The part you're missing is that the process of growing the plants soaks up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, using the carbon (with water) to create sugars and releasing the oxygen. Any carbon dioxide emitted when the fuel is burnt is essentially offset by the fact that it was removed from the atmosphere when the fuel was grown.
There would obviously be some CO2 emissions involved in setting up the infrastructure, but once set up you could (in theory) run the production process on biofuel as well. Assuming of course that you're producing enough fuel to make it economical.
There are plenty of reasons why biofuels are a poor solution to our fuel needs, but CO2 isn't one of them.
You can produce some biofuels from recycled waste cooking oil, but I don't think growing specifically for fuel is a good solution.
I tried contacts but had the same problem, only it took me much longer than you to get them in and out. I decided to give up after one night when I was up until 4am trying to get the bloody things out before going to bed (having started at 10pm).
I'm quite comfortable wearing my glasses (in fact, while wearing contacts I found myself habitually touching my nose as if to re-position my glasses), and I really don't like touching my eyes, so the whole thing was a bit of a non-starter.
Do those still roam on Orange's 2G network when out of range of 3's 3G network? We bought one for our office (in a 2G area, 2G was fine for us) and then 3 binned the roaming agreement. I'd heard that they'd reinstated it though.
I was under the impression that any website would be able to expose their services as a Chrome OS app, not just Google. So you wouldn't necessarily have to give any data to Google, and you could even write your own 'cloud' service.
Am I wrong, or missing something? Like, will there be certain Chrome OS components (e.g. filesystem) that will be tied to Google 'cloud' services?
I don't think so. What makes me me is the part of me that experiences. Call it the soul if you will, or an illusion created by the complexity of our brains - science has yet to quantify it. The idea that I could experience new things in a future life is enticing to me, even if I would forget everything about my current life.
How can you enjoy it if you're not yourself anymore.
Suppose for a second that you are a reincarnation of someone that lived in the 19th century. Is your life really that intolerable because you can't remember that past life?
If you have your drachma in notes, they're still worth 1/340.75 of a euro, at least until the 1st of March 2012, because the Bank of Greece will still exchange them based on the face value.
If your drachma were sitting in a bank account then they were probably converted automatically to euros.
It would be more tolerable if you could erase your memories and start fresh each time, much like reinstalling Windows from scratch to clear the crud out. I'd quite like the option of knowing that, although my current life may end for all practical purposes, I won't be consigned to oblivion.
The culmination of the West's influence in South Africa was apartheid, which I think the indigenous population would have been better off without. It's true that there was a lot of outside pressure on SA from the west to end the regime, but there was also significant pressure internally, without which post-apartheid SA would never have been a success.
A lot of the problems elsewhere in Africa can be attributed to the erection of borders and nation-states to suit colonial divisions as opposed to tribal distribution. You can't put two tribes with a history of animosity in one country and expect them to get along, but that's what was done, and fighting continues to this day.
In Australia, unemployment and alcoholism are rife among Aborigine communities, because they haven't been able to adapt to a western lifestyle. Education in Australia is geared towards western needs and Aborigine children don't cope well. And I don't think anybody today believes that the Stolen Generation was a good idea.
It's unrealistic to expect societies to develop at the same rate. Western societies of a century ago or more could also be described as inferior to those of today, but because of the lack of outside interference from 'superior' societies, they have developed.
On the other hand, the list of societies that have been irreparably damaged by westerners who thought they knew better trying to 'civilise the barbarians' is long. Waltzing in and attempting to hand a society freedom and democracy on a silver platter just doesn't work, as we can see from the ongoing failure that is Afghanistan. Societies have to develop themselves.
This isn't the first time the birds have attempted to disrupt the scientific community. Fortunately they only managed to delay Penzias and Wilson; hopefully they won't have any more success at the LHC.
I'd contest the idea that ordinary people are that much better at managing debt than governments. Personal debt and insolvencies are running pretty high right now.
Of course the key difference is that a labourer will usually feel the effects of his sacrifice just as much as his family. With a politician, or whoever is given the job of balancing the books, that't not necessarily so...
we hate the fact that BBC dropped the P2P idea because they couldn't figure out how to get it to work
Actually, "we the public" hated the P2P idea because the BBC was using "we the public's" bandwidth to distribute its content instead of providing its own. The P2P iPlayer was only liked by people who read Slashdot.
Why do you care whether P2P is used or not? As long as your downloads complete in a timely manner, what difference does it make how it got there?
He has the perfect name for his job. He can disprove any arguments that parents should be responsible for their child's upbringing, simply by introducing himself.
The problem is not the injunction against the Guardian that prevented the Minton report from being published. The problem is that the injunction also prevented the newspaper from revealing that an injunction had been served at all.. This is why, according to the opinion of Trafigura's lawyers, the Guardian could not report on this particular parliamentary question - because it revealed the fact that an injunction was in place.
Injunctions are a necessary part of the legal system, as you've pointed out. The prevention of reporting that an injunction is in place is not.
The 'super-injunction', as the press are calling it, was the injunction placed on the Guardian's publication of the Minton Report, and the associated gag order that prevented the paper from revealing the existence of the injunction.
The judge didn't directly apply the gag order to the parliamentary question tabled by Paul Farrelly (which didn't exist at the time), and by all accounts the gag order did not cover parliamentary proceedings in any case because of qualified privilege. The only reason it became an issue was because the Guardian received a specific legal threat from law firm Carter-Ruck:
"The threatened publication would place the Guardian in contempt of court... please confirm by immediate return that the publications threatened will not take place."
As we all know, statements made by lawyers are often merely the legal opinions of said lawyers.
The gag order is the sinister part of the whole thing (not the injunction, which is perfectly reasonable given judicial oversight), but I'd like to point out that these are not uniquely British as the GP seems to be alluding. I'm put in mind of the National Security Letters sent out by arms of the US Government, which placed similar gag orders, but unlike this situation did not have any judicial oversight.
You can't prove that an app doesn't exist. And every time somebody brings up an example of an app on one operating system that doesn't have an equivalent on another operating system, the first reply is invariably along the lines of, "Have you tried X app?"
Aside from stuff like games and OS-specific utilities, I've never had a problem finding a suitable alternative app on either Windows or OS X (although I would contend that the quality of the OS X apps is higher).
That's not what TFA says. Is it possible that the author has been misled? Or is it just that his definition of 'reasonable' is different from mine?
The main problem here is that the only reasonable way that exists to distribute software for the Palm Pre is to get it into the App Catalog. On Palm's previous operating system, PalmOS, you could download and install applications from anywhere. There was a thriving software ecosystem of third-party applications for the Palm Treo, Centro, and their decade-long history of PDAs before that. You could (and I did) buy third-party software that ran on PalmOS on random web sites, or buy it in physical stores on CD-ROMs.
But taking a page from Apple's play-book, Palm has now decided that they have to be the one and only gate-keeper for all the software on your Palm Pre, in a way they never did on the Treo, Centro, or any of the earlier PDAs.
Slashdot Mirror
The part you're missing is that the process of growing the plants soaks up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, using the carbon (with water) to create sugars and releasing the oxygen. Any carbon dioxide emitted when the fuel is burnt is essentially offset by the fact that it was removed from the atmosphere when the fuel was grown.
There would obviously be some CO2 emissions involved in setting up the infrastructure, but once set up you could (in theory) run the production process on biofuel as well. Assuming of course that you're producing enough fuel to make it economical.
There are plenty of reasons why biofuels are a poor solution to our fuel needs, but CO2 isn't one of them.
You can produce some biofuels from recycled waste cooking oil, but I don't think growing specifically for fuel is a good solution.
You mean /,
Because the world is running Windows and a web browser on everything.
You mean in the same way that Tesla wants to replace every car on the road with a battery powered two seater sports car?
Google is taking an incredible amount of flak for offering an alternative, it seems.
I tried contacts but had the same problem, only it took me much longer than you to get them in and out. I decided to give up after one night when I was up until 4am trying to get the bloody things out before going to bed (having started at 10pm).
I'm quite comfortable wearing my glasses (in fact, while wearing contacts I found myself habitually touching my nose as if to re-position my glasses), and I really don't like touching my eyes, so the whole thing was a bit of a non-starter.
I should have been clearer - 3 only ceased roaming on Orange for mobile broadband customers, not phone customers.
Do those still roam on Orange's 2G network when out of range of 3's 3G network? We bought one for our office (in a 2G area, 2G was fine for us) and then 3 binned the roaming agreement. I'd heard that they'd reinstated it though.
I was under the impression that any website would be able to expose their services as a Chrome OS app, not just Google. So you wouldn't necessarily have to give any data to Google, and you could even write your own 'cloud' service.
Am I wrong, or missing something? Like, will there be certain Chrome OS components (e.g. filesystem) that will be tied to Google 'cloud' services?
I don't think so. What makes me me is the part of me that experiences. Call it the soul if you will, or an illusion created by the complexity of our brains - science has yet to quantify it. The idea that I could experience new things in a future life is enticing to me, even if I would forget everything about my current life.
Suppose for a second that you are a reincarnation of someone that lived in the 19th century. Is your life really that intolerable because you can't remember that past life?
If you have your drachma in notes, they're still worth 1/340.75 of a euro, at least until the 1st of March 2012, because the Bank of Greece will still exchange them based on the face value.
If your drachma were sitting in a bank account then they were probably converted automatically to euros.
It would be more tolerable if you could erase your memories and start fresh each time, much like reinstalling Windows from scratch to clear the crud out. I'd quite like the option of knowing that, although my current life may end for all practical purposes, I won't be consigned to oblivion.
The culmination of the West's influence in South Africa was apartheid, which I think the indigenous population would have been better off without. It's true that there was a lot of outside pressure on SA from the west to end the regime, but there was also significant pressure internally, without which post-apartheid SA would never have been a success.
A lot of the problems elsewhere in Africa can be attributed to the erection of borders and nation-states to suit colonial divisions as opposed to tribal distribution. You can't put two tribes with a history of animosity in one country and expect them to get along, but that's what was done, and fighting continues to this day.
In Australia, unemployment and alcoholism are rife among Aborigine communities, because they haven't been able to adapt to a western lifestyle. Education in Australia is geared towards western needs and Aborigine children don't cope well. And I don't think anybody today believes that the Stolen Generation was a good idea.
It's unrealistic to expect societies to develop at the same rate. Western societies of a century ago or more could also be described as inferior to those of today, but because of the lack of outside interference from 'superior' societies, they have developed.
On the other hand, the list of societies that have been irreparably damaged by westerners who thought they knew better trying to 'civilise the barbarians' is long. Waltzing in and attempting to hand a society freedom and democracy on a silver platter just doesn't work, as we can see from the ongoing failure that is Afghanistan. Societies have to develop themselves.
This isn't the first time the birds have attempted to disrupt the scientific community. Fortunately they only managed to delay Penzias and Wilson; hopefully they won't have any more success at the LHC.
I can't speak for Windows or Linux, but on a Mac:
Option-C.
System Preferences > Language & Text > Input Sources, and select 'Arabic'. There's a keystroke that will let you switch instantly between layouts.
I'd contest the idea that ordinary people are that much better at managing debt than governments. Personal debt and insolvencies are running pretty high right now.
Of course the key difference is that a labourer will usually feel the effects of his sacrifice just as much as his family. With a politician, or whoever is given the job of balancing the books, that't not necessarily so...
Actually, "we the public" hated the P2P idea because the BBC was using "we the public's" bandwidth to distribute its content instead of providing its own. The P2P iPlayer was only liked by people who read Slashdot.
Why do you care whether P2P is used or not? As long as your downloads complete in a timely manner, what difference does it make how it got there?
He has the perfect name for his job. He can disprove any arguments that parents should be responsible for their child's upbringing, simply by introducing himself.
The hilarious thing is, it appears to be a reprint of this article, the URL of which lacks the 'www'.
Right enough, this is the correct link. I had made a note to fix it before posting but subsequently forgot.
The problem is not the injunction against the Guardian that prevented the Minton report from being published. The problem is that the injunction also prevented the newspaper from revealing that an injunction had been served at all.. This is why, according to the opinion of Trafigura's lawyers, the Guardian could not report on this particular parliamentary question - because it revealed the fact that an injunction was in place.
Injunctions are a necessary part of the legal system, as you've pointed out. The prevention of reporting that an injunction is in place is not.
That depends on what you regard as 'the problem'.
The 'super-injunction', as the press are calling it, was the injunction placed on the Guardian's publication of the Minton Report, and the associated gag order that prevented the paper from revealing the existence of the injunction.
The judge didn't directly apply the gag order to the parliamentary question tabled by Paul Farrelly (which didn't exist at the time), and by all accounts the gag order did not cover parliamentary proceedings in any case because of qualified privilege. The only reason it became an issue was because the Guardian received a specific legal threat from law firm Carter-Ruck:
As we all know, statements made by lawyers are often merely the legal opinions of said lawyers.
The gag order is the sinister part of the whole thing (not the injunction, which is perfectly reasonable given judicial oversight), but I'd like to point out that these are not uniquely British as the GP seems to be alluding. I'm put in mind of the National Security Letters sent out by arms of the US Government, which placed similar gag orders, but unlike this situation did not have any judicial oversight.
You're getting Iraq and Iran muddled up.
You can't prove that an app doesn't exist. And every time somebody brings up an example of an app on one operating system that doesn't have an equivalent on another operating system, the first reply is invariably along the lines of, "Have you tried X app?"
Aside from stuff like games and OS-specific utilities, I've never had a problem finding a suitable alternative app on either Windows or OS X (although I would contend that the quality of the OS X apps is higher).
That's not what TFA says. Is it possible that the author has been misled? Or is it just that his definition of 'reasonable' is different from mine?