I am tired of complex and complicated taxes. The overhead from processing it hurts business more, than does the actually tax.
Obama/Dems should push a FIXED tax on ALL on-line goods for some amount (say 6%). Then have the feds take a set amount( say 3), and then the rest goes to the state. If the state does not want it, then it remains with the feds. In the states, they decide how to divy it up (states vs. local area). The point being that the costs of the accounts and complex IRS are worse than the overhead of the tax.
Sure, I will.
The patriot act was suppose to be used against terrorists. So far, there has been less then one use/year dealing with terrorism. All the other uses were against drugs, common criminals. And that was what was detailed. The real question is, what is missing?
Look again. It says that it can carry 1 ton up to 20K feet. However, it can carry a GREAT deal more at lower altitude (read denser air). And this craft can go 80 mph. Fuel is a LARGE costs of fighting fires.
How many mountains are there over Haiti? Or over Florida? Or over an Afghanistan base?
What I find interesting is that you speak of beaming data around via cell, yet,think that beaming power is not going to happen? The fact is that beaming power is being researched and happening now.
Out here in the west, we have LARGE forest fires. During those times we need to dump 10's or 100's of tonnes of H20 on it. This blimp that moves at 80 mph is more than fast enough.
The first is that we need something like this to carry water for putting out fires. While it can carry a ton at 20K, it can carry much more at a lower altitude.
The second thought is that this can be used to transmit power as this tech gets developed. It can either take it from space, or from a beam below and then re-distribute it. Where that would be useful is in Afghanistan, or in disaster area. IOW, it would be to our advantage to work this out so that we can beam say 5 or more miles, with at least 60% efficiency.
EU has it right that we need to address this. EU's solution which is the carbon tax as well as Tax/Trade SUX and is failing BAD. Now, why do I say that? Because they put this in place and yet, America, China, Russia, Brazil, India, etc have done relatively little to drop their CO2 emissions. And if America puts in place the same horrible solutions, it will actually make things WORSE. The reason is that other nations ESP. CHINA will massively increase electrification and transportation. Why? To try and grab as much American companies as possible. And they will not grow it slowly. We will see LOADS of new China's poppiing up while everybody seeks to grab what they can. That means Coal plants and Roads.
So, is there a solution that will work? Yes. And it is the ONLY one that I know that CAN.
Tax ALL goods based on CO2 emissions / km^2 for the item and primary sub-component. The emissions and size of land is verifiable by satellites (co2 out - co2 in == your part). THis has to be done slowly, BUT ASSUREDLY, to give all nations and businesses time to adjust. In addition, and more importantly, it rewards those nations that actually DO change. Finally, one of the bigger issues with making these changes is that it brings success which will actually increase emissions. With this tax, it has a negative feedback to prevent that from happening.
If this has ANY chance of working, this is likely the only way.
A decade ago, I tried to get Colorado Gov Owens to do that. In particular, I was trying to get him to use X prizes as way to do it electronically. It was an interesting attempt.
While I have mod points, I feel the need to comment here (I wish that the AC had had some courage).
The AC's point was that America does not care when it is out of sight, out of mind. AC is 100% correct.
The problem is that AC limits it to just America. That is a mistake. It absolutely should include EU as well as Russia, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, and most of all, China. Basically, it is the industrial nations that are doing this. Now, most of the west has cleaned up OUT nations, but a big part of that was done by outsourcing. It is hypocritical on our part to do that. It needs to change. That is why I keep speaking out against the EU approach on Climate: that is for the west to tax ONLY our goods. That is the dead wrong approach. Instead, every nation should be taxing ALL goods based on the pollution (start with CO2) that is in the area for the good as well as the largest sub-component. After time, change the CO2 to include Mercury, and other pollutants. THis approach is the ONLY way to clean up the world.
Actually, it IS automatically under the GPL code. However, GPL does not say that you MUST distribute your code to anyone that wants it. GPL says that if you give/sell application, that you must give source with it. As long as the employer does not transfer that application to a 3rd party, then this author has ZERO rights to it. Once the application is transfered to a 3rd party, then the 3rd party must be given the source code (all of it, including the extended), otherwise the university WILL be in the wrong. Once the 3rd party gets the application/source code, then they are free to do with it what they want, including transferring back to the original author, or releasing on the web.
While it never hurts to talk to a lawyer, there is a simple answer for all of this.
The original code base that he developed before the university hire IS GPL and belongs to him. He is free to do with it what he wants. Note, that the code is GPL as well, unless the author created a separate license for it.
The extended code base that was created is ALSO GPL, but owned by the university. As long as they keep it in house, there is not a thing that the author can do. IOW, he does not dare release it, since he does not own it.
IFF the university attempts to commercialize this, and releases it in any fashion (gives away, sells, etc), they will have to release it as well as GPL barring that either rewrite all of the libraries, or get permission from all to not release as GPL. ANY of the customers who get that source code can do with it as THEY see fit, including give it back to the author, or release it on the web.
The GPL license is a simple thing. Now, the university, and/or the author may not like the outcome, but that is the gist of it.
I realize what they are up to. HOWEVER, that does not change the ability to increase the RH in an area so as to send snow/rain to an area. Basically, this is a MUCH cheaper way to send water to an inland area, rather then to use pipes. Keep in mind that if these ships are dual use (increase clouds formation to lower temps; increase RH to cause snow/rain earlier in a land), then it will make them quite a bit more affordable.
Spreading the precipiation out all over the place will do what you say. HOWEVER, if you have a number of these ships close together, located about 25-50 miles offshore, then you are looking at a much higher precipitation.
Adding more moisture to the air increase the RH. As such, all we need to do is increase it enough to cause the water to fall in the mountains, rather than continuing on to the east coast. Obviously, we do not want to do it all the time, but during an el nino, we receive little water, while the east coast gets massive floods (like this current el nino). Had we used this to drop out the moisture on the rockies, then Tennessee would not have the issues that it has this year.
There is just something about/.. Over the last decade, the average intelligence here has dropped greatly. Just a real dumb question. Exactly WHERE do you think that the current h20 vapor comes from? Fresh water lakes only?
How were you modded insightful? The simple fact is, that the h20 is not the issue. It goes up, it comes down. In addition, when water is in the form of CLOUDS, it COOLS the planet. It is when it has a high vapor, but not enough to form clouds, that you get warming. OTH, the CO2 is an issue because it stays around and around and around. As such, a VERY small amount goes a long ways. So, the global warming issue is just garbage.
I will say that there are OTHER possible side effects, for example, the clouds WILL block sun from getting to the crops, so there will be less food. And I am sure that there are other ones that are not thought about.
Here in the west USA, we have long droughts. We count on reservoirs having enough water. The problem is that we have also been depending for far too long on aquifers. So, we regularly talk about pipelines. Well, there is ZERO chance that an economical large pipeline can be developed. HOWEVER, this has the ability to put a lot more moisture in the air. When it is known that a cold front is going to hit an area, then we simply bump up the amount of moisture in the air. It will mean LARGE snow dumps, but that is needed. It will allow us to fill the aquifers as well as reservoirs.
Generally, I think that Gates is causing more issues than solving (trying to stop hurricanes is a HORRIBLE mistake; it brings up nutrients from deep down; likewise, killing mosquitoes may actually stop evolution), but this one will help bring fresh water throughout the world as well as temporaly help with the global warming issues until we switch off of fossil fuels. Interestingly, if China, the worlds largest polluter of nearly everything, was to clean up their h2so4, then it would raise global temps quickly. With the clouds, it allows us to not worry about temps, while we go back to encouraging all nations to clean up their act.
The periods that I pointed out was during good economic times. I ignore the bad economic times since I believe that those are times that the country SHOULD be willing to incur some debt. Obama is dealing with a near depression. As such, I overlook his debts during these times. However, if he continues on this course AND the economy has improved, then you are absolutely right.
Have you seen Texans? They ARE FAT. They compete with Mississippians, Alabamians and Georgians or even what the old Hawaiian royalty for the title.
The last time I was down in Houston, I was teaching at NASA and I noticed then that once I got away from NASA and north towards Houston, that it had LOADS of fat ppl.
Slashdot Mirror
No doubt about it. He is actually doing things, and not just stealing other ppl's work or using that money to make their name.
I am tired of complex and complicated taxes. The overhead from processing it hurts business more, than does the actually tax.
Obama/Dems should push a FIXED tax on ALL on-line goods for some amount (say 6%). Then have the feds take a set amount( say 3), and then the rest goes to the state. If the state does not want it, then it remains with the feds. In the states, they decide how to divy it up (states vs. local area). The point being that the costs of the accounts and complex IRS are worse than the overhead of the tax.
I have tried adata. Slow and prone to failures. THey are pure pieces of junk. Return it if you can, and if not, then you just got an education.
Sure, I will. The patriot act was suppose to be used against terrorists. So far, there has been less then one use/year dealing with terrorism. All the other uses were against drugs, common criminals. And that was what was detailed. The real question is, what is missing?
And yet, it is India that has the claim, not America. But hey, lets not let facts get in your way.
Look again. It says that it can carry 1 ton up to 20K feet. However, it can carry a GREAT deal more at lower altitude (read denser air). And this craft can go 80 mph. Fuel is a LARGE costs of fighting fires.
How many mountains are there over Haiti? Or over Florida? Or over an Afghanistan base?
What I find interesting is that you speak of beaming data around via cell, yet,think that beaming power is not going to happen? The fact is that beaming power is being researched and happening now.
Far too little of water and at a much higher costs. This airship is using the engines just for forward thrust, not for overcoming the drag of lift.
Out here in the west, we have LARGE forest fires. During those times we need to dump 10's or 100's of tonnes of H20 on it. This blimp that moves at 80 mph is more than fast enough.
The first is that we need something like this to carry water for putting out fires. While it can carry a ton at 20K, it can carry much more at a lower altitude.
The second thought is that this can be used to transmit power as this tech gets developed. It can either take it from space, or from a beam below and then re-distribute it. Where that would be useful is in Afghanistan, or in disaster area. IOW, it would be to our advantage to work this out so that we can beam say 5 or more miles, with at least 60% efficiency.
EU has it right that we need to address this. EU's solution which is the carbon tax as well as Tax/Trade SUX and is failing BAD. Now, why do I say that? Because they put this in place and yet, America, China, Russia, Brazil, India, etc have done relatively little to drop their CO2 emissions. And if America puts in place the same horrible solutions, it will actually make things WORSE. The reason is that other nations ESP. CHINA will massively increase electrification and transportation. Why? To try and grab as much American companies as possible. And they will not grow it slowly. We will see LOADS of new China's poppiing up while everybody seeks to grab what they can. That means Coal plants and Roads.
So, is there a solution that will work? Yes. And it is the ONLY one that I know that CAN.
Tax ALL goods based on CO2 emissions / km^2 for the item and primary sub-component. The emissions and size of land is verifiable by satellites (co2 out - co2 in == your part). THis has to be done slowly, BUT ASSUREDLY, to give all nations and businesses time to adjust. In addition, and more importantly, it rewards those nations that actually DO change. Finally, one of the bigger issues with making these changes is that it brings success which will actually increase emissions. With this tax, it has a negative feedback to prevent that from happening.
If this has ANY chance of working, this is likely the only way.
A decade ago, I tried to get Colorado Gov Owens to do that. In particular, I was trying to get him to use X prizes as way to do it electronically. It was an interesting attempt.
While I have mod points, I feel the need to comment here (I wish that the AC had had some courage).
The AC's point was that America does not care when it is out of sight, out of mind. AC is 100% correct.
The problem is that AC limits it to just America. That is a mistake. It absolutely should include EU as well as Russia, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Canada, and most of all, China. Basically, it is the industrial nations that are doing this. Now, most of the west has cleaned up OUT nations, but a big part of that was done by outsourcing. It is hypocritical on our part to do that. It needs to change. That is why I keep speaking out against the EU approach on Climate: that is for the west to tax ONLY our goods. That is the dead wrong approach. Instead, every nation should be taxing ALL goods based on the pollution (start with CO2) that is in the area for the good as well as the largest sub-component. After time, change the CO2 to include Mercury, and other pollutants. THis approach is the ONLY way to clean up the world.
5.0.342.9 beta/Linux shows it perfectly (and it really is nice).
Actually, it IS automatically under the GPL code. However, GPL does not say that you MUST distribute your code to anyone that wants it. GPL says that if you give/sell application, that you must give source with it. As long as the employer does not transfer that application to a 3rd party, then this author has ZERO rights to it. Once the application is transfered to a 3rd party, then the 3rd party must be given the source code (all of it, including the extended), otherwise the university WILL be in the wrong. Once the 3rd party gets the application/source code, then they are free to do with it what they want, including transferring back to the original author, or releasing on the web.
The GPL license is a simple thing. Now, the university, and/or the author may not like the outcome, but that is the gist of it.
I realize what they are up to. HOWEVER, that does not change the ability to increase the RH in an area so as to send snow/rain to an area. Basically, this is a MUCH cheaper way to send water to an inland area, rather then to use pipes. Keep in mind that if these ships are dual use (increase clouds formation to lower temps; increase RH to cause snow/rain earlier in a land), then it will make them quite a bit more affordable.
Spreading the precipiation out all over the place will do what you say. HOWEVER, if you have a number of these ships close together, located about 25-50 miles offshore, then you are looking at a much higher precipitation.
Adding more moisture to the air increase the RH. As such, all we need to do is increase it enough to cause the water to fall in the mountains, rather than continuing on to the east coast. Obviously, we do not want to do it all the time, but during an el nino, we receive little water, while the east coast gets massive floods (like this current el nino). Had we used this to drop out the moisture on the rockies, then Tennessee would not have the issues that it has this year.
There is just something about /.. Over the last decade, the average intelligence here has dropped greatly. Just a real dumb question. Exactly WHERE do you think that the current h20 vapor comes from? Fresh water lakes only?
How were you modded insightful? The simple fact is, that the h20 is not the issue. It goes up, it comes down. In addition, when water is in the form of CLOUDS, it COOLS the planet. It is when it has a high vapor, but not enough to form clouds, that you get warming. OTH, the CO2 is an issue because it stays around and around and around. As such, a VERY small amount goes a long ways. So, the global warming issue is just garbage.
I will say that there are OTHER possible side effects, for example, the clouds WILL block sun from getting to the crops, so there will be less food. And I am sure that there are other ones that are not thought about.
Here in the west USA, we have long droughts. We count on reservoirs having enough water. The problem is that we have also been depending for far too long on aquifers. So, we regularly talk about pipelines. Well, there is ZERO chance that an economical large pipeline can be developed. HOWEVER, this has the ability to put a lot more moisture in the air. When it is known that a cold front is going to hit an area, then we simply bump up the amount of moisture in the air. It will mean LARGE snow dumps, but that is needed. It will allow us to fill the aquifers as well as reservoirs.
Generally, I think that Gates is causing more issues than solving (trying to stop hurricanes is a HORRIBLE mistake; it brings up nutrients from deep down; likewise, killing mosquitoes may actually stop evolution), but this one will help bring fresh water throughout the world as well as temporaly help with the global warming issues until we switch off of fossil fuels. Interestingly, if China, the worlds largest polluter of nearly everything, was to clean up their h2so4, then it would raise global temps quickly. With the clouds, it allows us to not worry about temps, while we go back to encouraging all nations to clean up their act.
The periods that I pointed out was during good economic times. I ignore the bad economic times since I believe that those are times that the country SHOULD be willing to incur some debt. Obama is dealing with a near depression. As such, I overlook his debts during these times. However, if he continues on this course AND the economy has improved, then you are absolutely right.
Actually, Clinton did large DOD cuts. And Gates is just cutting some of the fat.
Have you seen Texans? They ARE FAT. They compete with Mississippians, Alabamians and Georgians or even what the old Hawaiian royalty for the title.
The last time I was down in Houston, I was teaching at NASA and I noticed then that once I got away from NASA and north towards Houston, that it had LOADS of fat ppl.