The point here is that the books are _not_ being digitized,
Make them prove that it has been digitized, and/or that copies exist elsewhere. In the US, any Tom Dick or Harry can get a restraining order, I'm sure there must be similar capabilities in Canada.
But the point is we only have some hand wringing allegations from one source that claims they are not digitized. Lets sort that out factually before we get all maudlin about it.
If the documents have in fact been digitized then they have gone to a better place. Someplace where they can be used, in stead of moldering away. Some place they can't walk away to never be seen again.
Just make them prove that they are available, in more than one location, from a computer connected to the web, and call it a day. Maybe these aren't in the public domain and you won't find them on line, but they should be asked to prove the still exist.
Go visit the dump, and do some random dumpster diving. Google a passage or phrase from random documents and see if they appear.
Yup, crime statistics are public information. The next thing you know the ACLU or some Cities will be anonymizing crime statistics to protect feelings. Responses to 911 calls will be dispatched to random addresses so as not to cast aspersions.
So how is startpage.com (acting like a proxy and therefore tracking you any better than Google tracking ?
I know what Google is going to do with the tracking. I have no idea what startpage might do. Their Privacy policy is no more impressive then Google's.
There is also http://www.epicbrowser.com/ they beat google with google's own stick. (they support either a direct mode or a proxy mode, and you can switch with one click).
Yup, and they are also much more yellow in appearance.
There is nothing new in this, my dad use to buy 130 volt bulbs for hard to reach ceiling installations in the school buildings he maintained. Power consumption was never much of an issue back then.
Still, when CFLs are under a buck apiece, and they promise 15 years (and deliver every bit of 4 years), they are still more cost effective.
296 with tea party connections 101 approved (most well after the election) 28 withdrawn That leaves..... 167 STILL UNAPPROVED as of 12/2012
More than half still pending after the scandal broke and was investigated!!! ALL of them were delayed so long as to remove them from the election effort completely.
None denied my ass. Where it the detailed report on the remaining 167. Nice cherry picking of data there. You Kan (selectively) read.
Well, as soon as you get your own house or condo your mind will change. Admittedly, its hard to justify LEDs when you plan to be moving in a few months.
Considering the successful pregnancy rate of in vitro fertilization is considerably lower (~30%, the last I knew), and considerably more expensive ($10,000 per attempt), their technique might be a boon to infertile couples.
But a great deal of that cost difference is Pigs don't sue. And if you mess up a sow, nobody cares. Infertile couples and lesbian couples. There are a hell of a lot more of the latter.
Well, Bush signed it into law and now Obama is repealing it. Does that affect your opinion?
Well that's not the way TFA or the summary reads, but its probably closer to the truth then the obviously biased TFA.
Eliminating incandescent bulbs is nobody's priority anymore, because CFCs are getting cheap enough that that they sell themselves, even to poor people who don't have a lot of money to spend on expensive bulbs, and the market penetration is almost universal, except for those situations where CFCs still don't work well.
I suspect that the same price trajectory will be followed by LED bulbs, and the problem will solve itself. (It always was going to do this anyway, as just taking longer than some people wanted).
My power company gave me free CFCs several years ago. They gave them to everyone who would take them. It was cheaper than running another gas plant for even a few days.
Can I send my salive and get a copy of myself in 9-10 months?
Are you a pig?
Are you saying the same can't be done with humans? Are you sure its not being done already? 70 to 80 percent success rate is high enough for more than a few women to choose this, to say nothing about with a gun to their head.
Slashdot Mirror
The point here is that the books are _not_ being digitized,
Make them prove that it has been digitized, and/or that copies exist elsewhere. In the US, any Tom Dick or Harry can get a restraining order, I'm sure there must be similar capabilities in Canada.
But the point is we only have some hand wringing allegations from one source that claims they are not digitized. Lets sort that out factually before we get all maudlin about it.
Meh.
If the documents have in fact been digitized then they have gone to a better place. Someplace where they can be used, in stead of moldering away. Some place they can't walk away to never be seen again.
Just make them prove that they are available, in more than one location, from a computer connected to the web, and call it a day.
Maybe these aren't in the public domain and you won't find them on line, but they should be asked to prove the still exist.
Go visit the dump, and do some random dumpster diving. Google a passage or phrase from random documents and see if they
appear.
Lets not get too sentimental about paper.
Openstreetmaps can't find a Starbucks in Seattle.
That's a feature. Seattlites know good coffeeshops from Starbucks.
Challenge accepted:
Zoom to Seattle down town: Search Coffee shops
Google: Map turns pink with hits
OSM: On shop in Singapore
Next?
Yup, crime statistics are public information.
The next thing you know the ACLU or some Cities will be anonymizing crime statistics to protect feelings.
Responses to 911 calls will be dispatched to random addresses so as not to cast aspersions.
edit wars with proper commentary are constructive.
Constructive, No. Not by a long shot. About as constructive a a gun fight in a night club.
And the end result is the same. You can't go to nightclubs, and if you do, you better be packin heat.
Your dad said he only read playboy for the articles. You tell us you only use Wiki for the arguments.
I'm more likely to believe your dad.
much of your electricity comes from coal, which emits vast quantities of mercury.
None of my electricity comes from coal.
And mercury can be scrubbed.
The level of detail is just fantastic, and I can carry the entire map on an sd card for offline use, including routing. It's plain awesome.
Detail? Not so much.
Side by side comparison: Zoomed to my town. Entered search term: Starbucks
Google Maps: Showed every starbucks in my town
OpenStreetMaps: Showed nothing in my town, but listed some in Japan, an ocean away.
Zoomed to Seattle. Repeated same test.
Same results. Openstreetmaps can't find a Starbucks in Seattle.
Keyed in a random address: 521 N 1st st, new york, NY
Google: Bam, direct hit.
Openstreetmaps: Nothing. Not a single thing.
This is probably where 50 people jump on me and suggest I should fix the maps and contribute.
Yeah, that will work.
Consumer protection agencies (both Federal and State) would like to review your technical measurements.
So an incandescent lumen is somehow different than a CFC lumen?
No clue, because none of these has ever burned out on me. Check back in 5 years or so.
I have no problem with VLC for music, but Winamp has been a favorite for years.
Yeah, its old and funky, and that's exactly why I like it.
So how is startpage.com (acting like a proxy and therefore tracking you any better than Google tracking ?
I know what Google is going to do with the tracking.
I have no idea what startpage might do. Their Privacy policy is no more impressive then Google's.
There is also http://www.epicbrowser.com/ they beat google with google's own stick. (they support either a direct mode or a proxy mode, and you can switch with one click).
I'd like it to block noisy tabs, block metro 8 and block malware. Maybe I should just go back to lynx.
This noisy tabs indicator has been running here for weeks.
But basically I agree. I don't want to just Know about noisy tabs, I want the noise blocked by default
until I decide I want to listen.
So close, Google, but you are still protecting the advertisers at the expense of the users.
Shut them UP.
By the way, all bulbs that are quoted in years assume 3 hours per day.
Up stream it was stated that running 100watt 130volt bulbs only deliver 75 watts.
So I based that less than a dollar / bulb on THESE, the closest equivalent. 850 lumens 12,000 hours. 88.5 cents apiece.
Turns out that isn't even the cheapest CFC 60watt equiv. You can get a 4 pack of THESE 900 lumens 12,000 hrs for 49 cents apiece.
If you need 100 watt equivalent get THESE, 1600lumens, 10,000 hours, just under $1.25 each.
For some obscure reason, 75watt equivalent costs more per bulb than 100 watt, coming in at $1.61.
Yup, and they are also much more yellow in appearance.
There is nothing new in this, my dad use to buy 130 volt bulbs for hard to reach ceiling installations in the school buildings he maintained. Power consumption was never much of an issue back then.
Still, when CFLs are under a buck apiece, and they promise 15 years (and deliver every bit of 4 years), they are still more cost effective.
Date of
And the date of the election........ ??
296 with tea party connections
101 approved (most well after the election)
28 withdrawn
That leaves.....
167 STILL UNAPPROVED as of 12/2012
More than half still pending after the scandal broke and was investigated!!!
ALL of them were delayed so long as to remove them from the election effort completely.
None denied my ass. Where it the detailed report on the remaining 167.
Nice cherry picking of data there.
You Kan (selectively) read.
Yeah, CFLs.
But At prices like these (4 pack for $3.54) even people without a lot of money can afford them.
Well, as soon as you get your own house or condo your mind will change.
Admittedly, its hard to justify LEDs when you plan to be moving in a few months.
Like vacuum tubes instead of transistors?
Vacuum tubes are still used in several applications, and they didn't include mercury.
Considering the successful pregnancy rate of in vitro fertilization is considerably lower (~30%, the last I knew), and considerably more expensive ($10,000 per attempt), their technique might be a boon to infertile couples.
But a great deal of that cost difference is Pigs don't sue. And if you mess up a sow, nobody cares.
Infertile couples and lesbian couples. There are a hell of a lot more of the latter.
Well, Bush signed it into law and now Obama is repealing it. Does that affect your opinion?
Well that's not the way TFA or the summary reads, but its probably closer to the truth then the obviously biased TFA.
Eliminating incandescent bulbs is nobody's priority anymore, because CFCs are getting cheap enough that that they sell themselves, even to poor people who don't have a lot of money to spend on expensive bulbs, and the market penetration is almost universal, except for those situations where CFCs still don't work well.
I suspect that the same price trajectory will be followed by LED bulbs, and the problem will solve itself. (It always was going to do this anyway, as just taking longer than some people wanted).
My power company gave me free CFCs several years ago. They gave them to everyone who would take them. It was cheaper than running another gas plant for even a few days.
You also gave no evidence of your claim. You just tossed it out there as if it was fact.
And notably, every single conservative political group eventually got their tax exempt status
Prove it or STFU.
Given the same number of sows, subtract the scientists, the laboratory, the uncertainty, and one boar.
It will always be cheaper to just breed them.
The average litter size in pigs is between 8 and 12 piglets per large pig.
Can I send my salive and get a copy of myself in 9-10 months?
Are you a pig?
Are you saying the same can't be done with humans?
Are you sure its not being done already?
70 to 80 percent success rate is high enough for more than a few women to choose this,
to say nothing about with a gun to their head.