link I provided, you will find that even though Kagan was tasked to support the govt in the CU case which the govt lost (and Obama chastized the SCOTUS on TV over), Kagan expressed views contrary to the principles that she was charged to support in arging the govt's case. The case Kagan argued against the CU decision was poorly made and she could have invoked supreme court precedent to make a much stronger case for the govt, but failed to do so. Again Obama looks to be a hypocrit; this time when he said he would nominate someone who would follow in Steven's footsteps WRT the CU case, that certainly doesn't seem to be the case with Kagan.
It's not that there isn't alot on Kagan out there, it's that the liberal corprate media doesn't want to report it.
Tritium is a byproduct of fission reactor operations, but if you need a multi-billion-dollar fission reactor (1,110 MWe) to supply a multi-billion-dollar fusion reactor (600 MWe) with fuel... why not just build two fission reactors and devote the savings to reprocessing or disposing of the spent nuclear fuel?
It's not like we're not getting any value out the fission reactors that generate the byproducts used in the laser inertial fusion reactor. NIF are using byproducts/waste from existing reactors, so essentially they are doing exactly what you proposed.
So long as they are able to generate a reaction that produces more energy than is required to power the ignition instruments, then theoretically it could be a net energy producer. Such a reaction would seem to be counter to the first law of thermodynamics, yet the NIF claims that using hydrogen pellets they could initiate a reaction that generates "many times" more energy than it took to initiate.
Right now, the CD/DVD format is enjoying the same obsolesce, yet pervasiveness, the floppy enjoyed circa 1999. They'll be (practically) dead soon enough...
I don't think so. Many people still do backup's on disk; it's a far cheaper medium than flash, and I'm guessing that people feel it's more reliable than online access to content or stored data.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not at all what they're doing here. The article is intentionally misleading.
No, you are the one who is being misleading. The article refers to an ammendment to HR 1, the FY 2011 appropriations bill. It's an earmark plain and simple. They know this is the only chance they will get with the current senate/president to pass this. I'll note that the last time repubs tried this, the pres vetoed the CR and made the repubs look bad.
The SS system is and was designed to be a direct transfer of income from the young to the old. Not in and of itself a terrible idea, but due to changes in life expectancy and demographics it just doesn't work any more.
-- SS was designed as a trust fund that congress subsequently made vulnerable to federal spending.
-- The SSA has increased the retirement age to account for increased life expectancy.
-- You left out 25% of the federal budget for corporate welfare, which they should cut completely before they even think about threatening the trust fund.
Premature not because the rules haven't been published, but because the FCC probably has no intention of enforcing them, and even if they attempted to, they would probably fail in the courts, again. Despite what the FCC says publicly, there is now certainty in the market, which is why we're now seeing more companies than just Comcast jump on the bandwagon to stovepipe the net.
Comcast has a large presence in the DC area and they are the largest cable provider in the country. Now the people that get internet service from a company that has a worse customer service reputation than the IRS can look forward to all the liberal media bias they can handle. There's more incentive for the republocrats to become even more homogeneous.
Hey, never underestimate the power of "Has never covered up a massive multinational paedophilia ring" on your CV...
Yeah, apparently "Cheated on his wife and lie to everyone about it." would have worked much better!
As for the pope, he admitted the problem and gave pedophile priests the smack down. He also addressed the root of the problem at the seminary level.
As for the top 3 on that list, only one is physically capable of admitting fault, and I don't think any of them honestly do anything to fix the messes they create.
At least the pope didn't preside over an institution that sunk the world into a multinational crisis; the pope's constituency is still quite healthy. Did they restrict this poll to members of wall street, or is this country really becoming a mental institution?
The worst adventure game I've ever played like this is "Rex Nebular and the Cosmic Gender Bender"...
I was ready to hunt down the game developers, one by one, Rambo-style.
You see, the game really can transform women into macho masculine action figures!
Modern republicanism is absurdly vacuous...
I find myself rolling my eyes at these partisan political posts. The modern democratic party is slyly vacuous. To prove that every administration is equally capable of rewarding its own economic beneficiaries in short order, watch as Slick barack and julius genouchie sell out the public with smiles on their faces by refusing to regulate the internet by pulling what slim foundation that still exists out from under themselves and blaming someone other than themselves (the courts or republicans, whatever, it doesn't matter) for the resulting disaster.
People need to realize that politics in this country is all about money vs money where competitive interests are at work. When it comes to money vs the people, there is no competition, the people don't have any money.
So the real question is why American broadband was redefined to a low number like 4 Mbit/s?
Probably because the FCC doesn't want to have to regulate the internet under the net neutrality rules it adopts. The FCC has to at least appear to make an effort to regulate the net in fullfillment of it's responsibility to protect consumers. However, the latest (and probably last) proposal the chairman has drawn up is weaker than what was promised by both the chairman and the president. Among other glaring problems, the latest proposal rests ambiguously on the same basis that the court has already ruled against and ignores the court's advice on how to go about creating rules that the FCC can legally enforce: ammori.org/2010/12/01/fcc-chairman-proposes-garbage-calls-it-net-neutrality.
An embryo from in vitro fertilisation will absolutely never become a person unless it is placed inside a human womb.
The point is it has the potential to become a person, and should be considered as a person, and not a means to profit.
Please provide links to back up your facts. Don't take this wrong, I am not saying you are wrong, but providing links is a valuable way of sharing your knowledge because simply stating something as a fact does not make it a fact. Help us out.
You don't have to look far, a google search would have provided multiple hits. From the wiki, read the section on adult stem cells: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell
Agreed. I also suspect that the AC is not in fact a doctor, or they would know about the lax requirements in other countries for obtaining a medical degree and certificate, and particularly, the unscrupulous work that some 'clinics' do WRT stem cell treatment. There is a reason it's labeled "stem cell tourism". In fact IIRC, CBS recently did a documentary on the problem of snake oil stem cell clinics operating in South/Central America that lure desperate unknowning individuals to their clinics without any intention of providing them a cure, but sell their treatment as such anyway. The article certainly didn't seem like FUD to me.
If you ever experience a nocturnal emission or go through a menstrual cycle without producing offspring then you are the same type of baby killer as the embryonic stem cell researchers.
I can't believe you would say something like this and imply that the poster you replied to was irrational. Sperm and egg individually will never become a person, but an embryo will be (and should be considered as) a person.
The fact is that you can derive pluripotent stem cells from sources other than embryo's (like the lining of an umbillical cord). The poster you replied to was correct, support for research using human embryos would drive an industry for their harvesting, just as there is a market for sperm and eggs. It should be noted that abortion is bad both physically and emotionally for a woman, which is why manyt physicians refuse to perform the procedure. We already are finding it difficult to keep those who worship money from killing babies that are partially born, and you don't think there is reason for concern?
The only thing that I'm unsure of is whether you can concentrate the light in nano-confined cells as much as you can in bulk material cells.
I would think that quantum dots might be ideal for use in a grid array of something like the dye-sensitized collectors that have recently been developed. I don't think that current saturation would be an issue, as the leads will be distributed evenly at each quantum dot. The problem I see is that increasing the area used for contact wiring will mean increased non-radiative losses. The article states that the wire contacts will be made of semi-conductor material as well, and semi-conductors typically have lower conductivity/higher loss than conductors. Supposedly they are trying to overcome those losses by using a partially generative material as an intermediate between the conducting leads and PbSe cells?
Secondly it isn't just about stats at something like the world cup where there are very few second chances and It is a game where you can completely dominate the opposition and still lose to a single error or bad ref decision.
When I was in college, my buddies and I would frequently bet our money on the dog races. They published detailed stats for every race and you could compile a statistical profile of each performer. In fact, I wrote a program that attempted to predict the position of each dog in the race as the race progressed. However, what was not provided and could not be predicted is what dog would lose it's footing and go tumbling to the far rail and which part of the pack he would take with him.
If the FCC has the authority to classify ISPs as "telecommunications providers" instead of "information providers" it should do so regardless of what Congress says
According to the SCOTUS Brand X descision, the FCC does indeed have the authority to make this classification. So, yeah, the FCC should tell those pol's to stuff it were the sun don't shine. I can't believe those pol's would be so stupid as to actually put their names to these letters.
Quoting from the republican letter:
"And tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars have been invested in broadband networks in reliance on the classification of broadband services as information services [as opposed to a telecommunications service]"
I couldn't figure out if these congresscritters were trying to say they gave industry all this money in return for promising they could work in a regulatory environment favorable to the industry, or wether the industry gave the pol's all this money in return for the same assurance!!!
The letter was signed with a bunch of scribbled signatures with no associated typed names.
Is this letter just a bad joke?
Optical media are still much cheaper than flash. This new tech would do two things:
1. Reduce the cost of the media and,
2. assuming the laser can switched to scale, increase bandwidth likewise.
Dailytech ran an article a few days ago that said some researchers used a scanning electron microscope to precisely place dots in a latice at about 4nm a side to create what looked like optically switched transistors. It sounds like these people are using the same tech to create a higher density re-writable disk.
A 1x DVD drive transfers data at about 10Mb/s, A 1x Blueray drive currently tranfers data at about 36Mb/sec. If they can increase the density 1000x over Blueray, then assuming the transfer rate can be scaled similarly, then theoretically the transfer rate of such a drive would be ~25920Mb/sec or 3200MB/s!
Of course, the overall storage market will drive when and if this tech becomes available.
This person decides to destroy all human life, because they hate mankind (picture some enviro-nut).
Or, someone might decide to wipe out all human life AND sea life (picture some oil executive).
If life is just an evolved entity composed of randomly assembled machines, as some biologists claim, then it begs the question of wether or not there might be 'life' out there that is not water based, but based on say, sand -- or silicon.
Btw, Net Neutrality is quite desirable *until* we have more choices of Internet Providers.
While this might help in the short term, I think that history has shown that companies tend to form monopolies and arrangements with each other with the purpose of controling prices to their advantage. IMO the need for regulation and consumer protections especially in markets as important as this will always exist.
Agreed, I subscribe to the Free Presses mailing list and though they do seem to have liberal political interests that I don't always agree with, according to what they say in their mailings they are interested in policy that will make it hard for private conglomerates to control too much of the spectrum and in ensuring that local interests have access to spectrum as well.
The GP presented a fairly accurate representation of the history of the internet's development, but seems to overlook the fact that the modems that formed the internet operated over a publicly regulated infrastructure of telcoms for which net neutrality was the rule. That changed with the advent of the new telcom rules in '96. Now the fight is over broadband, which traditonally has not been regulated as the telco's have and which most people connect to the internet through.
With reference to net neutrality, Kagan appears to be arguing on behalf of cable companies in private writings when saying: that the "Buckley principle" states that government may not "restrict the speech of some elements of our society [think: powerful corporations] in order to enhance the relative voice of others [think: average individuals]." Her viewpoint on the Buckley principle is almost the opposite of what Obama said: "powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens.". Kagan suggested that the Buckley principle "could summarize the view" of the Turner dissenters, who sided with the cable companies. This also would seem to at odds with the president's public statements in support of net neutrality.
More info here: http://balkin.blogspot.com/2010/05/does-elena-kagan-disagree-with-justice.html
If you want a nerd angle, consider the word "cyberterror."
You can do far better than that actually. With reference to net neutrality, Kagan appears to be arguing on behalf of cable companies in private writings when saying: that the "Buckley principle" states that government may not "restrict the speech of some elements of our society [think: powerful corporations] in order to enhance the relative voice of others [think: average individuals]." Her Buckley principle is almost the opposite of the Obama statement that "powerful interests must not be allowed to drown out the voices of ordinary citizens." and then saying that the Buckley principle "could summarize the view" of the Turner dissenters, who sided with the cable companies. This also would seem to at odds with the president's public statements in support of net neutrality. More info here: http://balkin.blogspot.com/2010/05/does-elena-kagan-disagree-with-justice.html
Kagan also appears to be a corporatist, which is probably why our corprate media is predicting that she will be confirmed without much republican protest despite the fact that she is a social liberal. If you read the material in the link I provided, you will find that even though Kagan was tasked to support the govt in the CU case which the govt lost (and Obama chastized the SCOTUS on TV over), Kagan expressed views contrary to the principles that she was charged to support in arging the govt's case. The case Kagan argued against the CU decision was poorly made and she could have invoked supreme court precedent to make a much stronger case for the govt, but failed to do so. Again Obama looks to be a hypocrit; this time when he said he would nominate someone who would follow in Steven's footsteps WRT the CU case, that certainly doesn't seem to be the case with Kagan.
It's not that there isn't alot on Kagan out there, it's that the liberal corprate media doesn't want to report it.
Tritium is a byproduct of fission reactor operations, but if you need a multi-billion-dollar fission reactor (1,110 MWe) to supply a multi-billion-dollar fusion reactor (600 MWe) with fuel... why not just build two fission reactors and devote the savings to reprocessing or disposing of the spent nuclear fuel?
It's not like we're not getting any value out the fission reactors that generate the byproducts used in the laser inertial fusion reactor. NIF are using byproducts/waste from existing reactors, so essentially they are doing exactly what you proposed.
So long as they are able to generate a reaction that produces more energy than is required to power the ignition instruments, then theoretically it could be a net energy producer. Such a reaction would seem to be counter to the first law of thermodynamics, yet the NIF claims that using hydrogen pellets they could initiate a reaction that generates "many times" more energy than it took to initiate.
Right now, the CD/DVD format is enjoying the same obsolesce, yet pervasiveness, the floppy enjoyed circa 1999. They'll be (practically) dead soon enough...
I don't think so. Many people still do backup's on disk; it's a far cheaper medium than flash, and I'm guessing that people feel it's more reliable than online access to content or stored data.