I answered your false dilemma above. Why not do both? I have an efficient house, but part of that strategy was installing programmable thermostats and part of it was installing hundreds of dollars (I don't know how you do anything even in an apartment for $20) of insulation and a radiant barrier, plus sealing all the places where air was intruding.
It's not really as simple as you claim. We both agree that you should turn down the HVAC when no one is home or they're sleeping, right? Once your house is really efficient, you still shouldn't waste energy when no one is home. But when is that, exactly? You can't just have it turn up and down the same time every day, because your weekend schedule differs. OK, so we'll use a different weekend schedule. But actually, Saturday and Sunday are very different, because we're at church/at a game/doing charity work/cleaning house/whatever. OK, so a 5-1-1 schedule. But our club/fraternity/band meets on Wednesday nights for 2 hours, so we need to adjust for that. So you buy a 7-day programmable thermostat, set it up for your crazy schedule, and-- then you set the other 3 thermostats for the other three zones. And you reset all of them when your schedule changes. And you manually bypass all of them for the times you're actually spontaneous and leave the house for a few hours to go shopping or have fun. But you probably really forget to do that. So it would be nice if you could set all the zones at once, and maybe if it could something really cool, like notice when no one is home and set itself.
That's why smart thermostats make sense. Saying they don't is like leaving your car idling because, hey, it already gets 50 MPG.
Definitely. This is already the case for taxicabs, with their de facto $1 million medallions. Now the city is protecting "big hotel", with the excuse that landlords might be kicking out their tenants in order to obtain more profit by renting out via AirBnB. Aren't there already laws on how and when tenants can be evicted? If these are being broken, enforce them. If they aren't good enough, pass new ones. This is rule by fiat, not by law. It's amazing how many politicians in the US find it too difficult to actually conceive, propose, and pass legislation.
So... blame it on Bush, again? What relevance does that have? Even if he personally tanked the economy, is this to be an excuse for the entire failure of the various Congresses and the President over the last 5 years?
There was no surplus. The social security contributions were counted in the general fund, which is either correct (which means the "trust fund" is a lie) or incorrect (which means we did not have a surplus and Clinton lied... again).
Don't let the fact that everything you just said is a lie stop you from posting more rants in the future.
The GOP is willing to pass a budget immediately as long as Obama waives the individual mandate-- just like he waived the mandate for employers-- for 2014. It's come to that, but the Fascists in the Senate do not wish to compromise and have said so.
It's time people like you let go of your cognitive dissonance and help us solve our problems.
Actually, no, it's not efficient at all. The bigger the organization, the MORE loss to bureaucracy and corruption. The idea of a benevolent government makes no sense when we in the same breath complain that individuals are not charitable enough.
I sympathize with your situation, but you must be aware that the House passed at least three different bills that would fund the ENTIRE government except Obamacare. They're even willing to fund it if Obama would sign a waiver of the individual mandate for just one year. That means Obamacare, in all its hideousness, would still go into effect for 2015. But Harry Reid, Obama, and their lackeys refuse to compromise, after years of criticizing their opponents for not compromising enough with their demands on other issues.
So I ask you: who are the real villains? And a second question: where are you getting your news? Because you are clearly not well informed.
I'm appalled that someone would write such a lengthy article about rights without cracking a history book to find out where the 5th amendment came from. In common law, confessions via torture were admissible. Even when torture was outlawed, it continued to be done in secret as defendants could still be compelled to testify against themselves. The only way to rectify this to a great degree is to give the defendant the option of remaining silent. This way, if he is coerced and thus blabs to avoid torture, it will raise questions. The small potential benefit to the prosecution is not worth the high risk of being caught torturing people.
Los Angeles proved what happens if you don't have a strong EPA; things like children with bleeding lesions on their lungs simply from breathing the air happen. As well, the federal government prevented The People of California from implementing only in our state the automotive emissions restrictions for which we actually voted because it would do harm to their future bailout poster children.
So, you want a strong Federal government to protect the environment, but you want a weak Federal government that can't stop you from protecting the environment? Sounds like the Federal government is the problem here.
You're the one who said "public spaces". Company-owned property is not public, by definition. While the easement in NYC and other places often allows people to pass through or even linger, it doesn't allow them to set up camp, leave refuse, vandalize, make noise, or block access to others. Perhaps my movement of the 50% of Americans who actually pay more in taxes than they receive in entitlements should set up camp on your lawn or, if it applies, the couch in your apartment. Hope you have HBO.
I'm guessing you're one of the folks who likes how states like New Jersey treat divorced fathers like convicted felons (Note: I'm not a divorced father). No, really-- if you are paying child support, they treat you like you are on probation. You can't move without telling them, and if you are behind on a payment for any reason, you're at the mercy of the court. They really are allowed to throw you in jail thanks to "deadbeat dad" laws even if you're in the hospital, for example, which actually HURTS kids because you can't exactly pay when imprisoned either.
By the way, you're a great example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Try to come to grips with the fact that you are not intelligent, and really THINK about the fact that laws have unintended consequences.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm a watery tart, you insensitive clod!
Mine shuts up if I wave at it. I just have to wave really hard.
Better yet, install a PHOTOELECTRIC detector-- not an ionizing one-- and install it just OUTSIDE the kitchen.
I answered your false dilemma above. Why not do both? I have an efficient house, but part of that strategy was installing programmable thermostats and part of it was installing hundreds of dollars (I don't know how you do anything even in an apartment for $20) of insulation and a radiant barrier, plus sealing all the places where air was intruding.
It's not really as simple as you claim. We both agree that you should turn down the HVAC when no one is home or they're sleeping, right? Once your house is really efficient, you still shouldn't waste energy when no one is home. But when is that, exactly? You can't just have it turn up and down the same time every day, because your weekend schedule differs. OK, so we'll use a different weekend schedule. But actually, Saturday and Sunday are very different, because we're at church/at a game/doing charity work/cleaning house/whatever. OK, so a 5-1-1 schedule. But our club/fraternity/band meets on Wednesday nights for 2 hours, so we need to adjust for that. So you buy a 7-day programmable thermostat, set it up for your crazy schedule, and-- then you set the other 3 thermostats for the other three zones. And you reset all of them when your schedule changes. And you manually bypass all of them for the times you're actually spontaneous and leave the house for a few hours to go shopping or have fun. But you probably really forget to do that. So it would be nice if you could set all the zones at once, and maybe if it could something really cool, like notice when no one is home and set itself.
That's why smart thermostats make sense. Saying they don't is like leaving your car idling because, hey, it already gets 50 MPG.
Obligatory "if you aren't doing anything illegal, you have nothing to hide".
Yeah, the 5th ward was totally full of "climate change denying hill billies with petrified civil war era brains". You're a racist, and an idiot.
Is this the sort of thing that keeps you up at night? You must be one tough womyn to live with.
I'm sure Bill Gates stopped trying to dominate the PC market as soon as he earned his first $31 billion.
Definitely. This is already the case for taxicabs, with their de facto $1 million medallions. Now the city is protecting "big hotel", with the excuse that landlords might be kicking out their tenants in order to obtain more profit by renting out via AirBnB. Aren't there already laws on how and when tenants can be evicted? If these are being broken, enforce them. If they aren't good enough, pass new ones. This is rule by fiat, not by law. It's amazing how many politicians in the US find it too difficult to actually conceive, propose, and pass legislation.
So... blame it on Bush, again? What relevance does that have? Even if he personally tanked the economy, is this to be an excuse for the entire failure of the various Congresses and the President over the last 5 years?
There was no surplus. The social security contributions were counted in the general fund, which is either correct (which means the "trust fund" is a lie) or incorrect (which means we did not have a surplus and Clinton lied... again).
Don't let the fact that everything you just said is a lie stop you from posting more rants in the future.
The GOP is willing to pass a budget immediately as long as Obama waives the individual mandate-- just like he waived the mandate for employers-- for 2014. It's come to that, but the Fascists in the Senate do not wish to compromise and have said so.
It's time people like you let go of your cognitive dissonance and help us solve our problems.
Actually, no, it's not efficient at all. The bigger the organization, the MORE loss to bureaucracy and corruption. The idea of a benevolent government makes no sense when we in the same breath complain that individuals are not charitable enough.
I sympathize with your situation, but you must be aware that the House passed at least three different bills that would fund the ENTIRE government except Obamacare. They're even willing to fund it if Obama would sign a waiver of the individual mandate for just one year. That means Obamacare, in all its hideousness, would still go into effect for 2015. But Harry Reid, Obama, and their lackeys refuse to compromise, after years of criticizing their opponents for not compromising enough with their demands on other issues.
So I ask you: who are the real villains? And a second question: where are you getting your news? Because you are clearly not well informed.
Someone decided we needed another Jon Katz.
I'm appalled that someone would write such a lengthy article about rights without cracking a history book to find out where the 5th amendment came from. In common law, confessions via torture were admissible. Even when torture was outlawed, it continued to be done in secret as defendants could still be compelled to testify against themselves. The only way to rectify this to a great degree is to give the defendant the option of remaining silent. This way, if he is coerced and thus blabs to avoid torture, it will raise questions. The small potential benefit to the prosecution is not worth the high risk of being caught torturing people.
So, you want a strong Federal government to protect the environment, but you want a weak Federal government that can't stop you from protecting the environment? Sounds like the Federal government is the problem here.
Yeah... I was wondering how to hook up the teletype and the terminal servers.
So Clinton had a gun to his head, right? Try reading this.
You're the one who said "public spaces". Company-owned property is not public, by definition. While the easement in NYC and other places often allows people to pass through or even linger, it doesn't allow them to set up camp, leave refuse, vandalize, make noise, or block access to others. Perhaps my movement of the 50% of Americans who actually pay more in taxes than they receive in entitlements should set up camp on your lawn or, if it applies, the couch in your apartment. Hope you have HBO.
Other than everyone on Slashdot, every day?
No, actually I don't, Captain Logic. You didn't have a point in there; it was a subjective rant.
The President repeatedly snaps back at the press with absurd analogies and I'm the one with mental problems?
I'm guessing you're one of the folks who likes how states like New Jersey treat divorced fathers like convicted felons (Note: I'm not a divorced father). No, really-- if you are paying child support, they treat you like you are on probation. You can't move without telling them, and if you are behind on a payment for any reason, you're at the mercy of the court. They really are allowed to throw you in jail thanks to "deadbeat dad" laws even if you're in the hospital, for example, which actually HURTS kids because you can't exactly pay when imprisoned either.
By the way, you're a great example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Try to come to grips with the fact that you are not intelligent, and really THINK about the fact that laws have unintended consequences.
Yes. It's dinnertime, and your Mom has been calling for you to come up for 20 minutes.