The "touching is good" ad only closes with that line. The rest of the ad is about precise control using the touch screen, not any sexually explicit or suggestive message at all.
I guess with some people, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, right?
Your comment might be insightful, except for the Cups Detroit won in 2002, 1998, and 1997. Oh yeah, and even 1995, although they lost in the finals, I'd hardly call a conference championship a sucky playoffs. That's 3 league championships (4 conference championships since 1997).
The Leafs haven't won a league championship since 1967.
There's no NHL season this year. I've bought the EA NHL game for years... but not this year. Why? Not because I bought a different game, but because I'm just not interested in playing a hockey video game when there's no hockey season.
Re:VW is already importing Passat and Toureg diese
on
A Viable Biofuel?
·
· Score: 1
Also: why the Passat then if you considered the Prius? We considered the Prius, the Civic Hybrid, and the Golf and Jetta TDIs for both myself and my wife. As you said, the Prius just isn't highly available, but the Passat is both bigger and goes down below the 40 mpg max efficiency area, where the Golf and Jetta both get around 50 mpg (for us, my Golf TDI is 2002, her Jetta TDI is 2003, so not the PD versions).
Re:VW is already importing Passat and Toureg diese
on
A Viable Biofuel?
·
· Score: 1
Sweet, somehow I mis-read the torque on VW's US Passat Specifications. Thanks for the info! My next car is likely the Passat TDI wagon.
Re:Okay, it's another bio-oil source.
on
A Viable Biofuel?
·
· Score: 1
Diesel Sales Continue to Climb in Europe. The majority of new cars in France, Belgium, and Spain are diesels. Europe-wide, the percentage was 40%. (This was 2002). Early estimates for 2004 put the Europe-wide majority to diesels for new car sales.
Re:VW is already importing Passat and Toureg diese
on
A Viable Biofuel?
·
· Score: 1
Yes, these models are set to arrive for the 2005 model year (which would mean cars on a lot near you). Unfortunately the only diesel engine for the Passat is the 2.0L SOHC I4, which is just plain wimpy compared to what they get over in Europe.
Now, the V10 Tuareg gets the 10 cylinder, 3.0L beast of an engine which throws out 553 ft-lbs of torque at 2000 rpm. (In Europe, the V10 is also available on the Phaeton sedan.)
When the/real/ mid-range diesel engines from Europe arrive (ULSD required) I'm going to be a happy camper. Something in the 175-225 ft-lbs of torque range should do nicely, and still get 40-45 mpg.
Re:Okay, it's another bio-oil source.
on
A Viable Biofuel?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Right here. I drive a VW TDI, and I'm already happily running on biodiesel. Bring on the algae-diesel, synthetic diesel, whatever.
Oh yeah, and the majority of new cars in Europe are diesels. Try taking a peek outside the American border once in a while! Anyway, once ULSD finally hits the States, perhaps America will get some decent diesel numbers as the improved engines from Europe (built for ULSD) can be imported.
The Jeep Liberty is coming to the US with a Mercedes diesel engine. Volkswagen makes the Jetta and Golf in diesel already for the American market, and the Tuareg (SUV) and Passat (sedan) are set to be brought to the US in their diesel versions.
Oh yeah. And I get 50 mpg/plus/ spirited torqued driving fun with my Golf TDI.
John Kerry "I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages" Don't blame me, he said it.
Actually didn't he read it from the writings of another person? (i.e. he was reading the accounts of another, not reciting his own first-hand account.)
They are not inaccurate -- unless you found some factual error that I missed.
That's not the right way to display visual information.
Have to agree with that sentiment entirely. This should have been a single map with multiple shaded increments.
Re:Do you -know- how many candidates there are?
on
Real Presidential Debates
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
My personal preference for the threshhold of who should be in the debates is this:
Add up the total electoral votes for all states on which the candidate is on the ballot. If this number is enough to gain election, the candidate should be involved in the debates. So if you can get on the ballot in Texas, California, New York, Florida, and a few other states, you should be eligible for the debates.
Completely agree: Metroid Prime, Mario Sunshine, and Zelda: The Wind Waker (and Ocarina for Gamecube was fantastic as well) have been some of the best games this console generation. Although I really liked Eternal Darkness, and I can't wait for Resident Evil 4, either, and those last two games have a bit of gore going on.
So the question is... who are these people? Am I just a clueless idiot, or are 37 of the most influential 50 people completely anonymous? They could be names out of a hat as far as I know.
# 1. Ashley Highfield # 3. Niklas Zennstrom # 5. David Blunkett # 6. Richard Granger # 9. Eric Schmidt # 10. Marc Benioff # 11. Sir Peter Gershon # 12. Marten Mickos # 13. Meg Whitman # 14. Sir David Tweedie # 15. Jonathan Ive # 16. James Murdoch # 17. Arun Sarin # 19. Sven Jaschan # 20. S Ramadorai # 21. Karen Price # 25. Joe McGeehan # 26. Vivek Paul # 28. Eric Abensur # 29. Martin Varsavsky # 31. Len Hynds # 32. David Levin # 33. John Connors # 35. Azim Premji # 36. Ben Verwaayen # 37. Daniel Egger # 38. Van Honeycutt # 39. Jon Rubinstein # 40. Mark J Cox # 41. Hu Jintao # 42. Dan'l Lewin # 45. Ratan Tata # 46. Michael Powell # 47. David Sainsbury # 48. Andy Duncan # 49. Bernard C Soriano # 50. Simon Davies
I only recognized 13 of the 50, and I work in IT, read "InformationWeek" and other junk like that for the sole purpose of trying to stay on top of this kind of thing.
# 2. Steve Jobs # 4. Tom Ridge # 7. Linus Torvalds # 7. Bill Gates # 18. Rupert Murdoch # 22. Lawrence Lessig # 23. Ian Foster # 24. Jonathan Schwartz # 27. Sam Palmisano # 30. Donald E Knuth # 34. Michael Dell # 43. Paul Sarbanes and Michael Oxley # 44. Richard Stallman
the way to provide a safer America at the least loss of civil liberties:
stop abusing other countries through our position of economic power.
what do I mean by abuse?
1. labor abuse 2. natural resource abuse 3. political abuse 4. "thou shalt not have the holy power of nuclear energy" abuse
and the list goes on. the reason much of the world hates America is perhaps partly because they envy America's wealth and freedom, but mostly because it is perceived that America uses its wealth to ensure its future wealth and dominance at the expense of others. if America wanted to flop around in gluttonous wealth, that would be one thing. but sweat shops, African gold mines, and not to mention propped-up dictators du jour and the removal at their whim of the same, show the world that America is interested in not just enjoying its wealth, but flexing it, flaunting it, and strip-mining other countries to prolong it.
What Mr. President still thinks about the weapons of mass destructions in Iraq?
Officially, I think it's been stated that "Iraq had the potential possibility of someday creating a program to research and develop such weapons" and that "Yes, that all along was the real reason for going to war, this possibility that they someday might become an iminent threat".
As we all know, if we want social programs, someone must pay for them. How do you address the fact that currently we are shoving a massive amount of debt onto future generations, by continuing to spend much more than we actually have? Surely, we must either cut spending drastically, raise taxes, or both. And as a secondary question, how do you address the fact that forcing someone to involuntarily pay for someone else's social programs amounts to government-sponsored theft?
Good comments -- I agree with your answers for the most part.
Now this I'd like to see,... maybe Alien and Predator can be on the opposite ticket!
Another neat fact: Jesse was also in The Running Man with Arnold.
Let's see... who would represent Alien on the ticket? Sigourney Weaver and Paul Reiser? Bill Paxton would obviously be disqualified although he was in Aliens, since he was also in Predator 2.
In the current system, a single fraudulent vote cast in the following states would have the corresponding introduced error:
I meant to say could have the corresponding introduced error.
Also, a third proposal to electoral reform which I have read elsewhere goes a little further to rewarding the "popularity contest" winner of a statewide election, by awarding the 2 "senatorial" electoral votes to the outright winner, and dividing the remaining "representative" electoral votes proportionally.
Still other proposals advocate awarding electoral votes on a district-by-district basis, but I believe this defrauds "political minority" members of those districts of their presidential vote, much as the "political minorities" in nearly every state are currently defrauded today. Ask the 35% of Californians who voted for Bush if they feel their vote was counted.
I expect that 1 fraudulent vote can change the outcome of the national election in any reasonable system.
Semantically speaking, of course that is true. I mean to emphasize the fact that 1 fraudulent or defrauded vote (one ten thousandth of a percent of total national votes cast) can bring about a large electoral swing (perhaps even 5%) in the current "all or nothing" electoral system. The error that a single erroneous vote should bring into a system should be minimized if possible, and it is very, very possible.
If the presidential election were moved to a popular vote, the 1 erroneous vote could at most cause one ten thousandth of a percent error (assuming 100 million votes cast). If the presidential election were moved to a "proportionally divided" electoral vote system, then the most error a single erroneous vote could cause is 1/538, or a little less than one fifth of a percent.
In the current system, a single fraudulent vote cast in the following states would have the corresponding introduced error:
California (55 electoral votes): more than ten percent Texas (34 electoral votes): more than six percent New York (31 electoral votes): more than five and a half percent Florida (27 electoral votes): about five percent
That's a lot of introduced error for a single data point, comprising one ten thousandth of a percent of the total data. Obviously, it would be great if instead we could ensure 100% error-free vote casting and tabulation. But as has been so frequently displayed, this is absolutely not the case. Votes are cast fraudulently, some voters are defrauded out of their votes, and vote counting errors abound no matter the employed system.
Slashdot Mirror
and snort it or inject it.
The "touching is good" ad only closes with that line. The rest of the ad is about precise control using the touch screen, not any sexually explicit or suggestive message at all.
I guess with some people, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail, right?
Your comment might be insightful, except for the Cups Detroit won in 2002, 1998, and 1997. Oh yeah, and even 1995, although they lost in the finals, I'd hardly call a conference championship a sucky playoffs. That's 3 league championships (4 conference championships since 1997).
The Leafs haven't won a league championship since 1967.
ESPN also doesn't release on GameCube, while EA does (although no online for GameCube).
There's no NHL season this year. I've bought the EA NHL game for years... but not this year. Why? Not because I bought a different game, but because I'm just not interested in playing a hockey video game when there's no hockey season.
Also: why the Passat then if you considered the Prius? We considered the Prius, the Civic Hybrid, and the Golf and Jetta TDIs for both myself and my wife. As you said, the Prius just isn't highly available, but the Passat is both bigger and goes down below the 40 mpg max efficiency area, where the Golf and Jetta both get around 50 mpg (for us, my Golf TDI is 2002, her Jetta TDI is 2003, so not the PD versions).
Sweet, somehow I mis-read the torque on VW's US Passat Specifications. Thanks for the info! My next car is likely the Passat TDI wagon.
Diesel Sales Continue to Climb in Europe. The majority of new cars in France, Belgium, and Spain are diesels. Europe-wide, the percentage was 40%. (This was 2002). Early estimates for 2004 put the Europe-wide majority to diesels for new car sales.
Yes, these models are set to arrive for the 2005 model year (which would mean cars on a lot near you). Unfortunately the only diesel engine for the Passat is the 2.0L SOHC I4, which is just plain wimpy compared to what they get over in Europe.
/real/ mid-range diesel engines from Europe arrive (ULSD required) I'm going to be a happy camper. Something in the 175-225 ft-lbs of torque range should do nicely, and still get 40-45 mpg.
Now, the V10 Tuareg gets the 10 cylinder, 3.0L beast of an engine which throws out 553 ft-lbs of torque at 2000 rpm. (In Europe, the V10 is also available on the Phaeton sedan.)
When the
Right here. I drive a VW TDI, and I'm already happily running on biodiesel. Bring on the algae-diesel, synthetic diesel, whatever.
/plus/ spirited torqued driving fun with my Golf TDI.
Oh yeah, and the majority of new cars in Europe are diesels. Try taking a peek outside the American border once in a while! Anyway, once ULSD finally hits the States, perhaps America will get some decent diesel numbers as the improved engines from Europe (built for ULSD) can be imported.
The Jeep Liberty is coming to the US with a Mercedes diesel engine. Volkswagen makes the Jetta and Golf in diesel already for the American market, and the Tuareg (SUV) and Passat (sedan) are set to be brought to the US in their diesel versions.
Oh yeah. And I get 50 mpg
Google doesn't show any authoritative source, only a few right-wing sites like freerepublic, etc.
seriously, post a link, I'll read it.
John Kerry "I took part in search and destroy missions, in the burning of villages" Don't blame me, he said it.
Actually didn't he read it from the writings of another person? (i.e. he was reading the accounts of another, not reciting his own first-hand account.)
Hilarity is: "Springtime for Hitler" sung while the chorus marches around in a swaztika formation...
Yes they're interesting, but also inaccurate.
They are not inaccurate -- unless you found some factual error that I missed.
That's not the right way to display visual information.
Have to agree with that sentiment entirely. This should have been a single map with multiple shaded increments.
My personal preference for the threshhold of who should be in the debates is this:
Add up the total electoral votes for all states on which the candidate is on the ballot. If this number is enough to gain election, the candidate should be involved in the debates. So if you can get on the ballot in Texas, California, New York, Florida, and a few other states, you should be eligible for the debates.
Completely agree: Metroid Prime, Mario Sunshine, and Zelda: The Wind Waker (and Ocarina for Gamecube was fantastic as well) have been some of the best games this console generation. Although I really liked Eternal Darkness, and I can't wait for Resident Evil 4, either, and those last two games have a bit of gore going on.
My guess is that less than 90% of Americans know who Hu Jintao. And less than 50% of /. readers.
Now that you mention Michael Powell being chairman of the FCC, the name does indeed make my "familiar with them" list.
So the question is... who are these people? Am I just a clueless idiot, or are 37 of the most influential 50 people completely anonymous? They could be names out of a hat as far as I know.
# 1. Ashley Highfield
# 3. Niklas Zennstrom
# 5. David Blunkett
# 6. Richard Granger
# 9. Eric Schmidt
# 10. Marc Benioff
# 11. Sir Peter Gershon
# 12. Marten Mickos
# 13. Meg Whitman
# 14. Sir David Tweedie
# 15. Jonathan Ive
# 16. James Murdoch
# 17. Arun Sarin
# 19. Sven Jaschan
# 20. S Ramadorai
# 21. Karen Price
# 25. Joe McGeehan
# 26. Vivek Paul
# 28. Eric Abensur
# 29. Martin Varsavsky
# 31. Len Hynds
# 32. David Levin
# 33. John Connors
# 35. Azim Premji
# 36. Ben Verwaayen
# 37. Daniel Egger
# 38. Van Honeycutt
# 39. Jon Rubinstein
# 40. Mark J Cox
# 41. Hu Jintao
# 42. Dan'l Lewin
# 45. Ratan Tata
# 46. Michael Powell
# 47. David Sainsbury
# 48. Andy Duncan
# 49. Bernard C Soriano
# 50. Simon Davies
I only recognized 13 of the 50, and I work in IT, read "InformationWeek" and other junk like that for the sole purpose of trying to stay on top of this kind of thing.
# 2. Steve Jobs
# 4. Tom Ridge
# 7. Linus Torvalds
# 7. Bill Gates
# 18. Rupert Murdoch
# 22. Lawrence Lessig
# 23. Ian Foster
# 24. Jonathan Schwartz
# 27. Sam Palmisano
# 30. Donald E Knuth
# 34. Michael Dell
# 43. Paul Sarbanes and Michael Oxley
# 44. Richard Stallman
Who knew there were still insightful comments being written on /.? Well done.
the way to provide a safer America at the least loss of civil liberties:
stop abusing other countries through our position of economic power.
what do I mean by abuse?
1. labor abuse
2. natural resource abuse
3. political abuse
4. "thou shalt not have the holy power of nuclear energy" abuse
and the list goes on. the reason much of the world hates America is perhaps partly because they envy America's wealth and freedom, but mostly because it is perceived that America uses its wealth to ensure its future wealth and dominance at the expense of others. if America wanted to flop around in gluttonous wealth, that would be one thing. but sweat shops, African gold mines, and not to mention propped-up dictators du jour and the removal at their whim of the same, show the world that America is interested in not just enjoying its wealth, but flexing it, flaunting it, and strip-mining other countries to prolong it.
What Mr. President still thinks about the weapons of mass destructions in Iraq?
Officially, I think it's been stated that "Iraq had the potential possibility of someday creating a program to research and develop such weapons" and that "Yes, that all along was the real reason for going to war, this possibility that they someday might become an iminent threat".
As we all know, if we want social programs, someone must pay for them. How do you address the fact that currently we are shoving a massive amount of debt onto future generations, by continuing to spend much more than we actually have? Surely, we must either cut spending drastically, raise taxes, or both. And as a secondary question, how do you address the fact that forcing someone to involuntarily pay for someone else's social programs amounts to government-sponsored theft?
Good comments -- I agree with your answers for the most part.
Now this I'd like to see,... maybe Alien and Predator can be on the opposite ticket!
Another neat fact: Jesse was also in The Running Man with Arnold.
Let's see... who would represent Alien on the ticket? Sigourney Weaver and Paul Reiser? Bill Paxton would obviously be disqualified although he was in Aliens, since he was also in Predator 2.
In the current system, a single fraudulent vote cast in the following states would have the corresponding introduced error:
I meant to say could have the corresponding introduced error.
Also, a third proposal to electoral reform which I have read elsewhere goes a little further to rewarding the "popularity contest" winner of a statewide election, by awarding the 2 "senatorial" electoral votes to the outright winner, and dividing the remaining "representative" electoral votes proportionally.
Still other proposals advocate awarding electoral votes on a district-by-district basis, but I believe this defrauds "political minority" members of those districts of their presidential vote, much as the "political minorities" in nearly every state are currently defrauded today. Ask the 35% of Californians who voted for Bush if they feel their vote was counted.
Some interesting maps:
Map: 2000 Popular Vote: Bush
Map: 2000 Popular Vote: Gore
I expect that 1 fraudulent vote can change the outcome of the national election in any reasonable system.
Semantically speaking, of course that is true. I mean to emphasize the fact that 1 fraudulent or defrauded vote (one ten thousandth of a percent of total national votes cast) can bring about a large electoral swing (perhaps even 5%) in the current "all or nothing" electoral system. The error that a single erroneous vote should bring into a system should be minimized if possible, and it is very, very possible.
If the presidential election were moved to a popular vote, the 1 erroneous vote could at most cause one ten thousandth of a percent error (assuming 100 million votes cast). If the presidential election were moved to a "proportionally divided" electoral vote system, then the most error a single erroneous vote could cause is 1/538, or a little less than one fifth of a percent.
In the current system, a single fraudulent vote cast in the following states would have the corresponding introduced error:
California (55 electoral votes): more than ten percent
Texas (34 electoral votes): more than six percent
New York (31 electoral votes): more than five and a half percent
Florida (27 electoral votes): about five percent
That's a lot of introduced error for a single data point, comprising one ten thousandth of a percent of the total data. Obviously, it would be great if instead we could ensure 100% error-free vote casting and tabulation. But as has been so frequently displayed, this is absolutely not the case. Votes are cast fraudulently, some voters are defrauded out of their votes, and vote counting errors abound no matter the employed system.