My guess would be that a fair bit of the CO2 will be released into the atmosphere but probably not all of it. An interesting thing to consider though is that trees do reproduce on their own if given an appropriate environment. If a forest is created where there was no forest before then the CO2 associated with those trees will be pulled out of the atmosphere. Eventually the forest region will probably reach an equilibrium with the environment: absorbing CO2 to produce new trees while at the same time emitting CO2 from decomposing trees. The change from "no forest" to "forest" will be a net decrease in atmospheric CO2.
If my understanding is correct, the alternative crypto-currency peercoin does not have this problem. It probably has other issues, but once it starts operating in purely proof-of-stake mode then the 51% attack simply disappears. Is that correct?
Probably participation in an open office design should be optional so that all the extraverts can follow their desires and get together in one ginormous noisy collaborative hive and all the introverts can follow their desires and perform deep contemplative naval gazing in their alone-cave.
I had a vague idea that I thought to share. Someone with more time please expand on it. Simply get the email spammers to fight against the CAPTCHA breakers! Email spammers are bots that are constantly trying to not be filtered by filter programs and yet still be understandable by humans. CAPTCHA breakers are bots that are constantly trying to not be filtered by filter programs but they are *not* trying to be understandable to any human.
If we use the understandability of email spam as a CAPTCHA that also feeds back to email filters we will, eventually, either eliminate spam or CAPTCHA breakers or come up with some totally ass kicking AI that rules us all.
It would be next to impossible to make the US congress utilize this scheme. Why not try something more local first, like a PTA/PTO, school board, city council, or the executive management at a small company? Demonstrate its effectiveness at increasing communication, removing ambiguity, and preventing slight-of-hand modifications that fit an individuals or small groups own agenda. Then wait for a hundred years while the technique propagates to other PTAs/PTOs/school boards/city councils/state governments/etc because it just works so damn well. Then, maybe, the US congress will implement such a technique.
IPv4 will likely remain around for quite some time until there is a sudden demand for new (globally accessable) IP addresses. If there is a sudden spike in the demand for IP addresses then it is likely that some companies will choose to adopt IPv6 instead of opting for a stopgap measure that may not save the day for very long.
The question people should ask is what type of device/application will emerge such that everyone wants a new global IP address (or 10)? Consider that if it were not for email and porn most people would have not linked up to the internet and the IPv4 addresses would still be being slowly chewed up by the academic and government agencies that grew out of ARPANET.
Unless the RATE at which new global IPv4 addresses are needed increases people will be totally fine putting up with stopgap measures.
Although I think that the ID people are nuts, the problem is that there are a whole lot of them and the US culture has a preference for allowing equal debate time to opposing sides of an argument even when one side is totally bonkers. This is done in the name of fairness. The trick is how to show that one side is totally bonkers.
Take a step back.
The true problem is NOT ID. In fact ID is just a smokescreen and the sooner we can all stop talking about it the sooner we can end the debate. ID requires a supernatural explanation for a natural phenomenon. This immediately puts it in the EXACT SAME camp as astrology, tarot cards, numerology, and the bodily humor theory of medieval medicine.
You will note that whenever some crazed school board starts trying to insert ID or creationism into their science classes that something else happens too. At best this something else gets a single sentence in mainstream media reports but it is actually the fundamental linchpin of the whole deal. Everybody yammers on and on about ID and evolution and misses how to shut these people down.
The linchpin is that they MUST change the definition of science to get their nutty ideas into a science debate. Science only works because it is based on NATURAL phenomena. The insane policy makers that want to push ID or whatever realize this and quietly change the definition of science to include everything BUT the requirement that phenomena be explained naturally (e.g. Kansas school board). Then they distract everyone with a fireworks show of VALID REAL TESTABLE GAP FREE DISCOVERY ID SCIENCE PROMOTED BY SOME REAL VALID BIOLIGIST AT LEHIGH UNIVERISTY vs. the GAP-ISH MISTAKE RIDDLED COMPLEXITY BEYOND REDUCABILITY EVOLUTIIIIOOOOONNNNNN! (only on pay-per-view).
Enough already. Strip away the distracting and emotionally charged bits and get down to the fundamental postulates! Stop debating ID vs. Evolution. Start debating natural vs. supernatural phenomena. Science is materialistic, supernatural phenomena (including ID and palm reading) are not. You must either say that ID is not science, or you must change the definition of science to get away from materialism.
It is my hope that once the public realizes that by changing the definition of science they give validity to things like future prediction through chicken entrails and will then back away from it. It is up to the readers of this note to make the connection between ID and future prediction through chicken entrails very clear to everyone they meet and in every discussion they have. ID and future prediction through chicken entrails are intimately connected because both are supernatural phenomena. If you vote for ID you are actually voting for supernatural phenomena and therefor getting a steaming plate of chicken entrails.
I have noticed that this statement has been repeated many times. It is true that the US has not built any new plants for decades. Instead, the US has modernized the existing plants to make them more efficient. The effect of this modernization has been to produce the demanded amount of electricity without having to build whole new plants.
I have no raw facts to back this up, but then the complaints typically levied against the US nuclear industry here rarely do either.
I would submit, however, that the concept of using modernization instead of building new plants is rather sound especially in a mostly nuclear unfriendly country like the US.
So, I suspect that US nuclear technology is not really much different than other nuclear power using nations.
Curiously, Ice Nine is real, but it does not have the odd properties predicted in the Cats Cradle. In fact there are some thirteen forms of crystalline ice that are known to exist.
I think it would be more interesting to consider a redundent array of independent flash cards. Since it is clear that solid state drives will soon be included in PCs and laptops in the near future it would be nice to address the speed and reliability issues associated with them. This would also help with the heat and all.
The thing that bothers me the most about what is happening is that the entire scheme for the propogation of knowledge is being subverted. I would tend to say that until some serious articles on a given new grand theory have pass peer review and been printed in the likes of Science or Nature then the theory has no business showing up in the highschool classroom.
Was quantum mechanics taught in highschool just as it was being initially developed? How about evolution? Was plate techtonics? NO! These topics survived brutal peer review and were accepted as valid explanitory theories by the scientific establishment first. THEN they made their way to the middle and high schools for the teachers to teach.
The argument quickly arrives that the scientific establishment is biased against new theories (Such as ID) and it would never accept them. MALARKY! Each of the above listed theories and others like them were also underdogs with establishment against them. But, they won out over the (at the time) current theories because they were good theories with overwhelming and crushing evidence to support them.
If something like ID really raised any serious questions for scientists involved in research on the origins of life you can bet that they will try to answer them since the scientist that did could be rewarded with immortality like the kind given to Einstein, Darwin, Schroedinger, Heisenberg, and others (not to mention a Nobel Prize).
The injection of unaccepted scientific theories into the school system for spongy minds to consume is just right out. Totally unacceptable.
The solution to this is to subvert (or maybe clarify) the meaning of the word "faith". I do not distinguish between a persons faith in the existence of a God, and a persons faith that all atoms are made out of a nucleus and electrons. The atoms can be observed in experiments to confirm my faith, but God cannot be so I must reject faith in a God. If I don't reject faith in God then I must accept any persons faith in anything that cannot be observed in an experiment!
Invisible aliens and ghosts of the dead abound! Oohga Booga they're real! I know it. The must be there because I believe. I have faith.
Slashdot Mirror
Consider citsci.org.
My guess would be that a fair bit of the CO2 will be released into the atmosphere but probably not all of it. An interesting thing to consider though is that trees do reproduce on their own if given an appropriate environment. If a forest is created where there was no forest before then the CO2 associated with those trees will be pulled out of the atmosphere. Eventually the forest region will probably reach an equilibrium with the environment: absorbing CO2 to produce new trees while at the same time emitting CO2 from decomposing trees. The change from "no forest" to "forest" will be a net decrease in atmospheric CO2.
Or Fortran....
If my understanding is correct, the alternative crypto-currency peercoin does not have this problem. It probably has other issues, but once it starts operating in purely proof-of-stake mode then the 51% attack simply disappears. Is that correct?
Issues such as this might encourage use of alternate coins that don't rely on mining in the long term (e.g. peercoin).
Probably participation in an open office design should be optional so that all the extraverts can follow their desires and get together in one ginormous noisy collaborative hive and all the introverts can follow their desires and perform deep contemplative naval gazing in their alone-cave.
I don't understand why weapons that can fire in a burst are illegal. What is the rational for this?
I would strongly recommend the adventure creation kit.
http://mozomedia.com/ack/
There was a Slashdot story not so long ago related to this issue.
It has its own website here too:
OpenDX
I had a vague idea that I thought to share. Someone with more time please expand on it. Simply get the email spammers to fight against the CAPTCHA breakers! Email spammers are bots that are constantly trying to not be filtered by filter programs and yet still be understandable by humans. CAPTCHA breakers are bots that are constantly trying to not be filtered by filter programs but they are *not* trying to be understandable to any human.
If we use the understandability of email spam as a CAPTCHA that also feeds back to email filters we will, eventually, either eliminate spam or CAPTCHA breakers or come up with some totally ass kicking AI that rules us all.
Maybe this isn't such a good idea after all. ^_^
Holy crap you have a lot of time on your hands.
Um....That would be us.
We are made from the material of the universe, and I consider myself to be at least moderately self aware and intelligent.
Cool. I always wanted to be a god.
It would be next to impossible to make the US congress utilize this scheme. Why not try something more local first, like a PTA/PTO, school board, city council, or the executive management at a small company? Demonstrate its effectiveness at increasing communication, removing ambiguity, and preventing slight-of-hand modifications that fit an individuals or small groups own agenda. Then wait for a hundred years while the technique propagates to other PTAs/PTOs/school boards/city councils/state governments/etc because it just works so damn well. Then, maybe, the US congress will implement such a technique.
>I think the GP's point stands, it'd be useful to have some sort of independent QA organization that would validate a bill against its intent.
In theory I think that the President is supposed to fulfill that job.
IPv4 will likely remain around for quite some time until there is a sudden demand for new (globally accessable) IP addresses. If there is a sudden spike in the demand for IP addresses then it is likely that some companies will choose to adopt IPv6 instead of opting for a stopgap measure that may not save the day for very long.
The question people should ask is what type of device/application will emerge such that everyone wants a new global IP address (or 10)? Consider that if it were not for email and porn most people would have not linked up to the internet and the IPv4 addresses would still be being slowly chewed up by the academic and government agencies that grew out of ARPANET.
Unless the RATE at which new global IPv4 addresses are needed increases people will be totally fine putting up with stopgap measures.
The worst bug ever is the one that's there but you don't know about. Yet.
Although I think that the ID people are nuts, the problem is that there are a whole lot of them and the US culture has a preference for allowing equal debate time to opposing sides of an argument even when one side is totally bonkers. This is done in the name of fairness. The trick is how to show that one side is totally bonkers.
Take a step back.
The true problem is NOT ID. In fact ID is just a smokescreen and the sooner we can all stop talking about it the sooner we can end the debate. ID requires a supernatural explanation for a natural phenomenon. This immediately puts it in the EXACT SAME camp as astrology, tarot cards, numerology, and the bodily humor theory of medieval medicine.
You will note that whenever some crazed school board starts trying to insert ID or creationism into their science classes that something else happens too. At best this something else gets a single sentence in mainstream media reports but it is actually the fundamental linchpin of the whole deal. Everybody yammers on and on about ID and evolution and misses how to shut these people down.
The linchpin is that they MUST change the definition of science to get their nutty ideas into a science debate. Science only works because it is based on NATURAL phenomena. The insane policy makers that want to push ID or whatever realize this and quietly change the definition of science to include everything BUT the requirement that phenomena be explained naturally (e.g. Kansas school board). Then they distract everyone with a fireworks show of VALID REAL TESTABLE GAP FREE DISCOVERY ID SCIENCE PROMOTED BY SOME REAL VALID BIOLIGIST AT LEHIGH UNIVERISTY vs. the GAP-ISH MISTAKE RIDDLED COMPLEXITY BEYOND REDUCABILITY EVOLUTIIIIOOOOONNNNNN! (only on pay-per-view).
Enough already. Strip away the distracting and emotionally charged bits and get down to the fundamental postulates! Stop debating ID vs. Evolution. Start debating natural vs. supernatural phenomena. Science is materialistic, supernatural phenomena (including ID and palm reading) are not. You must either say that ID is not science, or you must change the definition of science to get away from materialism.
It is my hope that once the public realizes that by changing the definition of science they give validity to things like future prediction through chicken entrails and will then back away from it. It is up to the readers of this note to make the connection between ID and future prediction through chicken entrails very clear to everyone they meet and in every discussion they have. ID and future prediction through chicken entrails are intimately connected because both are supernatural phenomena. If you vote for ID you are actually voting for supernatural phenomena and therefor getting a steaming plate of chicken entrails.
NO WAY OUTTA THAT!
Hope Michael Behe is hungry.
Like this person?
I think that it is important to point out that this stuff is NOT cloned. It is grown. There is a very big difference.
(It is possible that the meat could be grown FROM a cloned animal, but that does not necessarily have to be the case.)
I have noticed that this statement has been repeated many times. It is true that the US has not built any new plants for decades. Instead, the US has modernized the existing plants to make them more efficient. The effect of this modernization has been to produce the demanded amount of electricity without having to build whole new plants.
I have no raw facts to back this up, but then the complaints typically levied against the US nuclear industry here rarely do either.
I would submit, however, that the concept of using modernization instead of building new plants is rather sound especially in a mostly nuclear unfriendly country like the US.
So, I suspect that US nuclear technology is not really much different than other nuclear power using nations.
Curiously, Ice Nine is real, but it does not have the odd properties predicted in the Cats Cradle. In fact there are some thirteen forms of crystalline ice that are known to exist.
I think it would be more interesting to consider a redundent array of independent flash cards. Since it is clear that solid state drives will soon be included in PCs and laptops in the near future it would be nice to address the speed and reliability issues associated with them. This would also help with the heat and all.
Just a thought.
The thing that bothers me the most about what is happening is that the entire scheme for the propogation of knowledge is being subverted. I would tend to say that until some serious articles on a given new grand theory have pass peer review and been printed in the likes of Science or Nature then the theory has no business showing up in the highschool classroom.
Was quantum mechanics taught in highschool just as it was being initially developed? How about evolution? Was plate techtonics? NO! These topics survived brutal peer review and were accepted as valid explanitory theories by the scientific establishment first. THEN they made their way to the middle and high schools for the teachers to teach.
The argument quickly arrives that the scientific establishment is biased against new theories (Such as ID) and it would never accept them. MALARKY! Each of the above listed theories and others like them were also underdogs with establishment against them. But, they won out over the (at the time) current theories because they were good theories with overwhelming and crushing evidence to support them.
If something like ID really raised any serious questions for scientists involved in research on the origins of life you can bet that they will try to answer them since the scientist that did could be rewarded with immortality like the kind given to Einstein, Darwin, Schroedinger, Heisenberg, and others (not to mention a Nobel Prize).
The injection of unaccepted scientific theories into the school system for spongy minds to consume is just right out. Totally unacceptable.
The solution to this is to subvert (or maybe clarify) the meaning of the word "faith". I do not distinguish between a persons faith in the existence of a God, and a persons faith that all atoms are made out of a nucleus and electrons. The atoms can be observed in experiments to confirm my faith, but God cannot be so I must reject faith in a God. If I don't reject faith in God then I must accept any persons faith in anything that cannot be observed in an experiment!
Invisible aliens and ghosts of the dead abound! Oohga Booga they're real! I know it. The must be there because I believe. I have faith.