A train can use a gallon of fuel to move a ton of freight 500 miles. And trains don't sink. But it's important to remember that we've not always been so good at building ships, nor have we used fossil fuels for locomotion. I think the main reason settlements spring up on waterways is the water. After all, you never see a settlement with no supply of fresh water, but you do find them in places that are pretty hard to get to.
No, I know what you meant. My brother is one of those people. It's crazy. Clearly there is nothing more important than having a good time. Why would we be concerned with promoting evolution? There isn't really anything in it for us. Maybe next we should start trying to promote gravity. See what I'm saying?
Yeah, but it's not fair to say that they provide transportation, since transportation would be easier without them. No matter how polluted the oceans are, they will always be a huge heat-sink.
By reprocessing it we can reduce it to zero. We can remove and recycle all of the transuranic elements from spent nuclear fuel. All you have left is uranium (which occurs naturally, so could hardly be considered nuclear waste) and fission products, which will decay over a few hundred years into non-radioactive substances.
If we use the breeder cycle, we can eliminate all waste except the fission products, and we'll get more total energy too.
But reprocessing fuel eliminates on of the main benefits of Nuclear - cost. Reprocessing as it is done today is expensive. A pound of reprocessed fuel is more expensive to produce than a pound or mined and enriched uranium. If we were to switch to molten salt reactors, reprocessing would be much less expensive because it would eliminate the need for handling fuel elements (molten salt reactors have a liquid core).
All the nihilists I know are chronically depressed. Evolution can take care of itself, it doesn't need our help. I am more concerned with living my life to the fullest.
Absolutely, I stand by my statement. They are making decisions about my life for me. There's no one who knows more about my life than me (except God, and even he does not try to force me to do things against my will). If I make mistakes, certainly someone else would too. And if someone has more "expertise" than me, and thinks I should do something differently they are welcome to make that case to me directly. They don't need to force or coerce me into doing something for my own good. I'd rather die free than live in chains.
Also, it is unwise to let "the experts" decide things for you without your consent. That is just asking for corruption. In fact, you should always scrutinize expert advice and make sure you understand it and agree with it before you follow it.
"What is best for the group isn't always necessarily what is best for the individual."
It really scares me when I hear this. I am a compassionate person. I would be willing to make sacrifices to help others. But I would NEVER demand that someone make a sacrifice for me if they were unwilling. Who would?
So tell me: I don't believe my taxes are being spent efficiently. And you know what, I think I'd be better off deciding how to spend it for myself. What will happen to me if I shop paying, and how for fucks sake is that efficient and necessary?
Why can't I decide how to deal with oil prices or the economy? I am just as qualified as anyone else.
No, land with plants is much better at producing oxygen than plankton. What I was saying is that we should me more concerned about our fresh water supply, I wasn't arguing that we should get rid of the oceans!
Geese and ducks take turns leading the flock, and do it only to push the air out of the way for the rest of the flock. The "leader" will not judge or punish another bird for not following.
But even if you weren't so disastrously misinformed about the world of animals, it wouldn't mean anything because we are neither birds nor ants, we are people, and this kind of society is not in our nature.
"You're applying this political identity angst to a topic which often doesn't need it."
That's not been my experience. I've not always felt the way I now do. The more I see in this world, the more I see the failures of leadership to deliver. I'm not blaming the leaders, I'm blaming the "system" by which we end up relying on people who will never be able to live up to their obligations. The leaders among us are as victimized by the system as the followers.
By even asking "why don't you solve the worlds problems?" it is clear that you don't understand what I'm saying. I was not trying to insult you or anyone else. I don't know shit about anything either. Here is what I am saying:
Humans have limited knowledge. None of us has any reason to believe the that he will do a better job than another. I want you to let me try to solve my problems and I want to let you solve yours. If you need help, you can ask me for it and I will give it to you (to the extent that I can), and if I need help I'll ask you for it and you can help me if you so chose. I will not try to use power and authority to compel you to do my bidding, and I'd appreciate it if you'd afford me the same privilege.
The leader/follower relationship is an inherently dysfunctional one. The leader engages in it because he believes it will earn him the love of his follower or because he wants to feel powerful. The follower engages in it because he wants someone else to take responsibility for his problems or because he is too afraid to stand up to the leader.
The leader is never a perfect leader, though the follower demands perfection from him and will secretly work to undermine him once his trust has been violated. The follower is never a perfect follower although the leader will demand perfect submission from him.
"Most people are followers, a few are leaders."
Most people resent whatever role in this disgusting system they fill. They are neither leaders for followers, but they have been pigeon-holed into those positions.
"Not one society in all our history has ever functioned on libertarian or anarchist principles. Not one."
Well, maybe it's about time someone tried. "Systems" that encourage freedom continually outperform other "systems" and yet the people in them always chose to push them more toward totalitarianism because of their desire for security. Cynical people like yourself promote fear and mistrust, and sell totalitarianism as a solution. It is a false hope, and these "systems" always end up failing to deliver on their promises. I don't think we need a system at all.
Paul is a Libertarian, and therefore, by definition, in a constant state of "full retard".
I used to be a Fascist, then I became a Republican, then I became a Libertarian, now I am a full-blown Anarchist. It is not that I have gone "full retard" as much as my respect for "authority" and the "rule of law" has been continually eroded over time as I have become more and more aware of the futility and idiocy of trying to "solve" problems with government "systems" and "institutions". Forgive my liberal use of quotes, I just don't even respect these ideas anymore.
As well intentioned as people like you and the majority of other people are, you simply fail grasp your own lack of power and knowledge. You like to imagine that if you had more power, you cold solve your problems. You imagine that we can devise a "system" that will solve our problems for us. But the reality is that you don't know shit about anything, and all you will do is make things worse.
All you can really do is try to solve your own problems in your own life and hope for the best. In the mean time, please leave everyone else alone.
The salt water isn't nearly as important as fresh water. The oceans only provide seafood, fresh water is necessary for most agriculture and industry. It is also necessary for most terrestrial animal life, including humans.
"Any institution made up of human beings can be corrupted."
Yeah, that's why we be better off without them. Democracy is just a facade of legitimacy over what is essentially the same old oppressive, evil system.
"Actually the community does have a right to force you to do certain things."
No they don't, I have a natural ability to refuse to do anything they would seek to compel me to do. It's just that the "community" is so corrupt and evil that if I refuse to bend to their will, they will lock me in prison. Fuck that.
"You are free to dislike it but the fact that you can voice your opinions against the status quo places you light-years ahead of your friends living in China or Russia. I wish people would remember that."
Right, I'm sure that makes people feel a lot better when they are sitting in prison but have committed no real crime.
It's not really clear that they've done anything illegal. Apple should let them be, and make it clear to customers that the clones are not authorized and not supported. The law wasn't meant to be used to enforce a vertical monopoly, and only a sociopath would think it is acceptable to use it that way. It is also not good for their image to be stifling entrepreneurship and small business.
"The Y chromosome is the sex-determining chromosome in most mammals, including humans. In mammals, it contains the gene SRY, which triggers testis development, thus determining sex. The human Y chromosome is composed of about 60 million base pairs."
So the SRY gene, which determines sex (words have gender, people have sex) is located on the Y chromosome. Since only the father has a Y chromosome, that gene is inherited from the father.
He was trying to say that the Japanese couldn't build fences, and all I'm pointing out is that many in the US live in apartments as well. So really what we have is a cultural problem, not a "geography/city layout" one.
And yes, it does seem rather silly to have the expectation of privacy when you are out in the open for everyone to see. What if someone looks because they don't know you're there? Could I stand by my front window completely naked and then explain to the police officer that I expected privacy when someone complains. This is what I mean when I say that it's to everyone's benefit.
I don't think it's unreasonable to express my (well founded) opinion in this way. It's completely unfair to say that I'm "closed minded, ignorant, self-centered and just plain stupid" just because I pointed out something that's as plain as the nose on your face for everyone to see.
Slashdot Mirror
A train can use a gallon of fuel to move a ton of freight 500 miles. And trains don't sink. But it's important to remember that we've not always been so good at building ships, nor have we used fossil fuels for locomotion. I think the main reason settlements spring up on waterways is the water. After all, you never see a settlement with no supply of fresh water, but you do find them in places that are pretty hard to get to.
No, I know what you meant. My brother is one of those people. It's crazy. Clearly there is nothing more important than having a good time. Why would we be concerned with promoting evolution? There isn't really anything in it for us. Maybe next we should start trying to promote gravity. See what I'm saying?
Yeah, but it's not fair to say that they provide transportation, since transportation would be easier without them. No matter how polluted the oceans are, they will always be a huge heat-sink.
By reprocessing it we can reduce it to zero. We can remove and recycle all of the transuranic elements from spent nuclear fuel. All you have left is uranium (which occurs naturally, so could hardly be considered nuclear waste) and fission products, which will decay over a few hundred years into non-radioactive substances.
If we use the breeder cycle, we can eliminate all waste except the fission products, and we'll get more total energy too.
But reprocessing fuel eliminates on of the main benefits of Nuclear - cost. Reprocessing as it is done today is expensive. A pound of reprocessed fuel is more expensive to produce than a pound or mined and enriched uranium. If we were to switch to molten salt reactors, reprocessing would be much less expensive because it would eliminate the need for handling fuel elements (molten salt reactors have a liquid core).
Also, desalination is energy intensive, and it's not economical for use in agriculture and industry, though it is a good source of drinking water.
All the nihilists I know are chronically depressed. Evolution can take care of itself, it doesn't need our help. I am more concerned with living my life to the fullest.
Absolutely, I stand by my statement. They are making decisions about my life for me. There's no one who knows more about my life than me (except God, and even he does not try to force me to do things against my will). If I make mistakes, certainly someone else would too. And if someone has more "expertise" than me, and thinks I should do something differently they are welcome to make that case to me directly. They don't need to force or coerce me into doing something for my own good. I'd rather die free than live in chains.
Also, it is unwise to let "the experts" decide things for you without your consent. That is just asking for corruption. In fact, you should always scrutinize expert advice and make sure you understand it and agree with it before you follow it.
"What is best for the group isn't always necessarily what is best for the individual."
It really scares me when I hear this. I am a compassionate person. I would be willing to make sacrifices to help others. But I would NEVER demand that someone make a sacrifice for me if they were unwilling. Who would?
So tell me: I don't believe my taxes are being spent efficiently. And you know what, I think I'd be better off deciding how to spend it for myself. What will happen to me if I shop paying, and how for fucks sake is that efficient and necessary?
Why can't I decide how to deal with oil prices or the economy? I am just as qualified as anyone else.
No, land with plants is much better at producing oxygen than plankton. What I was saying is that we should me more concerned about our fresh water supply, I wasn't arguing that we should get rid of the oceans!
Geese and ducks take turns leading the flock, and do it only to push the air out of the way for the rest of the flock. The "leader" will not judge or punish another bird for not following.
But even if you weren't so disastrously misinformed about the world of animals, it wouldn't mean anything because we are neither birds nor ants, we are people, and this kind of society is not in our nature.
"You're applying this political identity angst to a topic which often doesn't need it."
That's not been my experience. I've not always felt the way I now do. The more I see in this world, the more I see the failures of leadership to deliver. I'm not blaming the leaders, I'm blaming the "system" by which we end up relying on people who will never be able to live up to their obligations. The leaders among us are as victimized by the system as the followers.
If there were no oceans we'd need no ships. Using them for transport is like using lemons to make lemonade.
By even asking "why don't you solve the worlds problems?" it is clear that you don't understand what I'm saying. I was not trying to insult you or anyone else. I don't know shit about anything either. Here is what I am saying:
Humans have limited knowledge. None of us has any reason to believe the that he will do a better job than another. I want you to let me try to solve my problems and I want to let you solve yours. If you need help, you can ask me for it and I will give it to you (to the extent that I can), and if I need help I'll ask you for it and you can help me if you so chose. I will not try to use power and authority to compel you to do my bidding, and I'd appreciate it if you'd afford me the same privilege.
The leader/follower relationship is an inherently dysfunctional one. The leader engages in it because he believes it will earn him the love of his follower or because he wants to feel powerful. The follower engages in it because he wants someone else to take responsibility for his problems or because he is too afraid to stand up to the leader.
The leader is never a perfect leader, though the follower demands perfection from him and will secretly work to undermine him once his trust has been violated. The follower is never a perfect follower although the leader will demand perfect submission from him.
"Most people are followers, a few are leaders."
Most people resent whatever role in this disgusting system they fill. They are neither leaders for followers, but they have been pigeon-holed into those positions.
"Not one society in all our history has ever functioned on libertarian or anarchist principles. Not one."
Well, maybe it's about time someone tried. "Systems" that encourage freedom continually outperform other "systems" and yet the people in them always chose to push them more toward totalitarianism because of their desire for security. Cynical people like yourself promote fear and mistrust, and sell totalitarianism as a solution. It is a false hope, and these "systems" always end up failing to deliver on their promises. I don't think we need a system at all.
Paul is a Libertarian, and therefore, by definition, in a constant state of "full retard".
I used to be a Fascist, then I became a Republican, then I became a Libertarian, now I am a full-blown Anarchist. It is not that I have gone "full retard" as much as my respect for "authority" and the "rule of law" has been continually eroded over time as I have become more and more aware of the futility and idiocy of trying to "solve" problems with government "systems" and "institutions". Forgive my liberal use of quotes, I just don't even respect these ideas anymore.
As well intentioned as people like you and the majority of other people are, you simply fail grasp your own lack of power and knowledge. You like to imagine that if you had more power, you cold solve your problems. You imagine that we can devise a "system" that will solve our problems for us. But the reality is that you don't know shit about anything, and all you will do is make things worse.
All you can really do is try to solve your own problems in your own life and hope for the best. In the mean time, please leave everyone else alone.
The salt water isn't nearly as important as fresh water. The oceans only provide seafood, fresh water is necessary for most agriculture and industry. It is also necessary for most terrestrial animal life, including humans.
"Any institution made up of human beings can be corrupted."
Yeah, that's why we be better off without them. Democracy is just a facade of legitimacy over what is essentially the same old oppressive, evil system.
"Actually the community does have a right to force you to do certain things."
No they don't, I have a natural ability to refuse to do anything they would seek to compel me to do. It's just that the "community" is so corrupt and evil that if I refuse to bend to their will, they will lock me in prison. Fuck that.
"You are free to dislike it but the fact that you can voice your opinions against the status quo places you light-years ahead of your friends living in China or Russia. I wish people would remember that."
Right, I'm sure that makes people feel a lot better when they are sitting in prison but have committed no real crime.
I know that their heart is in the right place, but what does this kind of protest actually accomplish? There has got to be more we can do.
It's not really clear that they've done anything illegal. Apple should let them be, and make it clear to customers that the clones are not authorized and not supported. The law wasn't meant to be used to enforce a vertical monopoly, and only a sociopath would think it is acceptable to use it that way. It is also not good for their image to be stifling entrepreneurship and small business.
I guess I'm just really stupid then. I'm sorry I offended you.
It says that it is part of a covenant with God. It doesn't say anything about it being a correction of God's design.
Genesis chapter 17 is a story which describes the ritualistic meaning and purpose of circumcision.
from wikipedia:
"The Y chromosome is the sex-determining chromosome in most mammals, including humans. In mammals, it contains the gene SRY, which triggers testis development, thus determining sex. The human Y chromosome is composed of about 60 million base pairs."
So the SRY gene, which determines sex (words have gender, people have sex) is located on the Y chromosome. Since only the father has a Y chromosome, that gene is inherited from the father.
I think you need to re-read that part of Genesis.
Isn't that what we have a government for? So we don't have to do anything for ourselves.
He was trying to say that the Japanese couldn't build fences, and all I'm pointing out is that many in the US live in apartments as well. So really what we have is a cultural problem, not a "geography/city layout" one.
And yes, it does seem rather silly to have the expectation of privacy when you are out in the open for everyone to see. What if someone looks because they don't know you're there? Could I stand by my front window completely naked and then explain to the police officer that I expected privacy when someone complains. This is what I mean when I say that it's to everyone's benefit.
I don't think it's unreasonable to express my (well founded) opinion in this way. It's completely unfair to say that I'm "closed minded, ignorant, self-centered and just plain stupid" just because I pointed out something that's as plain as the nose on your face for everyone to see.