I still need to light my house somehow - and power the computer I'm typing this on.
Also solar thermal is great, but on a cold day you still need a backup plan. The ideal would be to use a heat exchanger inside your normal water heating system, thus keeping the cost (and use of corporations) down.
Seeds aren't an issue. Where I live I can buy them from local farmers, and at the end of the season I can collect some of the seeds for next years crops.
As for fertiliser - that's one reason why I want to keep chickens. Chicken sh*t makes great fertiliser. Also most home systems like this don't rely on fertiliser in the same way that large scale farms do. Leaving an area fallow for a year is an ancient technique.
As for tools - I think I covered that with the "can't make toilet paper"
The purpose of traffic laws in the developed world is essentially as an extra tax. Therefore no road laws will ever be sufficiently enforced to significantly discourage the activity they purport to prohibit.
This is clearly rubbish. In the Canada and most of Europe (both of which most definitely count as developed) have a system of penalty points or demerit points. Accrue too many points and you lose your license. You also get a fine. It could be argued that if you do get a fine then you're paying for them to prosecute you because you're so much of an incompetent fool as to not be able to control your vehicle responsibly.
I suggest you learn the meaning of the phrase "developed world". If your country doesn't have a system of demerit points, I suggest you are NOT in the developed world.
It doesn't help when they don't want to appear weak on terrorism. This kind of thing happens in England too. It's stupid, and just shows how many idiots there are. Of course all this will be resolved when I become the benevolent dictator
I already have started. I grow a lot of veggies (you should see my food bill in late summer/early autumn - I save a fortune). Next year we're going to start keeping chickens, which will help cut down on the cost of basic meat and of course eggs.
Personally I'd love to have solar power/wind generation, as that's another big bill, but the start up costs are rather extreme. I've seen one quote for $20k CDN for a 2.2kW system. That would barely touch what I use because we have an electric water heater, etc. But it would be a massive start. If I could be off grid entirely that would be even better as it would help avoid all the power outages we often get round here during winter.
The problems with avoiding large corporations come when you need to buy things like a car (a car is a necessity where I live). Personally I'd love to build a bio-diesel plant to solve the problem of a) drilling for oil and b) paying the oil companies in the first place. (Would someone please please make Exxon et al. at least pay 10% of what they make - America might not be quite so screwed if they did). The alternative would be an electric car, especially if I could generate my own power.
There will always be a need for accessing corporations products, after all I will still need someone to make chainsaw blades so I can heat the house in winter. And as someone else pointed out, I can't make toilet paper.
I'm not so sure your argument stands up. A lot of the Betamax vs VHS (and their ilk) wins were often down to better marketing - and often not because you had a better product. This is why marketing is such a shitty job - you're paid to lie to people.
I've always wondered if there should be a system whereby when you patent something, the patent office must license it on your behalf.
It should work something like this:
1) You patent something, and you go through the normal processes of checking for prior art/obviousness etc. There is no fee at this point. 2) The patent office sets a standard fee (or tax if you want to call it that) for a patent, which you can negotiate on, but ultimately it HAS to be licensed. I'm not sure how you could make this fair to both patent holder and licensee. I considered a time limit on negotiations (say six months), but that would encourage the licensee to just negotiate their way to a cheaper license. So I don't know about this part. 3) The patent office gets a very small percentage of the patent fee, which it uses to fund itself, relieving the system of a tax burden. 3.1) This encourages the patent office to publicise patents, and negotiations/licenses. 3.2) It would mean that everyone, small and large has a shot at cheaply being able to use ideas already out there, encouraging innovations instead of creating the aforementioned hostile environment. 3.3) It also stops patent trolls from just suing - perhaps the courts can automatically throw out any case that hasn't already gone through the above negotiations/licensing.
Obviously you don't need to license the patents from yourself, so you still have an economical advantage - you don't have to pay the patent fees on your own ideas.
Just like in America then. And you wonder why the Republicans want to do away with more regulations - so their buddies in big business can screw over the people even more.
It's irrelevant if humans or god were doing the molestation. It's the fact that god either allowed it to happen through inaction, didn't know it was happening - or worse knew it was happening and didn't do anything about it. Either way, god is not what Christians purport him to be.
It seems to me that Congress has a LOT of power. Are they the only ones who can propose laws - for example changing budgets etc.? Is there a way to by-pass congress (or the senate if that's what you need to do) - in the same way you can get a 2/3 majority in both Senate and Congress to by-pass presidential veto?
In the UK we don't have a presidential branch, we have the Queen, though I don't recall her ever not giving Royal Assent. Its as if all the President did was to rubber stamp laws put in front of him. Hell - she doesn't even get to write her speech to Parliament any more, the Prime Minister does it.
Both major parties (not one, both) need to set aside their posturing and pontificating for the benefit of their fringe constituencies. This country has serious problems. We need a frank discussion of the solutions followed by non-partisan action. Let's put an end to any activity that only benefits a small portion of the citizenship. Halt useless Congressional activity that only serves political parties and their patronage. The time for such nonsense is long over. Let's get to work.
All well and good until the Republicans de-fund the inspectors.
Perhaps someone from the States can explain something to me, seeing as I'm a Brit. So some law gets passed by both Congress and Senate, and the President then signs it into law, effectively creating a government body (I'm thinking the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, but I'm sure there are plenty of other examples). This has been considered to be a Good Thing (TM), and then Congress then de-funds it, effectively shutting it down.
Why don't they just repeal the original law that created it in the first place?
Slashdot Mirror
This is safe for work
I still need to light my house somehow - and power the computer I'm typing this on.
Also solar thermal is great, but on a cold day you still need a backup plan. The ideal would be to use a heat exchanger inside your normal water heating system, thus keeping the cost (and use of corporations) down.
Seeds aren't an issue. Where I live I can buy them from local farmers, and at the end of the season I can collect some of the seeds for next years crops.
As for fertiliser - that's one reason why I want to keep chickens. Chicken sh*t makes great fertiliser. Also most home systems like this don't rely on fertiliser in the same way that large scale farms do. Leaving an area fallow for a year is an ancient technique.
As for tools - I think I covered that with the "can't make toilet paper"
The purpose of traffic laws in the developed world is essentially as an extra tax. Therefore no road laws will ever be sufficiently enforced to significantly discourage the activity they purport to prohibit.
This is clearly rubbish. In the Canada and most of Europe (both of which most definitely count as developed) have a system of penalty points or demerit points. Accrue too many points and you lose your license. You also get a fine. It could be argued that if you do get a fine then you're paying for them to prosecute you because you're so much of an incompetent fool as to not be able to control your vehicle responsibly.
I suggest you learn the meaning of the phrase "developed world". If your country doesn't have a system of demerit points, I suggest you are NOT in the developed world.
This just demonstrates how invasive and generally crap marketing is.
I understand 1984 was banned in Soviet Russia, but required reading for party officials
So how do you power your desktop PC?
It might also be for technical reasons. Australia appears to be on 230v, like Europe unlike the retarded US's (and Canada following suit) 110v
Good luck with that!
In England they've already got that covered with the RIPA - which IIRC requires you to give up passwords, and denies you any whistle blowing.
Better yet encrypt the drives and then plead the 5th when they ask for the boot password.
It doesn't help when they don't want to appear weak on terrorism. This kind of thing happens in England too. It's stupid, and just shows how many idiots there are. Of course all this will be resolved when I become the benevolent dictator
I already have started. I grow a lot of veggies (you should see my food bill in late summer/early autumn - I save a fortune). Next year we're going to start keeping chickens, which will help cut down on the cost of basic meat and of course eggs.
Personally I'd love to have solar power/wind generation, as that's another big bill, but the start up costs are rather extreme. I've seen one quote for $20k CDN for a 2.2kW system. That would barely touch what I use because we have an electric water heater, etc. But it would be a massive start. If I could be off grid entirely that would be even better as it would help avoid all the power outages we often get round here during winter.
The problems with avoiding large corporations come when you need to buy things like a car (a car is a necessity where I live). Personally I'd love to build a bio-diesel plant to solve the problem of a) drilling for oil and b) paying the oil companies in the first place. (Would someone please please make Exxon et al. at least pay 10% of what they make - America might not be quite so screwed if they did). The alternative would be an electric car, especially if I could generate my own power.
There will always be a need for accessing corporations products, after all I will still need someone to make chainsaw blades so I can heat the house in winter. And as someone else pointed out, I can't make toilet paper.
This does seem a particularly odd thing to leave out seeing as they already have a chat interface through Gmail.
Or at the very least only post stuff that you can't easily explain to your grandmother or parents without embarrassment.
I'm not so sure your argument stands up. A lot of the Betamax vs VHS (and their ilk) wins were often down to better marketing - and often not because you had a better product. This is why marketing is such a shitty job - you're paid to lie to people.
And yet I can read Twitter comments in Facebook. There are apps for it
You need new friends
I've always wondered if there should be a system whereby when you patent something, the patent office must license it on your behalf.
It should work something like this:
1) You patent something, and you go through the normal processes of checking for prior art/obviousness etc. There is no fee at this point.
2) The patent office sets a standard fee (or tax if you want to call it that) for a patent, which you can negotiate on, but ultimately it HAS to be licensed. I'm not sure how you could make this fair to both patent holder and licensee. I considered a time limit on negotiations (say six months), but that would encourage the licensee to just negotiate their way to a cheaper license. So I don't know about this part.
3) The patent office gets a very small percentage of the patent fee, which it uses to fund itself, relieving the system of a tax burden.
3.1) This encourages the patent office to publicise patents, and negotiations/licenses.
3.2) It would mean that everyone, small and large has a shot at cheaply being able to use ideas already out there, encouraging innovations instead of creating the aforementioned hostile environment.
3.3) It also stops patent trolls from just suing - perhaps the courts can automatically throw out any case that hasn't already gone through the above negotiations/licensing.
Obviously you don't need to license the patents from yourself, so you still have an economical advantage - you don't have to pay the patent fees on your own ideas.
Just like in America then. And you wonder why the Republicans want to do away with more regulations - so their buddies in big business can screw over the people even more.
So was it HUMANS or GOD doing the molestation?
You've missed the point of the post.
It's irrelevant if humans or god were doing the molestation. It's the fact that god either allowed it to happen through inaction, didn't know it was happening - or worse knew it was happening and didn't do anything about it. Either way, god is not what Christians purport him to be.
Correction - after a little more digging, it would seem the last time the Queen refused . Ironically, it was on the advice of her own government that she refuse.
It seems to me that Congress has a LOT of power. Are they the only ones who can propose laws - for example changing budgets etc.? Is there a way to by-pass congress (or the senate if that's what you need to do) - in the same way you can get a 2/3 majority in both Senate and Congress to by-pass presidential veto?
In the UK we don't have a presidential branch, we have the Queen, though I don't recall her ever not giving Royal Assent. Its as if all the President did was to rubber stamp laws put in front of him. Hell - she doesn't even get to write her speech to Parliament any more, the Prime Minister does it.
Both major parties (not one, both) need to set aside their posturing and pontificating for the benefit of their fringe constituencies. This country has serious problems. We need a frank discussion of the solutions followed by non-partisan action. Let's put an end to any activity that only benefits a small portion of the citizenship. Halt useless Congressional activity that only serves political parties and their patronage. The time for such nonsense is long over. Let's get to work.
Good luck with that...
All well and good until the Republicans de-fund the inspectors.
Perhaps someone from the States can explain something to me, seeing as I'm a Brit. So some law gets passed by both Congress and Senate, and the President then signs it into law, effectively creating a government body (I'm thinking the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, but I'm sure there are plenty of other examples). This has been considered to be a Good Thing (TM), and then Congress then de-funds it, effectively shutting it down.
Why don't they just repeal the original law that created it in the first place?