It is illegal to drive a car over the speed limit, it is illegal to shoot a red light (shoot a red light? you/they mean 'run' a red light? Because I'm pretty sure discharging a fire arm in order to destroy public property has a few other 'illegalities' tied to it...:).
It is not your _RIGHT_ to drive a car, but you do, however, have a RIGHT to remain anonymous. It's a violation of your free will to have your life monitored by the state for the sole purpose of keeping you in line.
I didn't actually (on either count) - I was mocking the idea that an appearance that's religiously motivated means you're a terrorist (parent said 'he chose the appearance of a terrorist' because of his beard and apparel he wore as an Islamic Muslim). The Quaker and implied Amish reference was a (poorly) veiled reference to the parents confusion over the Al Queda = Taliban connection.
More so, I'm mocking the notion that he confuses Islam with terrorism, probably because he watches too much TV and keeps hearing "Islamic terrorists". Imagine how pissed off Christians in America would be if we started calling most (if not all) US extremist factions "Christian Terrorists". Would then, any white guy with a military hair cut have the appearance of a terrorist?
Also note that I think the guy that stars in this topic is guilty of treason for trying to go to Afghanistan for the reasons he did. If he renounced his citizenship to the US before he left (or even after), I don't know anyone that would have a problem with it...
Man, you're sooo right. We better round up those fuckin' Quakers too. Damn terrorists and their horses and buggies, cloggin' the roads and not giving us enough room to pass in our Hummvee's...
Seriously though, if anyone bothered to read the article they'd see that he tried to enter Afghanistan through western China to fight US troops. I can admire his conviction, and his choice on some level (we should all be so lucky to believe in something that strongly), but unless he renounced his US citizenship and declared why before joining the fight... he's a traitor to the US. He conspired with and gave aid to the enemy. Like Jane.
Even before SCO started selling distributions, the alleged code existed in the codebase. If this is true, than that code is not legitimately GPL'd.
While the majority of the arguments are based on SCO still selling a GPL'd Linux kernel after they "knew" their code was in it, the GPL argument overall and in part stems in part from the suspicion that Caldera released some of that infringing code. If Caldera did this willingly and knowingly (which we can be pretty sure they did), the code is legitimately GPL'd and cannot be retracted. So while SCO may not have been a willing contributor, Caldera was, and the "infringing & plagiarized" code SCO bought from Caldera was simply a (deep) misunderstanding between what SCO thought it was buying and what Caldera was selling. That SCO bought that code from Caldera, thinking it was proprietary and confidential information, and would now like it to NOT be out there is irrelevant... and does not in any way negate Caldera's contribution [and to be honest, many others] of the code to the GPL. Which means SCO is up the GPL creek without a lawsuit.
I've been to "Bedrock", the home of the Flinstones. It's off some highway in the Nevada desert (we were on our way to Pheonix from Vegas). It's a $5 entry, and it's pretty much a bad funhouse version of bedrock, including the dino-slide. It was a riot, we spent something like 4 hours there.
Later, some half way to LA from Pheonix, there was a turn off for a petting zoo. In the middle of the desert. "A little odd, but what the hell" we thought. It was almost 30 miles out of the way and starting to feel a whole lot like a Stephen King novel by the time we rolled in. It was deserted. Completely. Not a car for miles, and you could see the road in and out of this little stop for 10 miles easy. The 'town' was an old west replica in good repair, complete with a gift shop, soda store, etc. At the end of main street, just past the fully stocked and working saloon (we had a beer, left money on the bar just in case), was the petting zoo. Goats, pigs, chickens, a dog (?!), a pony, some screwed up looking desert creature I couldn't begin to explain (reptilian for sure)... and of course, a 'pet' vulture on stand (I think we called him moe). And still, an hour and half later, not a soul. After a serious case of the hebbie jeebies we burned out of there at just about as fast as the car would go.
Mall of America was silly, but the Corn Palace... ah, the Corn Palace. What can you say about Palace made of Corn. heh!
Side roads are by far the best, and the more you take the better you get at spotting them. Don't forget to take the time to see those places that are always behind and two streets over from the big places.
What he's probably referencing (or maybe not) is a professor emeritus of English, Paul Fussell who discussed this topic in an editorial for the Washington Post.
None of the situations in her song (no, not even the plane crash) are 'ironic'. There was a fair amount of debate over it in the academic community, and while there were a few dissenting opinions about what 'could' constitute irony, not one of those English professors would concede that her song contained a clear case of actual irony.
The irony is that her song is about irony, while containing no actual irony. To which she replied something to the effect of 'how ironic.'... correctly.
They were going to call it 'withdrawal symptoms' but initial audience tests suggested they wanted continuity with the first one. Admittedly it has a harder edge to it, but heroin is a bitch to kick.:)
Having squirreled away enough money for a new computer (and by the good graces of my wife whom gave me money on my b-day...:) ) I was torn between the ATI Radeon 9500 pro and an Nvidia chipset for my graphics card. I actually ORDERED the 9500 pro this weekend, then panic'd, checked some message boards and compatibility lists for Linux and having not found very much to go on (either way to be honest, no one said yea or nay) for the ATI chipsets, I decided to cancel my order until I could find out more.
...doesn't the result of splitting H2O using another energy source result in more energy than was used to do the splitting? Not unless I'm miss-remembering the laws of thermodynamics (you might be thinking of potential energy). Thermodynamics
And I don't agree with your opinion that cars would be 10-100 times more expensive, maybe initially. Look at all technology how prices drop real quickly. The problem isn't the technology as much as the materials - you need a high quality electrolyte membrane between the electrode and anode. This means your materials to make the cell are made of expensive metals that aren't dependant on technology. They break down, bond and degrade under the performance requirements of a car.
In the interest of exploring the current potential cost of a fuel cell power plant I'll give you an example - fuel cell Here's a currently available home fuel cell technology that provides 1.2kw. For $8k. The EV1 (ford's electric car) uses 102 KW for roughly 137 HP. To power this car with a fuel cell you'd need 82 of these units, running about $680,000. Not including the cost of the engine and 'carrying case' - the seats, body, breaks, wheels. The cost of the hydrogen (note that it's derived from natural gas or PROPANE... a petroleum product, not electrolyzed water) is $100 per bottle. That means a tank of gas for those 82 units powering your car will run $8,200. Ouch.
How many technological breakthroughs in materials and science will we need to make that fuel cell cost the same (and weigh less) as the batteries in an EV1? Even with Moores Law (technology doubling at half the price) we're looking at roughly 12 years. But since fuel cells are dependant on materials sciences (not technology), Moores law will probably be a bit slower.
I'm a big fan of the fuel cell, it's just that it's touted benefits are a far... FAR cry from reality. It's like the 'American Idol' of the energy world - a lot of hype, but talent? Not so much. (It's funny, I held the same position you do about 2 years ago. Someone challenged me, I got a stick up my ass and tried to prove him wrong, and in the process swore never to admit to him that he's right.;))
One other thing to consider - lead acid batteries can be recycled with water cheaply. Fuel cells... pretty much can't unless someone's figured out how to unbond gold from nickle.
But thanks for playing. Here's the funniest thing about this whole 'we'll use hydrogen and tell those silly towel-heads to go F*** themselves!' argument: Where do you think we'll get hydrogen from? That's right - fossil fuels.
OH OH! I KNOW! WE'LL USE SOLAR, WIND, AND OTHER "RENUEWWWWABLE" SOURCES! Pllbbt. You'd need a wind farm from Texas to Canada to produce enough electricity to electrolize the amount of water needed to produce enough hydrogen to fuel those cars. Solar? Try covering the entire US with [extremely expensive] solar panels - can't wait for that tax hike. Ad nausium. Further, lets discuss the fact that your hydrogen fuel will be exponentially more expensive than gas. You're using the same process we use to get electricity now, using that energy to convert another substance into a fuel, then distributing that fuel in more expensive containers to more expensive outlets for public consumption. In short, we'll be getting hydrogen from fossil fuels, because it's the cheapest and easiest way to get it now and in 2020, 2040, etc.
And let's not get into the fact that a fuel cell car will be 10 - 100 times more expensive than your current car (even if the technology gets better). The membranes also break down pretty quickly, so brace for high maintenance bills. And make room for more landfills because it's cheaper to buy a new car than try and recycle the fuel cell parts.
Finally, let's discuss the fact that the average age of the car on the road is 8 years old. Which means if in 2020 we finally get to buy fuel cell cars (which is, by the way, unlikely) it'll be 2028 (plenty of time for another war) before the AVERAGE car on the road is a hydrogen based car. With the explosion of SUV's, expect us to need a lot more oil in the next 10 - 20 years, BEFORE hydrogen is an option.
You want to get away from oil you have one current choice and another in 5 years - Natural gas power or electric. Neither need fossil fuels at any stage of the process. Your current car can be converted to natural gas for under $4k, you can fill up on your home gas line, you'll save 43 barrels of oil per car per year, and it'll only cost you about a 1/2 horse per 100 horses of power. It's cleaner than gas, your car will last longer, your not depending on Bush (or any of the other dancing monkeys back east), the oil companies, car companies or anyone else. Do for yourself for once.
SO basically, because you and yours can't take criticism or responsibility for yourselves and your company, it's OUR fault.
Get a backbone you sissy, Caldera got pushed out of the market because it couldn't compete with RH or the others, not because some news site on the internet didn't like it. Sheesh... I haven't heard that much crying since I dumped my last girlfriend.
It would be the same if there was a major movie released in America where the hero's name just happened to be 'Osama Bin Laden' (not that I'm drawing any significants comparison). Of course there would be uproar, and the movie would not be shown by most theatres regardless of it's artistic quality.
Perhaps we're forgetting about "The Last Temptation of Christ"?
Slashdot Mirror
(it was a joke ya' yahoo's...)
It is illegal to drive a car over the speed limit, it is illegal to shoot a red light (shoot a red light? you/they mean 'run' a red light? Because I'm pretty sure discharging a fire arm in order to destroy public property has a few other 'illegalities' tied to it... :).
It is not your _RIGHT_ to drive a car, but you do, however, have a RIGHT to remain anonymous. It's a violation of your free will to have your life monitored by the state for the sole purpose of keeping you in line.
what the hell?! You have his HOME ADDRESS! KICK HIS ASS FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!
what's he going to do, call the police and say 'some guy just kicked my ass! I don't know why!' 'aahhghgh!'
Do it every couple of weeks. Or hell, once every couple of months (defend your identity as you have been, just give the guy a little interest...).
>:)
No, CowboyNeal... *ducks too*
More so, I'm mocking the notion that he confuses Islam with terrorism, probably because he watches too much TV and keeps hearing "Islamic terrorists". Imagine how pissed off Christians in America would be if we started calling most (if not all) US extremist factions "Christian Terrorists". Would then, any white guy with a military hair cut have the appearance of a terrorist?
Also note that I think the guy that stars in this topic is guilty of treason for trying to go to Afghanistan for the reasons he did. If he renounced his citizenship to the US before he left (or even after), I don't know anyone that would have a problem with it...
Man, you're sooo right. We better round up those fuckin' Quakers too. Damn terrorists and their horses and buggies, cloggin' the roads and not giving us enough room to pass in our Hummvee's...
Seriously though, if anyone bothered to read the article they'd see that he tried to enter Afghanistan through western China to fight US troops. I can admire his conviction, and his choice on some level (we should all be so lucky to believe in something that strongly), but unless he renounced his US citizenship and declared why before joining the fight... he's a traitor to the US. He conspired with and gave aid to the enemy. Like Jane.
those are mine.
While the majority of the arguments are based on SCO still selling a GPL'd Linux kernel after they "knew" their code was in it, the GPL argument overall and in part stems in part from the suspicion that Caldera released some of that infringing code. If Caldera did this willingly and knowingly (which we can be pretty sure they did), the code is legitimately GPL'd and cannot be retracted. So while SCO may not have been a willing contributor, Caldera was, and the "infringing & plagiarized" code SCO bought from Caldera was simply a (deep) misunderstanding between what SCO thought it was buying and what Caldera was selling. That SCO bought that code from Caldera, thinking it was proprietary and confidential information, and would now like it to NOT be out there is irrelevant... and does not in any way negate Caldera's contribution [and to be honest, many others] of the code to the GPL. Which means SCO is up the GPL creek without a lawsuit.
If they could make that work, they should get a patent. 'Cause they'd be RICH! :P
I've been to "Bedrock", the home of the Flinstones. It's off some highway in the Nevada desert (we were on our way to Pheonix from Vegas). It's a $5 entry, and it's pretty much a bad funhouse version of bedrock, including the dino-slide. It was a riot, we spent something like 4 hours there.
Later, some half way to LA from Pheonix, there was a turn off for a petting zoo. In the middle of the desert. "A little odd, but what the hell" we thought. It was almost 30 miles out of the way and starting to feel a whole lot like a Stephen King novel by the time we rolled in. It was deserted. Completely. Not a car for miles, and you could see the road in and out of this little stop for 10 miles easy.
The 'town' was an old west replica in good repair, complete with a gift shop, soda store, etc. At the end of main street, just past the fully stocked and working saloon (we had a beer, left money on the bar just in case), was the petting zoo. Goats, pigs, chickens, a dog (?!), a pony, some screwed up looking desert creature I couldn't begin to explain (reptilian for sure)... and of course, a 'pet' vulture on stand (I think we called him moe). And still, an hour and half later, not a soul. After a serious case of the hebbie jeebies we burned out of there at just about as fast as the car would go.
Mall of America was silly, but the Corn Palace... ah, the Corn Palace. What can you say about Palace made of Corn. heh!
Side roads are by far the best, and the more you take the better you get at spotting them. Don't forget to take the time to see those places that are always behind and two streets over from the big places.
What he's probably referencing (or maybe not) is a professor emeritus of English, Paul Fussell who discussed this topic in an editorial for the Washington Post.
None of the situations in her song (no, not even the plane crash) are 'ironic'. There was a fair amount of debate over it in the academic community, and while there were a few dissenting opinions about what 'could' constitute irony, not one of those English professors would concede that her song contained a clear case of actual irony.
The irony is that her song is about irony, while containing no actual irony. To which she replied something to the effect of 'how ironic.'... correctly.
Are we done here?
MyASS!
because when I kill someone "player1 was blown away by MyASS!" and when I die "player1 Killed MyASS!"
heh!
All your G0d's are belong to us. ;P
-Brother Jake.
They were going to call it 'withdrawal symptoms' but initial audience tests suggested they wanted continuity with the first one. Admittedly it has a harder edge to it, but heroin is a bitch to kick.
[teamhasnoi] YOU! YOU'RE OUT OF THE MOB!
[me] What?! I'm out of the mob? This mob sucks anyway, I'm going to find a better mob!
--with apologies to the water boy...
WHEW! Nvidia it is. Thanks ATI!
but how many of THOSE countries have a 'justice league'? Ah? Aaaah? [waggles eyes]
Should I start waving a pistol at everybody who cuts me off, or torching the car of that guy down the street who plays his stereo too loud?
Have you BEEN TO L.A.?
...doesn't the result of splitting H2O using another energy source result in more energy than was used to do the splitting? Not unless I'm miss-remembering the laws of thermodynamics (you might be thinking of potential energy). Thermodynamics
;))
And I don't agree with your opinion that cars would be 10-100 times more expensive, maybe initially. Look at all technology how prices drop real quickly. The problem isn't the technology as much as the materials - you need a high quality electrolyte membrane between the electrode and anode. This means your materials to make the cell are made of expensive metals that aren't dependant on technology. They break down, bond and degrade under the performance requirements of a car.
In the interest of exploring the current potential cost of a fuel cell power plant I'll give you an example -
fuel cell
Here's a currently available home fuel cell technology that provides 1.2kw. For $8k. The EV1 (ford's electric car) uses 102 KW for roughly 137 HP. To power this car with a fuel cell you'd need 82 of these units, running about $680,000. Not including the cost of the engine and 'carrying case' - the seats, body, breaks, wheels. The cost of the hydrogen (note that it's derived from natural gas or PROPANE... a petroleum product, not electrolyzed water) is $100 per bottle. That means a tank of gas for those 82 units powering your car will run $8,200. Ouch.
How many technological breakthroughs in materials and science will we need to make that fuel cell cost the same (and weigh less) as the batteries in an EV1? Even with Moores Law (technology doubling at half the price) we're looking at roughly 12 years. But since fuel cells are dependant on materials sciences (not technology), Moores law will probably be a bit slower.
I'm a big fan of the fuel cell, it's just that it's touted benefits are a far... FAR cry from reality. It's like the 'American Idol' of the energy world - a lot of hype, but talent? Not so much. (It's funny, I held the same position you do about 2 years ago. Someone challenged me, I got a stick up my ass and tried to prove him wrong, and in the process swore never to admit to him that he's right.
One other thing to consider - lead acid batteries can be recycled with water cheaply. Fuel cells... pretty much can't unless someone's figured out how to unbond gold from nickle.
OH OH! I KNOW! WE'LL USE SOLAR, WIND, AND OTHER "RENUEWWWWABLE" SOURCES! Pllbbt. You'd need a wind farm from Texas to Canada to produce enough electricity to electrolize the amount of water needed to produce enough hydrogen to fuel those cars. Solar? Try covering the entire US with [extremely expensive] solar panels - can't wait for that tax hike. Ad nausium. Further, lets discuss the fact that your hydrogen fuel will be exponentially more expensive than gas. You're using the same process we use to get electricity now, using that energy to convert another substance into a fuel, then distributing that fuel in more expensive containers to more expensive outlets for public consumption. In short, we'll be getting hydrogen from fossil fuels, because it's the cheapest and easiest way to get it now and in 2020, 2040, etc.
And let's not get into the fact that a fuel cell car will be 10 - 100 times more expensive than your current car (even if the technology gets better). The membranes also break down pretty quickly, so brace for high maintenance bills. And make room for more landfills because it's cheaper to buy a new car than try and recycle the fuel cell parts.
Finally, let's discuss the fact that the average age of the car on the road is 8 years old. Which means if in 2020 we finally get to buy fuel cell cars (which is, by the way, unlikely) it'll be 2028 (plenty of time for another war) before the AVERAGE car on the road is a hydrogen based car. With the explosion of SUV's, expect us to need a lot more oil in the next 10 - 20 years, BEFORE hydrogen is an option.
You want to get away from oil you have one current choice and another in 5 years - Natural gas power or electric. Neither need fossil fuels at any stage of the process. Your current car can be converted to natural gas for under $4k, you can fill up on your home gas line, you'll save 43 barrels of oil per car per year, and it'll only cost you about a 1/2 horse per 100 horses of power. It's cleaner than gas, your car will last longer, your not depending on Bush (or any of the other dancing monkeys back east), the oil companies, car companies or anyone else. Do for yourself for once.
That is a unique viewpoint, nancy.
SO basically, because you and yours can't take criticism or responsibility for yourselves and your company, it's OUR fault.
Get a backbone you sissy, Caldera got pushed out of the market because it couldn't compete with RH or the others, not because some news site on the internet didn't like it. Sheesh... I haven't heard that much crying since I dumped my last girlfriend.
It would be the same if there was a major movie released in America where the hero's name just happened to be 'Osama Bin Laden' (not that I'm drawing any significants comparison). Of course there would be uproar, and the movie would not be shown by most theatres regardless of it's artistic quality.
Perhaps we're forgetting about "The Last Temptation of Christ"?