and closed the account out in cash as soon as the transaction cleared.
I think it unlikely that one would be able to close an account and walk out with the equivalent of millions of dollars. What bank has such large sums of cash available for customers to withdraw?
Some signed up immediately for drone piloting, one said though they don't get to fly the "real thing" but you don't want to be in the horse calvary when the tank comes along.
Another massive waste of resources. You don't need the same level of training to pilot a drone that you need to sit in and pilot a fast jet. The Army uses enlisted men/women to fly drones, while the Air Force uses officers.
Well, natural gas has its own problems, since fracking in its current form produces a lot of methane which is a much worse greenhouse gas than CO2 and this has contributed to a spike in methane levels
My proposal is actually to use less natural gas. My proposal is that when the solar output is at its max, they simply turn off some of the natural gas generators. This might require replacing some older natural gas generators with newer technologies.
Unfortunately, when peak power consumption occurs and when peak solar output are are not the same time generally. Similarly, while there's least power consumed very late at night (1-3 AMish), solar stops being useful well before that. See http://www.vox.com/2016/2/12/1....
That's very interesting, but it ignores the fact that newer natural gas plants can be flexible. They can ramp up production quickly and can be cost effective operating only 30% to 70% of the time. California uses natural gas plants for base loads, but could instead use them as a variable supply to offset the variations in solar production.
I have seen a couple of similar articles recently -- all of which ignore the possibility of varying the output of natural gas generation. I suspect that there is some big money pushing an agenda. Perhaps it is simply an anti-solar agenda.
So in the case of chargers in parking lots, who pays for the power? I suppose you pay it as part of your parking fee.
That depends on the company that owns the charger. Typically, the chargers are part of a network. The owner can decide how much to charge, or to make it free, should they wish. The car owner will use a RFID-equipped card (either a credit card, or a card that merely identifies itself to the network). Alternatively, it is possible to call the network and have them turn on the charger (perhaps giving credit card details over the phone).
Depending on the state (in the USA), they may charge for time connected to the charger, or energy delivered (some states don't allow "resale" of electricity, so the only option in those states is to charge for time connected to the charger).
Companies such as Whole Foods may feel that providing free charging will bring in customers.
In summary, charging (or not charging) for the use of charging stations is a solved problem.
Battery capacity isn't the only game in town. Fast charging (faster than today's DC chargers) on a car that can do 200+ miles between charges makes long drives possible. If charging speeds can be improved and charging stations are more available, there will be little difference between a battery car and a gasoline car.
Perhaps the Saudis should not have made frakking a profitable exercise by pushing up the oil price to $150/barrel. Greed got them in this situation. The Saudis created their own monsters.
Your argument is essentially a "no true scotsman" argument. What you say is that although authors are not being paid, people reading books in bookstores doesn't count because it doesn't meet your strict definition under which authors are not being paid when people read books. Your definition apparently requires "over the Internet".
As for authors being paid for books in book stores: that's not true. In the USA, at least, book stores can "strip" books and return them for credit. Authors effectively only get paid when the book store sells a book and not while it is on the shelf.
But let's not forget other attempts by authors to receive additional payments. In the past, authors have attempted to make libraries pay when library patrons check out a book.
This action by the Authors' guild is quite simply a money grab. Google has money and the authors want a slice of it. That's the beginning and the end of it.
The bookstore doesn't really want you just sitting there treating their retail shelves as a library. You are welcome to browse. But if you brought in your laptop, a scanner/camera, set yourself up on a desk and started doing your "research". Taking notes, scanning/photographic pages getting everything you need, and then putting the books back. They'd ask you to leave.
Did you ever go into a large US bookstore in the late '90s/early '00s? If you did, you would see several people reading books from cover to cover. The staff did not prevent this activity.
My vote for all-time best recording for vinyl is Supertramp's "Crime of the Century."
Wow! I used to annoy the other people in their dorm rooms at college with this album every Saturday. There are probably a couple of people who, to this day, hate Supertramp because of the way I played it obnoxiously loudly every Saturday morning.
Watch the video of the police telling each protester, individually, that they will be pepper sprayed if they don't move.
Irrelevant, because the police officers must have: 1) justifiable reason to tell them to move and 2) authority to use the pepper spray.
The officers had neither.
The officer was not trained nor authorized to use the pepper spray. What's more, it appears that the spray was not used in accordance with the way it should be used. That the use was not authorized makes it an assault.
If police officers are the sole authority on who can protest, when and where, with the threat of assault if you don't comply, then you live in a police state.
In that video that YOU linked, did you notice how they are blocking the path that students are supposed to use to get to class? All they had to do is to move so that they are not blocking the students that have paid their money to addend classes! Do you think that this was impossible for them?
Or, the people walking to classes could have merely walked around the protesters. Yes, they would have had to walk on the well-maintained and flat area around the path. Such a problem!
Right around the 9.57 mark, you can SEE the police apparently surrounded. Students in front of them, behind them, and to the left of the screen.
It's possible that there were protesters around the police. What's important though is whether the protesters were actually stopping the police from moving away if they wanted to. You will also note that the police were on both sides of the sitting protesters, which suggests very strongly that the protesters were not significantly impeding the movement of the police officers.
Watch the video of the pepper spraying: it's clear from the way the officers were standing that they were relaxed: they did not feel threatened. So, the "but surrounded!" excuse is merely a distraction.
Under your interpretation, the first amendment is meaningless. "You can protest, but anything we do to you is your fault" means that there is no right to protest.
Just declaring that the order to disperse is a "legal order" does not automatically make it so, but plenty of police seem to think that it does.
In this case, the protesters were clearly peaceful, were offering no resistance and presented no threat to the police. Other people were not affected by the protesters since they could have easily walked around the protesters.
Furthermore, the officer who used the pepper spray was not authorized to carry and use this weapon. Double standards such as this (no meaningful action for breaking department rules and policies) serves to encourage the use of excessive violence against the public.
The Dyson's (or any other hand dryer) part in the water on the floor is no different than what happens after someone shakes their hands off following washing (rinsing) their hands.
Reading your post again, I see that you have misunderstood my post. I am referring to water that pools *within* the Dyson hand dryer and hence is much closer to the high-speed air that is blown by the dryer. I am not discussing water that is on the floor.
Does it get sucked up from the floor and onto my hands?
My own unscientific observations show that it gets blown around. Does it get atomized such that it could be breathed in? I don't know, but I think that it is a significant concern that someone should investigate.
The only way to make this happen is to start taxing all goods based on where the worst sub-part comes from (i.e. which nation or state). If this tax starts low and then increases yearly, and it is applied as a % (best place like sweden would get 0; worst like China would get 100% of the tax).
What do you think the TPP is for? Answer: stopping your proposal from ever happening.
I don't think that diet and fitness are a science fail. They are a pseudo-science fail.
These disciplines (if even that word is applicable) have been systematically promulgated without the benefit of real science. Now that real scientific methods are being used, the assumptions that were used to derive the advice people were given are (in many cases) proving to be false.
Perhaps you need to open your eyes a bit more. This is happening already. Perhaps it is happening in my area because we have a relatively high concentration of electric vehicles, but it is happening. Many destinations (shopping malls, strip malls, parking garages, theme parks, sports venues, office parks, etc..), have charging stations already.
There are plenty of retail places that have rapid charge systems already in my area. They are all empty. You know why? Because only 0.0001% of all the cars in the area are electric
In my area, the fast DC chargers are mostly busy. If they are not busy, it's probably because they are broken. One charging network has a very high failure rate on their chargers.
Level2 chargers are also likely to be in use. Level2 isn't very useful at a retail site because they charge at about 25 miles/hour (25 miles of range added for each hour of charging, in comparison, fast DC chargers will deliver an 80% charge in 30 minutes).
But I live in a different area to you. If I look at my neighbors' cars, probably about one in 20 is a Nissan LEAF.
When will household rooftop solar be mainstream? Not something used only by granola-munching superliberals like actor Ed Begley JR?
Outside of California and a few other states, never. The utility companies have been fighting hard against net metering. Nevada stopped net metering and the solar companies shut down all activity in Nevada the next day.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it unlikely that one would be able to close an account and walk out with the equivalent of millions of dollars. What bank has such large sums of cash available for customers to withdraw?
Another massive waste of resources. You don't need the same level of training to pilot a drone that you need to sit in and pilot a fast jet. The Army uses enlisted men/women to fly drones, while the Air Force uses officers.
The FBI hacks a computer -- it is to "get" evidence, or to "plant" evidence? How can you be sure what happened?
Not my post.
My proposal is actually to use less natural gas. My proposal is that when the solar output is at its max, they simply turn off some of the natural gas generators. This might require replacing some older natural gas generators with newer technologies.
That's very interesting, but it ignores the fact that newer natural gas plants can be flexible. They can ramp up production quickly and can be cost effective operating only 30% to 70% of the time. California uses natural gas plants for base loads, but could instead use them as a variable supply to offset the variations in solar production.
I have seen a couple of similar articles recently -- all of which ignore the possibility of varying the output of natural gas generation. I suspect that there is some big money pushing an agenda. Perhaps it is simply an anti-solar agenda.
That depends on the company that owns the charger. Typically, the chargers are part of a network. The owner can decide how much to charge, or to make it free, should they wish. The car owner will use a RFID-equipped card (either a credit card, or a card that merely identifies itself to the network). Alternatively, it is possible to call the network and have them turn on the charger (perhaps giving credit card details over the phone).
Depending on the state (in the USA), they may charge for time connected to the charger, or energy delivered (some states don't allow "resale" of electricity, so the only option in those states is to charge for time connected to the charger).
Companies such as Whole Foods may feel that providing free charging will bring in customers.
In summary, charging (or not charging) for the use of charging stations is a solved problem.
Battery capacity isn't the only game in town. Fast charging (faster than today's DC chargers) on a car that can do 200+ miles between charges makes long drives possible. If charging speeds can be improved and charging stations are more available, there will be little difference between a battery car and a gasoline car.
Perhaps the Saudis should not have made frakking a profitable exercise by pushing up the oil price to $150/barrel. Greed got them in this situation. The Saudis created their own monsters.
Your argument is essentially a "no true scotsman" argument. What you say is that although authors are not being paid, people reading books in bookstores doesn't count because it doesn't meet your strict definition under which authors are not being paid when people read books. Your definition apparently requires "over the Internet".
As for authors being paid for books in book stores: that's not true. In the USA, at least, book stores can "strip" books and return them for credit. Authors effectively only get paid when the book store sells a book and not while it is on the shelf.
But let's not forget other attempts by authors to receive additional payments. In the past, authors have attempted to make libraries pay when library patrons check out a book.
This action by the Authors' guild is quite simply a money grab. Google has money and the authors want a slice of it. That's the beginning and the end of it.
Did you ever go into a large US bookstore in the late '90s/early '00s? If you did, you would see several people reading books from cover to cover. The staff did not prevent this activity.
Wow! I used to annoy the other people in their dorm rooms at college with this album every Saturday. There are probably a couple of people who, to this day, hate Supertramp because of the way I played it obnoxiously loudly every Saturday morning.
Just like Carl Sagan, except for the 600 scientific papers and articles and his contributions to scientific research.
Irrelevant, because the police officers must have: 1) justifiable reason to tell them to move and 2) authority to use the pepper spray.
The officers had neither.
The officer was not trained nor authorized to use the pepper spray. What's more, it appears that the spray was not used in accordance with the way it should be used. That the use was not authorized makes it an assault.
If police officers are the sole authority on who can protest, when and where, with the threat of assault if you don't comply, then you live in a police state.
Or, the people walking to classes could have merely walked around the protesters. Yes, they would have had to walk on the well-maintained and flat area around the path. Such a problem!
It's possible that there were protesters around the police. What's important though is whether the protesters were actually stopping the police from moving away if they wanted to. You will also note that the police were on both sides of the sitting protesters, which suggests very strongly that the protesters were not significantly impeding the movement of the police officers.
Watch the video of the pepper spraying: it's clear from the way the officers were standing that they were relaxed: they did not feel threatened. So, the "but surrounded!" excuse is merely a distraction.
Under your interpretation, the first amendment is meaningless. "You can protest, but anything we do to you is your fault" means that there is no right to protest.
Just declaring that the order to disperse is a "legal order" does not automatically make it so, but plenty of police seem to think that it does.
In this case, the protesters were clearly peaceful, were offering no resistance and presented no threat to the police. Other people were not affected by the protesters since they could have easily walked around the protesters.
Furthermore, the officer who used the pepper spray was not authorized to carry and use this weapon. Double standards such as this (no meaningful action for breaking department rules and policies) serves to encourage the use of excessive violence against the public.
Reading your post again, I see that you have misunderstood my post. I am referring to water that pools *within* the Dyson hand dryer and hence is much closer to the high-speed air that is blown by the dryer. I am not discussing water that is on the floor.
My own unscientific observations show that it gets blown around. Does it get atomized such that it could be breathed in? I don't know, but I think that it is a significant concern that someone should investigate.
What about the pool of water at the bottom of the Dyson dryers? Some of that water gets blown around. That water must contain lots of bacteria.
What do you think the TPP is for? Answer: stopping your proposal from ever happening.
I don't think that diet and fitness are a science fail. They are a pseudo-science fail.
These disciplines (if even that word is applicable) have been systematically promulgated without the benefit of real science. Now that real scientific methods are being used, the assumptions that were used to derive the advice people were given are (in many cases) proving to be false.
Perhaps you need to open your eyes a bit more. This is happening already. Perhaps it is happening in my area because we have a relatively high concentration of electric vehicles, but it is happening. Many destinations (shopping malls, strip malls, parking garages, theme parks, sports venues, office parks, etc..), have charging stations already.
In my area, the fast DC chargers are mostly busy. If they are not busy, it's probably because they are broken. One charging network has a very high failure rate on their chargers.
Level2 chargers are also likely to be in use. Level2 isn't very useful at a retail site because they charge at about 25 miles/hour (25 miles of range added for each hour of charging, in comparison, fast DC chargers will deliver an 80% charge in 30 minutes).
But I live in a different area to you. If I look at my neighbors' cars, probably about one in 20 is a Nissan LEAF.
Outside of California and a few other states, never. The utility companies have been fighting hard against net metering. Nevada stopped net metering and the solar companies shut down all activity in Nevada the next day.
You actually think that China is a communist country. That's so cute.
I had not realized how naive posters on /. can be.