European might not- but Jewish Greek Egyptian writings even included it in scripture (Bel and the Dragon, a kind of addendum to the Book of Daniel in which an encounter with a dragon is indeed described; one could also point out that a similar encounter is attributed to Alexander the Great). Of course, their dragon didn't have wings, and didn't breathe fire, just had bad breath. It was probably a crocodile.
Actually, the description in the Catholic Old Testament book "Bel and the Dragon" didn't breathe fire, but did have rather bad breath; I read an article once that compared it favorably to a Nile Crocodile.
When I can grab a set of co-ordinates off the web, add it to a contact on my phone, then bluetooth the destination to my car GPS, that will be a brilliant thing
I'm close- I can take the address off of a contact on my phone, place it in the copy buffer in Windows Mobile, paste it into iGuidance, and let it talk to the radio in my car to announce directions.
Now if only the steering wheel would obey the radio....
Other classes of animal are unlikely to have melanin in their hair- their hair isn't really hair to begin with anyway, it's something else. Only mammals and their distant cousins the marsupials, have hair as humans do.
If the article isn't bullshit (and I'm not sure either way) then Goldilock's hair, lacking in melanin, would be particularily worthless. The best would be young hair from a black African.
Well, in addition to the Chinese HTR-10, which they are now selling around the third world in mass production, South Africa is gearing up production- if the third world can do it, I don't see why we can't.
Hardly at all. Modern Pebble Bed reactors recycle their own waste until there is almost no radiation left and only a lump of lead where the uranium should be. There's almost no waste at all in a modern reactor, and the whole thing can be shielded so well that it's virtually impossible to have a melt down from one even if things do go wrong.
In fact, places like Yucca Mountain and Hanford, if Pebble Bed reactors take off- could become MINES.
And yet you want to not allow people who will end up involved with meth to graduate from high school. If the kid I know who is entering Drexel this fall is involved with meth without me knowing it, there is no way a high school teacher/administrator is going to be able to separate the kids who should be allowed to graduate from the kids who shouldn't.
Meth is just one of many bad choices. I also don't want people who are still affected by advertising to escape from high school. Or people who can't give the one allowable use of credit. Or people who can't balance a checkbook.
So, who did the system fail to properly assimilate, those who think that abortion should be illegal, or those who think it should be readily available to everybody? How about between those who think that assisted suicide should be legal and those who think it is murder?
I'm living in a state where I'm outvoted on these two issues- however, I think anybody who has sex while not intending to have a child is an idiot. The potential cost- and even vasectomies have an 18/1000 pregnancy rate- is simply not worth the orgasm. That last, I'll admit, has not become the slippery slope here in Oregon it could have been- but I'd also point out that despite my feelings, economically euthanasia is a reasonable decision, and having it available has also increased the use of hospice care, which is halfway in between.
But all of these are rather beside the point of *STUPIDITY*- not taking into account all potential information before making a decision.
Then why, upon receiving my diagnosis of Asperger's and finally having a *reason* why I was an "introvert", did I start immediately working on coping skills to appear more extroverted?
Sometimes, all people need is to be shown why they are wrong.
Plus, I'd argue it would be cheaper to institutionalize such a person until they can be shown why they are stupid- than to pay the unintended social cost of their mistakes.
"For some of these people it's not entirely obvious that being in some sort of institution would be any better for them."
According to the original post in this thread- people making bad decisions are causing the major medical cost. If these people were institutionalized- that is, if their ability to make bad decisions was removed- then the overall medical cost for society as a whole would go down. Thus, institutionalizing them is not for their benefit- but for ours.
I make no judgments about your idea, but rather have a question about the philosophy. If things should be priced based on public welfare, would you only price it by calories? Would you also price it based on how much oil and carbon went into making it? Would you make it either/or/and? What if somebody was killed in the making of a product? Would you increase the cost to cover the loss of life?
I like all of those ideas, actually. But I'd point out that due to modern agricultural processes, the energy in/out ratio of food is particularily stable. But for other products? Absolutely. I've previously proposed, in the oil and carbon sector, a volume/mile shipping tax, for instance. I'm a little bothered by your last one though- what is the value of a human life?
So, you are saying that people should be required to stay in school until they meet some standard of acceptable behavior? Even after they reach 18? or 21?
Heck, I know a good many 30 to 40 year olds who have yet to figure out that borrowed money costs more. But if we were teaching to that standard to begin with- you'd also see a few 12 year olds graduating.
The guy getting his degree from Drexel has never been involved with meth (the guy who was involved with meth is a former friend of the father of the Drexel student).
As far as you know- and yet.
I do agree that a large part of the failure of our schools is because of the lack of a moral code. The problem with public schools teaching a moral code is; whose moral code? We do not have a moral code that is agreed upon by the overwhelming majority of our population.
That, in and of itself, is a failure of the American System at assimilation.
So, are you saying that students who don't meet your definition of competent citizen should be locked up until they do? Or are you saying that they should not be granted a degree?
They shouldn't be granted a degree automatically with the rest of their class- AND they should be required to stay in school until they get that degree. Work should not be an option.
In the second case then the guy under discussion wouldn't have had a degree. Of course neither would another friend of mine whose eldest son is entering his third year of college on a full ride scholarship and whose second son is about to enter Drexel on a full ride academic scholarship in their Biomedical engineering program. I can't think of any method that a school teacher/administrator could have used to tell the difference between the two based on their behavior in school.
Likely then, it doesn't matter if they get degrees from Drexel, they'll just use their knowledge to find new ways to manufacture meth. Once schools stopped teaching morality, or at least enough morality to match the value system of "every man needs to earn a living without breaking the law or negatively affecting his neighbors", then education just becomes a tool for criminal behavior.
2. He's been a British Citizen all his life and on NHS for years before he became famous
3. If the death panel was going to kill him, why did they spend MILLIONS on giving him a motorized wheelchair and a speech synthesizer, long before these were cheap items?
4. And finally- if the Death Panel was going to kill him, why not just claim he died of his ALS in his 20s like every other ALS patient at the time?
And not let him graduate until he's a competent citizen, yes. That was the original purpose of public education, before coddling the unfit took hold- to create productive & well rounded citizens.
I don't see it happening. For one, there are too many people right now that sudden exercise would cause all sorts of injury to (though I do like the idea in general). That would be a short-term INCREASE in health care costs, where calorie restriction is pure decrease....
Slashdot Mirror
European might not- but Jewish Greek Egyptian writings even included it in scripture (Bel and the Dragon, a kind of addendum to the Book of Daniel in which an encounter with a dragon is indeed described; one could also point out that a similar encounter is attributed to Alexander the Great). Of course, their dragon didn't have wings, and didn't breathe fire, just had bad breath. It was probably a crocodile.
Actually, the description in the Catholic Old Testament book "Bel and the Dragon" didn't breathe fire, but did have rather bad breath; I read an article once that compared it favorably to a Nile Crocodile.
I think he meant a treaty that actually survived more than a few weeks.
You've got to admit, among native tribal peoples, we whites descended from Englishmen and Northern Europeans have a horrible reputation for lying.
When I can grab a set of co-ordinates off the web, add it to a contact on my phone, then bluetooth the destination to my car GPS, that will be a brilliant thing
I'm close- I can take the address off of a contact on my phone, place it in the copy buffer in Windows Mobile, paste it into iGuidance, and let it talk to the radio in my car to announce directions.
Now if only the steering wheel would obey the radio....
Other classes of animal are unlikely to have melanin in their hair- their hair isn't really hair to begin with anyway, it's something else. Only mammals and their distant cousins the marsupials, have hair as humans do.
IF the kid's theory is correct, any black mammalian hair would do. It's the light colored stuff that wouldn't work as well.
If the article isn't bullshit (and I'm not sure either way) then Goldilock's hair, lacking in melanin, would be particularily worthless. The best would be young hair from a black African.
Which, in a sealed pebble bed reactor, produces more heat and then more electricity....until you hit the half life wall.
Well, in addition to the Chinese HTR-10, which they are now selling around the third world in mass production, South Africa is gearing up production- if the third world can do it, I don't see why we can't.
The current power plant designs are overwhelmingly thorium cycle to begin with, which stretches that out at least another 50-100 years.
But other than that, you're right. If we went with this as our only solution, it would last only as long as coal.
Modern Pebble Bed Reactors recycle their water, just like they recycle their uranium.
Hardly at all. Modern Pebble Bed reactors recycle their own waste until there is almost no radiation left and only a lump of lead where the uranium should be. There's almost no waste at all in a modern reactor, and the whole thing can be shielded so well that it's virtually impossible to have a melt down from one even if things do go wrong.
In fact, places like Yucca Mountain and Hanford, if Pebble Bed reactors take off- could become MINES.
Modern pebble-bed reactors include maintenance, decomissioning, and uranium as a part of the initial cost.
And yet you want to not allow people who will end up involved with meth to graduate from high school. If the kid I know who is entering Drexel this fall is involved with meth without me knowing it, there is no way a high school teacher/administrator is going to be able to separate the kids who should be allowed to graduate from the kids who shouldn't.
Meth is just one of many bad choices. I also don't want people who are still affected by advertising to escape from high school. Or people who can't give the one allowable use of credit. Or people who can't balance a checkbook.
So, who did the system fail to properly assimilate, those who think that abortion should be illegal, or those who think it should be readily available to everybody?
How about between those who think that assisted suicide should be legal and those who think it is murder?
I'm living in a state where I'm outvoted on these two issues- however, I think anybody who has sex while not intending to have a child is an idiot. The potential cost- and even vasectomies have an 18/1000 pregnancy rate- is simply not worth the orgasm. That last, I'll admit, has not become the slippery slope here in Oregon it could have been- but I'd also point out that despite my feelings, economically euthanasia is a reasonable decision, and having it available has also increased the use of hospice care, which is halfway in between.
But all of these are rather beside the point of *STUPIDITY*- not taking into account all potential information before making a decision.
Not good enough, unless you had a place for the children when the parent's license was revoked.
Then why, upon receiving my diagnosis of Asperger's and finally having a *reason* why I was an "introvert", did I start immediately working on coping skills to appear more extroverted?
Sometimes, all people need is to be shown why they are wrong.
Plus, I'd argue it would be cheaper to institutionalize such a person until they can be shown why they are stupid- than to pay the unintended social cost of their mistakes.
"For some of these people it's not entirely obvious that being in some sort of institution would be any better for them."
According to the original post in this thread- people making bad decisions are causing the major medical cost. If these people were institutionalized- that is, if their ability to make bad decisions was removed- then the overall medical cost for society as a whole would go down. Thus, institutionalizing them is not for their benefit- but for ours.
I make no judgments about your idea, but rather have a question about the philosophy. If things should be priced based on public welfare, would you only price it by calories? Would you also price it based on how much oil and carbon went into making it? Would you make it either/or/and? What if somebody was killed in the making of a product? Would you increase the cost to cover the loss of life?
I like all of those ideas, actually. But I'd point out that due to modern agricultural processes, the energy in/out ratio of food is particularily stable. But for other products? Absolutely. I've previously proposed, in the oil and carbon sector, a volume/mile shipping tax, for instance. I'm a little bothered by your last one though- what is the value of a human life?
So, you are saying that people should be required to stay in school until they meet some standard of acceptable behavior? Even after they reach 18? or 21?
Heck, I know a good many 30 to 40 year olds who have yet to figure out that borrowed money costs more. But if we were teaching to that standard to begin with- you'd also see a few 12 year olds graduating.
The guy getting his degree from Drexel has never been involved with meth (the guy who was involved with meth is a former friend of the father of the Drexel student).
As far as you know- and yet.
I do agree that a large part of the failure of our schools is because of the lack of a moral code. The problem with public schools teaching a moral code is; whose moral code? We do not have a moral code that is agreed upon by the overwhelming majority of our population.
That, in and of itself, is a failure of the American System at assimilation.
So, are you saying that students who don't meet your definition of competent citizen should be locked up until they do? Or are you saying that they should not be granted a degree?
They shouldn't be granted a degree automatically with the rest of their class- AND they should be required to stay in school until they get that degree. Work should not be an option.
In the second case then the guy under discussion wouldn't have had a degree. Of course neither would another friend of mine whose eldest son is entering his third year of college on a full ride scholarship and whose second son is about to enter Drexel on a full ride academic scholarship in their Biomedical engineering program. I can't think of any method that a school teacher/administrator could have used to tell the difference between the two based on their behavior in school.
Likely then, it doesn't matter if they get degrees from Drexel, they'll just use their knowledge to find new ways to manufacture meth. Once schools stopped teaching morality, or at least enough morality to match the value system of "every man needs to earn a living without breaking the law or negatively affecting his neighbors", then education just becomes a tool for criminal behavior.
Having stupid people making stupid decisions with no input is a pretty bad idea, though. In Portland, OR, it has a tendency to lead to Suicide By Cop.
Maybe, but that one apparently didn't exist either as:
1. Stephen Hawking is still alive, at least as of August 12, according to The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/12/hawking_british_and_alive/)
2. He's been a British Citizen all his life and on NHS for years before he became famous
3. If the death panel was going to kill him, why did they spend MILLIONS on giving him a motorized wheelchair and a speech synthesizer, long before these were cheap items?
4. And finally- if the Death Panel was going to kill him, why not just claim he died of his ALS in his 20s like every other ALS patient at the time?
And not let him graduate until he's a competent citizen, yes. That was the original purpose of public education, before coddling the unfit took hold- to create productive & well rounded citizens.
I'll have to catch up on the latest research....I thought BMI was directly correlated to body fat percentage.
I don't see it happening. For one, there are too many people right now that sudden exercise would cause all sorts of injury to (though I do like the idea in general). That would be a short-term INCREASE in health care costs, where calorie restriction is pure decrease....