Overpopulation is always the primary problem that nobody dares to address.
Nuclear power is a scam. Heavily subsidized and not regulated heavily enough or even properly for the regulations they already have. I doubt that the subsidization is enough to balance out the costs for the current level of inadequate regulation.
Next gen nuclear is always off topic because it doesn't exist even after decades of solutions that were 5 years away - anything you build today is not next gen; therefore, off topic. It is foolish to build them today, the USA is building TWO nuclear plants and those cost MORE than India's solar plants - plus the construction time is comparable (except India's can be online before it's completed and its construction costs are going to go down while it is being built, so it's likely to be near budget, unlike the nuclear plants.)
Solar is cheaper than nuclear power. TODAY. The same tech from decades ago finally being mass produced with the resources that could have been there for decades already... The "innovations" have been minimal (silicon cells) and they are mass production related; nothing that couldn't have happened 20 years ago. If solar only had half what the nuclear industry had to help it evolve it's mass production... (instead we kept putting money into new tech and ignoring mass production... delaying.... The USA dumped some $$ into CIGS instead of making existing tech cheaper like the Chinese did. CIGS may win long term but we can't keep stalling letting the perfect be the enemy of good. )
A modern grid to replace our century+ old primitive power grid would mitigate most the fluctuation issues of wind and solar. Leaving other kinds of power to fill in the gaps which can be done cheaper and safer than nuclear can do. We still have plenty of old power plants that can fill the void while newer ones are invented; perhaps the mythical mini next-gen nuclear plant will happen by that time.
Google Chrome can't be trusted and just because they used to say they'd do no evil doesn't make them safe to trust with everything you do online.
Firefox isn't that horrible, even on a computer from 2006. Splitting hairs. They'll have their up and their downs like the others and I don't mind they are not focused on the same priorities google is. I don't approve of SPDY, I'd rather they not waste the time and help HTTP 2 move forward faster. They should put more time into privacy since that is a weakness for the others.
SOPA melted their phone lines with irate voters! Voters may be fools but they can remember a few BIG issues come a election day and SOPA scared the shit out of all the politicians. The sponsors of SOPA quickly ran out to denounce their own bill before it ruined them.
With the internet big players reminding the public for FREE, they couldn't distract the issue from voter's on election day. It didn't matter that the public was entirely against it-- they don't care if 90% of their voters are against their policies, they only need to worry about suckering enough votes and if you can distract people with 1-3 issues THEY CHOOSE then they win.
They will NOT pay a political price come election day; it'll be forgotten or lower priority because the usual 1-3 issues will be all that matters (usually the same few issues over and over.) Whether a representative ACTUALLY represents the voters is NEVER a campaign issue - when that really should be the #1 issue. Whether they follow constitutional principles is also not a big issue; even when cities ban free speech it usually has to be handled in the courts (free assembly forget it.)
They did not have a filibuster proof majority! How can that be Insightful? Who is naive enough to believe 100% of a party is going to vote with their party on a big issue? (Perhaps you are a Republican? The two parties do not function the same - but the corrupt members of both do tend to act alike.)
1) Al Franken was delayed from his seat for a year of that "majority" due to political hacking of the legal system (they knew he won but tied up the courts intentionally to the point the Republican judges even made comments about how untrustworthy their lawyers were.) That was done as a power ploy, with BS voter rights smokescreen.
2) You assume the label "Democrat" makes some politician a mindless drone of the party. The corrupting forces in this issue are corporate and they have enough pull in BOTH parties that you can't measure the majority by political party. It only took 1 corrupt Democrat to allow a filibuster to happen.
3) Senators more than most politicians, routinely grandstand on lies. They make deals during votes and change their votes so they can come down on the right side of an issue where they already know the outcome of the vote! This is not unusual practice in the US Senate. You may feel your senator is doing right by you when they support failed bills... but when it comes down their filibuster breaking vote, they will show their true position.
Accenture -- weren't they the company that worked for Enron but in the aftermath of the fraud and the role they played in it they renamed the company to "Accenture." Or did they rename again and this company took the name? I am pretty sure Accenture was the name they picked after the Enron disaster.
Government flops that involve voters are a good thing; they can hold somebody accountable which is far more than they can do with businesses they are bound to.
Politicians are made or broken on how they handle Medicare and Social Security; the result is that those programs run quite well despite attempts to sabotage them. This will likely end up in a similar situation which is why so much is being put into sabotaging it now because it gains too much momentum with the voters.
Try converting the DOW over the last century adjusting for inflation. You'll see it's gone nowhere - it only seems to go up because the number gets higher but it ends up only matching inflation.
In the 1980s a million $ was a huge unobtainable amount for nearly everybody on earth (but that didn't stop people from unrealistic dreams of earning that much.) Not so much today. Thinking in terms of real items, a cheap car back in the 80s was $10,000 cheaper than it is today. There has been a huge amount of inflation. Property values went up more than most everything due to additional factors, so it's not a great measure other than one needs shelter (sadly it's over emphasis in the economy creates a disconnect from shelter and investment. So we have to fight to get solar panels because some idiot neighbor is worried about their property value in 30 years when they move to a retirement home.)
Neanderthals were most probably smarter. The theory is that they lived in small groups while our migrating ancestors lived in packs/tribes in larger numbers and until there was proof many people thought that they died off and were probably overrun. It was controversial to claim they bred until there was proof (but it's rather obvious if you think about it, people will screw anything - there is no way they wouldn't; no religion to stop them.)
India has a lot of poor uneducated people. If you lived and grew up like many of them did you'd be no smarter on a standardized IQ test.
It's not so simple; they train their brains so intensely that they think IN chess - not visual representations, not words, not even like you might think-- in that they step thru every process they are thinking about and merely are faster than average at that.
Sure the basics are wrote memory but that comes with that level of experience and the number of memorized sequences between masters them doesn't amount to much (which is why they beat computers for so long which always had the memorization advantage.) You can find info on the study of these peoples' brains and how they work, it is more like learning to ride a bike where you "don't think" when you get skilled. For advanced maneuvers there is still thinking required but it's not on the same level because of all the skill to build upon and the kind of thought process wired into a skilled brain has one thinking "in the language" of the skill just as you can think in english.
Chess masters can move extremely quickly in their native language while you are stuck thinking in a foreign language. That said, anybody who plays chess a lot is going to become most familiar with the 1st minute of the game - even if you lose all the time, you are likely to experience a few minutes of the game before you lose. So that is going to become the most familiar in addition to being the smallest problem space of the game.
I have a completely opposite opinion. I think the foreign language requirement is BS. Maybe under the conditions that people who made the requirement were thinking of provided a good enough reason to make that a requirement; however, today that is NOT the case.
At least with programming they will be exposed to logic and having to think differently in a way that is not naturally human. Yes, it's unlikely they'll get proper programming experience to have the desired impact on them, but that already is the case for foreign language education. Thinking in programming code is going to impact them if they get to that skill level; just as a foreign language would. I also think people are too biased into thinking that people can only think in a spoken language - if you could get people to NOT think in a spoken language that would probably do the most.
English education is poor quality. People who used to learn Latin ended up way better off but that was killed in favor of living language -- many of the popular ones are so similar to English that it can't be providing much benefit other than perhaps the way they teach it exposing grammar - which is not really taught. Teaching proper English grammar again with the Latin based-concepts etc would be far more beneficial. They no longer taught grammar when I was in school (it was passive at that point, the teacher would have to correct it for you to even know of a rule... perhaps this approach would work if they made us read a whole lot more; that that didn't happen either.)
Cultures, geography, etc. should be taught (does social studies even exist anymore?) about multiple areas not just the one who's language you are learning (in my case, we learned almost nothing other than stuff we already knew from pop culture on Span or Mexico and I bet you half the students couldn't find Spain on a map and 1/5 wouldn't realize if you renamed Canada Mexico on a map.)
If you REALLY want or need to learn a language -- GO THERE. Everybody admits it is the best way to learn. Americans do not get 1 month vacation per year to travel around Europe; perhaps if they did... they'd at least learn some Spanish or French going short distances. If you want people to think differently by language exposure, pick something DIFFERENT-- like Chinese, not some popular European language.
Ethnocentrism is extremely high in the USA.
I would cover the basics strongly before adding lots of extras - we don't have good English, Math, or Science skills nationally. No, all those studies that cite mixed language exposure helping out leave out the fact that English can be taught in a way that has those benefits without all the wasted time. (It IS a waste when the main purpose is to lean better English-- it's like going across the street by going around the planet... sure you get a nice trip but it takes a long time even if you'd learn some geography...something Americans suck at.)
I tend to think they have more brainpower than they do; however, I continue: I would assume this is the usual GOP tactic (but not unique to them it's just one of their favorites) of causing a disaster and counting on the voters to be too ignorant about whom to blame. They can then campaign against the results of their own plans (or intentional incompetence.) An endless cycle of profit.
They put all this in place (2006 too not just 2002) and Obama got caught with the mess; which he used, extended and supported once he had the powers himself... (now maybe he changed his mind when he ran for pres, or maybe the fact the NSA spied on him when he was a nobody and "changed his mind"...either way, crook or coward, it's the same result.)
The technique proved itself for generations now, fuck up government then run on the hate of government that you fostered. They just try to extend that plan into everything and it seems to work well enough that they'll not stop unless there is a huge backfire or the press starts to do it's job... Even then people don't tend to vote with their heads, so actual performance isn't a big deal unless something big happens. Sadly many times when that is a factor, it's something idiotic like an unrelated scandal that has nothing to do with their competence. High school student elections seem no less mature. Instead of picking an official like one would choose an expensive product (ok bad example?) ah, like choosing a doctor-- we choose them for same emotional reasons kids do.
BSD depends upon generosity. GPL doesn't depend upon generosity, it depends upon law to force collaboration.
The real issue here with GCC is they are huge with a wide existing base and couldn't adapt quickly like a new project could, plus some bad decisions (likely related to resisting big changes.) Now they will have to change direction slowly or die.
LLVM has had generous corporate backing but one can't count on that forever.
I've done quite a bit of prelim research figuring out what I'd do for an off grid house and the biggest problem I find currently is the inability for me to change electric car batteries myself. They have expensive robots in the works for the cars but they lack standards and I don't need a robot, some tools to pull the battery and swap it are all I'd need - and it can be expensive, that isn't really the issue.
The smart thing would be to charge the car battery during the day while you are at work; then swap batteries. Sure an extra battery will cost $10k (sooner than you think and obviously I'm not thinking of Tesla's massive one) but to connect a new house to the grid around here costs about $10k. The grid and the monopoly are not setup for a fair deal as far as putting power back into the grid. May as well put that grid tie into your own solution. (and don't forget about connection fees and the possibility you'll be charged future ones as they get threatened by solar.)
It gets costly and quite wasteful to lose all that energy storing it into poor quality (but cheap) batteries that even at their best lose MOST the energy only to hold it until the car can then chuck a % of it recharging. You can make an array large enough to charge the car during the day and it can fit on a roof; however, when you start including % losses in the storage process it gets unrealistic. Sure you can find new expensive storage methods-- but the reality is most that power needs to go into the car and the car is not around during the day - the least wasteful thing is a personal battery swap - and that is not unrealistic... but we are not even given the option of buying such a thing at this time (plus the battery's charge electronics are likely not in the battery so add some more cost.)
I've never thought that I must perfectly replace the current lifestyle; some changes are expected. Too many wimps who can't be inconvenienced even slightly are what keep progress from happening. So what if a car recharge takes an hour; I can waste an hour going out to eat, shop, etc. Shopping malls should be jumping at infrastructure to charge all these cars... slowly. Tesla is genius if they own enough land to setup coffee shops at their charging stations, it'll more than pay for the free electricity.
The "Rule of Law" is a slogan just like about everything else. Sure, nothing is or was perfect but as we continue our gradual fall into despotism, real actual things fade into metaphor and then into meaningless emotional trigger phrases. Unlike in history, where they lacked the social sciences we have today which enhance the skilled sheep herders control.
If you are their enemy, they can drag you into court over ANYTHING what so ever and the only protection you have is which judge you happen to get - who may "interpret" it anyway they seem fit to; including pulling out old common law that isn't actual law -- that is just if they want to cite something instead of pull some total BS like "corporations are people." Sure, you may win eventually after they wreak your life and freeze your funds (or lose your job) so you can't pay for a defense even if you have the money... which most people do not. The political pressure the press can provide when such abuses happen is the last resort but we all know how that doesn't happen...
Mars gets almost half the sunlight as earth. It's more close to 60% so that is a 40% drop from what Earth has. With their weak atmosphere it is COLD on mars and at the poles everything does freeze, even the air. But if Mars had earth's atmosphere it would be significantly warmer than it is now.
Now keep in mind that we lose solar power in the summer when the earth is further away - but it is a negligible amount. What I'd like to know is what % do we lose due to the kilometers variation of the orbit.. Probably sun variations are more but I don't think they are likely going to be significant either; at least for billion years or something.
Feinstein has had access to threat assessments. Notice that those who get access to this information OR perhaps it's those who have influence over big brother are all informed in such a way that they go against the public.
Multiple possibilities exist. Here are a few to think about:
1) "You don't know what we know" creates a culture with an attitude that your ignorance of the situation makes your views irrelevant. It is similar to people who know science and history dealing with Sara Palin types. I leave discussion of differences up to you.
2) Lobbyists do not have to be registered. The CIA, NSA, FBI, HMS, using what they know about policy makers (legal or not) can tell them what they need to hear to get them to vote where desired. Similar to lobbyists but without the $$$ "contributions". Add to that all the privatization produced contractors who DO contribute $$$. They don't have to lie, it's easy to filter information in a biased but honest way to alter perception. Officials rely great deal upon their staff and dept. staff for information, they must take the word of the NSA when it lies to them... until a "traitor" like Snowden provide proof. Sure they should be skeptical but you can't get much done or get far without functionally acting trusting. I suggest "Yes, Minister" as a primer on the subject. You'll see this when you write something specific to your representative and get a non-canned reply - when you get a new representative and write it again you'll get nearly the same reply from the new official (because the staff hasn't changed.)
3) Officials. Sometimes the law forbids doing one's job or doing the right thing. Snowden is an example of this. People who accept the "reality" of the situation succeed and those who don't quit early or are fired or are imprisoned. This fosters a culture. Even like minded people will have to officially oppose and stop others if they want to continue. It is quite a bit like authoritarian societies where children turn in their parents (and if you don't think the USA is already authoritarian, you have a lot of learning to do.) The NSA head has to lie or become a Snowden and Snowden types never make it to the top... if they didn't contract out they'd have filtered him out at a lower security level -- it would take years to get to where he was if he wasn't a contractor. Plus officials have catch-21 situations in their career history that can be used against them.
I did the AP for Calculus. Tested out but I knew exams were BS so I took Calculus in college. It could have been a different course. The difference was HUGE. The AP thing is a total scam and colleges should not accept it. We were ONLY taught to the AP test.
One single multiple guess exam is not going to measure the result of a college course understanding of a subject. It should be obvious, high school kids do not have the work requirements or motivation that colleges can easily demand. Sure, some do but that is not the norm; the situational and maturity differences make it impossible to expect the same from both. The AP students tend to be the best in the school but if it was handled like a college course the results would be different... more upset parents and failed children.
Keyword: children. The main thing college has which makes it better is that it is for adults. You are not a paying customer (despite trends to the contrary) you will be failed and lose your money. The customer is wrong until they can prove they are right. The filtering that produces elite graduates is what makes it valuable and once we've lost that (which is the trend,) it's just another high school. Big difference between producing functional citizens (public school) and producing valuable employees (primary motive for most college students.)
The world only exists if YOU personally are there to observe it. See no evil, hear no evil, speak of no evil and.... there is no more evil! Just think of it! You can stop all the bad things in the world simply by YOU ignoring them.
The rest of us need to either find a way to get people to mature (in a society engineered against that, immaturity is good for the modern economy,) OR we harass people like the parent until they let us solve the problem because that is the easiest way out for them.
Century of the Self. The "me" generation has brought about most of our problems and their offspring have yet to prove themselves... and given the number of baby boomers and their collective wealth it's not a fair match. Hopefully they will retreat more with age, they are likely to be the longest lived generation in US history.
Focusing on the US is important, given it is the source of the consumer culture and still the largest polluter (don't forget the outsourced pollution... which is often ignored when using China as an excuse to do nothing.)
Economists are the witch doctors of our times, they have already had too much influence - and I don't mean the Nobel prize banker award winners; which only reflect the banker's agenda at the time they get it-- and it should mean something when they pick the kind of guys they have been in recent times - it has to be getting extremely bad when they pick more reasonable ones.
Combine that with the bad economy and how fewer parents can afford to allow it now they are working the jobs the teens used to be aiming for... if they can find a job.
Teens today MUST have their embarrassingly expensive smart phones (think about it, it costs them less than the ground lines but you pay 3x-5x more.) which cost more per month than the car would. They'd nearly all choose the phone over the car.
All things being equal, a significant number would be priced out due to the cell phone expenses that weren't a big issue before.
Driving is also miserable, traffic has noticeably increased in 10 years; sometimes I wonder if there wasn't an unreported baby boom that has begun to get on the road (plus they are on their dam phones while driving.)
The main issue that a lot of people are going to have is: 1) They denied everything until Snowden 2) What they fix, they'll deny until the next leaker.
Possibly) What Snowden didn't leak, they will continue to deny and have no need to fix it. Plus there is the "need to know" stuff, some of which POTUS doesn't even know.
Yes, but I also remember ATnT practically funded the DFL convention too... These corps did what they were told and paid to do, it's not exactly their job to defend the constitution... and it's not profitable. Qwest refused and was punished later; now they are Century Link and I bet that transformation had government influence involved with it. I wouldn't ever trust a corporation to defend the country, especially when it goes against profit.
I think it's complex; multiple tactics are used by multiple parties to maintain the status quo - no need to conspire for everything, many things can simply be small parties with loosely aligned interests. Just as opposing activist organizations will team up on occasion; they also sometimes are aligned without any coordination.
With hindsight, we can now see that it was likely McSame would have lived and probably not died from the stress of dealing with Palin. or not... His actions since 2007 show he's not have been any better; most likely worse. We'd not be fighting about what kind of deal to have with Iran we'd be at war with Iran and in Syria and probably fighting over a huge military base being put into Libya. Palin would eat up most the "news" cycle with reality TV BS; as she did after losing. I hope the GOP drop their recent attempts to become reality TV stars (2012 included.)
Don't forget Global Dimming which everybody would know about from the "skeptics" and the fossil industry except that Global Dimming was found to fit in with Global Warming and undermine their propaganda strategy. You might hear more about it from the Atmosphere Engineering people who will cite it as proof we can change the climate... but instead of unhealthy pollution we are dimming the earth with today we'd use more healthy pollution. There is no doubt we'd be much hotter today if it were not for Global Dimming. Me, I think we'll eventually be sold on some "safe" form of pollution for a bunch of cash to mitigate the problem (more money to be made on all sides with that kind of solution. safety be dammed.)
The impact of pollution dimming seems to be larger than that of this change in the Sun; which sounds to me like it is just triggering some weather changes not changing the overall temperature. Wouldn't it have to be rather massive to impact us greatly?
That is to say, we are closer to the sun in the winter and we have winter simply because we have more darkness due to our rotation at an angle -- to compare with those wouldn't the sun need really drastic event way beyond anything observed? Think about it: during winter we are completely blocked from the sun for more of the day - to do something similar the sun would have to turn down by 30%?
Slashdot Mirror
Overpopulation is always the primary problem that nobody dares to address.
Nuclear power is a scam. Heavily subsidized and not regulated heavily enough or even properly for the regulations they already have. I doubt that the subsidization is enough to balance out the costs for the current level of inadequate regulation.
Next gen nuclear is always off topic because it doesn't exist even after decades of solutions that were 5 years away - anything you build today is not next gen; therefore, off topic. It is foolish to build them today, the USA is building TWO nuclear plants and those cost MORE than India's solar plants - plus the construction time is comparable (except India's can be online before it's completed and its construction costs are going to go down while it is being built, so it's likely to be near budget, unlike the nuclear plants.)
Solar is cheaper than nuclear power. TODAY. The same tech from decades ago finally being mass produced with the resources that could have been there for decades already... The "innovations" have been minimal (silicon cells) and they are mass production related; nothing that couldn't have happened 20 years ago. If solar only had half what the nuclear industry had to help it evolve it's mass production... (instead we kept putting money into new tech and ignoring mass production... delaying.... The USA dumped some $$ into CIGS instead of making existing tech cheaper like the Chinese did. CIGS may win long term but we can't keep stalling letting the perfect be the enemy of good. )
A modern grid to replace our century+ old primitive power grid would mitigate most the fluctuation issues of wind and solar. Leaving other kinds of power to fill in the gaps which can be done cheaper and safer than nuclear can do. We still have plenty of old power plants that can fill the void while newer ones are invented; perhaps the mythical mini next-gen nuclear plant will happen by that time.
Google Chrome can't be trusted and just because they used to say they'd do no evil doesn't make them safe to trust with everything you do online.
Firefox isn't that horrible, even on a computer from 2006. Splitting hairs. They'll have their up and their downs like the others and I don't mind they are not focused on the same priorities google is. I don't approve of SPDY, I'd rather they not waste the time and help HTTP 2 move forward faster. They should put more time into privacy since that is a weakness for the others.
SOPA melted their phone lines with irate voters! Voters may be fools but they can remember a few BIG issues come a election day and SOPA scared the shit out of all the politicians. The sponsors of SOPA quickly ran out to denounce their own bill before it ruined them.
With the internet big players reminding the public for FREE, they couldn't distract the issue from voter's on election day. It didn't matter that the public was entirely against it-- they don't care if 90% of their voters are against their policies, they only need to worry about suckering enough votes and if you can distract people with 1-3 issues THEY CHOOSE then they win.
They will NOT pay a political price come election day; it'll be forgotten or lower priority because the usual 1-3 issues will be all that matters (usually the same few issues over and over.) Whether a representative ACTUALLY represents the voters is NEVER a campaign issue - when that really should be the #1 issue. Whether they follow constitutional principles is also not a big issue; even when cities ban free speech it usually has to be handled in the courts (free assembly forget it.)
They did not have a filibuster proof majority! How can that be Insightful? Who is naive enough to believe 100% of a party is going to vote with their party on a big issue? (Perhaps you are a Republican? The two parties do not function the same - but the corrupt members of both do tend to act alike.)
1) Al Franken was delayed from his seat for a year of that "majority" due to political hacking of the legal system (they knew he won but tied up the courts intentionally to the point the Republican judges even made comments about how untrustworthy their lawyers were.) That was done as a power ploy, with BS voter rights smokescreen.
2) You assume the label "Democrat" makes some politician a mindless drone of the party. The corrupting forces in this issue are corporate and they have enough pull in BOTH parties that you can't measure the majority by political party. It only took 1 corrupt Democrat to allow a filibuster to happen.
3) Senators more than most politicians, routinely grandstand on lies. They make deals during votes and change their votes so they can come down on the right side of an issue where they already know the outcome of the vote! This is not unusual practice in the US Senate. You may feel your senator is doing right by you when they support failed bills... but when it comes down their filibuster breaking vote, they will show their true position.
Accenture -- weren't they the company that worked for Enron but in the aftermath of the fraud and the role they played in it they renamed the company to "Accenture." Or did they rename again and this company took the name? I am pretty sure Accenture was the name they picked after the Enron disaster.
Government flops that involve voters are a good thing; they can hold somebody accountable which is far more than they can do with businesses they are bound to.
Politicians are made or broken on how they handle Medicare and Social Security; the result is that those programs run quite well despite attempts to sabotage them. This will likely end up in a similar situation which is why so much is being put into sabotaging it now because it gains too much momentum with the voters.
Try converting the DOW over the last century adjusting for inflation. You'll see it's gone nowhere - it only seems to go up because the number gets higher but it ends up only matching inflation.
In the 1980s a million $ was a huge unobtainable amount for nearly everybody on earth (but that didn't stop people from unrealistic dreams of earning that much.) Not so much today. Thinking in terms of real items, a cheap car back in the 80s was $10,000 cheaper than it is today. There has been a huge amount of inflation. Property values went up more than most everything due to additional factors, so it's not a great measure other than one needs shelter (sadly it's over emphasis in the economy creates a disconnect from shelter and investment. So we have to fight to get solar panels because some idiot neighbor is worried about their property value in 30 years when they move to a retirement home.)
Neanderthals were most probably smarter. The theory is that they lived in small groups while our migrating ancestors lived in packs/tribes in larger numbers and until there was proof many people thought that they died off and were probably overrun. It was controversial to claim they bred until there was proof (but it's rather obvious if you think about it, people will screw anything - there is no way they wouldn't; no religion to stop them.)
India has a lot of poor uneducated people. If you lived and grew up like many of them did you'd be no smarter on a standardized IQ test.
It's not so simple; they train their brains so intensely that they think IN chess - not visual representations, not words, not even like you might think-- in that they step thru every process they are thinking about and merely are faster than average at that.
Sure the basics are wrote memory but that comes with that level of experience and the number of memorized sequences between masters them doesn't amount to much (which is why they beat computers for so long which always had the memorization advantage.) You can find info on the study of these peoples' brains and how they work, it is more like learning to ride a bike where you "don't think" when you get skilled. For advanced maneuvers there is still thinking required but it's not on the same level because of all the skill to build upon and the kind of thought process wired into a skilled brain has one thinking "in the language" of the skill just as you can think in english.
Chess masters can move extremely quickly in their native language while you are stuck thinking in a foreign language. That said, anybody who plays chess a lot is going to become most familiar with the 1st minute of the game - even if you lose all the time, you are likely to experience a few minutes of the game before you lose. So that is going to become the most familiar in addition to being the smallest problem space of the game.
I have a completely opposite opinion. I think the foreign language requirement is BS. Maybe under the conditions that people who made the requirement were thinking of provided a good enough reason to make that a requirement; however, today that is NOT the case.
At least with programming they will be exposed to logic and having to think differently in a way that is not naturally human. Yes, it's unlikely they'll get proper programming experience to have the desired impact on them, but that already is the case for foreign language education. Thinking in programming code is going to impact them if they get to that skill level; just as a foreign language would. I also think people are too biased into thinking that people can only think in a spoken language - if you could get people to NOT think in a spoken language that would probably do the most.
English education is poor quality. People who used to learn Latin ended up way better off but that was killed in favor of living language -- many of the popular ones are so similar to English that it can't be providing much benefit other than perhaps the way they teach it exposing grammar - which is not really taught. Teaching proper English grammar again with the Latin based-concepts etc would be far more beneficial. They no longer taught grammar when I was in school (it was passive at that point, the teacher would have to correct it for you to even know of a rule... perhaps this approach would work if they made us read a whole lot more; that that didn't happen either.)
Cultures, geography, etc. should be taught (does social studies even exist anymore?) about multiple areas not just the one who's language you are learning (in my case, we learned almost nothing other than stuff we already knew from pop culture on Span or Mexico and I bet you half the students couldn't find Spain on a map and 1/5 wouldn't realize if you renamed Canada Mexico on a map.)
If you REALLY want or need to learn a language -- GO THERE. Everybody admits it is the best way to learn. Americans do not get 1 month vacation per year to travel around Europe; perhaps if they did... they'd at least learn some Spanish or French going short distances. If you want people to think differently by language exposure, pick something DIFFERENT-- like Chinese, not some popular European language.
Ethnocentrism is extremely high in the USA.
I would cover the basics strongly before adding lots of extras - we don't have good English, Math, or Science skills nationally. No, all those studies that cite mixed language exposure helping out leave out the fact that English can be taught in a way that has those benefits without all the wasted time. (It IS a waste when the main purpose is to lean better English-- it's like going across the street by going around the planet... sure you get a nice trip but it takes a long time even if you'd learn some geography...something Americans suck at.)
I tend to think they have more brainpower than they do; however, I continue:
I would assume this is the usual GOP tactic (but not unique to them it's just one of their favorites) of causing a disaster and counting on the voters to be too ignorant about whom to blame. They can then campaign against the results of their own plans (or intentional incompetence.) An endless cycle of profit.
They put all this in place (2006 too not just 2002) and Obama got caught with the mess; which he used, extended and supported once he had the powers himself... (now maybe he changed his mind when he ran for pres, or maybe the fact the NSA spied on him when he was a nobody and "changed his mind"...either way, crook or coward, it's the same result.)
The technique proved itself for generations now, fuck up government then run on the hate of government that you fostered. They just try to extend that plan into everything and it seems to work well enough that they'll not stop unless there is a huge backfire or the press starts to do it's job... Even then people don't tend to vote with their heads, so actual performance isn't a big deal unless something big happens. Sadly many times when that is a factor, it's something idiotic like an unrelated scandal that has nothing to do with their competence. High school student elections seem no less mature. Instead of picking an official like one would choose an expensive product (ok bad example?) ah, like choosing a doctor-- we choose them for same emotional reasons kids do.
BSD depends upon generosity.
GPL doesn't depend upon generosity, it depends upon law to force collaboration.
The real issue here with GCC is they are huge with a wide existing base and couldn't adapt quickly like a new project could, plus some bad decisions (likely related to resisting big changes.) Now they will have to change direction slowly or die.
LLVM has had generous corporate backing but one can't count on that forever.
I've done quite a bit of prelim research figuring out what I'd do for an off grid house and the biggest problem I find currently is the inability for me to change electric car batteries myself. They have expensive robots in the works for the cars but they lack standards and I don't need a robot, some tools to pull the battery and swap it are all I'd need - and it can be expensive, that isn't really the issue.
The smart thing would be to charge the car battery during the day while you are at work; then swap batteries. Sure an extra battery will cost $10k (sooner than you think and obviously I'm not thinking of Tesla's massive one) but to connect a new house to the grid around here costs about $10k. The grid and the monopoly are not setup for a fair deal as far as putting power back into the grid. May as well put that grid tie into your own solution. (and don't forget about connection fees and the possibility you'll be charged future ones as they get threatened by solar.)
It gets costly and quite wasteful to lose all that energy storing it into poor quality (but cheap) batteries that even at their best lose MOST the energy only to hold it until the car can then chuck a % of it recharging. You can make an array large enough to charge the car during the day and it can fit on a roof; however, when you start including % losses in the storage process it gets unrealistic. Sure you can find new expensive storage methods-- but the reality is most that power needs to go into the car and the car is not around during the day - the least wasteful thing is a personal battery swap - and that is not unrealistic... but we are not even given the option of buying such a thing at this time (plus the battery's charge electronics are likely not in the battery so add some more cost.)
I've never thought that I must perfectly replace the current lifestyle; some changes are expected. Too many wimps who can't be inconvenienced even slightly are what keep progress from happening. So what if a car recharge takes an hour; I can waste an hour going out to eat, shop, etc. Shopping malls should be jumping at infrastructure to charge all these cars... slowly. Tesla is genius if they own enough land to setup coffee shops at their charging stations, it'll more than pay for the free electricity.
The "Rule of Law" is a slogan just like about everything else. Sure, nothing is or was perfect but as we continue our gradual fall into despotism, real actual things fade into metaphor and then into meaningless emotional trigger phrases. Unlike in history, where they lacked the social sciences we have today which enhance the skilled sheep herders control.
If you are their enemy, they can drag you into court over ANYTHING what so ever and the only protection you have is which judge you happen to get - who may "interpret" it anyway they seem fit to; including pulling out old common law that isn't actual law -- that is just if they want to cite something instead of pull some total BS like "corporations are people." Sure, you may win eventually after they wreak your life and freeze your funds (or lose your job) so you can't pay for a defense even if you have the money... which most people do not. The political pressure the press can provide when such abuses happen is the last resort but we all know how that doesn't happen...
It's not green, so it doesn't have people in it yet. So what secret will we discover is the ingredient in Soylent Grey?
Mars gets almost half the sunlight as earth. It's more close to 60% so that is a 40% drop from what Earth has. With their weak atmosphere it is COLD on mars and at the poles everything does freeze, even the air. But if Mars had earth's atmosphere it would be significantly warmer than it is now.
Now keep in mind that we lose solar power in the summer when the earth is further away - but it is a negligible amount. What I'd like to know is what % do we lose due to the kilometers variation of the orbit.. Probably sun variations are more but I don't think they are likely going to be significant either; at least for billion years or something.
Not if you are on the stock market; then you're obligated to eventually screw your customers.
Feinstein has had access to threat assessments. Notice that those who get access to this information OR perhaps it's those who have influence over big brother are all informed in such a way that they go against the public.
Multiple possibilities exist. Here are a few to think about:
1) "You don't know what we know" creates a culture with an attitude that your ignorance of the situation makes your views irrelevant. It is similar to people who know science and history dealing with Sara Palin types. I leave discussion of differences up to you.
2) Lobbyists do not have to be registered. The CIA, NSA, FBI, HMS, using what they know about policy makers (legal or not) can tell them what they need to hear to get them to vote where desired. Similar to lobbyists but without the $$$ "contributions". Add to that all the privatization produced contractors who DO contribute $$$. They don't have to lie, it's easy to filter information in a biased but honest way to alter perception. Officials rely great deal upon their staff and dept. staff for information, they must take the word of the NSA when it lies to them... until a "traitor" like Snowden provide proof. Sure they should be skeptical but you can't get much done or get far without functionally acting trusting. I suggest "Yes, Minister" as a primer on the subject. You'll see this when you write something specific to your representative and get a non-canned reply - when you get a new representative and write it again you'll get nearly the same reply from the new official (because the staff hasn't changed.)
3) Officials. Sometimes the law forbids doing one's job or doing the right thing. Snowden is an example of this. People who accept the "reality" of the situation succeed and those who don't quit early or are fired or are imprisoned. This fosters a culture. Even like minded people will have to officially oppose and stop others if they want to continue. It is quite a bit like authoritarian societies where children turn in their parents (and if you don't think the USA is already authoritarian, you have a lot of learning to do.) The NSA head has to lie or become a Snowden and Snowden types never make it to the top... if they didn't contract out they'd have filtered him out at a lower security level -- it would take years to get to where he was if he wasn't a contractor. Plus officials have catch-21 situations in their career history that can be used against them.
I did the AP for Calculus. Tested out but I knew exams were BS so I took Calculus in college. It could have been a different course. The difference was HUGE. The AP thing is a total scam and colleges should not accept it. We were ONLY taught to the AP test.
One single multiple guess exam is not going to measure the result of a college course understanding of a subject. It should be obvious, high school kids do not have the work requirements or motivation that colleges can easily demand. Sure, some do but that is not the norm; the situational and maturity differences make it impossible to expect the same from both. The AP students tend to be the best in the school but if it was handled like a college course the results would be different... more upset parents and failed children.
Keyword: children. The main thing college has which makes it better is that it is for adults. You are not a paying customer (despite trends to the contrary) you will be failed and lose your money. The customer is wrong until they can prove they are right. The filtering that produces elite graduates is what makes it valuable and once we've lost that (which is the trend,) it's just another high school. Big difference between producing functional citizens (public school) and producing valuable employees (primary motive for most college students.)
The world only exists if YOU personally are there to observe it. See no evil, hear no evil, speak of no evil and .... there is no more evil! Just think of it! You can stop all the bad things in the world simply by YOU ignoring them.
The rest of us need to either find a way to get people to mature (in a society engineered against that, immaturity is good for the modern economy,) OR we harass people like the parent until they let us solve the problem because that is the easiest way out for them.
Century of the Self. The "me" generation has brought about most of our problems and their offspring have yet to prove themselves... and given the number of baby boomers and their collective wealth it's not a fair match. Hopefully they will retreat more with age, they are likely to be the longest lived generation in US history.
Focusing on the US is important, given it is the source of the consumer culture and still the largest polluter (don't forget the outsourced pollution... which is often ignored when using China as an excuse to do nothing.)
Economists are the witch doctors of our times, they have already had too much influence - and I don't mean the Nobel prize banker award winners; which only reflect the banker's agenda at the time they get it-- and it should mean something when they pick the kind of guys they have been in recent times - it has to be getting extremely bad when they pick more reasonable ones.
Combine that with the bad economy and how fewer parents can afford to allow it now they are working the jobs the teens used to be aiming for... if they can find a job.
Teens today MUST have their embarrassingly expensive smart phones (think about it, it costs them less than the ground lines but you pay 3x-5x more.) which cost more per month than the car would. They'd nearly all choose the phone over the car.
All things being equal, a significant number would be priced out due to the cell phone expenses that weren't a big issue before.
Driving is also miserable, traffic has noticeably increased in 10 years; sometimes I wonder if there wasn't an unreported baby boom that has begun to get on the road (plus they are on their dam phones while driving.)
Am I the only one that EXPECTED to see a Chicago Economist involved?
The main issue that a lot of people are going to have is:
1) They denied everything until Snowden
2) What they fix, they'll deny until the next leaker.
Possibly) What Snowden didn't leak, they will continue to deny and have no need to fix it. Plus there is the "need to know" stuff, some of which POTUS doesn't even know.
Yes, but I also remember ATnT practically funded the DFL convention too... These corps did what they were told and paid to do, it's not exactly their job to defend the constitution... and it's not profitable. Qwest refused and was punished later; now they are Century Link and I bet that transformation had government influence involved with it. I wouldn't ever trust a corporation to defend the country, especially when it goes against profit.
I think it's complex; multiple tactics are used by multiple parties to maintain the status quo - no need to conspire for everything, many things can simply be small parties with loosely aligned interests. Just as opposing activist organizations will team up on occasion; they also sometimes are aligned without any coordination.
With hindsight, we can now see that it was likely McSame would have lived and probably not died from the stress of dealing with Palin. or not... His actions since 2007 show he's not have been any better; most likely worse. We'd not be fighting about what kind of deal to have with Iran we'd be at war with Iran and in Syria and probably fighting over a huge military base being put into Libya. Palin would eat up most the "news" cycle with reality TV BS; as she did after losing. I hope the GOP drop their recent attempts to become reality TV stars (2012 included.)
Don't forget Global Dimming which everybody would know about from the "skeptics" and the fossil industry except that Global Dimming was found to fit in with Global Warming and undermine their propaganda strategy. You might hear more about it from the Atmosphere Engineering people who will cite it as proof we can change the climate... but instead of unhealthy pollution we are dimming the earth with today we'd use more healthy pollution. There is no doubt we'd be much hotter today if it were not for Global Dimming. Me, I think we'll eventually be sold on some "safe" form of pollution for a bunch of cash to mitigate the problem (more money to be made on all sides with that kind of solution. safety be dammed.)
The impact of pollution dimming seems to be larger than that of this change in the Sun; which sounds to me like it is just triggering some weather changes not changing the overall temperature. Wouldn't it have to be rather massive to impact us greatly?
That is to say, we are closer to the sun in the winter and we have winter simply because we have more darkness due to our rotation at an angle -- to compare with those wouldn't the sun need really drastic event way beyond anything observed? Think about it: during winter we are completely blocked from the sun for more of the day - to do something similar the sun would have to turn down by 30%?