I was going to go into climatology/meteorology - but then i learned to code - however I still have a large knowledge on the subject.
Ocean surface temperature under a hurricane determines it's maximum possible strength - it's also a generial indicator of it's probable strength. As ocean surface temperatures rise that creates larger areas with higher levels of potential energy, and temperatures above the minimum to hold enough potential energy to spawn hurricanes (about 80F) last for more in the year.
So as the planet warms more tropical storm systems will occur (longer season in which they can), they will be on average stronger and last longer (having more area with higher potential energy)
This all being IIRC, it's been a while since I cracked open any of my books that covers tropical weather.
I tried Ubuntu - it's not great, it's downright crippled
latest version has PAM older than.79 and the latest is.99, the default GCC installed (GCC 4.0) from the default debian repositories cannot build executables,/etc/security/console.perms is missing,/etc/ld.so.conf is missing
that last one was the last straw for me and i proceeded to wipe that ext3 partition and load Fedora Core 5 on it.
For all it's faults atleast things work right with Fedora Core and I can compile mythtv with miniminal effort
And yet here in my shop we have 5/6 of our people running FC4 as our software development platform and the other 1/6 is running Ubuntu
We're deploying a completely new server cluster based upon FC4 because all the tools and various things that come with the distribution.
This also gives us the ability to "upgrade" to RHEL if we ever need major support.
I certainly have some criticisms: FC can be a little bloatish and yum isn't as good as apt (so install APT for RPM:D) and a few other minor things. However the positives outweigh the negatives.
Excuse me but your presumption and arrogance is astounding - I am not some weak minded fool who compromises my lack of belief in difficult and stressful situations and I would appreciate if you would refrain from such presumption and arrogance.
The analogy to blogs is a false one. Blogs are not money-in-the-pocket of congressscritters. Money is buying favor.
But my money, wealth, property, jelly beans, or whatever, do not infringe on anyone else's rights.
Your use of them can.
I am stopping no one from speaking. The lubrication of my wallet has no more impact upon your ability to speak than does the popularity of my blog.
You are stopping people from having representative government by buying favor of the politicians to vote in your interest no matter what.
You're evading this point and refusing to address it and instead picking straw men out of my argument - which makes me inclined to think you have no refutation for this statement: or, worse for your position, recognize the validity.
The dripping stereotyping and bigotry in your post are appaling. You have no valid input - and your political views are Anarchocapitalism: you have no right to be accusing others of "helping Destroy America"
Anarchocapitalism would destroy america instantly.
Please do not speak on subjects of which you have no understanding.
If it were gone, every congresscritter would suffer under an endless barrage of lawsuits over everything they say
No they wouldn't - slander/libel are very specific things and most lawyers won't consider litigating it, and those that do are very choosy to make sure they actually have a case.
Seems and does are two different things. Unlimited campaign contributions to individual candidates SEEMS to be protected by the first ammendment - but since such can be used to buy favor with politicians and thereby silence the voices of others in their representatives decisions it is not.
There are many things you tax dollars are spent on that you dislike - paying to put all candidates on a level playing field is protectionary of your first ammendment rights.
You can either have something like what I proposed, or the current system under which most of the people in washington are bought-and-paid for by the various moneyed groups.
1. Just because it is not written in the constitution does not mean it exists. You're gauranteed equal representation with everyone else in your district. (there went your counter example)
When someone buys the favor of the politician they effectively negate your vote and your voice.
2. IRV was the only one I knew of LIKE that - if there is a better system so be it
$100m was just a nice round number - the money for a campaign would come from a cominbation of a "starting fund" in tax dollars (other countries do this and have less corruption problems) and then can be grown by private donations from individuals and business to the race and the pot is evenly divided.
What if I don't want my tax dollars going to support Candidate B's campaign because I don't like Candidate B?
tough shit - money from people who don't like your candidate is going to pay for your candidate too.
Also, how does someone become eligible to receive a share of this money?
they get on the ballot.
What is to prevent 100 or 1000 people from applying for their share?
they have to go through the process of getting onto the ballot - which is generally getting a certain ammount of signatures - ie showing they have enough support to be viable.
any unspent money returns to the pot and is saved for the next election cycle.
(and you're immmune from libel/slander for anything said in Congress if you're a member)....
that needs to change
I see your point - I never said this was a perfect system, it's the only option I see to end the culture of corruption - I am but one mind, it takes more than one to find the best solution.
Slashdot Mirror
who exactly is the leftist here? GP is definantly not.
get a new boogeyman
It isn't fair for people like me who are christians to be told that they're outright wrong.
yes it is
if you're outright wrong you're outright wrong
no "fairness" involved.
You have no evidence to support your worldview, science is the art of collecting and analyzing evidence.
Bringing religion to a science debate is like taking a knife to a nuke fight.
I was going to go into climatology/meteorology - but then i learned to code - however I still have a large knowledge on the subject.
Ocean surface temperature under a hurricane determines it's maximum possible strength - it's also a generial indicator of it's probable strength. As ocean surface temperatures rise that creates larger areas with higher levels of potential energy, and temperatures above the minimum to hold enough potential energy to spawn hurricanes (about 80F) last for more in the year.
So as the planet warms more tropical storm systems will occur (longer season in which they can), they will be on average stronger and last longer (having more area with higher potential energy)
This all being IIRC, it's been a while since I cracked open any of my books that covers tropical weather.
yes it's my fault that their official package manager (Adept) is a POS
Caveat: i was using Kubuntu (another idiotic thing: a fork just for a different window manager?)
i said default "debian" repository because that's the package system you are using.
Old PAM IS a crime when it doesn't support a feature you critically need for what you're doing.
Flame On
I sholdn't have to file bugs for errors that freaking stupid on a PRODUCTION RELEASE
Like I said - I went back to my favorite distro since it works.
(I was going to use Ubuntu for a mythtv box)
crt1.so was missing then I selected the build essentials and it installed gcc4 - i installed gcc 3.something from Adept and it started working.
/usr/local/lib to be added to your ld.so.conf
many multimedia applications require
I tried Ubuntu - it's not great, it's downright crippled
.79 and the latest is .99, the default GCC installed (GCC 4.0) from the default debian repositories cannot build executables, /etc/security/console.perms is missing, /etc/ld.so.conf is missing
latest version has PAM older than
that last one was the last straw for me and i proceeded to wipe that ext3 partition and load Fedora Core 5 on it.
For all it's faults atleast things work right with Fedora Core and I can compile mythtv with miniminal effort
I believe the subject is more technical innovation than atrist innovation
overwhelming ammounts of evidence
you misread
Ironically, the grant was for a study into the detrimental effects of intelligent design on Canadian academics and leaders
whoever modded you up should be smacked.
And yet here in my shop we have 5/6 of our people running FC4 as our software development platform and the other 1/6 is running Ubuntu
:D) and a few other minor things. However the positives outweigh the negatives.
We're deploying a completely new server cluster based upon FC4 because all the tools and various things that come with the distribution.
This also gives us the ability to "upgrade" to RHEL if we ever need major support.
I certainly have some criticisms: FC can be a little bloatish and yum isn't as good as apt (so install APT for RPM
[Old cluster based on debian-stable]
Excuse me but your presumption and arrogance is astounding - I am not some weak minded fool who compromises my lack of belief in difficult and stressful situations and I would appreciate if you would refrain from such presumption and arrogance.
Walmart plays by the rules.
actually they've had their balls busted for not playing by the rules with their employees many times
and pretty soon they should start getting their balls busted for the anticompetitive practices they engage in.
The analogy to blogs is a false one. Blogs are not money-in-the-pocket of congressscritters. Money is buying favor.
But my money, wealth, property, jelly beans, or whatever, do not infringe on anyone else's rights.
Your use of them can.
I am stopping no one from speaking. The lubrication of my wallet has no more impact upon your ability to speak than does the popularity of my blog.
You are stopping people from having representative government by buying favor of the politicians to vote in your interest no matter what.
You're evading this point and refusing to address it and instead picking straw men out of my argument - which makes me inclined to think you have no refutation for this statement: or, worse for your position, recognize the validity.
The dripping stereotyping and bigotry in your post are appaling. You have no valid input - and your political views are Anarchocapitalism: you have no right to be accusing others of "helping Destroy America"
Anarchocapitalism would destroy america instantly.
Please do not speak on subjects of which you have no understanding.
(Libertarianism is the new "clueless hippy")
I never said my idea was the perfect solution and I did say that no one mind can see the optimal solution
My client is the Green Party
I knew there was a reason I liked you!
You would have to get onto the ballot in atleast half of the states.
If it were gone, every congresscritter would suffer under an endless barrage of lawsuits over everything they say
No they wouldn't - slander/libel are very specific things and most lawyers won't consider litigating it, and those that do are very choosy to make sure they actually have a case.
I'm saying its the only one I can see that would come close to working.
Seems and does are two different things. Unlimited campaign contributions to individual candidates SEEMS to be protected by the first ammendment - but since such can be used to buy favor with politicians and thereby silence the voices of others in their representatives decisions it is not.
There are many things you tax dollars are spent on that you dislike - paying to put all candidates on a level playing field is protectionary of your first ammendment rights.
You can either have something like what I proposed, or the current system under which most of the people in washington are bought-and-paid for by the various moneyed groups.
1. Just because it is not written in the constitution does not mean it exists. You're gauranteed equal representation with everyone else in your district. (there went your counter example)
When someone buys the favor of the politician they effectively negate your vote and your voice.
2. IRV was the only one I knew of LIKE that - if there is a better system so be it
When that equal representation is interfered with by people buying favor with the elected official the effect of their vote is negated.
So where does the $100m come from? Tax dollars?
$100m was just a nice round number - the money for a campaign would come from a cominbation of a "starting fund" in tax dollars (other countries do this and have less corruption problems) and then can be grown by private donations from individuals and business to the race and the pot is evenly divided.
What if I don't want my tax dollars going to support Candidate B's campaign because I don't like Candidate B?
tough shit - money from people who don't like your candidate is going to pay for your candidate too.
Also, how does someone become eligible to receive a share of this money?
they get on the ballot.
What is to prevent 100 or 1000 people from applying for their share?
they have to go through the process of getting onto the ballot - which is generally getting a certain ammount of signatures - ie showing they have enough support to be viable.
any unspent money returns to the pot and is saved for the next election cycle.
(and you're immmune from libel/slander for anything said in Congress if you're a member)....
that needs to change
I see your point - I never said this was a perfect system, it's the only option I see to end the culture of corruption - I am but one mind, it takes more than one to find the best solution.