High resolution screens mixed with lackluster standard resolution images is a match made in hell.....
Switch you beautiful 1280 x 1024 res for 640 x 480 on a screen with native 1280 x 1024 res and see what I mean... it gets all blurry and pseudo-pixelated...
CRTs/Tube tech and low res signals were made for each other... they can't help but be the best combination.
Hi-res screens such as LCD/Plasma will benefit from HDTV and newer hi-res broadcasts today and tomorrow.
It's true though that a standard TV signal looks worse on a screen never designed to show it's poor quality signal.
Just cause I called Senior Burrito an idiot my comment is marked flamebait?
The Wired article was fine... I read it the way it was meant to be understood, that code was stolen, not destroyed, stolen.
I could 'steal' your identity and rack up thousands of dollars in bills... by 'stealing' your identification info and getting credit in your name, I didn't destroy your ID or take it from you in such a way so that you could no longer use it... I simply copied the significant info and used it without your knowledge, forcing you to register a new ID with new credentials.. a very time-consuming and costly expenditure of your time.
So did I steal anything from you?
If I was a hacker I could demonstrate by 'stealing' access to Admiral Burrito's account and making a bunch of dumb ass posts that would both ruin his reputation and his karma... would I have 'stolen' anything?
Dude, you're an idiot.... they had to 'reprogram' it so it wouldn't constantly be compromised by hackers with full access to the source code... it is a 'commercial' application that cost serious money to develop and manage after deployment with hundreds of thousands of paying users who expect the product/service they purchased to work as described (as best as possible).
The code was 'stolen' in the same way that if you were to get mugged the pretty green paper in your pocket would be 'stolen'... you don't care about the paper do you? Not really, it's the work you put in that is represented by that paper that you care about. It's your time that has been stolen. In the same way the code for HL2 represents a huge amount of time that is suddenly useless when the code becomes compromised.
OSS isn't a very good revenue model for a game which isn't really a software application, it's a software product... and yes they are two very different things.
The Wired reporter was perfectly accurate.. you just misread the text and jumped to conclusions based on your own biased opinion of what was described.
Why is rape so bad? It's not like you're actually hurting anyone... I mean sure the person's rights and body are being violated but unless the rape is particularly violent no real harm is being done. Animals rape each other all the time.. it's survival of the fittest, evolution in action. What' s so bad about it?
Oh yeah - that's right we all at some point collectively decided, through our elected representative government and duly appointed court system. that sexually violating someone is a criminal act.
I'm not convinced either way as for whether IP laws are good or not but until the laws change they're still the law and should be enforced reasonably.
The government can only mess with MLB because it established domain over it during the 30s and 40s when it stepped in to get rid of organized crime which had a big stake in gambling over games... sorry I'm not too educated on the subject but I do know that there is a connection there as opposed to the NFL which has no government oversight.. or the NBA or NHL.
Possibly. You make some very good points. If you are pursuing both titles for the sake of having the titles and the status to go with them then you are probably of the type you have described.
Personally I took teh altogether alternate path and didn't get either nor even a degree. However if I was to have gone the route of higher education I would have been interested enough in both disciplines to go after the doublet.
PhD's do not typically have enough real world savvy and I surmise it is because they have not been exposed to real world simulations in their educational experiences... well certainly not real business simulations. More likely they have more than adequate experience writing grant proposals and dealing with entrenched beaurocracy, which would leave them in a pretty poor position to persuade business executives who prefer their proposals both flexible in revenue model and agile in implementation... neither of which describes the research community or academia, whom prefer traditional revenue models with little room for 'maneuvering' and rigid implementation methods which can be tracked meticulously by said entrenched beaurocrats.
You're probably right about one person wearing both hats, in general, and it's most likely preferable to have a plurality of individuals with complimentary skillsets... but in some cases, such as the CEO of the last company I worked for... it can work out. He has both a PhD in Electrical Engineering and a MBA. Great guy, fully understands the technology as well as he needs to for decision making AND can make BUSINESS decisions based on that understanding.
A 1.5 Ghz G4 will be as fast to your average user as their new 3 Ghz PC... since they won't be running 50 extra programs while browsing a single web page and emailing their aunt pics of the dog...
If you want games get an Xbox, to do computery stuff buy a Mac!
They should bundle it with the OpenOffice Suite as well... hopefully after contributing a really super fast and native port.
I bet there was a time when someone said the same thing about hard copies of data.... ie: if it's not a hard copy it's not a backup.
Times are a changing... you'd be surprised to find out how many companies are moving to disk to disk backup solutions, no tape to be found, and they're not looking back.
my opinion is that if you have a copy of old data you can restore from, you've got a backup.
Re:Go back and get an MBA
on
Ph.D Employment?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Sorry to tell you but I know first hand that if you have the right credentials and the right idea you can in fact get VCs to not only play ball but to put serious money down on something.
I spent 4 months in a 3 bedroom apartment working on presentations and demo software with 15 to 20 people in the first months of 2000 putting together a valid business plan for CMGI@Ventures, Benchmark Capital and Lightwave Venture Funds to get 13 million in funding for a software startup company...
Yes there was $600,000 Angel investment. Still that amount is not insurmountable by anyone with a legitimate idea with any amount of connection to the business industery whatsoever... and the MBA in the company got the Angel funding as well... an SBA loan would have done equally as well.
Within 1 months there was a very basic working demo of the software... 1 month more it was closer... 2 months more we got funding... 13 million... after I personally spent 2 months of 18 hour days going over data to put together the best presentations I could create at the time and all the founders spent even more time in conference rooms with the VCs going over ROI numbers and timelines. We moved into a 10,000 sq ft building and got down to some serious work. Since then there has been Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley as funders... not too bad I'd say.
Yes.. the comment was superficial... nobody is knocking on your door... literally, but with even a little buzz they will be doing so metaphorically.
No... it is not impossible for you to get incredible attention for your idea if you actually know where to look and how to ask for said attention... and really that is what an MBA will get for you.
Having been through such an experience I forget that almost everyone else has not! Seeing the start of a 500 million dollar company from it's very humble beginnings to it's very honest success gives me confidence that anything is possible... sorry if the parent is jaded or needs salt with his meal....
All I know is that this startup had several PhDs whom couldn't get squat for funding on their own... and a Harvard MBA whom at age 26 could get 13 million using their credentials as collateral.
Imagine if either the MBA also had a PhD or at least one of the PhDs also had an MBA?
Also.. I was part of a startup in 2000... the year the bubble burst... the founders were.. MBA Harvard, PhD CS, PhD, CS, PhD CS.... guess who got the funding... to the tune of 13 million, 50 million total over the last 4 years... the MBA Harvard. The other guys made it real of course.. real and patented.. but the MBA got the money, he was 26 years old.. the PhDs were 37 on average. He knew how to put the numbers together, they knew how to back the numbers up with results. The company in question is now doing a million plus in sales every month... a top privately held company in US... the MBA started it... the PhDs are finishing it.
Hmmm... no. An MBA means you know how to manage money... how to allocate funds, how to apply business theory. It means you can balance a budget, create a spreadsheet for profit/loss, etc.
These are the things a lender wants to see... they care as much for your idea as how you manage your idea. An MBA should be able to take on any business and make it work... mix that with a PhD in EE and you have both business acumen and technological know-how.... ++
You may learn a lot from starting your own business but it may not be enough to become 'successful'... depends on your personal interests and motivations... some people are better at business than others and can learn as they go... some people need the foundation knowledge to do it...
MBAs are not for middle managers... middle managers are people who got an MBA because they couldn't think of anything more interesting to do... it's a set thing... you know where some middle managers have an MBA but not all MBAs are middle managers...
PhD + MBA is still a winning combination
Go back and get an MBA
on
Ph.D Employment?
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Go back to school and get an MBA as well... should only take you 3 years... then you can a) have an awesome number of jobs to pick from or b) start your own company and do what you really want to do.
Having an MBA and a PhD in EE will guarantee you plenty of funding for any idea you have. VCs and Traditional lenders will be knocking down your door to give you money.
The obvious solution to this particular problem is to provide two sets of packaging... the display box that contains the EULA printed and shrinkwrapped documentation and an internal package with just the CD/DVD set which is also shrinkwrapped or sealed in a way that cannot be tampered with non-obviously that says in big clear letters... READ THE LICENSE before opening.
It's true. 2000 was a horrible year for bukkake.... very embarassing... now 1999, that was vintage bukkake..;-p I've got some I'm saving for my wedding night.
Thought this was concluded. Can't let anyone have the final say can you? Do you always think you're the most correct? Not many friends I'd guess. ---> personal attacks, they're pretty tacky aren't they...
I'll promise you something... when I've written, submitted and received approval for a USDA + DOE Grant to study the viability of biodiesel as an end-to-end replacement fuel for liquid fossil fuels, you will be the first to know the results.
My point is I don't have to fully support my opinion, the facts are not available to conclusively state that it is a sure thing... hence the nature of the wager metaphor, if there were a conclusive answer available this discussion would be moot and the risk inherent in wagering would be missing.
I've tried to make a case for biodiesel as the best alternative currently available and viable for any near future which of course would mean that it would also have the best chance to become a standard fuel source by nature of it's priority as the earliest adopted. The reasons for this conclusion is that the infrastructure and end consuming engines already exist in fully mature form. Plus the methods of manufacturing, distribution, maintenance, insurance, and other economically and socially necessary criteria for acceptance on a large scale, are already in practice in equally mature form.
With biodiesel there are no unknown parameters... only known current limitations (such as the one/s you have submitted) with equally known but possibly unsupportable means of surpassing them for the near future.
I argue with logic and reason.. you argue with trivia and passionate cynicism. Neither of us has enough information to disprove the other... and we aren't likely to gain it via second hand accounts of old data leeched off the internet regardless of the source or it's credibility.. it's old data gotten second hand.
Luckily I've already won the bet so i won't bother worrying the topic to death by means of a million slashdot posts.
Yes, I've won. If you checked out the news.google.com reference or simply do a search on any news aggregate engine you can't help but see the momentum behind biodiesel. It is a matter of fact that it is the fastest growing alternative fuel in use today.
You can argue all you like that other fuel options may be better or that biodiesel can not be sustained.. it's just too bad your opinion doesn't count. It is already number one both here in the US and abroad, other alternative fuels have years of development before they can attain the market traction of biodiesel and years more after that before they become economically feasible to consumers and commercial entities.
Demand has spoken... and it wants biodiesel. All that's left it for Supply to figure out the best way to make a profit and where there is profit to be made, Supply will find a way to achieve it.
So yes I will stick with the only viable claim... viable means more than technically possible.. it means, well viable - as in it works now, not Sometime Soon(TM)
You have the same attitude the Indians on Manhattan Island had when they 'sold' their land (according to legend, for a handful of glass beads).
They felt that noone could 'own' land and therefore it had no value... the white guys who 'bought' it from them were suckers...
Value does come from Supply and Demand situations, so all the guy has to do is create demand.. austensibly aided by the Company which has a vested interest in showing that their virtual land does indeed have value and that you as a player should want to own it.
Look at how a T-Shirt that would normally sell for $5 can have $0.50 worth of ink applied to it at a cost of $2 labor and can then be sold for $30 IF the ink is in the form of "Donna Karen" or "Gucci".
It makes no sense from an intrinsic value perspective but from a "Associate myself with a philosophy or popular social group" perspective it makes some sense, however irrational... people who buy them feel like they improve their own value by being associated with someone or soemthing with perceived value itself.
Here's the part of the article that seems most important...
"But in July 2003, almost at the end of its testing period for the hybrid buses, Metro suddenly announced that it needed to switch engines.
The federal government had imposed stricter exhaust emissions standards, and the Cummins engine was not federally certified. Metro sent the bus to the Winnipeg, Manitoba, manufacturer to have a certified Caterpillar engine installed in its place.
The fuel economy results were never the same after the switch to the Caterpillar engine. Boon said it wasn't just a switch in the engine but also a switch in the emissions control system."
This is unfortunate because it will provide some bad press for the vehicles which could be adopted in their more fuel efficient version by states with less strict emissions standards... while still providing very clean emissions relative to what they are replacing.
I think there's room for online sports that doesn't require the consent of Pro Sports Orgs... there are pleny of concepts out there for doing innovative sport games and some of them include using traditional rules from popular sports... some of them don't.
I'd like to see football with fireballs and sleeping spells or baseball with alternative physics at play... why limit sports games to what you can see on TV?
Missed that... how stupid. The only advantage to using IE is it's remote security rule system... being able to centrally manage IE's access rights to various zones... who cares about the rendering engine.. if it works it works
Well it's a good thing soybeans are only 18% usable oil, while Jatropha plants, wild Castor.. Mustard seed, Rape Seed and Cotton see are much more than that.. upwards of 30% or on average double that of Soybeans. I mentioned that biodiesel.org was a mouth piece for the Soybean Growers Association for a reason.. they don't like to talk about other crop supplies too much.
You did see that part of the reference right? It was next to the link... clearly stated.
You also seem to have overlooked the statements about importing organics oil.. seeing as how the US is the biggest importer or petrol/fossil oil I don't see how you can assume that the US will ever be able to produce all of it's own fuel supply... something you seem to be going back to time and time again.
I said biodiesel was the best bet, I didn't say that the US had to be self-sufficient in it's production. There are plenty of nations who use far less fuel than the US and yet have available land for farming.
SO back to the beginning where you've assumed that soybeans are the only fuel oil producing plants... why would you say that and then strike out on a crusade to prove that if we only grew soybeans it would take 40% of the land area of the US?
Seems like you're the one listening and repeating the unsupported word of farm lobbyists... and only one faction at that... the title to your rebuttal spells it out... using "soybean.org" to prove your point when they are only giving you a small part of the bigger picture.
Last word:
If the US doesn't begin seriously working with biodiesel and expanding what infrastructure is needed, the rest of the world will leave us behind gasping our last breath while the petrol drains us dry. It is the only viable renewable source of energy for use as a liquid fuel.
p.s. Haven't heard a word from you about a better alternative... and for all your facts there isn't an ounce of strength to your argument, you've been saying the equivalent of "There'll never be enough food to support the growing population" yet every year as the population swells we somehow manage to grow enough food.
Slashdot Mirror
High resolution screens mixed with lackluster standard resolution images is a match made in hell.....
Switch you beautiful 1280 x 1024 res for 640 x 480 on a screen with native 1280 x 1024 res and see what I mean... it gets all blurry and pseudo-pixelated...
CRTs/Tube tech and low res signals were made for each other... they can't help but be the best combination.
Hi-res screens such as LCD/Plasma will benefit from HDTV and newer hi-res broadcasts today and tomorrow.
It's true though that a standard TV signal looks worse on a screen never designed to show it's poor quality signal.
If said plane is flying directly at you.
Don't know the details nor did I RTA... just an observation that seems to be missing herein..
Just cause I called Senior Burrito an idiot my comment is marked flamebait?
The Wired article was fine... I read it the way it was meant to be understood, that code was stolen, not destroyed, stolen.
I could 'steal' your identity and rack up thousands of dollars in bills... by 'stealing' your identification info and getting credit in your name, I didn't destroy your ID or take it from you in such a way so that you could no longer use it... I simply copied the significant info and used it without your knowledge, forcing you to register a new ID with new credentials.. a very time-consuming and costly expenditure of your time.
So did I steal anything from you?
If I was a hacker I could demonstrate by 'stealing' access to Admiral Burrito's account and making a bunch of dumb ass posts that would both ruin his reputation and his karma... would I have 'stolen' anything?
Dude, you're an idiot.... they had to 'reprogram' it so it wouldn't constantly be compromised by hackers with full access to the source code... it is a 'commercial' application that cost serious money to develop and manage after deployment with hundreds of thousands of paying users who expect the product/service they purchased to work as described (as best as possible).
The code was 'stolen' in the same way that if you were to get mugged the pretty green paper in your pocket would be 'stolen'... you don't care about the paper do you? Not really, it's the work you put in that is represented by that paper that you care about. It's your time that has been stolen. In the same way the code for HL2 represents a huge amount of time that is suddenly useless when the code becomes compromised.
OSS isn't a very good revenue model for a game which isn't really a software application, it's a software product... and yes they are two very different things.
The Wired reporter was perfectly accurate.. you just misread the text and jumped to conclusions based on your own biased opinion of what was described.
Why is rape so bad? It's not like you're actually hurting anyone... I mean sure the person's rights and body are being violated but unless the rape is particularly violent no real harm is being done. Animals rape each other all the time.. it's survival of the fittest, evolution in action. What' s so bad about it?
Oh yeah - that's right we all at some point collectively decided, through our elected representative government and duly appointed court system. that sexually violating someone is a criminal act.
I'm not convinced either way as for whether IP laws are good or not but until the laws change they're still the law and should be enforced reasonably.
just an FYI...
The government can only mess with MLB because it established domain over it during the 30s and 40s when it stepped in to get rid of organized crime which had a big stake in gambling over games... sorry I'm not too educated on the subject but I do know that there is a connection there as opposed to the NFL which has no government oversight.. or the NBA or NHL.
Possibly. You make some very good points. If you are pursuing both titles for the sake of having the titles and the status to go with them then you are probably of the type you have described.
Personally I took teh altogether alternate path and didn't get either nor even a degree. However if I was to have gone the route of higher education I would have been interested enough in both disciplines to go after the doublet.
PhD's do not typically have enough real world savvy and I surmise it is because they have not been exposed to real world simulations in their educational experiences... well certainly not real business simulations. More likely they have more than adequate experience writing grant proposals and dealing with entrenched beaurocracy, which would leave them in a pretty poor position to persuade business executives who prefer their proposals both flexible in revenue model and agile in implementation... neither of which describes the research community or academia, whom prefer traditional revenue models with little room for 'maneuvering' and rigid implementation methods which can be tracked meticulously by said entrenched beaurocrats.
You're probably right about one person wearing both hats, in general, and it's most likely preferable to have a plurality of individuals with complimentary skillsets... but in some cases, such as the CEO of the last company I worked for... it can work out. He has both a PhD in Electrical Engineering and a MBA. Great guy, fully understands the technology as well as he needs to for decision making AND can make BUSINESS decisions based on that understanding.
A 1.5 Ghz G4 will be as fast to your average user as their new 3 Ghz PC... since they won't be running 50 extra programs while browsing a single web page and emailing their aunt pics of the dog...
If you want games get an Xbox, to do computery stuff buy a Mac!
They should bundle it with the OpenOffice Suite as well... hopefully after contributing a really super fast and native port.
That's an interesting opinion.
I bet there was a time when someone said the same thing about hard copies of data.... ie: if it's not a hard copy it's not a backup.
Times are a changing... you'd be surprised to find out how many companies are moving to disk to disk backup solutions, no tape to be found, and they're not looking back.
my opinion is that if you have a copy of old data you can restore from, you've got a backup.
Well I'm a little biased having worked for a disk-as-backup company for over 4 years... so...
here's some links:
Scroll down about half way
This will give you a good overview of TCO for tape vs. Disk
Do your own research... you'll see the facts for yourself...
or go here to see the future of backup and restore:
Avamar Technologies
Sorry to tell you but I know first hand that if you have the right credentials and the right idea you can in fact get VCs to not only play ball but to put serious money down on something.
I spent 4 months in a 3 bedroom apartment working on presentations and demo software with 15 to 20 people in the first months of 2000 putting together a valid business plan for CMGI@Ventures, Benchmark Capital and Lightwave Venture Funds to get 13 million in funding for a software startup company...
Yes there was $600,000 Angel investment. Still that amount is not insurmountable by anyone with a legitimate idea with any amount of connection to the business industery whatsoever... and the MBA in the company got the Angel funding as well... an SBA loan would have done equally as well.
Within 1 months there was a very basic working demo of the software... 1 month more it was closer... 2 months more we got funding... 13 million... after I personally spent 2 months of 18 hour days going over data to put together the best presentations I could create at the time and all the founders spent even more time in conference rooms with the VCs going over ROI numbers and timelines. We moved into a 10,000 sq ft building and got down to some serious work. Since then there has been Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley as funders... not too bad I'd say.
Yes.. the comment was superficial... nobody is knocking on your door... literally, but with even a little buzz they will be doing so metaphorically.
No... it is not impossible for you to get incredible attention for your idea if you actually know where to look and how to ask for said attention... and really that is what an MBA will get for you.
Having been through such an experience I forget that almost everyone else has not! Seeing the start of a 500 million dollar company from it's very humble beginnings to it's very honest success gives me confidence that anything is possible... sorry if the parent is jaded or needs salt with his meal....
All I know is that this startup had several PhDs whom couldn't get squat for funding on their own... and a Harvard MBA whom at age 26 could get 13 million using their credentials as collateral.
Imagine if either the MBA also had a PhD or at least one of the PhDs also had an MBA?
Also.. I was part of a startup in 2000... the year the bubble burst... the founders were.. MBA Harvard, PhD CS, PhD, CS, PhD CS.... guess who got the funding... to the tune of 13 million, 50 million total over the last 4 years... the MBA Harvard. The other guys made it real of course.. real and patented.. but the MBA got the money, he was 26 years old.. the PhDs were 37 on average. He knew how to put the numbers together, they knew how to back the numbers up with results. The company in question is now doing a million plus in sales every month... a top privately held company in US... the MBA started it... the PhDs are finishing it.
It takes both to be credible.
Hmmm... no. An MBA means you know how to manage money... how to allocate funds, how to apply business theory. It means you can balance a budget, create a spreadsheet for profit/loss, etc.
These are the things a lender wants to see... they care as much for your idea as how you manage your idea. An MBA should be able to take on any business and make it work... mix that with a PhD in EE and you have both business acumen and technological know-how.... ++
You may learn a lot from starting your own business but it may not be enough to become 'successful'... depends on your personal interests and motivations... some people are better at business than others and can learn as they go... some people need the foundation knowledge to do it...
MBAs are not for middle managers... middle managers are people who got an MBA because they couldn't think of anything more interesting to do... it's a set thing... you know where some middle managers have an MBA but not all MBAs are middle managers...
PhD + MBA is still a winning combination
Go back to school and get an MBA as well... should only take you 3 years... then you can a) have an awesome number of jobs to pick from or b) start your own company and do what you really want to do.
Having an MBA and a PhD in EE will guarantee you plenty of funding for any idea you have. VCs and Traditional lenders will be knocking down your door to give you money.
Just remember that if you use tape to backup... there's a good chance you won't get a valid restore. I wouldn't bet my life on it is all I'm saying...
The obvious solution to this particular problem is to provide two sets of packaging... the display box that contains the EULA printed and shrinkwrapped documentation and an internal package with just the CD/DVD set which is also shrinkwrapped or sealed in a way that cannot be tampered with non-obviously that says in big clear letters... READ THE LICENSE before opening.
Go get PithHelmet and you can have adblockedness in Safari too!
It's true. 2000 was a horrible year for bukkake.... very embarassing... now 1999, that was vintage bukkake.. ;-p I've got some I'm saving for my wedding night.
BTW here's a better definition for viable that also fits the context of the discussion:
feasible: capable of being done with means at hand and circumstances as they are
www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn
Thought this was concluded. Can't let anyone have the final say can you? Do you always think you're the most correct? Not many friends I'd guess. ---> personal attacks, they're pretty tacky aren't they...
I'll promise you something... when I've written, submitted and received approval for a USDA + DOE Grant to study the viability of biodiesel as an end-to-end replacement fuel for liquid fossil fuels, you will be the first to know the results.
My point is I don't have to fully support my opinion, the facts are not available to conclusively state that it is a sure thing... hence the nature of the wager metaphor, if there were a conclusive answer available this discussion would be moot and the risk inherent in wagering would be missing.
I've tried to make a case for biodiesel as the best alternative currently available and viable for any near future which of course would mean that it would also have the best chance to become a standard fuel source by nature of it's priority as the earliest adopted. The reasons for this conclusion is that the infrastructure and end consuming engines already exist in fully mature form. Plus the methods of manufacturing, distribution, maintenance, insurance, and other economically and socially necessary criteria for acceptance on a large scale, are already in practice in equally mature form.
With biodiesel there are no unknown parameters... only known current limitations (such as the one/s you have submitted) with equally known but possibly unsupportable means of surpassing them for the near future.
I argue with logic and reason.. you argue with trivia and passionate cynicism. Neither of us has enough information to disprove the other... and we aren't likely to gain it via second hand accounts of old data leeched off the internet regardless of the source or it's credibility.. it's old data gotten second hand.
Luckily I've already won the bet so i won't bother worrying the topic to death by means of a million slashdot posts.
Yes, I've won. If you checked out the news.google.com reference or simply do a search on any news aggregate engine you can't help but see the momentum behind biodiesel. It is a matter of fact that it is the fastest growing alternative fuel in use today.
You can argue all you like that other fuel options may be better or that biodiesel can not be sustained.. it's just too bad your opinion doesn't count. It is already number one both here in the US and abroad, other alternative fuels have years of development before they can attain the market traction of biodiesel and years more after that before they become economically feasible to consumers and commercial entities.
Demand has spoken... and it wants biodiesel. All that's left it for Supply to figure out the best way to make a profit and where there is profit to be made, Supply will find a way to achieve it.
So yes I will stick with the only viable claim... viable means more than technically possible.. it means, well viable - as in it works now, not Sometime Soon(TM)
You have the same attitude the Indians on Manhattan Island had when they 'sold' their land (according to legend, for a handful of glass beads).
They felt that noone could 'own' land and therefore it had no value... the white guys who 'bought' it from them were suckers...
Value does come from Supply and Demand situations, so all the guy has to do is create demand.. austensibly aided by the Company which has a vested interest in showing that their virtual land does indeed have value and that you as a player should want to own it.
Look at how a T-Shirt that would normally sell for $5 can have $0.50 worth of ink applied to it at a cost of $2 labor and can then be sold for $30 IF the ink is in the form of "Donna Karen" or "Gucci".
It makes no sense from an intrinsic value perspective but from a "Associate myself with a philosophy or popular social group" perspective it makes some sense, however irrational... people who buy them feel like they improve their own value by being associated with someone or soemthing with perceived value itself.
Here's the part of the article that seems most important...
"But in July 2003, almost at the end of its testing period for the hybrid buses, Metro suddenly announced that it needed to switch engines.
The federal government had imposed stricter exhaust emissions standards, and the Cummins engine was not federally certified. Metro sent the bus to the Winnipeg, Manitoba, manufacturer to have a certified Caterpillar engine installed in its place.
The fuel economy results were never the same after the switch to the Caterpillar engine. Boon said it wasn't just a switch in the engine but also a switch in the emissions control system."
This is unfortunate because it will provide some bad press for the vehicles which could be adopted in their more fuel efficient version by states with less strict emissions standards... while still providing very clean emissions relative to what they are replacing.
I think there's room for online sports that doesn't require the consent of Pro Sports Orgs... there are pleny of concepts out there for doing innovative sport games and some of them include using traditional rules from popular sports... some of them don't.
I'd like to see football with fireballs and sleeping spells or baseball with alternative physics at play... why limit sports games to what you can see on TV?
Missed that... how stupid. The only advantage to using IE is it's remote security rule system... being able to centrally manage IE's access rights to various zones... who cares about the rendering engine.. if it works it works
Well, my comment stands but thanks for the info.
Well it's a good thing soybeans are only 18% usable oil, while Jatropha plants, wild Castor.. Mustard seed, Rape Seed and Cotton see are much more than that.. upwards of 30% or on average double that of Soybeans. I mentioned that biodiesel.org was a mouth piece for the Soybean Growers Association for a reason.. they don't like to talk about other crop supplies too much.
You did see that part of the reference right? It was next to the link... clearly stated.
You also seem to have overlooked the statements about importing organics oil.. seeing as how the US is the biggest importer or petrol/fossil oil I don't see how you can assume that the US will ever be able to produce all of it's own fuel supply... something you seem to be going back to time and time again.
I said biodiesel was the best bet, I didn't say that the US had to be self-sufficient in it's production. There are plenty of nations who use far less fuel than the US and yet have available land for farming.
SO back to the beginning where you've assumed that soybeans are the only fuel oil producing plants... why would you say that and then strike out on a crusade to prove that if we only grew soybeans it would take 40% of the land area of the US?
Seems like you're the one listening and repeating the unsupported word of farm lobbyists... and only one faction at that... the title to your rebuttal spells it out... using "soybean.org" to prove your point when they are only giving you a small part of the bigger picture.
Last word:
If the US doesn't begin seriously working with biodiesel and expanding what infrastructure is needed, the rest of the world will leave us behind gasping our last breath while the petrol drains us dry. It is the only viable renewable source of energy for use as a liquid fuel.
p.s. Haven't heard a word from you about a better alternative... and for all your facts there isn't an ounce of strength to your argument, you've been saying the equivalent of "There'll never be enough food to support the growing population" yet every year as the population swells we somehow manage to grow enough food.