What's the net potential energy difference between the difference between the different spin states, if any? And what does the curve look like - is there a big hump between them, or a small hump relative to any energy difference? If it's a hump, is it a trough to flip the states back?
I had to pull out my quantum mechanics book for this one. As a rough estimate for the energy difference between "up" and "down" spins, you can use the energy of the Zeeman effect (energy level splitting in an atom when in a magnetic field). The magnitude of that effect is (B/2.4e9 gauss) * 13.6 eV, where B is the size of the applied magnetic field. A supermagnet would produce fields on the order of 1e5 gauss, so we're not talking very much energy here. As another very crude estimate, consider that random thermal effects have enough energy to flip spins randomly, which is one of the big problems facing spintronics.
As to the humping issue, this is quantum mechanics; there is no curve. Only discrete states are allowed, with nothing in between
Uheheheh.... you said 'humping.'
Re:Well this sounds promising...
on
CSS Cookbook
·
· Score: 1
Hacks are a bad practice that has been challenged and debated for a while now. I though, and correct me if I am wrong, that conditional HTML statements were the best way to go. Nowadays, why would someone want a book that is going to lead you to write non-compliant code.
Non-compliant code is the only way to go.
Take a look at any complicated JS application. There's bound to be at least one place where things are 'hacked' to work in different browsers.
I remember when I wrote my first real website and got it to display right in all the popular browsers. W3C's auto-verify went to town telling me my page was a piece of crap... so I 'fixed' it and it only worked in netscape. Outstanding. I restored from backups and have not since verified using w3c.
HTML nowadays is pretty much the same no matter which browser you use (just prop open table cells with empty images so IE will display right). Javascript and CSS, however, are a whole different story. Try page item positioning in CSS or finding an 'isArray()' function that works in safari.
I'd like as much as anyone to be able to write a page and not have to verify it in a browser (I know my code's theoretically correct, but it only works as-is 90% of the time).
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
In the same vein as France's declaration of games as art, the 'Great Canadian Videogame Competition' may just mean more great games for gamers, more jobs for game makers, and the chance for a new EA or Ubisoft to emerge.
EA messes up so much of its product out of stupid policies like high programmer turnover and insisting on long-running franchises like Madden 20XX and others.
What the game industry needs is for the PC to reemerge, which wont happen until there's an OS for PCs that 'just works'. People use consoles over PCs because their PC is splorked full of viruses and spyware so all their games run like crap, even on expensive hardware. That's in addition to the constant battle over whose responsibility it is to get the game to work: the video card company or the game company.
EA messes up so many PC games it's surprising they still make them. Bugs galore, lack of optimization, and console-like limitations all end up in the final product. It ends up ruining otherwise excellent games such as Global Operations.
That's one reason Valve kicked so much ass--they release games when they are DONE (yeah I know EA helped distribute hard copies of HL2, but valve sold most of the copies themselves through downloads). I'd put half-life 2 up against any single player game EA ever produced.
USPTO encourages its own financial advancement and the proliferation of unproductive patent law firms by providing incentives to create legal ammo for the big corporations that can afford the insanly expensive process of filing a patent
It's cheap to file a patent.
The reason you file one is so that way, when you find someone has violated your patent, you SUE them and use your patent documents as slam-dunk evidence in court (provided that it predates THEIR patent and adequately describes the device THEY created).
Patent law is 2 fold.
Patenting things that already exist, therefore, is not a big deal. However, patenting things that everyone uses (like navigation frames on a webpage) is downright evil.
Part of having rights is excepting that some people aren't going to use them for what you want them to.
The rights taken by the DMCA may well include this site's right to let people 'cheat' on WoW.
If you believe that this site should be shut down, you believe in the same principles that the DMCA was based on. Private technology, even when licensed, can be used by customers in only methods sanctioned by the company they bought it from.
I don't believe in that, no matter how much disdain I hold towards cheaters.
However it did seem to me that he is saying that the theory behind his fusor engines has been proven, and that he is staking his reputation on that. I'm also pretty sure he is saying that the remaining problems are in the engineering, not the physics. So its like rocketships: we know it can be done but we don't yet know how to do it well enough to be really useful.
He built a prototype that broke the world record for fusions per second back in 2005.
The finished product would 'simply' be an upscaled version with practical control mechanisms.
He was using parts from a microwave oven for christ's sake.
So, as he said "the physics has been proven, now comes the engineering." This also means that the leap of faith is over, now you just have to build a device that harnesses this technology.
He was also saying that since everyone and their grandmother has been using the tokamak design for the past 30 years (which is "crap"), nobody knows how to build parts for this new kind of machine.
The DOE is all hooked on tokamaks, and the 2 new fusion things in France and Japan are tokamaks.
A quote from the video "We've spent 20 years studying tokamaks and the only thing we've found is that they're no darn good!"
Another (a joke): "I think the reason the Soviets gave us Tokamak's design was to send us in the wrong direction."
1. Write down a load of world of warcraft references and in jokes. 2. Add a couple of toilet jokes. 3. Profit!
I have to agree (before you get modded down as the dirty troll you are!).
I don't play WoW, but I've been a gamer since I was 10 years old (which was before you were born, whoever you are). I understood all the jokes and even knew enough about WoW to appreciate that it was right on the money.
Also, the way that they talked was hilarious--the sort of condescending borderline malaise in the vocal commands from Cartman to the other 3--that was spot on.
All in all, though... It just wasn't... that... funny. A lot of WoW players I know thought this was an epic event and were actually giddy that Trey and Matt decided to shed light on their somewhat lame past-time. All I'm saying is, it could've used more fart jokes.
I think there is still a large a degree of colonial thinking left around, just under the surface, both in the subdued racism in Western societies (they do not deserve/will never understand laptops) but also in the 'victim mentality' of some ex-colonial states.
As was mentioned in several other posts in this thread, this laptop program isn't directed at 3rd world nations which are having famine and water issues, it's directed at DEVELOPING nations.
What's the difference? Well, the only starving nations around to day are starving because of their GOVERNMENTS. Therefore, I will say: yes, they don't deserve laptops. Why? because they'll get stolen by their government and resold, burned, warehoused, or whatever just so the people will not have the power (economic or otherwise) to bring them down.
Much of the 3rd world is, however, ready to grow. That's what this is about.
So the answer to "Why don't we give food instead?" is that there's no point: The only nations who have starving people also have governments which will take the food. If the west tries to do anything about it, they'll be accused of invading a sovereign nation and other 3rd world dictators will get really peeved that they may be next.
Then we'll hear a thug like Hugo Chavez spout off about being 'the underdog' in front of roaring applause from the UN, while he holds up a Noam Chomsky book, much to the appreciation of peacenik bathing-boycotters everywhere.
Umm, the idea of Milton Friedman and other economic liberals is that the world is NOT a zero sum game, which is why the fact that we are wealthy is taking exactly nothing away from people in the third world (who were poor when we were poor, and would still be poor if we became poor again).
Yes but 1 plus one equals two, not more!
There is a limited amount of wealth in the world and the richer one nation/group is, the poorer someone else has to be. There is only so much to go around.
By the way: if you believe what I just said, you're a moron.
Note from this era too, the least recently modified web page we know of, last changed Tue, 13 Nov 1990 15:17:00 GMT (though the URI changed.)
The URI changed, so it's not the oldest page on the net. I could mirror this and say "er, the URI changed AGAIN!"... would I then have my page slashdotted?
I'm sure there was once a blank HTML page up at one time ("").. could I put that up and say it's even older?
In developing nations, the key is ensuring factories and agriculture do not dump their waste into the drinking supply (one of the big problems in India), that the sewage and drinking systems are separated, and that modern filtration units are used.
The main source of arsenic poisoning is and has always been from naturally-occurring sources in soil.
I remember when the international community paid millions of dollars to supply Bangladesh with wells to give them water. The problem was, the earth in that area is naturally rich in arsenic and it caused the single largest occurrence of arsenic poisoning in the history of man. Better than dying of thirst, I guess... or not.
The big news comes in the form of a speed jump from 128Mbps to 320Mbps, which pushes it above competing networking standards HomePlug AV and MoCA (Multimedia over Coax) for the title of fastest networking tech outside of gigabit Ethernet and makes it a more attractive option for triple-play providers.'"
this is just sick. 'ok, let's write off forty million men, women, and children. why should we keep people with a disease from dying? That would be like, medical treatment, or something.'
The current AIDS drugs don't keep ANYBODY from dying. They just prolong their lives.
You may think it's worth it, but when I give money to 'fight AIDS in Africa,' I think the most effective way to spend that money is to find a CURE, not keep these people on life support for a decate, but to spend all that money to SAVE the lives of future victims.
It's all economics. Would you give a billion dollars to give a million people 1 extra year, or would you use that money to give 10's of millions of people the rest of their natural life and eliminate the disease altogether.
It's not like you're a villian if you don't want to give your money to dying people. It's your money and your decision. The fact that I give money at all to fight AIDS is selfless in that AIDS DOES NOT EFFECT ME.
There IS a limited amount of money we're talking about here. AIDS isn't that big of a problem in the western world so think of it as charity from us to them. What is the best way for it to be spent?
There's a problem with wanting to help the dying people you see on TV when there are far more people you could help by helping to find a cure.
There are consequences to helping people in certain ways. Pouring money into anti-virals for Africa will mean MORE DEATHS OVER-ALL. Putting money to fight a cure, if we find one, will mean FEWER DEATHS. Those are the facts, act accordingly.
We all want these people to live, but, and listen closely now, LIFE ISN'T FAIR.
More certainly is necessary. Much, much more. But drug cocktails do help substantially. All else being equal, they drastically reduce the odds of a person spreading the HIV virus during an unprotected sexual encounter, and reduce the odds of a pregnant woman passing it to her child from 30% (surprising in and of itself) to something like 5%. Now granted, people with HIV shouldn't be running around getting pregnant in the first place, nor should they be having unprotected sex. But it's not a perfect world, and if drug cocktails slow the spread, that's a win in my book. If they save even a few children from being born with HIV, that's a gargantuan win against a terrible injustice.
Hate to nitpick here, but keeping people with AIDS alive and kicking longer will probably lead to more AIDS infections. If they're willing to have unprotected sex even though they have AIDS or HIV, giving them drugs to keep them stronger and alive longer will ultimately lead to more infection.
Also, other STDs such as genital herpes make AIDS transmission almost a sure thing. Anti-virals have little effect in parts of the world where most of the population has a pre-existing trasmission-enhancing STD (including many of the most AIDS-afflicted African areas).
For some parts of the world, giving people these anti-virals and doubling their prognosis will lead to more deaths. The millions of dollars spent on distributing these treatments would be better spent on finding a cure and simple education about the trasmission of the virus.
It doesn't help that the leader of South Africa announced that HIV doesn't cause AIDS, while another African leader said that AIDS was a scourge created by the west to kill blacks. There was also a terrible rumor which was spread partially by the South African government that having sex with a virgin would cure AIDS. This lead to the rape of thousands of children in that country (who then became infected with AIDS, if they hadn't been already). This still happens hundreds of times a day.
This disease will not be cured until we have a real cure. Lowering infection rates by using anti-virals could have a negative net effect in uneducated regions. The third world isn't like the west--there is little chance of being caught for rape and knowingly spreading a deadly plague. It's amazing what happens when you remove the threat of de-jure reprisal for ones actions.
Alter Relationship on Sunday November 05, @11:44PM (#16731467) I can't wait till they get a hold of this one. Regardless of all the other evidence they will use it as a way to slag on evironmentalists, the Kyoto treaty, liberals, democrats, gay marriage, stem cell research and find creative ways to link all of them to terrorism. And champion corrupt corporations as being the benign benefactors of all humanity. This should be fun.
This just goes to show how the global warming debate is less about science and more about politics.
Look at the rest of the posts in this thread: half of them are political in nature--bashing Bush for one thing or another or somehow making fun of religious people. There are probably some alleged "right wing" posts around here but even 'balanced' posts on this subject end up being modded as 'troll' most of the time (proof here).
There's no point in even debating the Global Warming issue anymore. Everyone has made their decision and the issue has been basked in politics. Considering that this issue shouldn't be political, such things present a huge problem.
I would talk about my beliefs on the subject but there's really no point. Politics isn't like science: facts have no influence on people's opinions.
Until we get to something like Instant Runoff Voting, or abolishing Parties as criminal conspiracies, or replacing them with nonexclusive, noncoordinating mere endorsement mills, we're stuck with the duopoly. We have to play the hand we're dealt, while working to change the dealer.
Just stop voting for bad candidates. All you can do is lead by example. No matter what you THINK will happen if so-and-so wins, if we'll still be screwed under 'the other guy', vote 3rd party.
Any vote for a candidate which will continue the cycle of destruction to our constitution--even if he's 'not as bad' as someone else--is a WASTED VOTE.
When you vote Republican or Democrat, you're voting to destroy this country. In your opinion, [insert name of your party here] is going to do it slower, but that doesn't change the fact that we are still screwed either way.
If you want to "Take a Stand(TM)", vote for who you think is right, not on who you think would be more strategically viable. Even if the worse candidate gets in, you're only slightly more screwed than you would be otherwise.
Slashdot Mirror
Uheheheh.... you said 'humping.'
Hacks are a bad practice that has been challenged and debated for a while now. I though, and correct me if I am wrong, that conditional HTML statements were the best way to go. Nowadays, why would someone want a book that is going to lead you to write non-compliant code.
Non-compliant code is the only way to go.
Take a look at any complicated JS application. There's bound to be at least one place where things are 'hacked' to work in different browsers.
I remember when I wrote my first real website and got it to display right in all the popular browsers. W3C's auto-verify went to town telling me my page was a piece of crap... so I 'fixed' it and it only worked in netscape. Outstanding. I restored from backups and have not since verified using w3c.
HTML nowadays is pretty much the same no matter which browser you use (just prop open table cells with empty images so IE will display right). Javascript and CSS, however, are a whole different story. Try page item positioning in CSS or finding an 'isArray()' function that works in safari.
I'd like as much as anyone to be able to write a page and not have to verify it in a browser (I know my code's theoretically correct, but it only works as-is 90% of the time).
In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
In the same vein as France's declaration of games as art, the 'Great Canadian Videogame Competition' may just mean more great games for gamers, more jobs for game makers, and the chance for a new EA or Ubisoft to emerge.
EA messes up so much of its product out of stupid policies like high programmer turnover and insisting on long-running franchises like Madden 20XX and others.
What the game industry needs is for the PC to reemerge, which wont happen until there's an OS for PCs that 'just works'. People use consoles over PCs because their PC is splorked full of viruses and spyware so all their games run like crap, even on expensive hardware. That's in addition to the constant battle over whose responsibility it is to get the game to work: the video card company or the game company.
EA messes up so many PC games it's surprising they still make them. Bugs galore, lack of optimization, and console-like limitations all end up in the final product. It ends up ruining otherwise excellent games such as Global Operations.
That's one reason Valve kicked so much ass--they release games when they are DONE (yeah I know EA helped distribute hard copies of HL2, but valve sold most of the copies themselves through downloads). I'd put half-life 2 up against any single player game EA ever produced.
USPTO encourages its own financial advancement and the proliferation of unproductive patent law firms by providing incentives to create legal ammo for the big corporations that can afford the insanly expensive process of filing a patent
It's cheap to file a patent.
The reason you file one is so that way, when you find someone has violated your patent, you SUE them and use your patent documents as slam-dunk evidence in court (provided that it predates THEIR patent and adequately describes the device THEY created).
Patent law is 2 fold.
Patenting things that already exist, therefore, is not a big deal. However, patenting things that everyone uses (like navigation frames on a webpage) is downright evil.
6.3 million residents, 9.5 million registered voters.. are you against giving the dead the right to vote?
Racist.
Face-Recognition Software Fingers Suspects
And what does it do if they're male?
Part of having rights is excepting that some people aren't going to use them for what you want them to.
The rights taken by the DMCA may well include this site's right to let people 'cheat' on WoW.
If you believe that this site should be shut down, you believe in the same principles that the DMCA was based on. Private technology, even when licensed, can be used by customers in only methods sanctioned by the company they bought it from.
I don't believe in that, no matter how much disdain I hold towards cheaters.
However it did seem to me that he is saying that the theory behind his fusor engines has been proven, and that he is staking his reputation on that. I'm also pretty sure he is saying that the remaining problems are in the engineering, not the physics. So its like rocketships: we know it can be done but we don't yet know how to do it well enough to be really useful.
He built a prototype that broke the world record for fusions per second back in 2005.
The finished product would 'simply' be an upscaled version with practical control mechanisms.
He was using parts from a microwave oven for christ's sake.
So, as he said "the physics has been proven, now comes the engineering." This also means that the leap of faith is over, now you just have to build a device that harnesses this technology.
He was also saying that since everyone and their grandmother has been using the tokamak design for the past 30 years (which is "crap"), nobody knows how to build parts for this new kind of machine.
The DOE is all hooked on tokamaks, and the 2 new fusion things in France and Japan are tokamaks.
A quote from the video "We've spent 20 years studying tokamaks and the only thing we've found is that they're no darn good!"
Another (a joke): "I think the reason the Soviets gave us Tokamak's design was to send us in the wrong direction."
1. Write down a load of world of warcraft references and in jokes.
... funny. A lot of WoW players I know thought this was an epic event and were actually giddy that Trey and Matt decided to shed light on their somewhat lame past-time. All I'm saying is, it could've used more fart jokes.
2. Add a couple of toilet jokes.
3. Profit!
I have to agree (before you get modded down as the dirty troll you are!).
I don't play WoW, but I've been a gamer since I was 10 years old (which was before you were born, whoever you are). I understood all the jokes and even knew enough about WoW to appreciate that it was right on the money.
Also, the way that they talked was hilarious--the sort of condescending borderline malaise in the vocal commands from Cartman to the other 3--that was spot on.
All in all, though... It just wasn't... that
I think there is still a large a degree of colonial thinking left around, just under the surface, both in the subdued racism in Western societies (they do not deserve/will never understand laptops) but also in the 'victim mentality' of some ex-colonial states.
As was mentioned in several other posts in this thread, this laptop program isn't directed at 3rd world nations which are having famine and water issues, it's directed at DEVELOPING nations.
What's the difference? Well, the only starving nations around to day are starving because of their GOVERNMENTS. Therefore, I will say: yes, they don't deserve laptops. Why? because they'll get stolen by their government and resold, burned, warehoused, or whatever just so the people will not have the power (economic or otherwise) to bring them down.
Much of the 3rd world is, however, ready to grow. That's what this is about.
So the answer to "Why don't we give food instead?" is that there's no point: The only nations who have starving people also have governments which will take the food. If the west tries to do anything about it, they'll be accused of invading a sovereign nation and other 3rd world dictators will get really peeved that they may be next.
Then we'll hear a thug like Hugo Chavez spout off about being 'the underdog' in front of roaring applause from the UN, while he holds up a Noam Chomsky book, much to the appreciation of peacenik bathing-boycotters everywhere.
Umm, the idea of Milton Friedman and other economic liberals is that the world is NOT a zero sum game, which is why the fact that we are wealthy is taking exactly nothing away from people in the third world (who were poor when we were poor, and would still be poor if we became poor again).
Yes but 1 plus one equals two, not more!
There is a limited amount of wealth in the world and the richer one nation/group is, the poorer someone else has to be. There is only so much to go around.
By the way: if you believe what I just said, you're a moron.
Are New DRM Technologies Setting Vista Up for Failure?
Nope, it's all that other stuff.
People who have talent don't get rich.
People who organize talent get rich.
Is organization not a talent?
People skills aren't easy to master.
Has Netcraft confirmed this?
... would I then have my page slashdotted?
Who Cares? (read on)
Note from this era too, the least recently modified web page we know of, last changed Tue, 13 Nov 1990 15:17:00 GMT (though the URI changed.)
The URI changed, so it's not the oldest page on the net. I could mirror this and say "er, the URI changed AGAIN!"
I'm sure there was once a blank HTML page up at one time ("").. could I put that up and say it's even older?
WHEN WAS SOMEONE GOING TO TELL ME THAT THE 3RD WORLD DOESN'T HAVE ANY MONEY?!
This is worse than that time we flew to Canada and bought ATI so I'd have an excuse to redeem my frequent flier miles.
It doesn't matter if it changed the fucking outcome! The point is that VOTES WERE NOT COUNTED!
NO freakin kidding.
We had the same thing happen in Arizona a while ago--the guy voted for himself, and his wife voted for him too.
Final count: Zero.
We don't even have electronic voting here.
I should point out that nothing came of it, either.
In developing nations, the key is ensuring factories and agriculture do not dump their waste into the drinking supply (one of the big problems in India), that the sewage and drinking systems are separated, and that modern filtration units are used.
The main source of arsenic poisoning is and has always been from naturally-occurring sources in soil.
I remember when the international community paid millions of dollars to supply Bangladesh with wells to give them water. The problem was, the earth in that area is naturally rich in arsenic and it caused the single largest occurrence of arsenic poisoning in the history of man. Better than dying of thirst, I guess... or not.
Does this mean they'll stop making walkmans?
These newfangled 'CD's will never catch on!
Investigators accuse Toyoda of illegally performing 33 songs such as the Beatles
Toyota motor company sued as well, claiming that playing bad harmonica under the name "Toyoda" qualifies as defamation of character and slander.
The big news comes in the form of a speed jump from 128Mbps to 320Mbps, which pushes it above competing networking standards HomePlug AV and MoCA (Multimedia over Coax) for the title of fastest networking tech outside of gigabit Ethernet and makes it a more attractive option for triple-play providers.'"
What was wrong with gigabit ethernet?
Any coincidence that they launch the first DX10 card the same day that Vista goes gold?
No. M$ doesn't release its products until they go bismuth (to treat typical symptoms of M$' early adopters), which is still 4 release candidates away.
this is just sick. 'ok, let's write off forty million men, women, and children. why should we keep people with a disease from dying? That would be like, medical treatment, or something.'
The current AIDS drugs don't keep ANYBODY from dying. They just prolong their lives.
You may think it's worth it, but when I give money to 'fight AIDS in Africa,' I think the most effective way to spend that money is to find a CURE, not keep these people on life support for a decate, but to spend all that money to SAVE the lives of future victims.
It's all economics. Would you give a billion dollars to give a million people 1 extra year, or would you use that money to give 10's of millions of people the rest of their natural life and eliminate the disease altogether.
It's not like you're a villian if you don't want to give your money to dying people. It's your money and your decision. The fact that I give money at all to fight AIDS is selfless in that AIDS DOES NOT EFFECT ME.
There IS a limited amount of money we're talking about here. AIDS isn't that big of a problem in the western world so think of it as charity from us to them. What is the best way for it to be spent?
There's a problem with wanting to help the dying people you see on TV when there are far more people you could help by helping to find a cure.
There are consequences to helping people in certain ways. Pouring money into anti-virals for Africa will mean MORE DEATHS OVER-ALL. Putting money to fight a cure, if we find one, will mean FEWER DEATHS. Those are the facts, act accordingly.
We all want these people to live, but, and listen closely now, LIFE ISN'T FAIR.
More certainly is necessary. Much, much more. But drug cocktails do help substantially. All else being equal, they drastically reduce the odds of a person spreading the HIV virus during an unprotected sexual encounter, and reduce the odds of a pregnant woman passing it to her child from 30% (surprising in and of itself) to something like 5%. Now granted, people with HIV shouldn't be running around getting pregnant in the first place, nor should they be having unprotected sex. But it's not a perfect world, and if drug cocktails slow the spread, that's a win in my book. If they save even a few children from being born with HIV, that's a gargantuan win against a terrible injustice.
Hate to nitpick here, but keeping people with AIDS alive and kicking longer will probably lead to more AIDS infections. If they're willing to have unprotected sex even though they have AIDS or HIV, giving them drugs to keep them stronger and alive longer will ultimately lead to more infection.
Also, other STDs such as genital herpes make AIDS transmission almost a sure thing. Anti-virals have little effect in parts of the world where most of the population has a pre-existing trasmission-enhancing STD (including many of the most AIDS-afflicted African areas).
For some parts of the world, giving people these anti-virals and doubling their prognosis will lead to more deaths. The millions of dollars spent on distributing these treatments would be better spent on finding a cure and simple education about the trasmission of the virus.
It doesn't help that the leader of South Africa announced that HIV doesn't cause AIDS, while another African leader said that AIDS was a scourge created by the west to kill blacks. There was also a terrible rumor which was spread partially by the South African government that having sex with a virgin would cure AIDS. This lead to the rape of thousands of children in that country (who then became infected with AIDS, if they hadn't been already). This still happens hundreds of times a day.
This disease will not be cured until we have a real cure. Lowering infection rates by using anti-virals could have a negative net effect in uneducated regions. The third world isn't like the west--there is little chance of being caught for rape and knowingly spreading a deadly plague. It's amazing what happens when you remove the threat of de-jure reprisal for ones actions.
Alter Relationship on Sunday November 05, @11:44PM (#16731467)
I can't wait till they get a hold of this one. Regardless of all the other evidence they will use it as a way to slag on evironmentalists, the Kyoto treaty, liberals, democrats, gay marriage, stem cell research and find creative ways to link all of them to terrorism. And champion corrupt corporations as being the benign benefactors of all humanity. This should be fun.
This just goes to show how the global warming debate is less about science and more about politics.
Look at the rest of the posts in this thread: half of them are political in nature--bashing Bush for one thing or another or somehow making fun of religious people. There are probably some alleged "right wing" posts around here but even 'balanced' posts on this subject end up being modded as 'troll' most of the time (proof here).
There's no point in even debating the Global Warming issue anymore. Everyone has made their decision and the issue has been basked in politics. Considering that this issue shouldn't be political, such things present a huge problem.
I would talk about my beliefs on the subject but there's really no point. Politics isn't like science: facts have no influence on people's opinions.
Until we get to something like Instant Runoff Voting, or abolishing Parties as criminal conspiracies, or replacing them with nonexclusive, noncoordinating mere endorsement mills, we're stuck with the duopoly. We have to play the hand we're dealt, while working to change the dealer.
Just stop voting for bad candidates. All you can do is lead by example. No matter what you THINK will happen if so-and-so wins, if we'll still be screwed under 'the other guy', vote 3rd party.
Any vote for a candidate which will continue the cycle of destruction to our constitution--even if he's 'not as bad' as someone else--is a WASTED VOTE.
When you vote Republican or Democrat, you're voting to destroy this country. In your opinion, [insert name of your party here] is going to do it slower, but that doesn't change the fact that we are still screwed either way.
If you want to "Take a Stand(TM)", vote for who you think is right, not on who you think would be more strategically viable. Even if the worse candidate gets in, you're only slightly more screwed than you would be otherwise.