Correction, first sentence in the post above should read: I believe the article from the New York Times is about the bill passed by the California legislature to limit renewable energy *to* in-state sources.
Thus, the point is that all renewable energy used in California would come from within the state of California. Legislature passed this bill and the governer (Schwarzenegger) is opposed.
I believe the article from the New York Times is about the bill passed by the California legislature to limit renewable energy from in-state sources. The governer's response, therefore, is focused on his support for receiving renewable energy from both inside and outside the state of California. The article doesn't really have anything to do with televisions.
As for the Consumer Electronics Association speaking out against a mandatory increase in energy efficiency in televisions, who saw that coming? An industry lobby is hardly where I would go for reliable advice on cutting down on energy consumption.
By the way, the other group opposed is named "Californians for Smart Energy" not "California citizens for smart clean energy," a difference I am sure we can all appreciate. According to their website, they are a group consisting of "consumers, small businesses, trade groups and associations." So, they are another industry-associated organization. Again, not the place to go for real advice on how to reduce waste.
All you have to do is overthrow the government and put an autocratic technocracy in its place. All citizens would then be ordered to love science upon pain of death.
Then again, if you want people to genuinely love science, I suggest you find a more useful way to occupy your time. Science doesn't get funding because we're not in a cold war. Science got funding during the cold war, not because it was popular in a cultural sense, but because it was seen as a solution to winning the cold war.
So, I guess you could always get elected president and start a war, but that doesn't seem to be working too well recently. Alternatively, you could become a teacher and spout a bunch of drivel about how science will show us the way. Or you could just become a scientist yourself and stop worrying about what other people think. There is plenty of funding for science available. If you don't believe that's true, then I suggest you get your head screwed on right, because non-science professions at universities have to work with far less.
My impression was the article suggested most reports came from Cork and Kerry, but a few isolated reports came from further north. In any event, all reports indicate observations trending to the west.
No, politics aside, UK is not an appropriate tag. If you'd actually read the article, you'd notice the areas referred are decidedly south and decidedly in the republic.
When you move out of your parents basement and buy or rent a home, you will realize that you do pay for sewage, usually on your water bill.
Actually, this depends. If sewage is included in your rental agreement, then you pay for sewage as a hidden/subsidized cost included in rent.
In any event, I believe you're missing the point, which is that the tax would be proportional to use. Perhaps it is proportional to use in your area, in mine the only use that is associated with proportional cost is water. Water use increases with increased waste, but this is not always a proportional increase.
In any event, did you honestly think my proposal was all that serious in the first place? I wouldn't waste time on Slashdot if I thought I had come up with something so revolutionary as requiring my congressperson's attention. Clearly, the proposal is meant solely for bemusement and not as a toolbox for those of fitting description to decide whether they belong inside.
In other words, just laugh a little at what is clearly a joke.
Why don't we also have a "Crap Tax" wherein those who consume food and subsequently release it into sewage systems must pay a percentage relative to the weight of their waste? This would have the additional benefit of taxing those who consume more and probably be about as effective as the tax proposed in TFA.
Or they could just rename the 'video game tax' the "crap tax" and be more honest about the quality of their reasoning on the issue.
Far be it from me to minimize such a significant accomplishment, but, as the article points out, two base RNA molecules have been created so far. So, there are still two more that need to be created in order to make the 'lucky' four.
I imagine it will only take a bit of time to figure out the last two now that the recipe to create things in the first place is known. Nevertheless, there is still a bit more to the puzzle at this point. In any event, this team deserves a Nobel Prize.
Ideally, they get advised by experts and this may have been the case here.
Experts are ideal, but state governments are more likely to go off half-cocked.
I don't know much about the Texas legislature specifically, but many state legislatures are relatively unprofessional compared to the national equivalent. Some state legislatures even operate on a part-time basis.
Besides, the PS3 is seriously lagging behind the 360 as far as games go. For the most part, the 360 has better games, better graphics, and better online play.
I'm tired of people dragging out this three-year-old argument. It's simply not true.
If Killzone 2 isn't enough to convince you that the consoles are an even playing-field, then how about these PS3 exclusives:
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots LittleBigPlanet Resistance: Fall of Man Resistance 2 Warhawk Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction Heavenly Sword Folklore Uncharted: Drake's Fortune Gran Turismo 5: Prologue MotorStorm MotorStorm: Pacific Rift Valkyria Chronicles Wipeout HD Flower
Perpetuating the fallacy that the 360 has better graphics is so 2006. I own both consoles and can honestly say that there are no differences worth mentioning in any worthwhile games over the past year.
I think it was always pretty clear that MonkeyBoy is totally a deranged maniac. And I mean this in the most flattering way I can [...]
Well now, Mr. Balmer... Let's see, I do have some feedback for you. And I mean this in the absolute best way possible.
At times, Steve, you're bit on the edge. And when I say, "on the edge," what I mean, really, is that you're a complete fucking loony. And I do mean that in a positive way.
Now, moving on, this 'urge to dance' you've been feeling, has it cropped up again recently?
Slashdot Mirror
Both groups opposed are closely tied with industry (see my other response post).
So, it's no surprise that they're going to say the bill will cost jobs. "Costing jobs" is the "fighting terrorism" of 2009.
Correction, first sentence in the post above should read: I believe the article from the New York Times is about the bill passed by the California legislature to limit renewable energy *to* in-state sources.
Thus, the point is that all renewable energy used in California would come from within the state of California. Legislature passed this bill and the governer (Schwarzenegger) is opposed.
I believe the article from the New York Times is about the bill passed by the California legislature to limit renewable energy from in-state sources. The governer's response, therefore, is focused on his support for receiving renewable energy from both inside and outside the state of California. The article doesn't really have anything to do with televisions.
As for the Consumer Electronics Association speaking out against a mandatory increase in energy efficiency in televisions, who saw that coming? An industry lobby is hardly where I would go for reliable advice on cutting down on energy consumption.
By the way, the other group opposed is named "Californians for Smart Energy" not "California citizens for smart clean energy," a difference I am sure we can all appreciate. According to their website, they are a group consisting of "consumers, small businesses, trade groups and associations." So, they are another industry-associated organization. Again, not the place to go for real advice on how to reduce waste.
Locking down sounds good to some of you, but it would break the workflow in a medical system that is already operating near the breaking point.
No, locking down does not sound "good." It sounds sane.
Leaving sensitive medical and personal records blatantly open to those with malicious intent sounds rather the opposite of sane.
All you have to do is overthrow the government and put an autocratic technocracy in its place. All citizens would then be ordered to love science upon pain of death.
Then again, if you want people to genuinely love science, I suggest you find a more useful way to occupy your time. Science doesn't get funding because we're not in a cold war. Science got funding during the cold war, not because it was popular in a cultural sense, but because it was seen as a solution to winning the cold war.
So, I guess you could always get elected president and start a war, but that doesn't seem to be working too well recently. Alternatively, you could become a teacher and spout a bunch of drivel about how science will show us the way. Or you could just become a scientist yourself and stop worrying about what other people think. There is plenty of funding for science available. If you don't believe that's true, then I suggest you get your head screwed on right, because non-science professions at universities have to work with far less.
My impression was the article suggested most reports came from Cork and Kerry, but a few isolated reports came from further north. In any event, all reports indicate observations trending to the west.
No, politics aside, UK is not an appropriate tag. If you'd actually read the article, you'd notice the areas referred are decidedly south and decidedly in the republic.
When you move out of your parents basement and buy or rent a home, you will realize that you do pay for sewage, usually on your water bill.
Actually, this depends. If sewage is included in your rental agreement, then you pay for sewage as a hidden/subsidized cost included in rent.
In any event, I believe you're missing the point, which is that the tax would be proportional to use. Perhaps it is proportional to use in your area, in mine the only use that is associated with proportional cost is water. Water use increases with increased waste, but this is not always a proportional increase.
In any event, did you honestly think my proposal was all that serious in the first place? I wouldn't waste time on Slashdot if I thought I had come up with something so revolutionary as requiring my congressperson's attention. Clearly, the proposal is meant solely for bemusement and not as a toolbox for those of fitting description to decide whether they belong inside.
In other words, just laugh a little at what is clearly a joke.
It would penalize people who eat a healthy diet with plenty of dietary fiber.
I should think it would tend to penalize those with a penchant for overeating.
If you eat a 'healthy diet' with plenty of fiber and are still over-eating, then your diet is not healthy.
Why don't we also have a "Crap Tax" wherein those who consume food and subsequently release it into sewage systems must pay a percentage relative to the weight of their waste? This would have the additional benefit of taxing those who consume more and probably be about as effective as the tax proposed in TFA.
Or they could just rename the 'video game tax' the "crap tax" and be more honest about the quality of their reasoning on the issue.
Far be it from me to minimize such a significant accomplishment, but, as the article points out, two base RNA molecules have been created so far. So, there are still two more that need to be created in order to make the 'lucky' four.
I imagine it will only take a bit of time to figure out the last two now that the recipe to create things in the first place is known. Nevertheless, there is still a bit more to the puzzle at this point. In any event, this team deserves a Nobel Prize.
Ideally, they get advised by experts and this may have been the case here.
Experts are ideal, but state governments are more likely to go off half-cocked.
I don't know much about the Texas legislature specifically, but many state legislatures are relatively unprofessional compared to the national equivalent. Some state legislatures even operate on a part-time basis.
Oh, pinpointing by "seat," nevermind then. I was really interested there for a second. Really big blowhorns anyone?
Er, those games aren't any more technically advanced than what's shown up on the Xbox 360.
Yeah, actually, Killzone 2 is more advanced. I'm not saying the 360 won't be able to match it, but Killzone 2 is on top at the moment.
Besides, the PS3 is seriously lagging behind the 360 as far as games go. For the most part, the 360 has better games, better graphics, and better online play.
I'm tired of people dragging out this three-year-old argument. It's simply not true.
If Killzone 2 isn't enough to convince you that the consoles are an even playing-field, then how about these PS3 exclusives:
Metal Gear Solid 4: Guns of the Patriots
LittleBigPlanet
Resistance: Fall of Man
Resistance 2
Warhawk
Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction
Heavenly Sword
Folklore
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune
Gran Turismo 5: Prologue
MotorStorm
MotorStorm: Pacific Rift
Valkyria Chronicles
Wipeout HD
Flower
Perpetuating the fallacy that the 360 has better graphics is so 2006. I own both consoles and can honestly say that there are no differences worth mentioning in any worthwhile games over the past year.
It's already been done in Tsukuba. Look it up.
The PSUbuntu website is a good resource for anyone who wants to run Ubuntu on their PS3:
http://psubuntu.com/
I have been thinking very seriously to introduce a recorder in my life to settle arguments with my girlfriend (yes yes, here's my geek card).
This is a good way to be single in the near future. You are a true geek, my friend.
Actually, I think the mayor issuing a mandatory evacuation had more to do with the guys from NOAA advising him to do so.
Nice story, though.
Hey clueless, the mayor of New Orleans is African American. Go stick your foot-mouth someplace else.
I think it was always pretty clear that MonkeyBoy is totally a deranged maniac. And I mean this in the most flattering way I can [...]
Well now, Mr. Balmer... Let's see, I do have some feedback for you. And I mean this in the absolute best way possible.
At times, Steve, you're bit on the edge. And when I say, "on the edge," what I mean, really, is that you're a complete fucking loony. And I do mean that in a positive way.
Now, moving on, this 'urge to dance' you've been feeling, has it cropped up again recently?
Since my keys are always in my pocket I will probably find your actions suspicious.
"Here, let me help you!"
"What?! No!"
"You're making a mess!"
"That's because you're grabbing me!"
Meanwhile, someone else sneaks up and takes your keys out of your pocket.
It could happen.
"I can't do it Obi-wan. I can't delete Mozilla Firefox..."
"Then, the terrorists have already won. You were our last hope..."
"Yoda spoke of another..."
"The other he spoke of is Internet Explorer."
"But, I use an iMac. I have no Internet Explorer."
"To protect you from hackers, it was hidden from you when you booted up the machine [...]"
And so on...
If they do a half assed job of rebuilding, then they will only be doing this again every few years
No. If they do a half-assed job of rebuilding, then, the next time this happens, The Big Easy will become The Big Ghost Town.
Make no mistake, they have one chance to rebuild.
Correction: change "chips" to "systems" in my comment above.