As for the dis-ingenuity of posting about "unreliable" renewables in a thread about BATTERY-based transportation.
Actually, this isn't about "BATTERY-based transportation" so much as about "recharging batteries used in transportation".
If you are just using your electric car for daily commutes, you'll recharge at night when load on the grid is comparatively low, so no problem.
On the other hand, if you're travelling a good distance, and need to recharge a couple times in the daytime, you're just adding to peak load on the system. If EVERYONE is doing it (using an electric for all their transportation needs, not just commuting), then the unreliability of solar/wind can become problematic unless we have a LARGE overcapacity.
Personally, I'm much more concerned about the way commercial organizations are spying on us. I think the loss of privacy to Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google, and other social media is much more creepy than some secret government bureau knowing that I called my parents 3 times last week.
So, you're "much more concerned" about social media spying on you than the Government, even though the Government gets the take from the social media PLUS their own "special" modes of spying....
As cars become automated, and more states follow Colorado and Washington in legalizing drugs, we are going to need far fewer police officers. Police numbers should be able to be reduced by at least half.
That's so cute!
You actually believe an existing bureaucracy (personal fief) will get SMALLER???
No, they'll just find some new laws you can break that they can target easily. Even if they have to lobby to get them written....
The constitution specifically says congress has the right to regulate. It's IN the fucking amendment.
You might want to read the amendment again, then. "A well-regulated militia" means (in 20th Century American English) "a well-trained militia", "regulated" being the adjective form of "regular" (as in "regular army") when it was written.
I don't know a damn thing about Danish law. But I find it really hard to believe that a liquid-fuel rocket, large enough to get a person into space, is completely legal and doesn't require any sort of permit or paperwork.
It's not.
The whole thrust of the Outer Space Treaty is to put NGO's on a short leash in regards to space.
In his case, he needs to get a lawyer and start the approval process at some point, hopefully well before he gets ready for a test launch.
Because the PTB are NOT going to be happy to hear "hey, we want to launch a suborbital rocket this weekend, can you sign this permission slip real quick?"
What I was trying to say is that the government is now experiencing the same challenges a lot of companies and other large organizations deal with. The government is just doing it on a national stage, while also forcing millions of people to use the site.
The fundamental difference between a government project and a private project is the "required by law" part - you can't be forced to use a private website, but the gov's website has tax penalties associated with it.
but that the release date couldn't slip for political reasons.
And legal reasons. Remember that everyone (who is not eligible for Medicaid) who doesn't have health insurance that is acceptable under the ACA by Jan 1, 2014 is liable for a tax penalty in the 2014 tax year.
It's their job to a) not blanket-grab millions of phone users of data in a random bug hunt but to apply "intelligence" and b) not to get caught doing so.
Actually, NSA's mandate is Signals Intelligence. Which pretty much means grabbing everything they can, then sorting it for utility.
Also, "intelligence" in the context of an intelligence agency (NSA, GCHQ, etc) has NOTHING to do with common usage of the word - it means the information they are gathering, or trying to.
However, on a similar note, if you found out that the French authorities had a complete copy of your phone records which got publicly leaked (WikiLeaks-style, say), would you not be pissed?
Surely would. However, absent me being a French citizen, it would never occur to me to scream "The French did something illegal!!!!", since FOREIGN intelligence gathering isn't illegal for any country.
Unless, of course, the actual intelligence gatherers are caught in the act of foreign soil. No, finding out they did it a year or two after the fact, with no names of the people doing the actual work, doesn't leave you much room for even a show trial, though "Viewing with Alarm" might be something you'd do to pacify your population when it is revealed that you can't protect your own people from foreign spying.
Which last seems to be what the French are trying for.
Just how much co-operation do you think you will see next time you're trying to track a terrorist cell through France?
I would never expect ANY cooperation from the French in regards to terrorism. The only interest they have is that it not be done against French citizens or businesses. They don't give a rat's ass about any other terrorism....
I think that when those "existing governments" want to collect taxes on your opt-in society, you'll find out just how easy it is to be "outside existing governments".
why does it seem like everything the federal government does was declared "essential" and not affected EXCEPT for science?
Because making "Science!" unessential could be parlayed into news articles.
Face it, a news article about the fact that government bureacrats had to empty their own trash wouldn't have nearly the appeal of "This Science! project was delayed by two weeks, and some of it may NEVER be done now! It was going to cure death, but now we've lost any chance of that, thanks to those EVIL Republicans!!!"
Note that running the National Parks was also considered nonessential, even to the extent that a lot of EXTRA work was done to shut them down - I especially like the traffic cones blocking the highway shoulders OUTSIDE Mount Rushmore - only put up in places from which someone could pull off the road (outside the Park, remember?) to take photos of Mount Rushmore....
Not a clue about the proper labelling. But my doctor has been calling me a chimera for a year now, and seemed quite pleased by it (any trace of my old bone marrow would mean that they did not cure my cancer - the fact that I'm showing 100% chimerism is the best possible result).
Contamination from decay products will yield unpredictable results, ranging from a fissile (weapon fails to reach nuclear yield) to a significant increase in power
"fissile" = capable of undergoing fission.
"fizzle" = didn't go boom when we tried to make it undergo fission.
Whether it sinks is largely irrelevant. What matters is whether it can continue as a viable warship for the duration of the conflict.
By this definition, we have TWO warships taken out by anti-shipping missiles. Neither was equipped to modern standards for defense (basically impossible, since both hits happened more than 25 years ago)...
Note, by the way, that USS Yorktown (the WW2 version, not the newer one, or the newest one) was severely damaged in the Battle of the Coral Sea, and after quick repairs went on to serve in the Battle of Midway.
Note further that many WW2 warships were damaged and returned to duty.
Pretty much the same way as USS Stark was damaged, and returned to duty.
Still no evidence that anti-shipping missiles are going to sweep the seas clean of warships. One ship sunk, one damaged over the last 31 years, neither of which were equipped with defenses comparable to even a halfway decent modern warship....
Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that anti-ship missile technology has been ahead of defence systems now for quite some time, such that basically any ship that gets within range of them is basically always sunk.
You're wrong.
A quick check shows that only one "modern" warship has been sunk by anti-ship missiles, and that was in the Falklands war 31 years ago.
Note that "modern" label above is NOT intended to imply that Sheffield had any modern defenses or anything.
The only "modern" warship with even rudimentary missile defenses hit with an anti-shipping missile had to sail home to be repaired. And was in service for another dozen years afterwards.
Note that one Iranian frigate was hit with three antiship missiles, but didn't sink until it was hit with another rocket-propelled bomb, several laser-guided bombs, and several iron bombs (that means a bomb that's just dropped, no propulsion, no guidance).
So, no, there's no real evidence that anti-shipping missiles are automatic death for any ship in range - just a lot of wishful thinking on the part of people with anti-shipping missiles and no Navy to speak of.
On the other hand, I can see the "conservative" side of the argument too. Imagine how terrible it would be if you could just, you know, go to the hospital and not worry about the financial aspects.
No, the conservatives are the ones worrying about the financial aspects - it's NOT free, even if you don't pay a dime out of pocket - the money has to come from somewhere.
Where the money should come from to pay for your healthcare is a matter for debate, but make no mistake in thinking that "free" healthcare is no more free than what we have now - you're just replacing one group of bureaucrats in the loop with another...
Don't be so sure that those are really your grandparents. Illegitimacy rates in Western culture run around 1 in 30, and you have two parents. That's a roughly 1/10 chance* that one of your grandparents aren't really a blood relative.
No, all four of your grandparents (parents of your parents) are blood relatives.
Of course, your grandparents may not be who you think they are - just because you call your father's father "grandpa" doesn't make it so....
Slashdot Mirror
There is a difference between "Japan didn't help the NSA tap the Asian internet" and "the NSA didn't tap the Asian internet"
Actually, this isn't about "BATTERY-based transportation" so much as about "recharging batteries used in transportation".
If you are just using your electric car for daily commutes, you'll recharge at night when load on the grid is comparatively low, so no problem.
On the other hand, if you're travelling a good distance, and need to recharge a couple times in the daytime, you're just adding to peak load on the system. If EVERYONE is doing it (using an electric for all their transportation needs, not just commuting), then the unreliability of solar/wind can become problematic unless we have a LARGE overcapacity.
So, you're "much more concerned" about social media spying on you than the Government, even though the Government gets the take from the social media PLUS their own "special" modes of spying....
That's so cute!
You actually believe an existing bureaucracy (personal fief) will get SMALLER???
No, they'll just find some new laws you can break that they can target easily. Even if they have to lobby to get them written....
If you wait till there's an immediate threat to do your spying, you might as well not bother.
Remember, all the immediate threats take a long time to create - tank factories aren't built overnight, and neither are Manhattan Projects...
If you already have health insurance, you probably don't care when, or even if, the site becomes functional.
Except perhaps in a "hey, look at the train wreck" sort of way....
Collar bone twice AND hip once. Mustn't forget that broken hip.
You might want to read the amendment again, then. "A well-regulated militia" means (in 20th Century American English) "a well-trained militia", "regulated" being the adjective form of "regular" (as in "regular army") when it was written.
It's not.
The whole thrust of the Outer Space Treaty is to put NGO's on a short leash in regards to space.
In his case, he needs to get a lawyer and start the approval process at some point, hopefully well before he gets ready for a test launch.
Because the PTB are NOT going to be happy to hear "hey, we want to launch a suborbital rocket this weekend, can you sign this permission slip real quick?"
Umm, no.
The hair on my head is darker. Alas, I don't wear hats all the time, but I DO wear pants all the time...
The fundamental difference between a government project and a private project is the "required by law" part - you can't be forced to use a private website, but the gov's website has tax penalties associated with it.
And legal reasons. Remember that everyone (who is not eligible for Medicaid) who doesn't have health insurance that is acceptable under the ACA by Jan 1, 2014 is liable for a tax penalty in the 2014 tax year.
Actually, NSA's mandate is Signals Intelligence. Which pretty much means grabbing everything they can, then sorting it for utility.
Also, "intelligence" in the context of an intelligence agency (NSA, GCHQ, etc) has NOTHING to do with common usage of the word - it means the information they are gathering, or trying to.
Surely would. However, absent me being a French citizen, it would never occur to me to scream "The French did something illegal!!!!", since FOREIGN intelligence gathering isn't illegal for any country.
Unless, of course, the actual intelligence gatherers are caught in the act of foreign soil. No, finding out they did it a year or two after the fact, with no names of the people doing the actual work, doesn't leave you much room for even a show trial, though "Viewing with Alarm" might be something you'd do to pacify your population when it is revealed that you can't protect your own people from foreign spying.
Which last seems to be what the French are trying for.
I would never expect ANY cooperation from the French in regards to terrorism. The only interest they have is that it not be done against French citizens or businesses. They don't give a rat's ass about any other terrorism....
Whatever makes you think a country spying on its friends is unusual?
You usually spend more effort spying on your friends than your enemies, if only because it's relatively easier...
I think that when those "existing governments" want to collect taxes on your opt-in society, you'll find out just how easy it is to be "outside existing governments".
You might be amazed at how little food is considered "scraps" in a really poor neighborhood....
Because making "Science!" unessential could be parlayed into news articles.
Face it, a news article about the fact that government bureacrats had to empty their own trash wouldn't have nearly the appeal of "This Science! project was delayed by two weeks, and some of it may NEVER be done now! It was going to cure death, but now we've lost any chance of that, thanks to those EVIL Republicans!!!"
Note that running the National Parks was also considered nonessential, even to the extent that a lot of EXTRA work was done to shut them down - I especially like the traffic cones blocking the highway shoulders OUTSIDE Mount Rushmore - only put up in places from which someone could pull off the road (outside the Park, remember?) to take photos of Mount Rushmore....
Not a clue about the proper labelling. But my doctor has been calling me a chimera for a year now, and seemed quite pleased by it (any trace of my old bone marrow would mean that they did not cure my cancer - the fact that I'm showing 100% chimerism is the best possible result).
Hey! *I* am a chimera!
(and have been since my bone marrow transplant - 100% chimera - my blood and bone marrow has my donor's DNA, the rest of me has what I was born with)
"fissile" = capable of undergoing fission.
"fizzle" = didn't go boom when we tried to make it undergo fission.
So, they're going to make US Internet companies subject to EU laws rather than American laws?
Somehow, I don't think that's going to work as well as they (pretend to) think it will....
By this definition, we have TWO warships taken out by anti-shipping missiles. Neither was equipped to modern standards for defense (basically impossible, since both hits happened more than 25 years ago)...
Note, by the way, that USS Yorktown (the WW2 version, not the newer one, or the newest one) was severely damaged in the Battle of the Coral Sea, and after quick repairs went on to serve in the Battle of Midway.
Note further that many WW2 warships were damaged and returned to duty.
Pretty much the same way as USS Stark was damaged, and returned to duty.
Still no evidence that anti-shipping missiles are going to sweep the seas clean of warships. One ship sunk, one damaged over the last 31 years, neither of which were equipped with defenses comparable to even a halfway decent modern warship....
You're wrong.
A quick check shows that only one "modern" warship has been sunk by anti-ship missiles, and that was in the Falklands war 31 years ago.
Note that "modern" label above is NOT intended to imply that Sheffield had any modern defenses or anything.
The only "modern" warship with even rudimentary missile defenses hit with an anti-shipping missile had to sail home to be repaired. And was in service for another dozen years afterwards.
Note that one Iranian frigate was hit with three antiship missiles, but didn't sink until it was hit with another rocket-propelled bomb, several laser-guided bombs, and several iron bombs (that means a bomb that's just dropped, no propulsion, no guidance).
So, no, there's no real evidence that anti-shipping missiles are automatic death for any ship in range - just a lot of wishful thinking on the part of people with anti-shipping missiles and no Navy to speak of.
No, the conservatives are the ones worrying about the financial aspects - it's NOT free, even if you don't pay a dime out of pocket - the money has to come from somewhere.
Where the money should come from to pay for your healthcare is a matter for debate, but make no mistake in thinking that "free" healthcare is no more free than what we have now - you're just replacing one group of bureaucrats in the loop with another...
No, all four of your grandparents (parents of your parents) are blood relatives.
Of course, your grandparents may not be who you think they are - just because you call your father's father "grandpa" doesn't make it so....