Since oppressed Iraqis are part of mankind, free Iraqis are also part of mankind, and the technology and civilization to put a space program into practice requires the free flow of oil, bombing lunatic dictatorial OPEC nations is of great benefit to mankind.
>>The problem with private enterprise is that it expects rewards from its funding - rewards that generate $$$, not scientific knowledge or nationalistic pride, but cold hard cash. The problem with space is that there is as-of-yet, no viable way to make $$$ out there.
I guess that's why Bell Labs, a privately funded corporate research company has so many nobel laureates and so many patents and technology breakthroughs. Ditto Xerox. Ditto GE. Ditto HP. Nearly all scientific breakthroughs have come from private enterprise, because these businesses know that future cold, hard cash comes from R&D paying off. You've been reading too much socialist drivel.
As far as commercial returns in space? How about high-vacuum, microgravity manufacturing?
There's plenty of commercial interest in space, it's just being strangled to death by government regulation and that nice socialist treat that says any profit from space must be shared equally among all the peoples of the Earth, or some other such asinine nonsense.
That's the major flaw with government underwriting a space program. You have to get public support for it. Let private enterprise underwrite it, and all you need is commercial interest. That's a MUCH easier beast to summon.
So explain to me why it is OK to put carbon back into the environment that was trapped for 5 years in a tree, but it's horrible to put carbon back into the environment that was trapped for a million years in an oil field?
Was the Earth a seething runaway greenhouse ball of scathing heat before all the carbon was miraculously extracted out of the environment and safely buried into coal beds and oil fields?
Burning oil doesn't add NEW carbon to the atmosphere, it simply restores carbon that used to BE in the atmosphere.
If you think about it, the whole logic of burning fossil fuels making the world uninhabitable is flawed logic. That carbon was out in the atmosphere before the oil and coal formed, and the Earth was quite habitable at that time.
One-button mice are used by Apple for two reasons:
1) To enforce good GUI development.
2) Ease of use. It's easier to mash a single button with three or four fingers than have to mentally process which finger is over which button and press the correct finger based on what you want to do.
PACs are a desired aspect of any representative government. They allow people to express their opinions to elected representatives.
Who do you think funds and comprises groups like NARAL and the NRA? People who agree with their positions. The PAC is the tool these people can use to get their views expressed in government.
In the Federalist Papers, Thomas Jefferson refers to them as Factions, and maintains they are an essential component of a healthy representative government.
The source was Apple computer. The reason they didn't support the machines is because it too long to get Next ported over and working on the Mac (most of the delays were getting the Classic environment to work.)
By the time OS X was ready to go, the hardware technology had shifted. Apple decided not to support what, by then, was legacy hardware. I'm sure they figured it would be cheaper to settle a lawsuit than to try and fulfill a promise. Unethical, but no unexpected.
Not exactly true. Naturally occurring Plutonium exists in trace amounts in Pitchblend. It is more common in supernova remnants.
From the EPA website:
In extremely rare cases, rocks with a high localized concentration of uranium can provide the right conditions for making small amounts of plutonium naturally. This natural process is called spontaneous fission. Only very small (trace) amounts of natural plutonium have ever been found in nature.
It has been my observation that when the government says they're going to deregulate an industry, what they really mean is they are going to re-regulate it.
The California energy "deregulation" included such wonderful non-regulatory freedoms as: Prohibition on construction of new power plants, Purchasing power at a higher, mandated rate, and selling at a lower mandated rate, etc.
Plant reproduction is vastly different in many respects than mammalian, and specifically human sexual reproduction. Again, another example of false equivalence.
I never maintained that every human being is worthy of life, though that is a reasonable presumption. There are times when I think a human being is not worthy of life, specifically, when a human is taking or takes the life of another human. That is one of the reasons I do favor abortion if the child is putting the mother's life in danger.
The difference is, my criteria for whether or not a human deserves life depends entirely on whether the human is taking or performing a deadly action against another human, not on its development, or physical location, or requirement for nourishment, or usefulness dead to those who are already alive.
Once again, the logical fallacy of false equivalence (it seems to be the favorite)
Read a biology text. Your skin cells are not a human being i.e. a member of the species Homo Sapiens. Your skin cells are a component of the organism.
Your analogy of zygote vs. liver cell suffers the same logical fallacy for the same reason.
Your argument also boils down to: A member of the species Homo Sapiens is worthy of life only when it has reached an arbitrarily set level of complexity and development.
Biology differs with you. Read a text on sexual reproduction. When the gametes join, a new member of the species has been created. The fertilized egg IS Homo Sapiens. Your position is simply factually incorrect.
Your argument basically boils down to: A human being is worthy of life when it has reached an arbitrarily defined stage of development.
Again, this is the fallacy of false equivalence. One human is in a state of deterioration. The other is in a state of growth and development.
Once the eeg is flat in an adult human being, it will not recur. Using a flatt eeg to define death, or the end of life, was arrived at biologically. A flat eeg indicates the death of the human being. Individual components may continue on for a few hours or days, but the organism as a whole is dead.
In a developing human being, organism will start with a flat eeg, then beging to show increasing development and complexity. The organism is already alive, and will continue to grow in complexity as time passes.
Slashdot Mirror
Since oppressed Iraqis are part of mankind, free Iraqis are also part of mankind, and the technology and civilization to put a space program into practice requires the free flow of oil, bombing lunatic dictatorial OPEC nations is of great benefit to mankind.
>>The problem with private enterprise is that it expects rewards from its funding - rewards that generate $$$, not scientific knowledge or nationalistic pride, but cold hard cash. The problem with space is that there is as-of-yet, no viable way to make $$$ out there.
I guess that's why Bell Labs, a privately funded corporate research company has so many nobel laureates and so many patents and technology breakthroughs. Ditto Xerox. Ditto GE. Ditto HP. Nearly all scientific breakthroughs have come from private enterprise, because these businesses know that future cold, hard cash comes from R&D paying off. You've been reading too much socialist drivel.
As far as commercial returns in space? How about high-vacuum, microgravity manufacturing?
There's plenty of commercial interest in space, it's just being strangled to death by government regulation and that nice socialist treat that says any profit from space must be shared equally among all the peoples of the Earth, or some other such asinine nonsense.
That's the major flaw with government underwriting a space program. You have to get public support for it. Let private enterprise underwrite it, and all you need is commercial interest. That's a MUCH easier beast to summon.
No, a killer app is an app that drives the purchase of the OS/hardware.
FCP counts as a killer app, and so do the iApps for this very reason.
No. It's from Winston Churchill
It isn't flamebait. Go talk to some oil geologists. The capped wells in the gulf ARE filling back up.
You do realize that oil is formed from marine life, not dinosaurs, right? Maybe it doesn't take as long to form as we thought.
So explain to me why it is OK to put carbon back into the environment that was trapped for 5 years in a tree, but it's horrible to put carbon back into the environment that was trapped for a million years in an oil field?
Was the Earth a seething runaway greenhouse ball of scathing heat before all the carbon was miraculously extracted out of the environment and safely buried into coal beds and oil fields?
Burning oil doesn't add NEW carbon to the atmosphere, it simply restores carbon that used to BE in the atmosphere.
If you think about it, the whole logic of burning fossil fuels making the world uninhabitable is flawed logic. That carbon was out in the atmosphere before the oil and coal formed, and the Earth was quite habitable at that time.
Your point is meaningless. It is a tu quoque fallacy.
Whatever some other nation may or may not have done during its revolution does not justify or make right what Stalin did in his revolution.
I suggest you go read some books on ergonomics and physiology. Pay particular attention to the parts about muscle coordination.
Better yet, do this experiment. Mash your fist on a keyboard. Now type the alphabet. Which one took more physical coordination? Which one was faster?
"an historic" is grammatically correct.
One-button mice are used by Apple for two reasons:
1) To enforce good GUI development.
2) Ease of use. It's easier to mash a single button with three or four fingers than have to mentally process which finger is over which button and press the correct finger based on what you want to do.
It's the supplemental hardware (serial port, video, dvd decoder, floppy drive) that Apple failed to optimize OS X for, not the G3 processor.
PACs are a desired aspect of any representative government. They allow people to express their opinions to elected representatives.
Who do you think funds and comprises groups like NARAL and the NRA? People who agree with their positions. The PAC is the tool these people can use to get their views expressed in government.
In the Federalist Papers, Thomas Jefferson refers to them as Factions, and maintains they are an essential component of a healthy representative government.
The source was Apple computer. The reason they didn't support the machines is because it too long to get Next ported over and working on the Mac (most of the delays were getting the Classic environment to work.)
By the time OS X was ready to go, the hardware technology had shifted. Apple decided not to support what, by then, was legacy hardware. I'm sure they figured it would be cheaper to settle a lawsuit than to try and fulfill a promise. Unethical, but no unexpected.
Not exactly true. Naturally occurring Plutonium exists in trace amounts in Pitchblend. It is more common in supernova remnants.
From the EPA website:
In extremely rare cases, rocks with a high localized concentration of uranium can provide the right conditions for making small amounts of plutonium naturally. This natural process is called spontaneous fission. Only very small (trace) amounts of natural plutonium have ever been found in nature.
Transferring 1.5 GB over USB?!? I think not. Firewire 800 maybe...
It has been my observation that when the government says they're going to deregulate an industry, what they really mean is they are going to re-regulate it.
The California energy "deregulation" included such wonderful non-regulatory freedoms as: Prohibition on construction of new power plants, Purchasing power at a higher, mandated rate, and selling at a lower mandated rate, etc.
Plant reproduction is vastly different in many respects than mammalian, and specifically human sexual reproduction. Again, another example of false equivalence.
Another example of false equivalence. An egg is a gamete. A ferilized egg is a member of the species Homo Sapiens.
It really is not a difficult concept, and refusing to see it requires a deliberate effort at self-delusion.
I never maintained that every human being is worthy of life, though that is a reasonable presumption. There are times when I think a human being is not worthy of life, specifically, when a human is taking or takes the life of another human. That is one of the reasons I do favor abortion if the child is putting the mother's life in danger.
The difference is, my criteria for whether or not a human deserves life depends entirely on whether the human is taking or performing a deadly action against another human, not on its development, or physical location, or requirement for nourishment, or usefulness dead to those who are already alive.
Once again, the logical fallacy of false equivalence (it seems to be the favorite)
Read a biology text. Your skin cells are not a human being i.e. a member of the species Homo Sapiens. Your skin cells are a component of the organism.
Your analogy of zygote vs. liver cell suffers the same logical fallacy for the same reason.
Your argument also boils down to: A member of the species Homo Sapiens is worthy of life only when it has reached an arbitrarily set level of complexity and development.
Biology differs with you. Read a text on sexual reproduction. When the gametes join, a new member of the species has been created. The fertilized egg IS Homo Sapiens. Your position is simply factually incorrect.
Your argument basically boils down to: A human being is worthy of life when it has reached an arbitrarily defined stage of development.
It really is that simple. The debate continues because people do not want to accept the logical conclusion of the premise.
Again, this is the fallacy of false equivalence. One human is in a state of deterioration. The other is in a state of growth and development.
.
Once the eeg is flat in an adult human being, it will not recur. Using a flatt eeg to define death, or the end of life, was arrived at biologically. A flat eeg indicates the death of the human being. Individual components may continue on for a few hours or days, but the organism as a whole is dead
In a developing human being, organism will start with a flat eeg, then beging to show increasing development and complexity. The organism is already alive, and will continue to grow in complexity as time passes.