No. It might depend on the market but iPods are not even 50% of the market. Many of the big electronics shops in both Denmark, Sweden and Germany that I know of, don't even sell iPods, and for the rest they take up less than half the shelf space.
Okay, sure the US gets more Nobel prizes. Please read what I wrote more closely, I am talking about Nobel prizes per citizens (million citizens really). The US is 50 times larger than Denmark and would if all things where equal win 50 times more often. Reality is that the US actually only wins 10 times more. Honestly though it _is_ a silly comparison, but is also silly to suggest that a wealthy western country like Denmark would be backwards or behind in science, just because we pay a slightly higher tax.
Well, just look up the watt usage of new LCDs. I guess the reason you doubt it is that LCDs _used_ to use less energy that CRTs, but LCD also used to have poorer contrast and narrow viewing angles. A low contrast and narrow viewing angel meant they had to produce less light, and thus could run on lower energy. Modern LCDs has overcome those difficulties and now have almost as good viewing angles as CRTs and many have _better_ contrast. All that additional produced light however means they now use more energy than CRTs (and much more than older LCDs). In other words if you shop for energy efficiency you should choose crappy LCDs with low contrast and poor viewing angles.
No, not really. Medicine is one of the strong industries in Denmark. By citizens Denmark produces more patents and earns more Nobel prices than the US in Medicine (by a factor of 4). Most of the large US medical companies has research centers in or near Copenhagen in the so-called "Medicon Valley", and Novo Nordisk one of the largst pharmaceatical companies is danish. One of the benefits of free education is a highly educated population ideal for research and development.
He is probably talking about how many megawatthours they can produce per hour. The "hour" in energy measures is often left out. Megawatthours per hour is still pretty stupid though.
Depends on whether there is difference between HIV resistance and HIV immunity. Around 25% of Europeans are resistant to HIV. This is one of many reason the disease has had much more limited impact among caucasians
In all fairness though. He wasn't just corrupt on his own behalf, he was much more corrupt on Alaska's behalf. I think they are rewarding him for his corrupt ways that has racked in billions for Alaskans.
Denmark has an average suicide rate, on line with that of the US. Alcoholism is low on average, but has a world record among teens (mainly because we find it natural that teens drinks the same amount of alcohol as adults). The tax rate is the world highest though, but then so are the incomes.
Denmark does have a surplus on oil trade however, we drill less oil per citizen than the US does. If the American spend as little oil as Danes did, the US too would be an oil exporter.
Take allergies or obesity, but not cancer. While we are still finding new minor causes to cancer, we do know the primary and most significant cause: Old age. This is why it was less common earlier and why it is still much less common in less developed countries. There is no evidence that among young people cancer is any more common today than 200 years ago.
The obesity epidemic can be partially blamed on government subsidies to the production of high fructose corn syrup, and tariffs on imported (more healthy) roe or cane sugar. On top of that if you nationalize healthcare you also nationalize the costs of obesity, therefore such a lifestyle should be taxed higher to cover their added cost to society.
Look at the graphs again.... Spending and deficits up during Reagan and Bush I, and down during Clinton and Carter.. Seriously how can you overlook the very graphs you are commenting on?
All of them. His positions on healthcare is unambitious, his positions on tax-cuts to the middle-class is just slightly less right wing than tax-cuts to the upper-class. He has been emphasizing his faith and how Christian he is, again a very conservative trait. The protectionism that Democrats for some reason defends is outright unliberal and typical conservative. The pandering that has happened in every debate is typical right-wing populism. You can go on. Unlike what GPs write, he is no where near the center of international politics, he is on center of American politics; very right wing.
He is an authoritative example of stupid and stubborn right-wing politicians. If scientists can convince him, they should be able to convince any denialist nut.
No I am saying I am following the anti-consensus research on global warming, and the few researchers and politicians that had alternative views on the cause, have dropped those views and are now favoring other reasons for not doing anything about it.
This doesn't mean that anyone can't have other viewpoints, it just means those viewpoints are now not backed by anyone in either the political nor the scientific communities. Even George W. Bush and Bjorn Lomborg has accepted that the climate changes are manmade.
Slashdot Mirror
No. It might depend on the market but iPods are not even 50% of the market. Many of the big electronics shops in both Denmark, Sweden and Germany that I know of, don't even sell iPods, and for the rest they take up less than half the shelf space.
Okay, sure the US gets more Nobel prizes. Please read what I wrote more closely, I am talking about Nobel prizes per citizens (million citizens really). The US is 50 times larger than Denmark and would if all things where equal win 50 times more often. Reality is that the US actually only wins 10 times more. Honestly though it _is_ a silly comparison, but is also silly to suggest that a wealthy western country like Denmark would be backwards or behind in science, just because we pay a slightly higher tax.
Well, just look up the watt usage of new LCDs. I guess the reason you doubt it is that LCDs _used_ to use less energy that CRTs, but LCD also used to have poorer contrast and narrow viewing angles. A low contrast and narrow viewing angel meant they had to produce less light, and thus could run on lower energy. Modern LCDs has overcome those difficulties and now have almost as good viewing angles as CRTs and many have _better_ contrast. All that additional produced light however means they now use more energy than CRTs (and much more than older LCDs). In other words if you shop for energy efficiency you should choose crappy LCDs with low contrast and poor viewing angles.
No, not really. Medicine is one of the strong industries in Denmark. By citizens Denmark produces more patents and earns more Nobel prices than the US in Medicine (by a factor of 4). Most of the large US medical companies has research centers in or near Copenhagen in the so-called "Medicon Valley", and Novo Nordisk one of the largst pharmaceatical companies is danish. One of the benefits of free education is a highly educated population ideal for research and development.
He is probably talking about how many megawatthours they can produce per hour. The "hour" in energy measures is often left out. Megawatthours per hour is still pretty stupid though.
There are no red light district in Denmark though. While prostitution is legal, pimping is not, and this prohibits most types of brothels.
This happens indirectly. Loosing this much money will mean the stocks will drop and the stockholders will likely punish the board and CEO.
Modern high-contrast LCD screens use much more power than equivalent CRTs.
KParts are perfectly interoperable with anything outside KDE. There is just noone outside KDE interoperating with them.
True, but only as long as the Republicans are wrong. Hopefully they will pull themselves together and stop being stupid.
Depends on whether there is difference between HIV resistance and HIV immunity. Around 25% of Europeans are resistant to HIV. This is one of many reason the disease has had much more limited impact among caucasians
TCP/IP might be an open protocol but everybody is using the original BSD implementation of it. This includes all unix, Macs, and Windows.
And all the strategy games and friends:
Europa Universalis III
X3: Terran Conflict
Heart of Iron II
Space Empires V
Railroad Tycoon III
In all fairness though. He wasn't just corrupt on his own behalf, he was much more corrupt on Alaska's behalf. I think they are rewarding him for his corrupt ways that has racked in billions for Alaskans.
Denmark has an average suicide rate, on line with that of the US. Alcoholism is low on average, but has a world record among teens (mainly because we find it natural that teens drinks the same amount of alcohol as adults). The tax rate is the world highest though, but then so are the incomes.
Denmark does have a surplus on oil trade however, we drill less oil per citizen than the US does. If the American spend as little oil as Danes did, the US too would be an oil exporter.
Take allergies or obesity, but not cancer. While we are still finding new minor causes to cancer, we do know the primary and most significant cause: Old age. This is why it was less common earlier and why it is still much less common in less developed countries. There is no evidence that among young people cancer is any more common today than 200 years ago.
The obesity epidemic can be partially blamed on government subsidies to the production of high fructose corn syrup, and tariffs on imported (more healthy) roe or cane sugar. On top of that if you nationalize healthcare you also nationalize the costs of obesity, therefore such a lifestyle should be taxed higher to cover their added cost to society.
Look at the graphs again.... Spending and deficits up during Reagan and Bush I, and down during Clinton and Carter.. Seriously how can you overlook the very graphs you are commenting on?
All of them. His positions on healthcare is unambitious, his positions on tax-cuts to the middle-class is just slightly less right wing than tax-cuts to the upper-class. He has been emphasizing his faith and how Christian he is, again a very conservative trait. The protectionism that Democrats for some reason defends is outright unliberal and typical conservative. The pandering that has happened in every debate is typical right-wing populism. You can go on. Unlike what GPs write, he is no where near the center of international politics, he is on center of American politics; very right wing.
A joint Danish and US project... So why is the price in British pounds?
Yes, there is one definition more: The Old World (Europa) and the New World (Americas), with the third world being the rest. Still India fits though.
You are not proposing free education, the third tenant of the welfare state, are you?
He is an authoritative example of stupid and stubborn right-wing politicians. If scientists can convince him, they should be able to convince any denialist nut.
No I am saying I am following the anti-consensus research on global warming, and the few researchers and politicians that had alternative views on the cause, have dropped those views and are now favoring other reasons for not doing anything about it.
This doesn't mean that anyone can't have other viewpoints, it just means those viewpoints are now not backed by anyone in either the political nor the scientific communities. Even George W. Bush and Bjorn Lomborg has accepted that the climate changes are manmade.