Ah. I suspect that sterility genes would tend to be bred out of the populations of other plants. The pesticide resistance could be more of a problem, but you can grow crops with mechanical plowing-under or other removal techniques. I still think the mere deletion of a gene or two that non-THC hemp would require would be so likely to occur naturally that it isn't worth worrying about.
Well, usually - I would personally be more worried about a crop disease that preyed on a particular GM or natural plant mutation wiping out a whole season of an important crop, should the advantage of that mutation to farmers make it nearly all of what is grown (a "monoculture"). Something like this happened to the corn crop in the USA back in 1970-1971 when the popular "Texas Male Sterile" (natural mutation) corn and its hybrids turned out to be very susceptable to a new strain of corn leaf blight, and 80-100% of some fields were lost - there was about a billion 1970 dollars of damage involved. There would be a similar danger that disease could hit a lot of the industrial hemp if it became a monoculture as well.
I find it hard to understand how THC-free hemp would damage other plants by the transfer of DNA that would presumably simply be missing the gene for THC production.
With the obvious exception that it would dilute or eliminate the THC content of cannabis grown for illegal use. Is that what you are worried about?
I suspect THC-free hemp would be either less resistant to hot weather or insect damage than the resinous kind. The gunk is probably there for a reason.
Nevertheless, it would be a great promotional feature for hemp advocates that the large amount of pollen generated into the environment would make it difficult or impossible to grow cannabis which could be used for illegal drug purposes, at least outside. In fact, this could be true of hemp developed by ordinary plant breeding techniques without using genetic engineering.
I would expect that sincere advocates of hemp for industrial purposes instead of drug use will be highly positive about this advantage...
A little while back, the environmental activist industry was really up in arms about "BT" corn, on the grounds that it would harm Monarch butterflies that might encounter stray pollen from nearby corn that landed on their food plant, milkweed.
Anyone else notice the resounding silence from those activists now that the actual effect has been found to be beneficial to the butterflies because fewer chemical insecticides are used on those fields?
Out of the 10% of everything that isn't shit, 90% of that 10% is shit compared to the remaining 10%. And so on.
I modestly propose that this extension be called "Sturgeon's law of Relativity".
More seriously, I suspect that the overall financial return follows the same law: 90% of anything is paid shit compared to the remaining 10%, et cetra...
My own experience is that art that is free is generally shit (except in the eyes of the artist). The same applies to government subsidized art, except that in this case, it goes all the way past worthless, and isn't worth shit.
And also, it doesn't clearly apply to legitimate electronically-stored versions of the whole publication, merely articles stored for individual retrieval as disjointed parts of Lexis-Nexis type databases.
Although the CNet article seems to treat it as a given ("But at least one federal appeals court panel has tried to fight worries about incomplete archives. In ruling that National Geographic violated a freelance magazine photographer's rights by including his images in a CD-ROM, the panel asked a lower court to order the magazine to pay him rather than pull the photos."), evidently the question of whether electronically-stored versions of entire publications are included or not is still in question ("National Geographic said today that it would soon file an appeal to the Supreme Court from a ruling by the federal appeals court in Atlanta, which said that a 30-disc CD-ROM set that reproduced every page of every issue of the magazine was a new work rather than a revision, even though each article appeared in its original context.")
The tender concern of the publishers for the freelance writers is oh, so precious:
"We're extremely disappointed in the ruling," Time, Inc. spokesman Peter Costiglio said. "The publishers lose because they have to delete articles; researchers, readers and historians lose because they won't have access to complete archives; and freelancers lose because their pieces won't appear in the archives."
Of course, it is up to the publishers whether to delete the articles or pay for what they took. Apparently the publishers consider themselves to be paternally "assisting" the freelancers to come to the decision that is best for them, the option they already have to notify the publishers that it is all right for them to include their work in such databases if they wish. How considerate of them. Yeah, sure.
According to this Time.comarticle, the Red Crabs have more to worry about from an accidently introduced species of ant. In all probability the admired crabs will be accomodated as well as they can be in their fairly brief migrations. Having a source of income tends to let the people living in remote areas pay more attention to the survival of the wildlife they share an environment with, compared to humans who have to scrape to survive.
And BTW, that environmental study has been done, evidently finding that the damages you propose are unlikely.
i would also suggest taking a look at how great a boon to wildlife, endangered and otherwise, that NASA's Cape Canaveral space facilities (USA, Florida) has turned out to be, to see how this has turned out before in the Real World.
[...] it was not until 1888 that Christmas Island was settled [...]
[...]As there was no indigenous population, a work force had to be imported[to work in the phosphate mines]
The island has [...] been chosen as a suitable site for a space satellite launching station. A decision for the Asia Pacific Space Centre project will be determined by an Environmental Impact Study which is nearly complete.
Does anyone have a link to the text of the ruling that Canadian Tire couldn't claim that the domain "crappytire.com" was an infringement of their trademark?
I've heard a rumor the decision was handed down, but I haven't been able to hunt down exactly what resulted.
Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) managed to blow $300,000 (19th century $) of his savings investing it in development of an automatic typesetting machine; Sir issac Newton lost his fortune in the South Sea Trading Company bubble way back in 1720; plenty of otherwise thought-to-be-intelligent people bit it investing in RCA in the 1920's, Polaroid in the 1960s, etc... I wouldn't try to judge people's intelligence based on their financial success. Human nature applies to the temptations of all, no matter how otherwise intelligent they might be. I think financial wisdom must follow a different thought pattern.
Re:how much stuff with this break?
on
GCC 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 2
That's what I said.
Re:how much stuff with this break?
on
GCC 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 2
Troll? How is this a troll? Sorry, I'm confused, I thought was just common sense.
And it is the policy of the gcc developers, isn't it, and the developers of the linux kernel itself that Red Hat had to also supply their "kgcc" secondary system-space compiler for?
Or is there someone out there who thinks the people are obligated to support the "gcc-2.96-REDHAT" stuff?
Re:how much stuff with this break?
on
GCC 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
Well, you can't expect everyone else to write special stuff to support Redhat's poor choices, can you?
They, and anyone choosing to use Redhat, have only themselves to blame if there are problems.
So... since Red Hat jumped the gun and grabbed development releases using libs that apparently gcc will no longer be compatable with - and according to what they've said is their policy that they won't change to incompatable libs in mid-major-version - I wonder if this means RH 8.0 will come out simultaneously with 7.2, or if they are going to just skip now to 8.0?
Or if Red Hat users will now be forced to continue to use what has become obsolete software?
Actually, I read it in the paper last night, and my paper sucks. It was probably in there, because they don't have any articles of their own to take up space.
I don't know what paper that was. of course. It was conspicuously not being picked up by the San Jose Mercury News however.
Probably because it would have looked odd against their local feature story and this attached story presenting tech workers as privileged and doing well - in contrast to more standard poor downtrodden nontechies which better fit as traditional liberal sympathy generators.
Not that I mean to imply tech workers somehow deserve to be handed jobs more, or paid more that the market traffic would bear (but not less based on increasing desperation of imported tech workers either) - in both the cases described in the SJMN and this article, it boils down to normal supply/demand.
Instead of the local papers. The only logical conclusion (if it really has gotten to the point the salon.com article indicates) is that it is being suppressed or ignored because it wouldn't give the proper "Wonderful California!" image.
It wouldn't be the first time, of course. California has always been so intent on image rather than reality that it has resorted to applying legal pressure to suppress news about the number of fatalities in the great SF earthquake, the fact of bubonic plague's introduction and spread there, and probably other disasters that no one has heard of because they were more successfully hidden.
Okay, even if it were 50k or 60k after taxes, the numbers are still obscene.Didn't that drop from $80K to $50K result in your savings calculation dropping to something less than being able to keep $5k/yr?
Slashdot Mirror
Well, usually - I would personally be more worried about a crop disease that preyed on a particular GM or natural plant mutation wiping out a whole season of an important crop, should the advantage of that mutation to farmers make it nearly all of what is grown (a "monoculture"). Something like this happened to the corn crop in the USA back in 1970-1971 when the popular "Texas Male Sterile" (natural mutation) corn and its hybrids turned out to be very susceptable to a new strain of corn leaf blight, and 80-100% of some fields were lost - there was about a billion 1970 dollars of damage involved. There would be a similar danger that disease could hit a lot of the industrial hemp if it became a monoculture as well.
With the obvious exception that it would dilute or eliminate the THC content of cannabis grown for illegal use. Is that what you are worried about?
Nevertheless, it would be a great promotional feature for hemp advocates that the large amount of pollen generated into the environment would make it difficult or impossible to grow cannabis which could be used for illegal drug purposes, at least outside. In fact, this could be true of hemp developed by ordinary plant breeding techniques without using genetic engineering.
I would expect that sincere advocates of hemp for industrial purposes instead of drug use will be highly positive about this advantage...
Anyone else notice the resounding silence from those activists now that the actual effect has been found to be beneficial to the butterflies because fewer chemical insecticides are used on those fields?
Out of the 10% of everything that isn't shit, 90% of that 10% is shit compared to the remaining 10%. And so on.
I modestly propose that this extension be called "Sturgeon's law of Relativity".
More seriously, I suspect that the overall financial return follows the same law: 90% of anything is paid shit compared to the remaining 10%, et cetra...
My own experience is that art that is free is generally shit (except in the eyes of the artist). The same applies to government subsidized art, except that in this case, it goes all the way past worthless, and isn't worth shit.
Although the CNet article seems to treat it as a given ("But at least one federal appeals court panel has tried to fight worries about incomplete archives. In ruling that National Geographic violated a freelance magazine photographer's rights by including his images in a CD-ROM, the panel asked a lower court to order the magazine to pay him rather than pull the photos."), evidently the question of whether electronically-stored versions of entire publications are included or not is still in question ("National Geographic said today that it would soon file an appeal to the Supreme Court from a ruling by the federal appeals court in Atlanta, which said that a 30-disc CD-ROM set that reproduced every page of every issue of the magazine was a new work rather than a revision, even though each article appeared in its original context.")
The tender concern of the publishers for the freelance writers is oh, so precious:
Of course, it is up to the publishers whether to delete the articles or pay for what they took. Apparently the publishers consider themselves to be paternally "assisting" the freelancers to come to the decision that is best for them, the option they already have to notify the publishers that it is all right for them to include their work in such databases if they wish. How considerate of them. Yeah, sure.And BTW, that environmental study has been done, evidently finding that the damages you propose are unlikely.
i would also suggest taking a look at how great a boon to wildlife, endangered and otherwise, that NASA's Cape Canaveral space facilities (USA, Florida) has turned out to be, to see how this has turned out before in the Real World.
From http://www.christmas.net.au/ :
[...] it was not until 1888 that Christmas Island was settled [...]
[...]As there was no indigenous population, a work force had to be imported[to work in the phosphate mines]
The island has [...] been chosen as a suitable site for a space satellite launching station. A decision for the Asia Pacific Space Centre project will be determined by an Environmental Impact Study which is nearly complete.
As far as I can find the island's major industry is phosphate mining. Is launching an occasional spacecraft going to be much worse?
This is, like unlawful isn't it?
Does Open Source need this kind of promotion?
At last, no more dreams of tentacles dragging me inside to a moldy fate...
Does anyone have a link to the text of the ruling that Canadian Tire couldn't claim that the domain "crappytire.com" was an infringement of their trademark?
I've heard a rumor the decision was handed down, but I haven't been able to hunt down exactly what resulted.
Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) managed to blow $300,000 (19th century $) of his savings investing it in development of an automatic typesetting machine; Sir issac Newton lost his fortune in the South Sea Trading Company bubble way back in 1720; plenty of otherwise thought-to-be-intelligent people bit it investing in RCA in the 1920's, Polaroid in the 1960s, etc... I wouldn't try to judge people's intelligence based on their financial success. Human nature applies to the temptations of all, no matter how otherwise intelligent they might be. I think financial wisdom must follow a different thought pattern.
That's what I said.
And it is the policy of the gcc developers, isn't it, and the developers of the linux kernel itself that Red Hat had to also supply their "kgcc" secondary system-space compiler for?
Or is there someone out there who thinks the people are obligated to support the "gcc-2.96-REDHAT" stuff?
They, and anyone choosing to use Redhat, have only themselves to blame if there are problems.
Or if Red Hat users will now be forced to continue to use what has become obsolete software?
I don't know what paper that was. of course. It was conspicuously not being picked up by the San Jose Mercury News however.
Probably because it would have looked odd against their local feature story and this attached story presenting tech workers as privileged and doing well - in contrast to more standard poor downtrodden nontechies which better fit as traditional liberal sympathy generators.
Not that I mean to imply tech workers somehow deserve to be handed jobs more, or paid more that the market traffic would bear (but not less based on increasing desperation of imported tech workers either) - in both the cases described in the SJMN and this article, it boils down to normal supply/demand.
Person who left Silicon Valley the year before returns, meets someone he knew there before.
"How are you doing? How's the dog?"
The other person, cluing him into reality with a gentle voice:
"There are no dogs in Silicon Valley anymore."
(Apologies to Thornton Wilder)
It wouldn't be the first time, of course. California has always been so intent on image rather than reality that it has resorted to applying legal pressure to suppress news about the number of fatalities in the great SF earthquake, the fact of bubonic plague's introduction and spread there, and probably other disasters that no one has heard of because they were more successfully hidden.
Okay, even if it were 50k or 60k after taxes, the numbers are still obscene.Didn't that drop from $80K to $50K result in your savings calculation dropping to something less than being able to keep $5k/yr?
Either the above post is missing the "online" point, or it deserves to be marked up as "funny".
Sometimes it's more fun to go along with it.
How long until the first house is built out of these things?
Note: in place of mortar, the joints should be filled with Velveeta.
Well, my neighbor's cat approached spherical, with no more apparent manipulation than overfeeding and its own laziness.
More of an oblate spheroid, of course, due to gravitational distortion.