Well, there are no known processes by which PFTBA is broken down or removed from the atmosphere.
Well, that still leaves the unknown processes and the known processes that are mistakenly thought to not break down or remove PFTBA. There are ways to figure out whether this gas has a sink or not in the environment without actually determining what that sink is (for example, if it has persistent differences in concentration which can't be explained through an emissions-only model). Let's try that simple observation first before deciding that we have to screw up the electronics industry for the environment.
I'll tell you what can't help them attract commercial launches: no space program whatsoever.
But again, how is having a space program better in this regard than not having one. Some of these countries have an advantage in that they are close to the equator and have some other quirks of geography. The rest don't. In those cases, they just shouldn't be trying.
It's a standard comparative advantage argument. Find what you're good at doing and do that. Don't try to do what others are already doing far better and more aggressively than you can ever do.
Excellent example. You can get insurance without having to change your oil ever. The presence of car insurance doesn't automatically create the sort of preventive maintenance analogous to what the original poster was speaking of.
Those who aren't welfare seekers of course. Also known as the capitalists.
Well, I'm a capitalist and I won't be providing health care to these people. The point here is that A doctor in a non-hospital practice can avoid having to treat below cost patients. An ER can't do that.
That's a good thing. Bigger wheels are more fun for the hamsters to run on. It can accommodate more hamsters too.
The point of the hamster wheel analogy is that it is a lot of running without actually getting anywhere. The analogy breaks in that even running in place can be healthy for the hamster since it needs to exercise. Not so for the economy.
It helps in the fact that people with infectious diseases are being treated instead of just spreading it around until their immune system kicks it and then they have to go to the ER or die.
Health insurance != health care. And people who stay away from doctors till they crawl into an ER, probably will end up on Medicaid. Who will actually provide medical care to Medicaid recipients when the payments are well below market rates? I think in the long run it'll be those ERs who can't legally refuse to serve you. That's a rather big hamster wheel.
That's the equivalent of saying "TV commercials are annoying, so stop watching TV at all." That's not a solution to the actual problem, that's just hiding from it. I love the actual service, I just find the intrusiveness of the commercials unnecessary( and counterproductive to the purpose of commercials i.e. to convince me to buy a product)
Well, given that not using the service actually does solve the problem of listening to loud commercials, I really don't see the point. "Hiding" works here.
There has yet to be a cloud provider to have gone bankrupt or sold out in the entire history of the Internet.
There's always turnover in colocation services, a cloud thing before the name was invented.
Finally, of the cloud providers that actually use the "cloud" buzzword, I was able to find Nirvanix, Cirtas Systems, Atmos Online, and 2e2. While looking through articles I read through also mentioned a bunch of swapping, selling, and closing of business units that purportedly offered cloud services.
In my view, not thinking about bankruptcy or other disruptions of a cloud provider that you rely on is pretty dangerous. It might not be as bad as having all your data on a single server in a basement somewhere, but it is something you should be aware of and have some sort of contingency available should it occur.
What you're saying is that the NFL doesn't have a product because the products are the teams that are NFL licensed franchises and the NFL itself is just a logo without a product.
Yes. Licensing is not a product. Actual products would be the providing of refereeing officials for games and the establishing of a common body of rules for the game (including out of game stuff like the treatment of visiting teams, media, and spectators).
A product can simply be a license to a design.
A design that Rambus didn't actually have a part in aside from owning blocking patents.
Well, writers block happens to anyone who writes. It's a natural state of the process, IMHO. I bet a prolific writer like Stross probably experiences and overcomes more writers block than I will ever see. What might have happened here is that Stross came up with a better and from his point of view more engaging story and simply lost the desire to continue the existing trilogy.
I suppose he could have applied nose to grindstone and crank out a final novel in the series, but that wouldn't be much fun. Maybe he doesn't need the money either.
They forced them to license the name and put it on those products.
Would be quite consistent with the original statement. Just because Rambus's logo is on a product doesn't mean it is a Rambus product. There is no shifting of goalposts here.
They are investing in infrastructure that does not yet exist.
What would this "infrastructure" do that would have any value for Africa? Merely putting things in space need not have positive value, especially if they hit other objects in orbit. And as I noted, the money would be taken from other areas.
which, in itself, is a suspiciously familiar metaphor - when all you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like the back of someone's head and all that
But that was one of the problems with the Gattaca universe. Everything was viewed through the lens of attaining genetic perfection. Going into space and being exposed to DNA-damaging radiation is precisely the sort of thing that this society would be pathologically afraid of.
I think a deeper plot could have explored issues like this - how the leaders of space development want the cream of society to do the work in space, but becoming increasingly thwarted by this growing paranoia. Perhaps older astronauts are shunned because of their loss of genetic perfection and status. Maybe some of the public believes space radiation can be caught from someone exposed to it.
The grand ironies would be yet another demonstration of the profound ignorance of the allegedly superior breed of human and the fact that unmodified humans such as the protagonist would continue to be excellent choices just due to having far less to lose, but are deliberately being screened out by perverse and illogical ideologies from one of the most important jobs that they could be tasked with.
Or if he actually did have such problems, they weren't going to show up in the next few months. It's also worth noting that a society that hardcore about eugenics and authoritarianism wouldn't be above lying to get more people to genetically tailor their offspring. I wager that blowing past his expected lifespan like that was probably an indication that the prediction was proganda nonsense in the first place.
Personally, I found the story rather bizarre. It's nice that you're genetically perfect. But you won't be after a few months exposure to deep space radiation.
The hero is precisely the sort of person they would send instead of the shiny people. He's healthy enough to serve and not going to get any worse genetically by Gattaca standards. And he'd be far cheaper because of the huge bias against employing such people.
If there are no such possessions to not have, then there wouldn't be poverty by that definitioin. Having said that, I'd say that poverty is the condition of having to spend most of one's time and resources satisfying basic wants such as food and shelter. That would make apes poor.
And lets say something does happen (the end) which could be at anytime then this was a waste anyway, they'll be few if anyone left with any knowledge, or skills to keep it going.
Unless those people happen to be somewhere else where the bad stuff isn't happening.
But they do have windows to break. Public funding comes from somewhere, either present or (more likely) future taxpayers. Those taxpayers are buying rockets (or more likely, rocket theater) - that's the "broken window", the economic activity that they're forced to fund.
Just because Ford didn't go bankruptcy doesn't mean that they came out ahead. I think they would have done better than that, if GM and Chrysler had been properly disposed of.
GM left Flint Michigan, and look how many jobs were created there in its wake!
Is Flint, Michigan the only place in the world that has employable people?
You're dealing with a highly imaginative intellectual argument which the vast majority of academic economists disagree.
So I have the "vast majority of academic economists" agreeing with me against this "highly imaginative intellectual argument"? I feel dirty.
I suppose that you are not interested in learning something about economics, since you already have all the answers.
What is there to "learn"? It's just more idiots rationalizing why they should get their free lunch. In order for there to be an opportunity to learn something, there has to be something which can challenge my opinion on the matter.
It's also why the layperson can make a very compelling case for some economic strategy that appeals to a lot of people - because it's probably true in the microeconomic sense
There are plenty of economic strategies which wouldn't work at any scale (particularly, the "free stuff" strategies). That's because of the real big problem with economic strategies - conflict of interest. A lot of people simply can't get around the idea that something which benefits me or a cause I support might not be good as a whole.
That depends on what your society is doing. If it's running a Solar System-wide computing system or shipping a lot of stuff between stars at a significant fraction of the speed of light, it will need some juice.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, there are no known processes by which PFTBA is broken down or removed from the atmosphere.
Well, that still leaves the unknown processes and the known processes that are mistakenly thought to not break down or remove PFTBA. There are ways to figure out whether this gas has a sink or not in the environment without actually determining what that sink is (for example, if it has persistent differences in concentration which can't be explained through an emissions-only model). Let's try that simple observation first before deciding that we have to screw up the electronics industry for the environment.
I'll tell you what can't help them attract commercial launches: no space program whatsoever.
But again, how is having a space program better in this regard than not having one. Some of these countries have an advantage in that they are close to the equator and have some other quirks of geography. The rest don't. In those cases, they just shouldn't be trying.
It's a standard comparative advantage argument. Find what you're good at doing and do that. Don't try to do what others are already doing far better and more aggressively than you can ever do.
And car insurance != car care
Excellent example. You can get insurance without having to change your oil ever. The presence of car insurance doesn't automatically create the sort of preventive maintenance analogous to what the original poster was speaking of.
Those who aren't welfare seekers of course. Also known as the capitalists.
Well, I'm a capitalist and I won't be providing health care to these people. The point here is that A doctor in a non-hospital practice can avoid having to treat below cost patients. An ER can't do that.
That's a good thing. Bigger wheels are more fun for the hamsters to run on. It can accommodate more hamsters too.
The point of the hamster wheel analogy is that it is a lot of running without actually getting anywhere. The analogy breaks in that even running in place can be healthy for the hamster since it needs to exercise. Not so for the economy.
It helps in the fact that people with infectious diseases are being treated instead of just spreading it around until their immune system kicks it and then they have to go to the ER or die.
Health insurance != health care. And people who stay away from doctors till they crawl into an ER, probably will end up on Medicaid. Who will actually provide medical care to Medicaid recipients when the payments are well below market rates? I think in the long run it'll be those ERs who can't legally refuse to serve you. That's a rather big hamster wheel.
That's the equivalent of saying "TV commercials are annoying, so stop watching TV at all." That's not a solution to the actual problem, that's just hiding from it. I love the actual service, I just find the intrusiveness of the commercials unnecessary( and counterproductive to the purpose of commercials i.e. to convince me to buy a product)
Well, given that not using the service actually does solve the problem of listening to loud commercials, I really don't see the point. "Hiding" works here.
There has yet to be a cloud provider to have gone bankrupt or sold out in the entire history of the Internet.
There's always turnover in colocation services, a cloud thing before the name was invented.
Finally, of the cloud providers that actually use the "cloud" buzzword, I was able to find Nirvanix, Cirtas Systems, Atmos Online, and 2e2. While looking through articles I read through also mentioned a bunch of swapping, selling, and closing of business units that purportedly offered cloud services.
In my view, not thinking about bankruptcy or other disruptions of a cloud provider that you rely on is pretty dangerous. It might not be as bad as having all your data on a single server in a basement somewhere, but it is something you should be aware of and have some sort of contingency available should it occur.
Commercial launches would bring in foreign money, for one thing.
How does this help them attract commercial launches? I think having a stable and relatively non-corrupt legal environment would do much more.
What you're saying is that the NFL doesn't have a product because the products are the teams that are NFL licensed franchises and the NFL itself is just a logo without a product.
Yes. Licensing is not a product. Actual products would be the providing of refereeing officials for games and the establishing of a common body of rules for the game (including out of game stuff like the treatment of visiting teams, media, and spectators).
A product can simply be a license to a design.
A design that Rambus didn't actually have a part in aside from owning blocking patents.
Well, writers block happens to anyone who writes. It's a natural state of the process, IMHO. I bet a prolific writer like Stross probably experiences and overcomes more writers block than I will ever see. What might have happened here is that Stross came up with a better and from his point of view more engaging story and simply lost the desire to continue the existing trilogy.
I suppose he could have applied nose to grindstone and crank out a final novel in the series, but that wouldn't be much fun. Maybe he doesn't need the money either.
They never had ... a working product.
And the most recent observation
They forced them to license the name and put it on those products.
Would be quite consistent with the original statement. Just because Rambus's logo is on a product doesn't mean it is a Rambus product. There is no shifting of goalposts here.
They are investing in infrastructure that does not yet exist.
What would this "infrastructure" do that would have any value for Africa? Merely putting things in space need not have positive value, especially if they hit other objects in orbit. And as I noted, the money would be taken from other areas.
which, in itself, is a suspiciously familiar metaphor - when all you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like the back of someone's head and all that
But that was one of the problems with the Gattaca universe. Everything was viewed through the lens of attaining genetic perfection. Going into space and being exposed to DNA-damaging radiation is precisely the sort of thing that this society would be pathologically afraid of.
I think a deeper plot could have explored issues like this - how the leaders of space development want the cream of society to do the work in space, but becoming increasingly thwarted by this growing paranoia. Perhaps older astronauts are shunned because of their loss of genetic perfection and status. Maybe some of the public believes space radiation can be caught from someone exposed to it.
The grand ironies would be yet another demonstration of the profound ignorance of the allegedly superior breed of human and the fact that unmodified humans such as the protagonist would continue to be excellent choices just due to having far less to lose, but are deliberately being screened out by perverse and illogical ideologies from one of the most important jobs that they could be tasked with.
Its not about generalized government spending.
It is when the pretext as in this case is to stimulate an economy.
It's totally not a scam. He used three significant digits!
Everything indicating he had no health problems.
Or if he actually did have such problems, they weren't going to show up in the next few months. It's also worth noting that a society that hardcore about eugenics and authoritarianism wouldn't be above lying to get more people to genetically tailor their offspring. I wager that blowing past his expected lifespan like that was probably an indication that the prediction was proganda nonsense in the first place.
Personally, I found the story rather bizarre. It's nice that you're genetically perfect. But you won't be after a few months exposure to deep space radiation.
The hero is precisely the sort of person they would send instead of the shiny people. He's healthy enough to serve and not going to get any worse genetically by Gattaca standards. And he'd be far cheaper because of the huge bias against employing such people.
Poverty is the absence of possessions.
If there are no such possessions to not have, then there wouldn't be poverty by that definitioin. Having said that, I'd say that poverty is the condition of having to spend most of one's time and resources satisfying basic wants such as food and shelter. That would make apes poor.
And lets say something does happen (the end) which could be at anytime then this was a waste anyway, they'll be few if anyone left with any knowledge, or skills to keep it going.
Unless those people happen to be somewhere else where the bad stuff isn't happening.
But they do have windows to break. Public funding comes from somewhere, either present or (more likely) future taxpayers. Those taxpayers are buying rockets (or more likely, rocket theater) - that's the "broken window", the economic activity that they're forced to fund.
Just because Ford didn't go bankruptcy doesn't mean that they came out ahead. I think they would have done better than that, if GM and Chrysler had been properly disposed of.
GM left Flint Michigan, and look how many jobs were created there in its wake!
Is Flint, Michigan the only place in the world that has employable people?
You're dealing with a highly imaginative intellectual argument which the vast majority of academic economists disagree.
So I have the "vast majority of academic economists" agreeing with me against this "highly imaginative intellectual argument"? I feel dirty.
I suppose that you are not interested in learning something about economics, since you already have all the answers.
What is there to "learn"? It's just more idiots rationalizing why they should get their free lunch. In order for there to be an opportunity to learn something, there has to be something which can challenge my opinion on the matter.
Ending the minimum wage would have the virtual of making a significant fraction of Detroit's population employable again.
It's also why the layperson can make a very compelling case for some economic strategy that appeals to a lot of people - because it's probably true in the microeconomic sense
There are plenty of economic strategies which wouldn't work at any scale (particularly, the "free stuff" strategies). That's because of the real big problem with economic strategies - conflict of interest. A lot of people simply can't get around the idea that something which benefits me or a cause I support might not be good as a whole.
Works over seas.
Uh oh. We need laws that work over land too!
That depends on what your society is doing. If it's running a Solar System-wide computing system or shipping a lot of stuff between stars at a significant fraction of the speed of light, it will need some juice.
No, it should be fine if the stock market is up or down.
Well, now you are informed. Should be != is.