How about nuclear energy? That doesn't fart out carbon, and then we can still use, you know, electricity rather than... "Unequivocally no" again?
Actually, environmentalists are very split on this.
No, they're actually not. Actual environmentalists (people who actually care about the environment) are 100% pro-nuclear power. 100%.
Leftist kooks who use faux "environmentalism" as their weapon to push their anti-human agenda on the world tend to be anti-nuke. But they're not actually environmentalists (if they were, they would be pro-nuke).
What you and the other commenter don't seem to get is that Hillary's emails were under subpoena, so she was legally obligated to turn them over (and not doing so was a criminal act). I'm not saying I want everybody to read my email. What I am saying is that I would comply with a subpoena and I would have nothing to lose because I'm honest. If Hillary was even the least bit honest she would have had nothing to lose.
The DNC/wikileaks issue is related but obviously those emails weren't under subpoena. But in that case there's no criminal investigation, and had DWS and the rest of the DNC been honest the leak would have been a nonissue.
If Podesta wasn't hiring goons to show up at Trump rallies and cause disturbances it would have been a boring email dump, right?
Apparently you are naive too. Just because you have nothing to hide does not mean you have nothing to fear. It is VERY easy for a lawyer or law enforcement to make even innocent sounding statements into something incriminating. Your honesty may not be any protection and in fact might serve as "evidence" to hang you with.
This is only a problem if you're a dishonest scumbag.
You REALLY need to watch this video about why you should never talk to the police.
I know to never talk to the police. However, if there's a valid subpoena for information that I have I will turn it over. That's the legal thing to do.
And note that if I didn't do that I'd end up with consequences. Unlike Hillary, someone would prosecute me.
I know I, as a lowly mid-level person, am very careful and exact about electronic communication. Whatever side of the Clinton email thing you're on, how would you feel about having the last 10 years of your private communication dumped out in an investigation?
I'm honest, so it doesn't matter. Also, if my emails were subpoenaed, I would turn them over. Looking at my friends' email and business associates' email wouldn't turn up any emails that I hadn't turned over since I would perform my legal obligation.
This is only a problem if you're a dishonest scumbag.
Trump and clinton are the same. But trump is a reactionary megalomaniac who has zero impulse control and poor intelligence.
Can we please drop the stupid shit about Republicans being "stupid"? Seriously. The Democrat candidate demonstrably can't use a fucking fax machine - but she's smart, right? Because of the (D)?
You should blame Donald Trump for hiring the Russians to do that using his secret server that connects directly to the Russian bank that something or other.
1. Wait. I thought Republicans were the party of big business. Schmidt must have gotten confused, right?
2. Wait. He's wanting "low paid workers". I though the Democrats were all about paying more? And making sure women had pay equity with men, right? $15 minimum wage? I mean, he wants to pay above minimum wage, right?
You're the one who's been spoon-fed the party's agenda, as usual.
For the rest of us it is just a mindless statement by an out of touch rich white guy stroking himself (stroking his ego, get your mind out of the gutter) on stage for applause.
He's attempting to channel Steve Jobs, who Apple desperately needs back at the helm.
But the thing about trying to be Jobs is this - you either hit the mark or you look pathetic. It's like a white guy trying to rap - there's no middle ground.
Needless to say, Cook misses the mark. I'm starting to think that Ives might be a better choice for CEO.
Per house, FTTH costs about $3000 on average to install. $25 per month over ten years. It's a long term investment, but it's far from being unreasonably expensive.
Yeah, sounds good. Say, do you want to use your internet connection of 10 years ago right now?
No?
And *that* is the problem. Hopefully fiber gives us enough room to upgrade by only upgrading the stuff on each end, but 10 years is forever in internet time.
Sorry for posting anon, but having difficulties logging in right now. Also, full disclosure, I'm a property technician for Target.
There's also a big difference in how Target and Walmart design their stores. There are a few stores Target has that uses direct lighting in, one in the greater metro Detroit area. For the most part though it isn't as feasible with how they have their drop ceilings set up. Walmart uses a more industrial design with a high, exposed girder system and full runs of florescents across the entire building. Target on the other hand uses a drop ceiling with an average height of 14ft and a floor with a high gloss finish to maximize the uses of it's grid pattern lighting solutions. Any type of direct lighting would be difficult to add into the brand image Target has for it's stores.
Thanks for the info, I've noticed the difference in style but didn't give it much thought. Still, it would be nice for them to figure out a way to get the best of both worlds.
This. Commercial PV panels are about 18% efficient at converting solar energy into electricity, and the best fluorescent bulbs are about 15% efficient at converting electricity into light (the rest becomes heat). So if you install PV panels to power your lights, you're only converting about 2.7% of the sunlight hitting your solar panels into interior light.
Fluorescent lights are around 80% efficient (similar to LEDs). Incandescent lights (traditional light bulbs) are around 15% efficient. It's why you can replace a 60W light bulb with a 13W CFL.
Uh, no. An incandescent bulb is 3-4% efficient, 5% efficient at best (that is 5% of the energy is emitted as visible light, 95% is emitted as heat). Fluorescent bulbs and LEDs are far more efficient, but nowhere near even 50%. Fluorescent bulbs are around 4x as efficient, LEDs around 6x.
Using direct lighting instead of PV + electric light is a huge win, and leaves the rest of the roof open for PV installation if you want.
To give an idea of how much lighting is used, I counted the lights in a Hobby Lobby last time I was there (what else would a guy do in there?) and they had about 3000 40W fluorescent lamps. That's 120KW just for lighting (most of which turns into heat that the A/C has to pump out, by the way) which works out to about $12/hour here in TN. Walmarts don't light as brightly as a Hobby Lobby, but they have larger stores. The energy savings from the skylights is really big.
Enforcing immigration law is not inherently xenophobic. Deporting all illegals and building a wall to hinder their return sound perfectly reasonable to me.
My wife is from the Philippines, and most Filipinos that I know are actually kind of pissed about the "illegals". When you come here legally, it costs a bunch of money, if you have a work permit it has to be renewed in person annually, and going through the process of getting a green card or citizenship is also expensive. And you get harassed if you don't do everything correctly. You (the American citizens) would be embarrassed if you knew how some folks are treated when they simply want to come here legally.
So, yeah, there's a little resentment when people come here without that sort of pain.
At the same time, we have friends who are illegals and we personally know that most go through other kinds of pain - like walking 1000 miles through the desert - to get here.
I mean, I'm sure our Linux users overall require the least tech support. But that's a function of who they are more than what they're using.
I don't doubt that Macs require less support, but 40% vs 5% says that something else is going on - and I doubt that sort of ratio will hold once people are converted in bulk.
I see you don't have a computer-using parent. I put my foot down about 10 years ago and told the parents that one of two things was going to happen:
1. The get a Mac 2. They quit bugging me about computer issues
There was no third option. They chose #1. The ratio of problems before and after is far larger than 8:1, probably more around 20:1. You think 8:1 seems like a large ratio - I'm wondering why IBM isn't seeing an even better average. My guess is it's because they already have a significant firewall/anti-virus setup to minimize that set of Windows headaches.
"Obama incentivized atomic power as part of his energy policy. I used to be a republican 4 decades ago, this could bring the two major parties together and defuse climate change debates. Bonus: defunding big oil"
He never claimed to be a Republican 4 decades ago. He said that nuclear power was a Republican dogwhistle 4 decades ago. You can go look up what a dogwhistle is in politics if you're unaware. Oddly, I'm not sure the GGP understood that, either.
Nuclear is eminently doable from a technological standpoint. But like rocketry, a lot of things conspire to make it very difficult to do affordably and safely.
True, but the main competitors up until recently - hydro and coal - have their own problems that aren't as bad a nuclear per generator, but in aggregate are bad. Acid rain and global warming come to mind. With hydro, we lose huge amounts of land (although we at least get a lake out of the deal) but imagine if we could have covered that land with solar cells instead of a lake.
Walmart has been using direct solar for lighting for 10+ years now - something I haven't seen Target do anywhere. In a newer Walmart the fluorescent lights only come on as needed to keep the light at a certain level. Noon with bright sunlight will have no electrical lighting on in a store.
Slashdot Mirror
How about nuclear energy? That doesn't fart out carbon, and then we can still use, you know, electricity rather than... "Unequivocally no" again?
Actually, environmentalists are very split on this.
No, they're actually not. Actual environmentalists (people who actually care about the environment) are 100% pro-nuclear power. 100%.
Leftist kooks who use faux "environmentalism" as their weapon to push their anti-human agenda on the world tend to be anti-nuke. But they're not actually environmentalists (if they were, they would be pro-nuke).
The world is about to discover that man made laws cannot override nature.
Man, you skeptics just kill me. It's 5 degrees cooler today than yesterday - what kind of proof are you looking for?
What you and the other commenter don't seem to get is that Hillary's emails were under subpoena, so she was legally obligated to turn them over (and not doing so was a criminal act). I'm not saying I want everybody to read my email. What I am saying is that I would comply with a subpoena and I would have nothing to lose because I'm honest. If Hillary was even the least bit honest she would have had nothing to lose.
The DNC/wikileaks issue is related but obviously those emails weren't under subpoena. But in that case there's no criminal investigation, and had DWS and the rest of the DNC been honest the leak would have been a nonissue.
If Podesta wasn't hiring goons to show up at Trump rallies and cause disturbances it would have been a boring email dump, right?
I'm honest, so it doesn't matter.
Apparently you are naive too. Just because you have nothing to hide does not mean you have nothing to fear. It is VERY easy for a lawyer or law enforcement to make even innocent sounding statements into something incriminating. Your honesty may not be any protection and in fact might serve as "evidence" to hang you with.
This is only a problem if you're a dishonest scumbag.
You REALLY need to watch this video about why you should never talk to the police.
I know to never talk to the police. However, if there's a valid subpoena for information that I have I will turn it over. That's the legal thing to do.
And note that if I didn't do that I'd end up with consequences. Unlike Hillary, someone would prosecute me.
I know I, as a lowly mid-level person, am very careful and exact about electronic communication. Whatever side of the Clinton email thing you're on, how would you feel about having the last 10 years of your private communication dumped out in an investigation?
I'm honest, so it doesn't matter. Also, if my emails were subpoenaed, I would turn them over. Looking at my friends' email and business associates' email wouldn't turn up any emails that I hadn't turned over since I would perform my legal obligation.
This is only a problem if you're a dishonest scumbag.
In other news, Valve is shut down today. It seems all the employees are helplessly rolling around on the floor laughing.
Trump and clinton are the same. But trump is a reactionary megalomaniac who has zero impulse control and poor intelligence.
Can we please drop the stupid shit about Republicans being "stupid"? Seriously. The Democrat candidate demonstrably can't use a fucking fax machine - but she's smart, right? Because of the (D)?
This is getting so old.
You should blame Donald Trump for hiring the Russians to do that using his secret server that connects directly to the Russian bank that something or other.
I'm not the one who's confused. Thanks for playing.
Shill.
Much of the tech industry leadership leans Democratic, mostly because they grew up in northern California.
It's not relevant - most industry leadership leans Democrat. They offer the most bang for the buck.
With Clinton as the Democrat candidate for POTUS I think we can drop the pretense that the Democrats aren't the party of big business.
A couple of observations:
1. Wait. I thought Republicans were the party of big business. Schmidt must have gotten confused, right?
2. Wait. He's wanting "low paid workers". I though the Democrats were all about paying more? And making sure women had pay equity with men, right? $15 minimum wage? I mean, he wants to pay above minimum wage, right?
You're the one who's been spoon-fed the party's agenda, as usual.
Nobody likes to carry around cash
Well, I prefer to carry cash rather than to disclose what I buy and where I am to banks and others that piggy back on them.
Count me in. You'll also find that prices are often cheaper on larger items when you have cash.
For the rest of us it is just a mindless statement by an out of touch rich white guy stroking himself (stroking his ego, get your mind out of the gutter) on stage for applause.
He's attempting to channel Steve Jobs, who Apple desperately needs back at the helm.
But the thing about trying to be Jobs is this - you either hit the mark or you look pathetic. It's like a white guy trying to rap - there's no middle ground.
Needless to say, Cook misses the mark. I'm starting to think that Ives might be a better choice for CEO.
Maybe we could call it "The Darl". Oracle is winning this year's Darl award.
Per house, FTTH costs about $3000 on average to install. $25 per month over ten years. It's a long term investment, but it's far from being unreasonably expensive.
Yeah, sounds good. Say, do you want to use your internet connection of 10 years ago right now?
No?
And *that* is the problem. Hopefully fiber gives us enough room to upgrade by only upgrading the stuff on each end, but 10 years is forever in internet time.
Why was he, of all people, the star of that show? Branding and marketing.
Ummm... because he signed the contract that made him the star of the show?
So you turned down the contract? They sent contracts to everybody and Trump was the only one who signed?
Obviously, they chose him out of everybody else based on his personal marketing.
Also, I'm pretty sure the marketing was performed by the folks who work at NBC, not Trump himself.
Really? They were working with him 25 years ago?
No.
Yeah, they'll be used for barricaded hostages and terrorists and such. Just like SWAT teams.
Sorry for posting anon, but having difficulties logging in right now. Also, full disclosure, I'm a property technician for Target.
There's also a big difference in how Target and Walmart design their stores. There are a few stores Target has that uses direct lighting in, one in the greater metro Detroit area. For the most part though it isn't as feasible with how they have their drop ceilings set up. Walmart uses a more industrial design with a high, exposed girder system and full runs of florescents across the entire building. Target on the other hand uses a drop ceiling with an average height of 14ft and a floor with a high gloss finish to maximize the uses of it's grid pattern lighting solutions. Any type of direct lighting would be difficult to add into the brand image Target has for it's stores.
Thanks for the info, I've noticed the difference in style but didn't give it much thought. Still, it would be nice for them to figure out a way to get the best of both worlds.
Fluorescent lights are around 80% efficient (similar to LEDs). Incandescent lights (traditional light bulbs) are around 15% efficient. It's why you can replace a 60W light bulb with a 13W CFL.
Uh, no. An incandescent bulb is 3-4% efficient, 5% efficient at best (that is 5% of the energy is emitted as visible light, 95% is emitted as heat). Fluorescent bulbs and LEDs are far more efficient, but nowhere near even 50%. Fluorescent bulbs are around 4x as efficient, LEDs around 6x.
Using direct lighting instead of PV + electric light is a huge win, and leaves the rest of the roof open for PV installation if you want.
To give an idea of how much lighting is used, I counted the lights in a Hobby Lobby last time I was there (what else would a guy do in there?) and they had about 3000 40W fluorescent lamps. That's 120KW just for lighting (most of which turns into heat that the A/C has to pump out, by the way) which works out to about $12/hour here in TN. Walmarts don't light as brightly as a Hobby Lobby, but they have larger stores. The energy savings from the skylights is really big.
Enforcing immigration law is not inherently xenophobic. Deporting all illegals and building a wall to hinder their return sound perfectly reasonable to me.
My wife is from the Philippines, and most Filipinos that I know are actually kind of pissed about the "illegals". When you come here legally, it costs a bunch of money, if you have a work permit it has to be renewed in person annually, and going through the process of getting a green card or citizenship is also expensive. And you get harassed if you don't do everything correctly. You (the American citizens) would be embarrassed if you knew how some folks are treated when they simply want to come here legally.
So, yeah, there's a little resentment when people come here without that sort of pain.
At the same time, we have friends who are illegals and we personally know that most go through other kinds of pain - like walking 1000 miles through the desert - to get here.
but at least they got their audience right, idiots that cant figure out the slightest thing, and they pay the premium for it too!
Or smart people like me who realize that they have better things to do than fuck around with cleaning up viruses...
I mean, I'm sure our Linux users overall require the least tech support. But that's a function of who they are more than what they're using.
I don't doubt that Macs require less support, but 40% vs 5% says that something else is going on - and I doubt that sort of ratio will hold once people are converted in bulk.
I see you don't have a computer-using parent. I put my foot down about 10 years ago and told the parents that one of two things was going to happen:
1. The get a Mac
2. They quit bugging me about computer issues
There was no third option. They chose #1. The ratio of problems before and after is far larger than 8:1, probably more around 20:1. You think 8:1 seems like a large ratio - I'm wondering why IBM isn't seeing an even better average. My guess is it's because they already have a significant firewall/anti-virus setup to minimize that set of Windows headaches.
I understood it just fine.
Actually, you didn't.
"Obama incentivized atomic power as part of his energy policy. I used to be a republican 4 decades ago, this could bring the two major parties together and defuse climate change debates. Bonus: defunding big oil"
He never claimed to be a Republican 4 decades ago. He said that nuclear power was a Republican dogwhistle 4 decades ago. You can go look up what a dogwhistle is in politics if you're unaware. Oddly, I'm not sure the GGP understood that, either.
Nuclear is eminently doable from a technological standpoint. But like rocketry, a lot of things conspire to make it very difficult to do affordably and safely.
True, but the main competitors up until recently - hydro and coal - have their own problems that aren't as bad a nuclear per generator, but in aggregate are bad. Acid rain and global warming come to mind. With hydro, we lose huge amounts of land (although we at least get a lake out of the deal) but imagine if we could have covered that land with solar cells instead of a lake.
Walmart has been using direct solar for lighting for 10+ years now - something I haven't seen Target do anywhere. In a newer Walmart the fluorescent lights only come on as needed to keep the light at a certain level. Noon with bright sunlight will have no electrical lighting on in a store.
https://www.google.com/maps/@3...
The grid of little squares are the solar powered "lights".
Young Target for comparison:
https://www.google.com/maps/@3...