Furthermore, I can choose not to go in the sunshine, but I can't choose to not drink water. So keep your micrograms of mercury out of my drinking water, and so forth.
The biggest waste regarding human excrement comes from flushing it away with water that is fit for drinking, wasting all of the energy that was spent purifying it. Drinking water is a precious resource. Forget extracting gasses from it, if you just manage to compost your shit, you are well on the road to sustainability.
I feel a lot better buying something that comes with a running Linux distro, because I know the hardware is compatible, even if I am going to reinstall right away (paranoid security-wise reinstalling is a damn good idea anyway). Thats why I bought a Zaurus, even though I didn't keep the original setup that was on it and immediately put OpenZaurus on it.
Thats why when my non-technically minded neigbor asked for my advice in selecting a computer on a budget, and after we agreed that she'd hold me responsible for the hardware only, we drove to Fry's and got her the 'Thiz Linux' machine in question. After I upgraded it with some parts she had laying around, I felt very comfortable letting it out of my hands, because regardless of what she installed on it, I could always pop a Knoppix CD in it and demonstrate that the hardware was fine.
She ended up installing a pirated copy of WinME on it, which worked for her eventually, it took her a little while to get the ethernet and sound working. (Psst, Bill, her name is Patty McCormic, and she lives at 751 19th Street, go get her for piracy -- just kidding...)
So if something is sold with Linux already running on it, at least I know I can endorse the hardware.
But if ya wanna 'build cool shit', then just do it! If you are a true geek, build first and worry about it later. Hardware is cheap enough these days, open source is free (pssst, don't buy that SCO licence), build whatever you want.
If you are good at it, maybe someone will see what you build and will want to either buy it, or the buy rights to it, or will want you to build them more of the same, or admire your skill and hire you for something else equally cool.
But if you are a true geek, you are not building cools shit for gain, but for the fun of it. And to eat and have a roof over your head in the meanwhile, it may, just may, be least painful to do some tech support. If may very well pay for your hobby of building cool shit.
I think you are right on about laying bricks, or pouring concrete, or framing wood houses -- immensly satisfying. That'ts what I do, by the way. But most techie people ould rather do tech support.
I think thats what the article is trying to convey.
> the Russian FSB (Front Side Bus?)
FedeRAL'naya SLUzhba BezopPASnosty -- Federal Service [of] Security, is what it stands for, I have capitalized the syllables for stress, the "L" in Federal'naya is followed by an apostrophe to signify palatalization, like the first "n" in canyon.
The FSB is analogous to the Department of Homeland Security, in that it oversees all national-level security operations.
It does not stand for Front Side Bus.
How many Greens do you know to say they are mostly uninformed? Or anti-technology? It's more about how the technology is used. How many lives does irradiation (of food, that's what I assume you are talking about) save? Inconclusive. The NYTimes last week did make mention of a study done in Europe that suggests that irradiating certain fats converts them to carcinogenic compounds. However, most things that are irradiated are vegetables and fruits, things low in fat, so, like I said, inconclusive. What's wrong with flash-pasteurization, anyway? Granted, nuclear power makes for cleaner air than burning fossil fuel, but where ya gonna stick the spent uranium? Can we keep it at your house for a while? Thanks! A better solution is growing corn or other biomass, and fermenting in to methanol and ethanol. Burning that you get almost entirely CO2 and H2O: clean. Back in the day, cars (Ford Model T?) used to have a lever: you can set it to gas or alcohol, gas for the city, alcohol for out in the country, where gasoline sales couldn't compete with alcohol fuel made by farmers. Right now, your car can run on 10% alcohol and 90% gas, and with an adjustment to the timing of the engine can run on alcohol only. A lassaiz-faire market? This country has never had one, nor is there such a thing in this day and age. The Fed has tight control over the expansion and contraction of the economy, furthermore, we have necessary anti-trust regulation in place, as well as tariffs on imported goods. For better or for worse, doing away with any of these at this point would be disasterous to the economy. So you can forget lassaiz-faire, which bwt != a "free" market. A market which thru lassaiz-faire came to be dominated by a monopoly is not "free" nor does it benefit the consumer. The Green model of the economy is actually truly capitalist, it treats natural resources as capital. Consider, for example, a forest. Forest makes more forest, just by sitting there. This is not only analogous to, but the very reason why, money makes more money just by sitting there, say, in a bank. Now if a company is using up all of its capital as fast as it can, would you call it successful? No, you'd call them morons. But under the current way of accounting, if you are using up natural resources faster than anyone, it looks like you are doing great, but you are really not. You haven't mentioned the Green stance on social welfare, perhaps you have an issue with that, too. Let me appeal to your enlightened self-interest (this will be a terribly gross oversimplification, forgive me). How do you feel about a scenario where a person has a choice between robbing you for food, or starving to death. Let's disregard for a minute how that person got to that point, that is a complicated question (in some cases, some people are just unskilled inept anti-social fuckups, and thats all). Now you have a choice between having that person trying to rob you, giving that person some money for food, or not dealing with this unpleasant person altogether, and instead giving some money to some third party that will pass it on to the person in question. Of the three, the latter is by far the most popular, and that's essentially one of the things we do when we pay taxes once a year. Hhmmph. What a horrible way to put it, but yeah, support social welfare programs, they indirectly benefit you. And vote Green. But even if you don't, you must agree that the satndard Parliamentary system is superiour to out two-party bullshit.
It makes a lot of sense, that's how a lot of commercial beer is made: in vats with heating coils and stirrers. The article doesn't say, but I am sure his beer is fermented in a conventional way, the washing machine is just to prepare the wort. And the washing machine is set up for exactly this, better than most homebrewers' stovetop setups. I wonder what his wife thinks about having to do laundry in a pail, but with so much homebrew around, once you get a little tipsy, such concerns are just not as pressing!
You are confusing the organization itself with the voices they allow to be heard. Where else do you have the opportunity to hear from communists, Puerto-Rican separatists, or some common regular folks from the third world? Of the multitude of voices that you will hear, consider each viewpoint on its own merit, that's what freedom of speech is all about. It is essential that all voices be heard.
I also urge you to pick up a book on economics before you come out either in favor of against so-called "globalization." It's not that simple. The world is a global marketplace, whether you like it or not. The debate is about how it is to be structured. If two countries suddenly do away with tariffs on imported goods, and the industry of one of the countries is much further advanced and is able to produce goods cheaper, the other country's industry will naturally be harmed. It is healthy and necessary to give the less developed country the incentive and the means to improve the state of their industry, but too sudden of a change can quickly put too many people out of work, leading to economic collapse. (This is just an example, not a real-world situation.)
There are other aspects to consider. The capitalist way of accounting (if you are a self-proclaimed capitalist and have any of that Ain Randian enlightened self interest, pay attention) does not assign any value to certain natural resources. How much is an unpolluted ocean worth, or a healthy forest? Now suppose one country is able to flood the market of another country with more cheaper goods faster that the second country ever could, because they harvest their lumber at a rate that does not leave a healthy forest, and pollute their (and everyone else's) oceans. Now imagine if a treaty is in place that precludes teh second country from imposing tariffs on these goods that may be an asset to own today, but their production is an ecological liability. And these rising rates of pollutants translate into very real rising rates of cancer.
Consider another example. Local company A pays a $450 wage for 5000 units produced, produces a product that they are able to sell for $10, and keeps $3 in profit from each one sold. Off-shore company B pays a $500 wage, sells identical product for $9, keeps the same $3 in profit. It may seem like the locals are best off working for and buying from company B. However, while for every 5000 units manufactured and sold $5500 was gained in higher wages and lower prices, $15000 in profits left the country's economy. This is why we cry, "Buy American!" so isn't it natural that someone else will say, buy Ecuadorian?
After your athletes laugh me out of the room, I'll come back with an elephant. That elephant that has never and wil never eat meat is stronger than any of your so-called athletes. Granted, people aren't elephants, but out intestines, teeth, and circulatory systems are most similar to herbivores. Also, how much protein do yuo think you can build in a day? The remainder the body tries to use for energy, and that is a toxic process that produces ketones. So if you were truly trying to build muscle and nothing else, you'd eat no more than 4 oz. of meat a day.
After loafing around all day, I say,
"I am working around the clock to protect you and your children. It's top secret, so I can't tell you what I am doing, and you can't check up on me. Now sign my paycheck."
And there is nothing those poor Australian taxpayers can do:)
Neither Redhat7.2 nor Mandrake8.0 allow you to install with less than 32M of RAM, regardless what packages you think you want. Selecting text based EXPERT mode does not help. I ended up having to install RedHat6.2 in that situation, which was a great distro when it came out, but now it's out of date. I really like iptables, for example.
Slashdot Mirror
Sodium chloride does not cause cancer.
Furthermore, I can choose not to go in the sunshine, but I can't choose to not drink water.
So keep your micrograms of mercury out of my drinking water, and so forth.
Apparently it's easily done using sawdust, check out The Humanure Handbook.
I feel a lot better buying something that comes with a running Linux distro, because I know the hardware is compatible, even if I am going to reinstall right away (paranoid security-wise reinstalling is a damn good idea anyway). Thats why I bought a Zaurus, even though I didn't keep the original setup that was on it and immediately put OpenZaurus on it.
Thats why when my non-technically minded neigbor asked for my advice in selecting a computer on a budget, and after we agreed that she'd hold me responsible for the hardware only, we drove to Fry's and got her the 'Thiz Linux' machine in question. After I upgraded it with some parts she had laying around, I felt very comfortable letting it out of my hands, because regardless of what she installed on it, I could always pop a Knoppix CD in it and demonstrate that the hardware was fine.
She ended up installing a pirated copy of WinME on it, which worked for her eventually, it took her a little while to get the ethernet and sound working. (Psst, Bill, her name is Patty McCormic, and she lives at 751 19th Street, go get her for piracy -- just kidding...)
So if something is sold with Linux already running on it, at least I know I can endorse the hardware.
I feel ya.
But if ya wanna 'build cool shit', then just do it! If you are a true geek, build first and worry about it later. Hardware is cheap enough these days, open source is free (pssst, don't buy that SCO licence), build whatever you want.
If you are good at it, maybe someone will see what you build and will want to either buy it, or the buy rights to it, or will want you to build them more of the same, or admire your skill and hire you for something else equally cool.
But if you are a true geek, you are not building cools shit for gain, but for the fun of it. And to eat and have a roof over your head in the meanwhile, it may, just may, be least painful to do some tech support. If may very well pay for your hobby of building cool shit.
I think you are right on about laying bricks, or pouring concrete, or framing wood houses -- immensly satisfying. That'ts what I do, by the way. But most techie people ould rather do tech support.
I think thats what the article is trying to convey.
> the Russian FSB (Front Side Bus?) FedeRAL'naya SLUzhba BezopPASnosty -- Federal Service [of] Security, is what it stands for, I have capitalized the syllables for stress, the "L" in Federal'naya is followed by an apostrophe to signify palatalization, like the first "n" in canyon. The FSB is analogous to the Department of Homeland Security, in that it oversees all national-level security operations. It does not stand for Front Side Bus.
How many Greens do you know to say they are mostly uninformed? Or anti-technology? It's more about how the technology is used. How many lives does irradiation (of food, that's what I assume you are talking about) save? Inconclusive. The NYTimes last week did make mention of a study done in Europe that suggests that irradiating certain fats converts them to carcinogenic compounds. However, most things that are irradiated are vegetables and fruits, things low in fat, so, like I said, inconclusive. What's wrong with flash-pasteurization, anyway? Granted, nuclear power makes for cleaner air than burning fossil fuel, but where ya gonna stick the spent uranium? Can we keep it at your house for a while? Thanks! A better solution is growing corn or other biomass, and fermenting in to methanol and ethanol. Burning that you get almost entirely CO2 and H2O: clean. Back in the day, cars (Ford Model T?) used to have a lever: you can set it to gas or alcohol, gas for the city, alcohol for out in the country, where gasoline sales couldn't compete with alcohol fuel made by farmers. Right now, your car can run on 10% alcohol and 90% gas, and with an adjustment to the timing of the engine can run on alcohol only. A lassaiz-faire market? This country has never had one, nor is there such a thing in this day and age. The Fed has tight control over the expansion and contraction of the economy, furthermore, we have necessary anti-trust regulation in place, as well as tariffs on imported goods. For better or for worse, doing away with any of these at this point would be disasterous to the economy. So you can forget lassaiz-faire, which bwt != a "free" market. A market which thru lassaiz-faire came to be dominated by a monopoly is not "free" nor does it benefit the consumer. The Green model of the economy is actually truly capitalist, it treats natural resources as capital. Consider, for example, a forest. Forest makes more forest, just by sitting there. This is not only analogous to, but the very reason why, money makes more money just by sitting there, say, in a bank. Now if a company is using up all of its capital as fast as it can, would you call it successful? No, you'd call them morons. But under the current way of accounting, if you are using up natural resources faster than anyone, it looks like you are doing great, but you are really not. You haven't mentioned the Green stance on social welfare, perhaps you have an issue with that, too. Let me appeal to your enlightened self-interest (this will be a terribly gross oversimplification, forgive me). How do you feel about a scenario where a person has a choice between robbing you for food, or starving to death. Let's disregard for a minute how that person got to that point, that is a complicated question (in some cases, some people are just unskilled inept anti-social fuckups, and thats all). Now you have a choice between having that person trying to rob you, giving that person some money for food, or not dealing with this unpleasant person altogether, and instead giving some money to some third party that will pass it on to the person in question. Of the three, the latter is by far the most popular, and that's essentially one of the things we do when we pay taxes once a year. Hhmmph. What a horrible way to put it, but yeah, support social welfare programs, they indirectly benefit you. And vote Green. But even if you don't, you must agree that the satndard Parliamentary system is superiour to out two-party bullshit.
It makes a lot of sense, that's how a lot of commercial beer is made: in vats with heating coils and stirrers. The article doesn't say, but I am sure his beer is fermented in a conventional way, the washing machine is just to prepare the wort. And the washing machine is set up for exactly this, better than most homebrewers' stovetop setups. I wonder what his wife thinks about having to do laundry in a pail, but with so much homebrew around, once you get a little tipsy, such concerns are just not as pressing!
that's micro-seconds, 250 of which is 1/4 of a milli-second. That's probably reasonable, delay-wise.
Whadda ya mean, "graphical"? Looks like text to me! That'll win over the IE crowd!
You are confusing the organization itself with the voices they allow to be heard. Where else do you have the opportunity to hear from communists, Puerto-Rican separatists, or some common regular folks from the third world? Of the multitude of voices that you will hear, consider each viewpoint on its own merit, that's what freedom of speech is all about. It is essential that all voices be heard.
I also urge you to pick up a book on economics before you come out either in favor of against so-called "globalization." It's not that simple. The world is a global marketplace, whether you like it or not. The debate is about how it is to be structured. If two countries suddenly do away with tariffs on imported goods, and the industry of one of the countries is much further advanced and is able to produce goods cheaper, the other country's industry will naturally be harmed. It is healthy and necessary to give the less developed country the incentive and the means to improve the state of their industry, but too sudden of a change can quickly put too many people out of work, leading to economic collapse. (This is just an example, not a real-world situation.)
There are other aspects to consider. The capitalist way of accounting (if you are a self-proclaimed capitalist and have any of that Ain Randian enlightened self interest, pay attention) does not assign any value to certain natural resources. How much is an unpolluted ocean worth, or a healthy forest? Now suppose one country is able to flood the market of another country with more cheaper goods faster that the second country ever could, because they harvest their lumber at a rate that does not leave a healthy forest, and pollute their (and everyone else's) oceans. Now imagine if a treaty is in place that precludes teh second country from imposing tariffs on these goods that may be an asset to own today, but their production is an ecological liability. And these rising rates of pollutants translate into very real rising rates of cancer.
Consider another example. Local company A pays a $450 wage for 5000 units produced, produces a product that they are able to sell for $10, and keeps $3 in profit from each one sold. Off-shore company B pays a $500 wage, sells identical product for $9, keeps the same $3 in profit. It may seem like the locals are best off working for and buying from company B. However, while for every 5000 units manufactured and sold $5500 was gained in higher wages and lower prices, $15000 in profits left the country's economy. This is why we cry, "Buy American!" so isn't it natural that someone else will say, buy Ecuadorian?
Food for thought.
After your athletes laugh me out of the room, I'll come back with an elephant. That elephant that has never and wil never eat meat is stronger than any of your so-called athletes. Granted, people aren't elephants, but out intestines, teeth, and circulatory systems are most similar to herbivores. Also, how much protein do yuo think you can build in a day? The remainder the body tries to use for energy, and that is a toxic process that produces ketones. So if you were truly trying to build muscle and nothing else, you'd eat no more than 4 oz. of meat a day.
After loafing around all day, I say, "I am working around the clock to protect you and your children. It's top secret, so I can't tell you what I am doing, and you can't check up on me. Now sign my paycheck." And there is nothing those poor Australian taxpayers can do :)
Neither Redhat7.2 nor Mandrake8.0 allow you to install with less than 32M of RAM, regardless what packages you think you want. Selecting text based EXPERT mode does not help. I ended up having to install RedHat6.2 in that situation, which was a great distro when it came out, but now it's out of date. I really like iptables, for example.