1. Repbulicans, for the most part, want to limit welfare programs to those that really need it.
2. Welfare is currently the majority of government spending, more than $1.1 trillion per year. (Including Social Security payments) Government total reciepts is around $2.2 Trillion
QED, the Republicans want to eliminate half of the government.
(OK, a little tounge in cheek - I really doubt the money would really be given back, and no one is really going to kill entitlements)
Wow - people are complaining about 3-5% inflation? You do know that there is a trade off between inflation and unemployment, right? So you are arguing for higher unemployment? Weird! (OK, the link is not obvious, but it is extremely strong - essentially if money is harder to get, less companies are formed / less projects are started, so less jobs are available - this is readily apparent in economic data)
3-5% inflation is normally regarded as a healthy level. One reason for this is that companies that need to cut employees salaries but can't just do not give wages (which is better for the economy in general than firing people, as long as the company recovers), much like what you said.
Of course, issuing debt causes many other problems, and of course if the debt is called due we would be forced into sky high inflation.
That is basically what I was trying to say, but putting it more simply. The reasons why soldiers follow orders are the ones you gave - and if you ever get to the point where orders will not be obeyed (mindless supieriors, in your example), you will lose the war.
My point is just that in order to be effective, soldiers need to obey orders - even the ones they don't understand. The reason they do that is based on trust in the US military, fear in Sadaam's old military, and I'm sure that there have been other motivations used (hatred, etc.).
In order to have a successful society, both viewpoint are required. If no one questions the orders, tyranny results. If no one follows the orders without understanding them, nothing can be accomplished. Specifically in the military case, if you question your orders, people die before they are cleared up for you. (Why should I fire artillery there? I'm not sure those are the bad guys...)
What is attempted in the military is that you have mostly order followers (enlisted), and a few order questioners (officers) to try to keep everyone honest. Most of the failures modes of this are bad, but less bad than what the enemy would do to you.
In normal society, most of the people are order questioners, and almost noone is an order follower. That means that nothing gets done (unless everyone can be made to agree quickly), but the failure modes mostly involved lack of information - and are not usually that critical (under the assumption that the more critical something is, the closer it is watched).
Both these systems seem to work pretty well - in normal society the government should probably not do anything unless a lot of people agree, and in the military it probably is best (for our side) to err on the side of following orders.
If you look at such things, the average joe is the person least hit by currency devaluations - essentially currency devaluations remove all the value of money from those that are holding it, and the average Joe just doesn't have much money. That's why it is so appealing to Socialist to cause huge inflation - it is a great way to steal from the rich to give to the poor. The only problem with currency devaluations / inflation is that it destroys the economy, because no one is willing to work anymore.
That said, as others have pointed out, currency is not linked to metals of any type - and the economy would be improved, not hurt, by cheap metals. There are two ways to make Joe happier - one is to pay Joe more, and the other is to make Joe's life less expensive without taking away anything. This would be the second option.
That is true, but if you have a task running as the superuser that backs up your files to some read-only (to the user) place you can still get them, and no virus can. Having some safe area helps, at any rate.
If only this were true. It turns out that a certain percentage of the sysadmins will also run the virus (and smack their heads right afterward) - and it's not really based on competence level, its just human nature. Social engineering really works, even when people know better - that's why it's so hard to defend against.
Whoops! I was thinking nor, not xor - my mistake. I just wanted to point out that this is really all you need, providing that it is cascadable with a fan out greater than one (one output can drive at least two inputs).
For those that care, binary addition of A and B into C1 and C0 is C0=AND(OR(A,B),NOT(AND(A,B))), C1=AND(a,b)
Um, the basis of all computers is two gates that allow oposing actions. For example, a Not gate and an OR gate. (And=not(or(not(a),not(b)))) Everything else is built from these gates - so this is already more than enough to build a computer. (Not=xor(a,a)), (or=not(and(not(a),not(b))))
On the other hand - if you were going to putz with the voting machine you built, would anyone be able to detect it? Didn't think so....
This is an example of localized voter fraud, the kind that has been going on forever. Only now we have the tools to hunt it down and arrest those responsible - and just for the record, I bet most of it is Democrat related. From a purely psychological perspective, extreme Democrats are very passionate and believe that they honestly know what is better for the rest of us. That mindset allows them to break the law, even if they are certain to get caught. Extreme Republicans, on the other hand, are most likely in it for personal enrichment. They are not going to do something if they will get caught.
Actually, we already have a way to deal with non-causal events. Evolution is the ultimate non-causal theory - that's what makes it so interesting. Essentially, cause and effect are swapped. For example, why do humans walk upright? Because it's better for them to walk upright - any universe where humans didn't walk upright wouldn't have humans in it (they would have been eaten by crocodiles). I think this (and quantum mechanics) are the only non-causal theories, though I'm probably wrong.
I keep thinking there must be a way to limit some quantum event so that the only internally consistant outcome is a universe where I am rich!
The FISC does not require prior court approval, it only requires court approval
I have to say, this is what I find to be the most stupid part of all this. Either you require prior approval, or nothing in required. What does it mean that you need approval after the fact? What if they say no? So they can't say no. but you have to ask? What a dumb law!!!!!
What is lost in your telling is that the external tank is pressurized to about 2 atmospheres, and expanded into pratically zero pressure - in other words, it exploded (it did not detonate, it exploded). Almost all of the damage can be directly traced to the external tank exploding - the shuttle would not have gone broadside to the air flow without being pushed by the "low pressure" tank explosion, etc.
If you look at this from the point of view of the shuttle and tank as the "shuttle," there was indeed an explosion (in the boiler sense). The external hydrogen tank is pressurized, and most of what could be seen was that going off - and though that did not directly destroy the orbiter, the "explosion" is what made it turn broadside to the air stream.
I think there is sufficient reason to call it an explosion, though not a very impressive one as explosions go.
Except from Disney's point of view - very few large company mergers are beneficial. Mergers are best left to little companies, or big cmopanies aquiring little companies.
To be more precise, the required sample size is determined by the standard deviation of the paramter in the population. For example, measuring the average height of people in Japan requires a much smaller sample than measuring the average height of people in the US (to the same certainty), because Japan has a more homogenous population. For something like this, an unbiased sample of a few tens will probably give +-5% - thousands would give +-1%. The real problems are bias (which a larger sample size will not help with), and misreporting what was measured.
For example, in this case, the number of males frequenting adult web sites is not what they found. They found the number of males that will admit in a survey that they frequent adult web sites - you cannot assume that the answers are the same without testing (and in this case, testing would be an invasino of privacy at the very least). For the really important surveys, the surveyor actually goes out and verifies a few tens (or hundreds) of responses by hand - and then does the same to the unresponsive population, to try to correct for sampling bias.
I'm not sure that there is a set limit to how high a balloon can go. As the balloon goes higher the air it displaces weighs less, so to lift a given mass you need more volume. But the mass of the balloon only goes up with the square of the radius, while volume goes up with the cube. I think the only real limits would be how well you can design a load bearing structure to keep such a large, thin thing together.
BTW, remember that balloons can't get you to orbit - orbit is a velocity, not an altitude. There is a company that take balloons pretty much to space, however!
As long as the balloon doesn't move, there is no change in potential energy. Perhaps we are talking about different things? Yes, if you ride the balloon to 10,000 feet then you would have transfered potential energy from the balloon to the rocket - but even then that energy amount is tiny compared to the energy used by a rocket to do the same.
Energy is force times velocity times time. Rockets have a very high exhaust velocity, so they use a lot of energy. Balloons are slow, so they use very little energy (basically just the difference in potential energy).
Slashdot Mirror
I suppose the easiest answer is this:
1. Repbulicans, for the most part, want to limit welfare programs to those that really need it.
2. Welfare is currently the majority of government spending, more than $1.1 trillion per year. (Including Social Security payments) Government total reciepts is around $2.2 Trillion
QED, the Republicans want to eliminate half of the government.
(OK, a little tounge in cheek - I really doubt the money would really be given back, and no one is really going to kill entitlements)
Which of those ideas will make me a millionaire the fastest?
That depends on which marketing channels are available to you, of course!
Wow - people are complaining about 3-5% inflation? You do know that there is a trade off between inflation and unemployment, right? So you are arguing for higher unemployment? Weird! (OK, the link is not obvious, but it is extremely strong - essentially if money is harder to get, less companies are formed / less projects are started, so less jobs are available - this is readily apparent in economic data)
3-5% inflation is normally regarded as a healthy level. One reason for this is that companies that need to cut employees salaries but can't just do not give wages (which is better for the economy in general than firing people, as long as the company recovers), much like what you said.
Of course, issuing debt causes many other problems, and of course if the debt is called due we would be forced into sky high inflation.
That is basically what I was trying to say, but putting it more simply. The reasons why soldiers follow orders are the ones you gave - and if you ever get to the point where orders will not be obeyed (mindless supieriors, in your example), you will lose the war.
My point is just that in order to be effective, soldiers need to obey orders - even the ones they don't understand. The reason they do that is based on trust in the US military, fear in Sadaam's old military, and I'm sure that there have been other motivations used (hatred, etc.).
In order to have a successful society, both viewpoint are required. If no one questions the orders, tyranny results. If no one follows the orders without understanding them, nothing can be accomplished. Specifically in the military case, if you question your orders, people die before they are cleared up for you. (Why should I fire artillery there? I'm not sure those are the bad guys...)
What is attempted in the military is that you have mostly order followers (enlisted), and a few order questioners (officers) to try to keep everyone honest. Most of the failures modes of this are bad, but less bad than what the enemy would do to you.
In normal society, most of the people are order questioners, and almost noone is an order follower. That means that nothing gets done (unless everyone can be made to agree quickly), but the failure modes mostly involved lack of information - and are not usually that critical (under the assumption that the more critical something is, the closer it is watched).
Both these systems seem to work pretty well - in normal society the government should probably not do anything unless a lot of people agree, and in the military it probably is best (for our side) to err on the side of following orders.
If you look at such things, the average joe is the person least hit by currency devaluations - essentially currency devaluations remove all the value of money from those that are holding it, and the average Joe just doesn't have much money. That's why it is so appealing to Socialist to cause huge inflation - it is a great way to steal from the rich to give to the poor. The only problem with currency devaluations / inflation is that it destroys the economy, because no one is willing to work anymore.
That said, as others have pointed out, currency is not linked to metals of any type - and the economy would be improved, not hurt, by cheap metals. There are two ways to make Joe happier - one is to pay Joe more, and the other is to make Joe's life less expensive without taking away anything. This would be the second option.
That is true, but if you have a task running as the superuser that backs up your files to some read-only (to the user) place you can still get them, and no virus can. Having some safe area helps, at any rate.
If only this were true. It turns out that a certain percentage of the sysadmins will also run the virus (and smack their heads right afterward) - and it's not really based on competence level, its just human nature. Social engineering really works, even when people know better - that's why it's so hard to defend against.
But don't you see? When they die they will become even more powerful:
They'll vote!
(Queue the "strike me down and I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine" quotes)
Well, I live in Chicago - we have an illustrious history in that regard...
It's amazing how many dead people vote!
Whoops! I was thinking nor, not xor - my mistake. I just wanted to point out that this is really all you need, providing that it is cascadable with a fan out greater than one (one output can drive at least two inputs).
For those that care, binary addition of A and B into C1 and C0 is C0=AND(OR(A,B),NOT(AND(A,B))), C1=AND(a,b)
Um, the basis of all computers is two gates that allow oposing actions. For example, a Not gate and an OR gate. (And=not(or(not(a),not(b)))) Everything else is built from these gates - so this is already more than enough to build a computer. (Not=xor(a,a)), (or=not(and(not(a),not(b))))
On the other hand - if you were going to putz with the voting machine you built, would anyone be able to detect it? Didn't think so....
This is an example of localized voter fraud, the kind that has been going on forever. Only now we have the tools to hunt it down and arrest those responsible - and just for the record, I bet most of it is Democrat related. From a purely psychological perspective, extreme Democrats are very passionate and believe that they honestly know what is better for the rest of us. That mindset allows them to break the law, even if they are certain to get caught. Extreme Republicans, on the other hand, are most likely in it for personal enrichment. They are not going to do something if they will get caught.
Extremists of any type are bad, IMHO.
Only if you believe the buzz.
</joke>
Actually, we already have a way to deal with non-causal events. Evolution is the ultimate non-causal theory - that's what makes it so interesting. Essentially, cause and effect are swapped. For example, why do humans walk upright? Because it's better for them to walk upright - any universe where humans didn't walk upright wouldn't have humans in it (they would have been eaten by crocodiles). I think this (and quantum mechanics) are the only non-causal theories, though I'm probably wrong.
I keep thinking there must be a way to limit some quantum event so that the only internally consistant outcome is a universe where I am rich!
See, they should have used java - 64 bit longs can handle it!
The FISC does not require prior court approval, it only requires court approval
I have to say, this is what I find to be the most stupid part of all this. Either you require prior approval, or nothing in required. What does it mean that you need approval after the fact? What if they say no? So they can't say no. but you have to ask? What a dumb law!!!!!
What is lost in your telling is that the external tank is pressurized to about 2 atmospheres, and expanded into pratically zero pressure - in other words, it exploded (it did not detonate, it exploded). Almost all of the damage can be directly traced to the external tank exploding - the shuttle would not have gone broadside to the air flow without being pushed by the "low pressure" tank explosion, etc.
If you look at this from the point of view of the shuttle and tank as the "shuttle," there was indeed an explosion (in the boiler sense). The external hydrogen tank is pressurized, and most of what could be seen was that going off - and though that did not directly destroy the orbiter, the "explosion" is what made it turn broadside to the air stream.
I think there is sufficient reason to call it an explosion, though not a very impressive one as explosions go.
Except from Disney's point of view - very few large company mergers are beneficial. Mergers are best left to little companies, or big cmopanies aquiring little companies.
The problem is that it does not magically lower your privileges - it should!
To be more precise, the required sample size is determined by the standard deviation of the paramter in the population. For example, measuring the average height of people in Japan requires a much smaller sample than measuring the average height of people in the US (to the same certainty), because Japan has a more homogenous population. For something like this, an unbiased sample of a few tens will probably give +-5% - thousands would give +-1%. The real problems are bias (which a larger sample size will not help with), and misreporting what was measured.
For example, in this case, the number of males frequenting adult web sites is not what they found. They found the number of males that will admit in a survey that they frequent adult web sites - you cannot assume that the answers are the same without testing (and in this case, testing would be an invasino of privacy at the very least). For the really important surveys, the surveyor actually goes out and verifies a few tens (or hundreds) of responses by hand - and then does the same to the unresponsive population, to try to correct for sampling bias.
No, no - trust me, the ones that invented guerilla warfare were the gorillas.
I'm not sure that there is a set limit to how high a balloon can go. As the balloon goes higher the air it displaces weighs less, so to lift a given mass you need more volume. But the mass of the balloon only goes up with the square of the radius, while volume goes up with the cube. I think the only real limits would be how well you can design a load bearing structure to keep such a large, thin thing together.
BTW, remember that balloons can't get you to orbit - orbit is a velocity, not an altitude. There is a company that take balloons pretty much to space, however!
As long as the balloon doesn't move, there is no change in potential energy. Perhaps we are talking about different things? Yes, if you ride the balloon to 10,000 feet then you would have transfered potential energy from the balloon to the rocket - but even then that energy amount is tiny compared to the energy used by a rocket to do the same.
Energy is force times velocity times time. Rockets have a very high exhaust velocity, so they use a lot of energy. Balloons are slow, so they use very little energy (basically just the difference in potential energy).