It's going to be really hard to make most of our electricity, let alone powering our vehicles, with renewable energy, but it can play a very large role and cut down on CO2 emissions significantly. However, your dichotomy is that you seem to see no middle ground between nukes for everything and "burn, baby, burn" with the coal.
And it's mostly statistical in nature. We used to have droughts. If we have more now, we can't point at any individual drought and say "See? If it wasn't for CO2 emission we wouldn't have had that". People generally get more concerned about specific things that are happening, not an increase in frequency of bad things.
Partly because, no matter what we do to this planet, it's going to be by far the most habitable planet in the System. Look at what it's got. It's got water, right there, and the temperature keeps a lot of it liquid at all times. There's plenty of oxygen in the air where we can just get it and breathe it. It's even got magnetic shielding. These things aren't going away in the next few million years, and they put Earth way ahead of the competition.
The thing about the last 5K years is that that's when civilization happened, and a heck of a lot of changes because of it. Slow changes happen, and we deal with them. It's harder to deal with rapid change, which is what we're seeing now.
I'm not saying the last 5K years are what the planet is supposed to be like. I'm saying that that's what we've adapted to, and rapid changes are going to have bad effects, even if they wind up being better in the long run if they ever stabilize.
Is that stuff actually from the DNC? Is all of it? Where did it come from? Someone hacked into the DNC, apparently, so we've got it starting with a criminal acting with political motives. For any of you who remember the old-style hackers, this isn't one of them. This is a bona fide criminal. There's evidence, not conclusive, that it's state-sponsored Russian cracking. It then came through Assange, who is not known as a paragon of honesty, particularly if he can get a few moments in the limelight. (He's also a criminal, specifically a fugitive from justice.)
In other words, lots of you are getting inflamed by completely unreliable evidence. I know it's hard to be critical of information sources that favor your point of view (I'm starting to get okay at it, after decades of trying), but let's be a little rational about this.
You don't seem to understand what Corney said. He said that the case wasn't worth prosecuting. In fact, nobody who did what Clinton did, which is allow classified material to be put on non-classified systems by negligence, has faced serious criminal prosecution, so he was correct in what he said and recommended.
I don't think you understand how things work. Revolutions rarely turn out for the better. Smash the system and what replaces it will almost certainly be much worse. The US government has its problems, but overall it's pretty good.
If you want to have an impact, I'd suggest identifying the corruption you see and at least trying to get some people to bring it up in public and vote against it.
Clinton has been subject to continuing vicious Republican attacks for quite a few years now, which, unfortunately, is why she's distrusted. What this means is that her opponents are not going to dig up anything new to use against her.
Sanders, on the other hand, was not significantly attacked by Republicans during the nomination campaign. They were piling up the dirt to use against him. He's a self-declared Socialist, which doesn't bother me but which would bother a lot of people who'd at least consider voting Republican. His popularity was going to go seriously down once the Republicans started their attacks. I think he's less electable. I could be wrong, but I don't think this is an argument from ignorance.
It seems to me that, if phones with removable batteries would outsell their fixed-battery cousins, someone would try that. Then other manufacturers would want to cash in on the sales and copy them. This isn't happening, so you're probably wrong.
You know, disagreeing with you is not prima facie evidence of stupidity or ignorance. People legitimately have different priorities from each other. You're asking companies to produce phones that are inferior to what they've got except that they have removable batteries, and complicate their supply chains so they can sell you and a few others what they want.
Um, the fact that it doesn't exist doesn't mean it can be built, you know. You're talking about adding stuff to the phone without taking up volume or weight, and that's got some inherent problems.
If the battery isn't replaceable, it doesn't need its own shell, and since the connections with the phone are inside the case they don't need their own waterproofing. The phone case isn't arbitrarily broken up to fit a battery, and hence can be made inherently stronger. Make it replaceable and you're adding at least two layers of metal or plastic inside the phone. You need to have secure attachment points, and a connector that is waterproof in itself and will work with lots of plugging and unplugging. You're probably going to have to thicken the phone casing to keep strong. You're likely to be unable to make the battery a little smaller to conform to the battery casing you select rather than conforming to whatever space is available in the phone interior. The cumulative effects may be small, but they will exist.
Does your waterproof watch have an easily removable battery? If not, it's completely irrelevant.
Yup. And if hitting Granny on the head to get her purse gets the death penalty, Granny's going to get hit REAL HARD in the head to cut down on the number of witnesses. First-degree murder should always have a heavier penalty than any other crime.
Alternatively, they're worried about possibly falling victim to something. Victim-blaming is a way to feel in control and less vulnerable. If you can convince yourself that the victim became a victim by doing stupid things, and you always do smart things, then you're safe, right?
He's referring to the fact that the IRS didn't clear political-sounding groups for tax-exempt status as quickly as he wanted. It's obviously partisan since most of the prima facie political groups trying for tax-exempt were right wing.
Yeah, he hasn't paid income taxes in a long time, and it's perfectly legal, since he hasn't had a net positive income this century. A businessman who doesn't pay taxes because he's still carrying forward losses is real impressive, right.
I did talk to a charity on the phone once. I was also Googling their name while talking, and the first hit on them was America's Ten Worst Charities. Amusing.
Not what I took. The problems did increase in difficulty, but not in sophistication. There were things I learned that helped a lot, but they tended to be things that benefited me in daily life, such as memory tricks.
Slashdot Mirror
It's going to be really hard to make most of our electricity, let alone powering our vehicles, with renewable energy, but it can play a very large role and cut down on CO2 emissions significantly. However, your dichotomy is that you seem to see no middle ground between nukes for everything and "burn, baby, burn" with the coal.
And it's mostly statistical in nature. We used to have droughts. If we have more now, we can't point at any individual drought and say "See? If it wasn't for CO2 emission we wouldn't have had that". People generally get more concerned about specific things that are happening, not an increase in frequency of bad things.
If we can keep some of it sequestered, that's at least a very slight help.
Partly because, no matter what we do to this planet, it's going to be by far the most habitable planet in the System. Look at what it's got. It's got water, right there, and the temperature keeps a lot of it liquid at all times. There's plenty of oxygen in the air where we can just get it and breathe it. It's even got magnetic shielding. These things aren't going away in the next few million years, and they put Earth way ahead of the competition.
The thing about the last 5K years is that that's when civilization happened, and a heck of a lot of changes because of it. Slow changes happen, and we deal with them. It's harder to deal with rapid change, which is what we're seeing now.
I'm not saying the last 5K years are what the planet is supposed to be like. I'm saying that that's what we've adapted to, and rapid changes are going to have bad effects, even if they wind up being better in the long run if they ever stabilize.
Okay, I forgot to ask this.
Is that stuff actually from the DNC? Is all of it? Where did it come from? Someone hacked into the DNC, apparently, so we've got it starting with a criminal acting with political motives. For any of you who remember the old-style hackers, this isn't one of them. This is a bona fide criminal. There's evidence, not conclusive, that it's state-sponsored Russian cracking. It then came through Assange, who is not known as a paragon of honesty, particularly if he can get a few moments in the limelight. (He's also a criminal, specifically a fugitive from justice.)
In other words, lots of you are getting inflamed by completely unreliable evidence. I know it's hard to be critical of information sources that favor your point of view (I'm starting to get okay at it, after decades of trying), but let's be a little rational about this.
Politics is dirty. If someone tells you that party A is dirty, that's probably true, but you should take no implication that party B isn't as dirty.
I didn't say it was okay. I also don't see why the DNC shouldn't have favored Clinton.
The point is that Assange is pointing out some things he thinks will hurt Clinton and not pointing out comparable things on the other side.
This is foreign intervention in a US election. It could be argued that this is sauce for the gander, but I really can't approve of it.
You don't seem to understand what Corney said. He said that the case wasn't worth prosecuting. In fact, nobody who did what Clinton did, which is allow classified material to be put on non-classified systems by negligence, has faced serious criminal prosecution, so he was correct in what he said and recommended.
I don't think you understand how things work. Revolutions rarely turn out for the better. Smash the system and what replaces it will almost certainly be much worse. The US government has its problems, but overall it's pretty good.
If you want to have an impact, I'd suggest identifying the corruption you see and at least trying to get some people to bring it up in public and vote against it.
Yes, that's what the polls said.
Clinton has been subject to continuing vicious Republican attacks for quite a few years now, which, unfortunately, is why she's distrusted. What this means is that her opponents are not going to dig up anything new to use against her.
Sanders, on the other hand, was not significantly attacked by Republicans during the nomination campaign. They were piling up the dirt to use against him. He's a self-declared Socialist, which doesn't bother me but which would bother a lot of people who'd at least consider voting Republican. His popularity was going to go seriously down once the Republicans started their attacks. I think he's less electable. I could be wrong, but I don't think this is an argument from ignorance.
Yup, and her medical reports are excellent. I'm not worried about her.
It seems to me that, if phones with removable batteries would outsell their fixed-battery cousins, someone would try that. Then other manufacturers would want to cash in on the sales and copy them. This isn't happening, so you're probably wrong.
You know, disagreeing with you is not prima facie evidence of stupidity or ignorance. People legitimately have different priorities from each other. You're asking companies to produce phones that are inferior to what they've got except that they have removable batteries, and complicate their supply chains so they can sell you and a few others what they want.
Um, the fact that it doesn't exist doesn't mean it can be built, you know. You're talking about adding stuff to the phone without taking up volume or weight, and that's got some inherent problems.
If the battery isn't replaceable, it doesn't need its own shell, and since the connections with the phone are inside the case they don't need their own waterproofing. The phone case isn't arbitrarily broken up to fit a battery, and hence can be made inherently stronger. Make it replaceable and you're adding at least two layers of metal or plastic inside the phone. You need to have secure attachment points, and a connector that is waterproof in itself and will work with lots of plugging and unplugging. You're probably going to have to thicken the phone casing to keep strong. You're likely to be unable to make the battery a little smaller to conform to the battery casing you select rather than conforming to whatever space is available in the phone interior. The cumulative effects may be small, but they will exist.
Does your waterproof watch have an easily removable battery? If not, it's completely irrelevant.
It might also help if people actually knew that they will get old sometime (well, that's actually the best-case scenario).
Yup. And if hitting Granny on the head to get her purse gets the death penalty, Granny's going to get hit REAL HARD in the head to cut down on the number of witnesses. First-degree murder should always have a heavier penalty than any other crime.
Alternatively, they're worried about possibly falling victim to something. Victim-blaming is a way to feel in control and less vulnerable. If you can convince yourself that the victim became a victim by doing stupid things, and you always do smart things, then you're safe, right?
Since my posts start higher than 0, THIS! Parent should be read and understood.
He's referring to the fact that the IRS didn't clear political-sounding groups for tax-exempt status as quickly as he wanted. It's obviously partisan since most of the prima facie political groups trying for tax-exempt were right wing.
Yeah, he hasn't paid income taxes in a long time, and it's perfectly legal, since he hasn't had a net positive income this century. A businessman who doesn't pay taxes because he's still carrying forward losses is real impressive, right.
I did talk to a charity on the phone once. I was also Googling their name while talking, and the first hit on them was America's Ten Worst Charities. Amusing.
Don't knock them. When was the last time you heard about terrorists shooting up a hockey game? Those Canadians take their hockey seriously.
I was amused when an ad on a website said my registry was hosed and they'd clean it up. I was on one of my Ubuntu machines at the time.
Not what I took. The problems did increase in difficulty, but not in sophistication. There were things I learned that helped a lot, but they tended to be things that benefited me in daily life, such as memory tricks.