Yes. As someone who made it through two hurricanes in Central Florida, I can say with certainty that the cell phones were up. In fact, they worked flawlessly during and immediatley after the storms. They eventually became overloaded with calls, but my service never stopped working.
Meanwhile, power was out, so I have no idea if the landlines worked or not (cordless phone) but I imagine they did as well.
"By comparison the post office runs several propane powered vehicles around the city here. These poor performing vehicles run on a fuel with an energy density of 7.5 kwh/liter"
Great, but how much carbon do they release into the atmosphere?
My problem is, and continues to be, that the PSP is a tool. It is supposed to play games, movies, and I suppose allow me to do a few other things with some add-ons.
With that in mind, 300 bucks is WAAAAYYY too much to pay for a tool. I would tolerate 100 bucks, and don't plan to buy one until the price is right.
"This is exactly what a scientist is supposed to do. As opposed to blustering loudly and referring to evidence without mentioning it."
No, zealot, science is supposed to ASK QUESTIONS, not sellte on answers. That explains quite clearlywhy you're so bad at this,you have no idea what you're supposed to be doing.
And don't play semantic games. You've made several declarative statements that strongly imply that you believe the dark matter hypothesis to be factual. Don't try and backpedal out of them.
I'm done with you, you're clearly only interested in making it seem like you know what you are talking about. It's pretty obvious to us real scientists you're just a pretender.
"To blame the Europeans is to blame ourselves, for we ARE europeans. We are responsible for importing slavery with us"
NO, I AM NOT. I am asian (siberian) and my grandparents were ALL immigrants. No one in my family lived here prior to 1947.
So, to blame Euros is to blame YOU, which I do. Slavery as basis for the economy didn't exist here until you came, and even the slavery that did exist wasn't the same thing.
I find it funny that you accuse me of "appaling ignorance" when you want to emphasize what you think are important facts (by the way it WAS states rights, not slavery, and all the after the fact revisionism can't change that) then go on to lump ME into a category to which I do not belong. Who's ignorant NOW? (that would be YOU in case you were wondering)
"While few people actually vocalised slavery as the cause, it was always lurking, and behind most of the political forces that ultimately caused the war. "
And the implication here is that I haven't "looked into it" because I don't agree with you. Well, fuck you. The historical experts agree with me, as do sociologists, political scholars, and lawyers. The FACT is that states rights were the cause. Deny until you turn blue, it doesn't change history. More importantly, you're applying your view of what you think people thought was "lurking" which is, as I am fond of saying. useless. You don't know. NO, you don't. NO YOU DO NOT.
And save your pathetic personal attacks, they were obvious despite your attempt to be subtle.
Sir, while I appreciate what you have said, none of it matters.
ALL that matters is that you've accepted a THEORY as FACT without sufficient proof. It doesn't matter what I think. What matters is that if you were a scientist, you'd be a shitty one.
EVIDENCE is NOT proof. Yet you've made up your mind based on (disputed) evidence. The worst part is you won't even admit it's disputed, but instead try to convince me to believe in what you believe in.
I am very capable of analyzing the information as it exists, and drawing my own conclusions.
Insisting that YOU are correct, in the absence of anything constituting convincing evidence, makes you a ZEALOT. Honestly, your post reads just like one of those screeds from an ID proponent.
How's it feel to behave exactly like a religious nut-job?
Thank you pedant, I should have written "implying". Are you happy now? Probably not, as your life consists of pointing out minute flaws in a post that others are smart enough to understand without clarification.
"outright rebelled at dire risk to their own lives - to defend that system."
First of all, the Civil War was about states rights, not slavery. Only those people interested in ignoring historical fact for the benefit of rhetorical convenience fail to admit that. Attempting to rewrite history, especially when you can easily be proven wrong, is just dumb.
I'm sure you're just such a person, but I'll continue anyway.
The POINT was that EUROPEANS were responsible. If the south fought to keep slavery, it was the Euros fault as well, because they CAUSED slavery. Get the picture? More importantly, what choice did the south have? Give up their way of life and ruin the southern economy? Sure. Try selling that one.
No, the Euros did it. It all runs back to them, and if there is any blame to be laid for slavery, WHY don't the Euros get any?
You know, while it seems like you are a reasonable individual, it also seems as though you have accepted the "dark matter" hypothesis as fact. What's that? I'm full of it? Then what about this?
"In essence, whatever dark matter is found will act very much like neutrinos - barely interacting, but dominating the universe at large scales."
Sounds like you've made up your mind there.
A REAL scientist would insist on further study, not blindly accept a theory that has its own problems, and may not even be valid (and no, none of the evidence you've given, which I was already aware of, makes the dark matter theory any more than a weak theory).
"But dark matter does have observed data to support it - namely, the rotation curves of galaxies, which indicate the existence of significant quantities of non-luminous matter"
No, the unususal rotation curves indicate that some UNKNOWN phenomenon is at work. Jamming the dark matter hypothesis in there works, but saying that the curves existence proves dark matters existence is bunk.
"Uh, there were no Americans (in the sense of inhabitants of the United States, or of the colonies that would become them) yet. A bunch of Europeans brought slavery and genocide to the continent and then became Americans."
Yes, Captain-can't-understand, that was my point.
America was populated by Europeans, who brought slavery with them. But NO ONE ever screams about how they were ultimately responsible for slavery, and instead those very same Euros blame Americans, who were only doing the best they could with the system forced on them.
"America is a christian nation founded upon christian principles. This is a hard fact"
You have a typo in there "fact" should be spelled "LIE". Another possibility would be "pathetic attempt to rewrite history by idiotic religious zealots who never bother to learn facts because with religious idiots, fervor is more important the accuracy" but I think "LIE" works best there.
"And I knew you were right when I posted. Thing is, we're dealing with spin here, and it needs a simple answer. If I had remained factually correct on every point, I'd have to add caveats with every single sentence in my post."
So, not only did you lie, but you lied with full knowledge that you were lying, and then gave a pathetic excuse.
The Europeans brought slavery to America, but Americans are to blame for it?
Slavery was wrong, but it existed in America long before it was a republic, and claiming America is to blame for it glosses over who is truly responsible.
Why aren't you screaming about the lazy Euros who deemed it necessary to build a society on the backs of slaves, then refused to own up when said society was found to be unsutainable?
You managed to completely twist his post, and throw up a bunch of straw men.
He ststed that the fees hurt small investors. He DID NOT state that the fees alone hurt small investors. No one made that argument at all, actually.
"Will the fees affect large corporations? Hell yes. The company I work for files thousands of patent applications a year. Their whole business is intellectual property. They would shit bricks if the fees were to double."
This displays your ignorance. As always, greater fees to a company would be passed on as greater fees to license the patents. Consumers woulld be the ones taking it in the shorts, and conceivably the businesses that were granted stupid patents would be making more money, not less.
Now, if you choose to respond, please leave out any points you THINK I made, and stick to what I actually said. No straw men please.
"Practically speaking it's always a crime because common business practices are illegal if you're a monopoly"
What the hell are you talking about. A mom and pop shop that's the only one in town has a monopoly, but there's nothing illegal about them doing business.
"As to implication, I think you did ( obviously ). Else why reply and say what you did?"
Because I despise individuals who act as though their anecdotal evidence is anyhting other than their opinion.
Read my posting history, and you'll see it bears out.
And as to you calling me a liar (which is what you did when you are doing by continuing to insist that you know what I was thinking when I posted), fuck you. I said what I said for EXACTLY the reasons given, perhaps you should take the comments at face value instead of reading things into them.
By the way, you can check, but you won't find anything that even implies the things you attributed to me. Try to find a statement in this thread that IMPLIES anything. Go ahead. TRY. You'll find straight-forward responses, no implications necessary. I DON'T DO THAT CRAP, so stop acting like you know what I meant. YOU DON'T.
No, the truth is you had a bone to pick about this, and you fired at the wrong target. Get your shit straight next time before you post, or else you'll continue to look silly.
"Yes, yes, wouldn't it be horrible if all those people with reduced abilities or special needs suddenly had much great potential to be productive, or suddenly didn't need expensive support systems to just live their lives."
How disgustingly shallow you must be if you believe they can't have productive lives already.
"But you come in with a claim based on "credible sources"."
No, I didn't. If you look closely, you'll realize I NEVER claimed anything, other than the fact that anecdotal information isn't credible (and that people who believe marketing hype are imbeciles, but I stand by that).
I never claimed anyhing was better than anything else, nor even that I had expertise in the area, only that one piece of data from one individual is essentially useless for making decisions.
Then, once you realize that you made a mistake, you can return and post your apology to me ( I bet you won't though).
Slashdot Mirror
That's the only way I'll buy it.
"Their cell phones?"
Yes. As someone who made it through two hurricanes in Central Florida, I can say with certainty that the cell phones were up. In fact, they worked flawlessly during and immediatley after the storms. They eventually became overloaded with calls, but my service never stopped working.
Meanwhile, power was out, so I have no idea if the landlines worked or not (cordless phone) but I imagine they did as well.
"By comparison the post office runs several propane powered vehicles around the city here. These poor performing vehicles run on a fuel with an energy density of 7.5 kwh/liter"
Great, but how much carbon do they release into the atmosphere?
See, energy density isn't the only consideration.
"If a dog laps up some spilled gasoline at a service station, he will get very sick.
If a child eats a dropped pellet (it looks like a Smarties tablet) at a service station, it would be nice that she didn't die"
If a dog laps up anti-freeze, it will die.
The point you fail to address is that there are massively toxic chemicals in the environment that are far more of a present danger.
It would be really nice if we could talk about new tech without someone bringing up irrelevant considerations.
And no, I don't consider making something less toxic so parents con be more irresponsible a good use of time or effort.
Get bleach banned, then pesticides, and then we'll talk about how toxic this stuff is.
My problem is, and continues to be, that the PSP is a tool. It is supposed to play games, movies, and I suppose allow me to do a few other things with some add-ons.
With that in mind, 300 bucks is WAAAAYYY too much to pay for a tool. I would tolerate 100 bucks, and don't plan to buy one until the price is right.
"This is exactly what a scientist is supposed to do. As opposed to blustering loudly and referring to evidence without mentioning it."
No, zealot, science is supposed to ASK QUESTIONS, not sellte on answers. That explains quite clearlywhy you're so bad at this,you have no idea what you're supposed to be doing.
And don't play semantic games. You've made several declarative statements that strongly imply that you believe the dark matter hypothesis to be factual. Don't try and backpedal out of them.
I'm done with you, you're clearly only interested in making it seem like you know what you are talking about. It's pretty obvious to us real scientists you're just a pretender.
"To blame the Europeans is to blame ourselves, for we ARE europeans. We are responsible for importing slavery with us"
NO, I AM NOT. I am asian (siberian) and my grandparents were ALL immigrants. No one in my family lived here prior to 1947.
So, to blame Euros is to blame YOU, which I do. Slavery as basis for the economy didn't exist here until you came, and even the slavery that did exist wasn't the same thing.
I find it funny that you accuse me of "appaling ignorance" when you want to emphasize what you think are important facts (by the way it WAS states rights, not slavery, and all the after the fact revisionism can't change that) then go on to lump ME into a category to which I do not belong. Who's ignorant NOW? (that would be YOU in case you were wondering)
"While few people actually vocalised slavery as the cause, it was always lurking, and behind most of the political forces that ultimately caused the war. "
And the implication here is that I haven't "looked into it" because I don't agree with you. Well, fuck you. The historical experts agree with me, as do sociologists, political scholars, and lawyers. The FACT is that states rights were the cause. Deny until you turn blue, it doesn't change history. More importantly, you're applying your view of what you think people thought was "lurking" which is, as I am fond of saying. useless. You don't know. NO, you don't. NO YOU DO NOT.
And save your pathetic personal attacks, they were obvious despite your attempt to be subtle.
Sir, while I appreciate what you have said, none of it matters.
ALL that matters is that you've accepted a THEORY as FACT without sufficient proof. It doesn't matter what I think. What matters is that if you were a scientist, you'd be a shitty one.
EVIDENCE is NOT proof. Yet you've made up your mind based on (disputed) evidence. The worst part is you won't even admit it's disputed, but instead try to convince me to believe in what you believe in.
I am very capable of analyzing the information as it exists, and drawing my own conclusions.
Insisting that YOU are correct, in the absence of anything constituting convincing evidence, makes you a ZEALOT. Honestly, your post reads just like one of those screeds from an ID proponent.
How's it feel to behave exactly like a religious nut-job?
Thank you pedant, I should have written "implying". Are you happy now? Probably not, as your life consists of pointing out minute flaws in a post that others are smart enough to understand without clarification.
"outright rebelled at dire risk to their own lives - to defend that system."
First of all, the Civil War was about states rights, not slavery. Only those people interested in ignoring historical fact for the benefit of rhetorical convenience fail to admit that. Attempting to rewrite history, especially when you can easily be proven wrong, is just dumb.
I'm sure you're just such a person, but I'll continue anyway.
The POINT was that EUROPEANS were responsible. If the south fought to keep slavery, it was the Euros fault as well, because they CAUSED slavery. Get the picture? More importantly, what choice did the south have? Give up their way of life and ruin the southern economy? Sure. Try selling that one.
No, the Euros did it. It all runs back to them, and if there is any blame to be laid for slavery, WHY don't the Euros get any?
You know, while it seems like you are a reasonable individual, it also seems as though you have accepted the "dark matter" hypothesis as fact. What's that? I'm full of it? Then what about this?
"In essence, whatever dark matter is found will act very much like neutrinos - barely interacting, but dominating the universe at large scales."
Sounds like you've made up your mind there.
A REAL scientist would insist on further study, not blindly accept a theory that has its own problems, and may not even be valid (and no, none of the evidence you've given, which I was already aware of, makes the dark matter theory any more than a weak theory).
"But dark matter does have observed data to support it - namely, the rotation curves of galaxies, which indicate the existence of significant quantities of non-luminous matter"
No, the unususal rotation curves indicate that some UNKNOWN phenomenon is at work. Jamming the dark matter hypothesis in there works, but saying that the curves existence proves dark matters existence is bunk.
"Uh, there were no Americans (in the sense of inhabitants of the United States, or of the colonies that would become them) yet. A bunch of Europeans brought slavery and genocide to the continent and then became Americans."
Yes, Captain-can't-understand, that was my point.
America was populated by Europeans, who brought slavery with them. But NO ONE ever screams about how they were ultimately responsible for slavery, and instead those very same Euros blame Americans, who were only doing the best they could with the system forced on them.
"America is a christian nation founded upon christian principles. This is a hard fact"
You have a typo in there "fact" should be spelled "LIE". Another possibility would be "pathetic attempt to rewrite history by idiotic religious zealots who never bother to learn facts because with religious idiots, fervor is more important the accuracy" but I think "LIE" works best there.
"And I knew you were right when I posted. Thing is, we're dealing with spin here, and it needs a simple answer. If I had remained factually correct on every point, I'd have to add caveats with every single sentence in my post."
So, not only did you lie, but you lied with full knowledge that you were lying, and then gave a pathetic excuse.
When are you running for president?
The Europeans brought slavery to America, but Americans are to blame for it?
Slavery was wrong, but it existed in America long before it was a republic, and claiming America is to blame for it glosses over who is truly responsible.
Why aren't you screaming about the lazy Euros who deemed it necessary to build a society on the backs of slaves, then refused to own up when said society was found to be unsutainable?
You managed to completely twist his post, and throw up a bunch of straw men.
He ststed that the fees hurt small investors. He DID NOT state that the fees alone hurt small investors. No one made that argument at all, actually.
"Will the fees affect large corporations? Hell yes. The company I work for files thousands of patent applications a year. Their whole business is intellectual property. They would shit bricks if the fees were to double."
This displays your ignorance. As always, greater fees to a company would be passed on as greater fees to license the patents. Consumers woulld be the ones taking it in the shorts, and conceivably the businesses that were granted stupid patents would be making more money, not less.
Now, if you choose to respond, please leave out any points you THINK I made, and stick to what I actually said. No straw men please.
"Practically speaking it's always a crime because common business practices are illegal if you're a monopoly"
What the hell are you talking about. A mom and pop shop that's the only one in town has a monopoly, but there's nothing illegal about them doing business.
"As to implication, I think you did ( obviously ). Else why reply and say what you did?"
Because I despise individuals who act as though their anecdotal evidence is anyhting other than their opinion.
Read my posting history, and you'll see it bears out.
And as to you calling me a liar (which is what you did when you are doing by continuing to insist that you know what I was thinking when I posted), fuck you. I said what I said for EXACTLY the reasons given, perhaps you should take the comments at face value instead of reading things into them.
By the way, you can check, but you won't find anything that even implies the things you attributed to me. Try to find a statement in this thread that IMPLIES anything. Go ahead. TRY. You'll find straight-forward responses, no implications necessary. I DON'T DO THAT CRAP, so stop acting like you know what I meant. YOU DON'T.
No, the truth is you had a bone to pick about this, and you fired at the wrong target. Get your shit straight next time before you post, or else you'll continue to look silly.
Did it ever occur to you that they are happy with their situation and don't need your pity?
How sad that you have such low opinion of people with physical challenges.
Funny how you're being a crybaby while claiming not to be a crybaby.
WAAAHHHHHAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!
"You knew, I believe, full well what we might assume those opinions were."
No, I didn't. Care to call me a liar, especially since NOTHING I said made any implications about anything?
You screwed up and attributed a point to me that I didn't state or imply, or even have any intention of making.
Just be a man and own up to it instead of trying to cover yourself.
How do you expect to have an intelligent discussion when you can't even read other people's posts correctly?
"Yes, yes, wouldn't it be horrible if all those people with reduced abilities or special needs suddenly had much great potential to be productive, or suddenly didn't need expensive support systems to just live their lives."
How disgustingly shallow you must be if you believe they can't have productive lives already.
"But you come in with a claim based on "credible sources"."
No, I didn't. If you look closely, you'll realize I NEVER claimed anything, other than the fact that anecdotal information isn't credible (and that people who believe marketing hype are imbeciles, but I stand by that).
I never claimed anyhing was better than anything else, nor even that I had expertise in the area, only that one piece of data from one individual is essentially useless for making decisions.
Then, once you realize that you made a mistake, you can return and post your apology to me ( I bet you won't though).
Please try to read more carefully in the future.
"You know nothing about THE CIO, and are in no position to determine if HE HAS ANY OF THE TRAITS YOU HAVE SO CARELESSLY ASSIGNED TO HIM"
You sir, are a hypocrite.