So tell you what, you pre-approve a refinery near the Canadian border and we'll stop pushing for the entirely sensible pipeline.
Short of that, you're playing an obvious shell game.
Either you misunderstand the situation or you're the one playing games.
The point of the pipeline is not to get oil to the refineries, it's to get oil to refineries near a port that can ship to China. It's not a secret, but I'm surprised at how many people seem ignorant of this fact.
Because there are huge regulatory obstacles to building refineries. In the US there have only been a small handful of refineries built in the past few decades since the advent of the EPA
You mean since the EPA was created by that notorious liberal hippie Richard Nixon? As a response to an escalating series of environmental disasters, culminating in the largest oil spill of its time?
Even if that oil was refined, the resulting products would still need to be moved to where they'll be consumed.
Right. To China. Which is the entire point of piping the oil down to Texas, because there's already shipping infrastructure in the Gulf of Mexico.
You lose the advantage of having the environmental impact of a single pipeline that is easy to monitor and the safest relative way to transport oil. Your instead replacing it with shipping through another pipeline to a port where it will be placed on ships and sent overseas. The most likely place to ship it to is China and you can rest assured they won't be worrying about environmental impact reports.
You fundamentally misunderstand: The refined petroleum products are going to China anyways. The only question is whether it gets shipped through the USA and put onto boats in the Gulf of Mexico, or if Canada has to build a pipeline across their own country and ship it from their own coast.
A Senator asked the President of TransCanada (the company in charge of Keystone XL) if he would require his clients to keep all the refined products in the USA and was unequivocally told no. http://boldnebraska.org/markey-exports
Previously, then-Representative Markey challenged TransCanada on this question at a hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee on December 2, 2011. There he asked Alexander Pourbaix, TransCanada's President of Energy and Oil Pipelines, whether he would commit to including a requirement in TransCanada's long-term contracts with Gulf Coast refineries, as a condition of shipping, that all refined fuels produced from oil transported through the Keystone XL pipeline be sold in the United States. In response, Mr. Pourbaix stated "no, I can't do that."
Even worse for the USA, Keystone will act like a giant straw to siphon out oil from the mid-west, causing their local prices to rise. The biggest joke is that Keystone XL creates ~35 full time jobs once it is done Keystone XL is not a winner for the United States, unless you own a oil refinery.
Let people teach their kids about their invisible men or aliens or evolution as they see fit.
The problem is that "they" see a secular society as a persecution of their beliefs. "They" want to teach their invisible men in schools and put their religious laws on the court house door.
I wish we would stop trying to force our beliefs on each other.
If we were all really trying to force our beliefs on each other (aka the "both sides" argument) where are the advocates for mandatory abortions? How come we don't have senators and congressmen introducing bills or making amendments to abort every pregnancy? Because that's the kind of crazy it would take to balance out the no-abortions-ever-not-even-if-it-was-rape crowd.
Your words sound moderate, but you're actually masking the reality of who is forcing what.
I found it at the website named in TFA: http://www.statewatch.org/news/ There's no reason not to link directly to these documents, but news organizations rarely seem to.
"Every part of the world where this has been tried, it has failed time and time again."
This is why we're not going to offer support and treatment. This is why there will not be less suffering in our society.
It's not just enough for there to be a change in public opinion, there has to be a change in political will and a massive bureaucratic upheaval to push out everyone who has invested decades in being afraid of the public's consumption of drugs.
This is a product that is shipping right now. The discs are still expensive like BD-Rs when they first came out, but with only the capacity of a DVD-R.
Renault pioneered turbo technology in the 70s on a 1.5L V6. They started around ~500 HP and in the 80s they reached ~800hp at race boost and ~1200hp for qualifying.
The only difference between now and then is it took 50 years to figure out a way to defeat turbo lag in a gentlemanly fashion.
Then the COURTS will look at EVIDENCE and decide if he qualifies for Whistleblower status.
Snowden and others have already talked about this at length. The law does not allow for him (a contractor) to be a whistleblower. If Snowden goes before a court, he'll be prosecuted under the Espionage Act, most of the evidence against him will be classified, and he'll be convicted in a fairly open and shut case.
And the COURTS will tell the Executive to pound sand.
That's a wonderful scenario, but extremely unlikely. The courts will follow the law, which leaves no room for Snowden to be found innocent.
Right now Snowden is not "wanted" for any listed CRIMES.
Snowden was charged with theft, "unauthorized communication of national defense information" and "willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person," according to the complaint. The last two charges were brought under the 1917 Espionage Act.
How is Steyn a "coward" when he is standing up in court, rather than fleeing?
The cowardness being discussed is Steyn's inability to "face the universe as it is," i.e. accept that climate change is man made. One could argue that the denial of man made climate change is an extensive attempt to flee from the facts and their consequences.
The NSA is also spying on the internet under Section 702 of FISA. No one is talking about discontinuing that program or protecting our 4th amendment rights online.
No really, all you have to do is define it such that "free trade" means the US has to bend over, while China, etc. get to do whatever they want to protect their industries.
If there was a problem with import taxes on autos, we'd complain to the WTO and get a ruling. Even "free trade" needs someone with the authority to regulate it.
Given how cheap almost everything made in China is here, I didn't realize that they could tax our exports of anything that highly.
Many countries have enormous import taxes on foreign cars, sometimes going up with engine size. And then Luxury cars always have extra taxes added on, even in the USA.
This statement assumes that all your choices are good. You make want to rethink that assumption.
Stallman has made a career out of arguing against what he sees are bad choices in the field of business and programming. His zealotry may be off putting to many, but his predictions have been mostly spot on.
Maintaining huge arrays of solar panels is done more efficiently at a utility level than on our rooftops.
The point of rooftop solar isn't maximum efficiency. If utility solar array covers X amount of land at Y% efficiency and we can do rooftop solar on 3X land at 1/2*Y% efficiency, it's a net win for everyone (except maybe the utility).
The main impediment to rooftop solar is an aging power distribution infrastructure that wasn't intended to handle power flowing both ways.
I suspect the reason we haven't heard from anybody is that the lifetime of high-power technological civilizations is only a few hundred to a thousand years.
Alternatively, after multiple millennia of exo-christians predicting the end of the world, space Jesus raptured everyone just to get them to STFU and that's why we haven't heard from any alien civilizations yet.
??? WTF ??? What business of theirs is it AT ALL, except to make sure that rockets don't crash into airplanes?
There's two basic things in play here: 1. Private space travel has potential to be a very profitable business. 2. Private space travel is going to produce a lot of R&D that NASA can put to use.
In both instances, it's very much in the government's interest to see that this nascent industry gets off the ground smoothly and without a high profile disaster. Nobody in NASA or the FAA wants private space travel to head off to another country.
Who the hell do they think they are? And what world are they living in
They think they're the people who are granted authority under law to regulate space travel. They live in a world where tolerance for risk is not what it was 30 years ago, or even 10 years ago.
I think there may be some fiber about 3 miles from me. So if I paid about $50,000, there's a chance I could get some pulled to me. Of course, finding an ISP to provision a circuit on top of that is extra.
If you have line of sight, you can bridge the gap for ~$1,000 in fixed costs and directional antennas.
Wireless has grown up a lot in the last few years and people are doing amazing things with consumer and low end commercial grade hardware.
Public funding is going down, actual bandwidth going up, a little fiber laid down in the dotcom days is growing old and they're in a short squeeze.
I'd be interested in learning more about how fiber "is growing old". I believe that dotcom era fiber should be good for >50 years and modern fibers should be good for even longer. My understanding is that the 15~25 year numbers you'll see are book figures for the accountants to calculate asset deprecation.
Which has nothing to do with the fact that this is a rural network pushing 1~3 Mb/s using DSL over copper.
YBB+ wasn't a copyright infringement in any way, shape, or form.
Course descriptions are copyrighted.
Anyway, copyright is tangential to the main problem Yale had with the website: They averaged the student evaluations and displayed it alongside the courses
This violated some agreement regarding course evaluations that the school had with the all teachers and here we are.
Slashdot Mirror
So tell you what, you pre-approve a refinery near the Canadian border and we'll stop pushing for the entirely sensible pipeline.
Short of that, you're playing an obvious shell game.
Either you misunderstand the situation or you're the one playing games.
The point of the pipeline is not to get oil to the refineries, it's to get oil to refineries near a port that can ship to China.
It's not a secret, but I'm surprised at how many people seem ignorant of this fact.
Because there are huge regulatory obstacles to building refineries. In the US there have only been a small handful of refineries built in the past few decades since the advent of the EPA
You mean since the EPA was created by that notorious liberal hippie Richard Nixon?
As a response to an escalating series of environmental disasters, culminating in the largest oil spill of its time?
Even if that oil was refined, the resulting products would still need to be moved to where they'll be consumed.
Right. To China.
Which is the entire point of piping the oil down to Texas, because there's already shipping infrastructure in the Gulf of Mexico.
You lose the advantage of having the environmental impact of a single pipeline that is easy to monitor and the safest relative way to transport oil. Your instead replacing it with shipping through another pipeline to a port where it will be placed on ships and sent overseas. The most likely place to ship it to is China and you can rest assured they won't be worrying about environmental impact reports.
You fundamentally misunderstand: The refined petroleum products are going to China anyways.
The only question is whether it gets shipped through the USA and put onto boats in the Gulf of Mexico,
or if Canada has to build a pipeline across their own country and ship it from their own coast.
A Senator asked the President of TransCanada (the company in charge of Keystone XL) if he would require his clients to keep all the refined products in the USA and was unequivocally told no.
http://boldnebraska.org/markey-exports
Previously, then-Representative Markey challenged TransCanada on this question at a hearing of the House Energy and Commerce Committee on December 2, 2011. There he asked Alexander Pourbaix, TransCanada's President of Energy and Oil Pipelines, whether he would commit to including a requirement in TransCanada's long-term contracts with Gulf Coast refineries, as a condition of shipping, that all refined fuels produced from oil transported through the Keystone XL pipeline be sold in the United States. In response, Mr. Pourbaix stated "no, I can't do that."
Even worse for the USA, Keystone will act like a giant straw to siphon out oil from the mid-west, causing their local prices to rise.
The biggest joke is that Keystone XL creates ~35 full time jobs once it is done
Keystone XL is not a winner for the United States, unless you own a oil refinery.
If I hit a slow loading site, I immediately try for the google cache because it is almost always responsive.
Let people teach their kids about their invisible men or aliens or evolution as they see fit.
The problem is that "they" see a secular society as a persecution of their beliefs.
"They" want to teach their invisible men in schools and put their religious laws on the court house door.
I wish we would stop trying to force our beliefs on each other.
If we were all really trying to force our beliefs on each other (aka the "both sides" argument) where are the advocates for mandatory abortions?
How come we don't have senators and congressmen introducing bills or making amendments to abort every pregnancy?
Because that's the kind of crazy it would take to balance out the no-abortions-ever-not-even-if-it-was-rape crowd.
Your words sound moderate, but you're actually masking the reality of who is forcing what.
Call me when they release these "classified documents",
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2014/jan/eu-enlets-wp-2014-2020.pdf
I found it at the website named in TFA: http://www.statewatch.org/news/
There's no reason not to link directly to these documents, but news organizations rarely seem to.
The opinion of the "chief of operations" at the DEA on decriminalization
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/dea-operations-chief-decries-legalization-of-marijuana-at-state-level/2014/01/15/17af548a-7e38-11e3-9556-4a4bf7bcbd84_story.html
"Every part of the world where this has been tried, it has failed time and time again."
This is why we're not going to offer support and treatment.
This is why there will not be less suffering in our society.
It's not just enough for there to be a change in public opinion, there has to be a change in political will and a massive bureaucratic upheaval to push out everyone who has invested decades in being afraid of the public's consumption of drugs.
I've yet to find a single media solution that has stood the test of time.
http://www.mdisc.com/what-is-mdisc/
This is a product that is shipping right now.
The discs are still expensive like BD-Rs when they first came out, but with only the capacity of a DVD-R.
Technology marches on.
Renault pioneered turbo technology in the 70s on a 1.5L V6.
They started around ~500 HP and in the 80s they reached ~800hp at race boost and ~1200hp for qualifying.
The only difference between now and then is it took 50 years to figure out a way to defeat turbo lag in a gentlemanly fashion.
Then the COURTS will look at EVIDENCE and decide if he qualifies for Whistleblower status.
Snowden and others have already talked about this at length.
The law does not allow for him (a contractor) to be a whistleblower.
If Snowden goes before a court, he'll be prosecuted under the Espionage Act,
most of the evidence against him will be classified, and he'll be convicted in a fairly open and shut case.
And the COURTS will tell the Executive to pound sand.
That's a wonderful scenario, but extremely unlikely.
The courts will follow the law, which leaves no room for Snowden to be found innocent.
Right now Snowden is not "wanted" for any listed CRIMES.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-charges-snowden-with-espionage/2013/06/21/507497d8-dab1-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html
06/21/2013
Snowden was charged with theft, "unauthorized communication of national defense information" and "willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person," according to the complaint. The last two charges were brought under the 1917 Espionage Act.
Your post needs less CAPS and more facts.
You may like to read:
Global-Warming Skepticism Hits 6-Year High
Creationism In Texas Public Schools
Bill Nye To Debate Creationist Museum Founder Ken Ham
How is Steyn a "coward" when he is standing up in court, rather than fleeing?
The cowardness being discussed is Steyn's inability to "face the universe as it is," i.e. accept that climate change is man made.
One could argue that the denial of man made climate change is an extensive attempt to flee from the facts and their consequences.
The NSA is also spying on the internet under Section 702 of FISA.
No one is talking about discontinuing that program or protecting our 4th amendment rights online.
No really, all you have to do is define it such that "free trade" means the US has to bend over, while China, etc. get to do whatever they want to protect their industries.
If there was a problem with import taxes on autos, we'd complain to the WTO and get a ruling.
Even "free trade" needs someone with the authority to regulate it.
Given how cheap almost everything made in China is here, I didn't realize that they could tax our exports of anything that highly.
Many countries have enormous import taxes on foreign cars, sometimes going up with engine size.
And then Luxury cars always have extra taxes added on, even in the USA.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01...
Is this a new thing now, where /. cuts off the hyperlink?
unmolested: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01...
a href: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/24/us/politics/us-willing-to-hold-talks-if-snowden-pleads-guilty.html?_r=0
This is dumb and whoever implemented it is dumb.
Choice for the consumer is good.
This statement assumes that all your choices are good.
You make want to rethink that assumption.
Stallman has made a career out of arguing against what he sees are bad choices in the field of business and programming.
His zealotry may be off putting to many, but his predictions have been mostly spot on.
Can it be that our fiat monetary systems are so flawed that this is a reasonable alternative for some folks?
Going back to a deflationary/metallic currency is not possible, plausible, or remotely rational.
We've been there and abandoned that.
For all the flaws of "fiat" currency, no one has really proposed a viable deflationary alternative that compensates for problems we've already fixed.
Maintaining huge arrays of solar panels is done more efficiently at a utility level than on our rooftops.
The point of rooftop solar isn't maximum efficiency.
If utility solar array covers X amount of land at Y% efficiency and
we can do rooftop solar on 3X land at 1/2*Y% efficiency,
it's a net win for everyone (except maybe the utility).
The main impediment to rooftop solar is an aging power distribution infrastructure that wasn't intended to handle power flowing both ways.
I suspect the reason we haven't heard from anybody is that the lifetime of high-power technological civilizations is only a few hundred to a thousand years.
Alternatively, after multiple millennia of exo-christians predicting the end of the world, space Jesus raptured everyone just to get them to STFU and that's why we haven't heard from any alien civilizations yet.
??? WTF ??? What business of theirs is it AT ALL, except to make sure that rockets don't crash into airplanes?
There's two basic things in play here:
1. Private space travel has potential to be a very profitable business.
2. Private space travel is going to produce a lot of R&D that NASA can put to use.
In both instances, it's very much in the government's interest to see that this nascent industry gets off the ground smoothly and without a high profile disaster.
Nobody in NASA or the FAA wants private space travel to head off to another country.
Who the hell do they think they are? And what world are they living in
They think they're the people who are granted authority under law to regulate space travel.
They live in a world where tolerance for risk is not what it was 30 years ago, or even 10 years ago.
Seagate should have 5TB drives on the market by next month.
I doubt they'll be cheap though.
I think there may be some fiber about 3 miles from me. So if I paid about $50,000, there's a chance I could get some pulled to me. Of course, finding an ISP to provision a circuit on top of that is extra.
If you have line of sight, you can bridge the gap for ~$1,000 in fixed costs and directional antennas.
Wireless has grown up a lot in the last few years and people are doing amazing things with consumer and low end commercial grade hardware.
Public funding is going down, actual bandwidth going up, a little fiber laid down in the dotcom days is growing old and they're in a short squeeze.
I'd be interested in learning more about how fiber "is growing old".
I believe that dotcom era fiber should be good for >50 years and modern fibers should be good for even longer.
My understanding is that the 15~25 year numbers you'll see are book figures for the accountants to calculate asset deprecation.
Which has nothing to do with the fact that this is a rural network pushing 1~3 Mb/s using DSL over copper.
It's about Yale's misuse of copyright to censor.
I'd agree.
YBB+ wasn't a copyright infringement in any way, shape, or form.
Course descriptions are copyrighted.
Anyway, copyright is tangential to the main problem Yale had with the website:
They averaged the student evaluations and displayed it alongside the courses
This violated some agreement regarding course evaluations that the school had with the all teachers and here we are.