Yeah, WTF? My comment is not a troll! Usually these comments of mine will be moded "overrated" or "redundant", but troll! That takes some real guts. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: you can't read the whole discussion unless you read at -1.
There doesn't have to be multiple players for a market to be free. A free market is simply one where by individuals determine unilaterally whether or not an they will exchange resources with another individual who is also free to make the same decision. That has nothing to do with whether or not a seller (or buyer) has a monopoly. It simply means that any party involved in an exchange is so by their own choosing.
The thing that always gets me about liberals is their constant instance that government regulations will do a better job than the free market would. They complain that the "hidden hand" is bit of hand waving that libertarians use to justify their own selfish ends. In reality the "hidden hand" is guided by the individual decisions of people trading goods.
Any yes, if individuals have enough information when making decisions, the "hidden hand" is quite good at taking resources from where they are available and putting them where they are needed. When it doesn't work, it is always a case where poor information had lead to poor decisions.
In reality, liberals are just arrogant people who think they know how to spend your money better than you do. That's not to say that they aren't well-meaning, they're just hopelessly misguided.
"the complexity and cost of 4 heavy lift helicopters"
What makes you say that? It hasn't been built yet, so how do you know how much it will cost?
"all you get is twice the lifting power of a helicopter that was designed 30 years ago"
No, that helicopter can lift 60 tons, this vehicle can lift only 40, but the difference is that this vehicle does not need to lift itself.
"This project doesn't make any sense"
Sure it does. It moves twice the cargo, but generates only 2/3 the lift, so it's probably three times more efficient than the helicopter. Maybe if this one works, they can build a bigger one.
You need to read the article. This is a neutrally buoyant craft when it's under no load. It uses rotors (like a helicopter) to lift the cargo itself. So when it's not carrying anything it is neutrally buoyant, but when it has a load it needs it's rotors to generate lift.
Obviously, the craft would be useless if it had the problems you describe, but the engineers at Boeing aren't as brainless as you imagine them to be.
I usually don't mind when people don't RTFA, but you just look really stupid right now and I think in the future you might want to consider it.
Unfortunately, the origin of life as it is currently taught in schools does require a lot of faith (or ignorance) as well. Maybe it's not something that should be taught in science class either.
Are you saying that the 10 commandments were not meant to be taken literally? I'll agree that the creation story is too ambiguous to be taken literally, but most to the Bible is meant to be taken literally.
This is exactly the kind of thinking I was talking about. You think about the inner workings first, without ever considering how it will be used. You don't even seem to realize that every piece of software has a user interface.
Linux has it's strengths, but it seems that Linux programmers tend to focus on the inner workings of the software, and implement the UI as almost an afterthought. I always thought this approach was backward. I think the UI is really the heart of any piece of software (since it is the interface between the user and the computer). Most people would agree that Linux is rather lacking in the UI department.
That's a nice theory, but since Apple sells a product, they can always pay programmers to make up the difference. It's hard to measure "goodness" but I don't think there's any reason to believe that Linux is getting better any faster than OSX.
I don't see how they could enforce a clause claiming you aren't allowed to campaign for the green party, but they should definitely be able to prohibit you from posting signs in their yard.
"The best solution is a combined solution in a small footprint."
No, it really isn't. Nuclear is 10 times cheaper and significantly more reliable than solar power. It is also cheaper and much more reliable than wind. We have plentiful uranium, and we have even more if we use breeder reactors (especially it we can use thorium).
Why should we expend more resources than we have to to build our energy infrastructure? Why pay more for a less reliable option. While you think of an answer to that, keep in mind that the more resources you spend, the more you tax the environment. That means that nuclear is also less of an environemtnal concern.
Social programs would be good, if they were able to accomplish their goals. The problem is that social problems can only be solved through hard work, compassion, understanding, and above all freedom and independent thought.
It's easy to sell stupid people on easy answers. They say that if you give up your economic freedom, they will give you guaranteed security. Of course, this is not how it plays out and in the end these naive voters give away their own freedom and take mine by force, and get nothing, absolutely nothing in return.
Of course, the fault lies partly with us conservative voters who often fail to act pro-actively to explain our viewpoints and stand up for what we believe in.
I've seen a lot of molded plastic manufacturing facilities (mostly spa manufacturers or boat manufactures. . . or custom car parts). They all look just like this because they all do the same thing. They build plugs, then molds, then finished pieces. I don't know why anyone would expect this factory to be clean. They are always grinding and cutting and spraying. It's just not a clean process.
The important thing is they clean each piece before each step. It doesn't matter if some dust gets into the finished product, because it will be encapsulated in resin. As long as it's not too much, it won't have an appreciable effect. I know it's nice to think that it can be perfect and dust free, but it's just not possible.
Cost estimates for things that have never been build are not reliable. Your $30 billion number seems . . . conservative. Seriously, this is a large, dynamic structure. They don't really know how they'd put it in place. They don't know how they would confine the ribbon, or how reliable that system would be. With so many unknowns, you're really just pulling numbers out of your ass. Moreover, the odds that it is actually build-able are not great. The odds of it staying up for any usable period of time are much worse.
"Do you realize how much money you'd save in fuel costs each year?"
Well, since I currently spend about $2,000 a year on gas (even at $4.60/gal) I'd say that it couldn't possibly save me more than that. Since you could buy a used subcompact in fairly good condition for less than $10,000 it sounds like it would take 10 to 15 years for this care to pay back on the investment. Then again, you never know what fuel prices will do in the future. . .
"The environmental impact of large-scale solar deployment is almost certainly less than that of most conventional power generation mechanisms."
No, any large structure will hurt the environment. Plus there is the issue of chemicals used for maintenance, or noise from the power generation. The endangered species act and the environmental protection act can be surprisingly unforgiving if you fail to do the proper research beforehand.
Better to ask forgiveness though, right? The lawsuits will be along shortly.
If anyone has used ATT in southern california, you've probably noticed that it needs all the help it can get. It would be wonderful if I could use my wireless internet to make calls out of my apartment. As it is now, I have to run outside whenever my phone rings. More bars in more places my ass!
It takes too long to get anywhere at that speed. And you aren't a lot less likely to get hit, since people driving slowly are more easily distracted. Can't you just carpool rather than riding your bike? Riding a bike is really pretty dangerous even if there aren't cars on the road.
Slashdot Mirror
If you're starting a new business, having a patent goes a long way toward convincing potential investors to become actual ones.
I thought it was relevant given the context. You can't really buy it in a store though, so I guess it's not what you were looking for :(
Yeah, WTF? My comment is not a troll! Usually these comments of mine will be moded "overrated" or "redundant", but troll! That takes some real guts. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: you can't read the whole discussion unless you read at -1.
There doesn't have to be multiple players for a market to be free. A free market is simply one where by individuals determine unilaterally whether or not an they will exchange resources with another individual who is also free to make the same decision. That has nothing to do with whether or not a seller (or buyer) has a monopoly. It simply means that any party involved in an exchange is so by their own choosing.
John 4
The thing that always gets me about liberals is their constant instance that government regulations will do a better job than the free market would. They complain that the "hidden hand" is bit of hand waving that libertarians use to justify their own selfish ends. In reality the "hidden hand" is guided by the individual decisions of people trading goods.
Any yes, if individuals have enough information when making decisions, the "hidden hand" is quite good at taking resources from where they are available and putting them where they are needed. When it doesn't work, it is always a case where poor information had lead to poor decisions.
In reality, liberals are just arrogant people who think they know how to spend your money better than you do. That's not to say that they aren't well-meaning, they're just hopelessly misguided.
"the complexity and cost of 4 heavy lift helicopters"
What makes you say that? It hasn't been built yet, so how do you know how much it will cost?
"all you get is twice the lifting power of a helicopter that was designed 30 years ago"
No, that helicopter can lift 60 tons, this vehicle can lift only 40, but the difference is that this vehicle does not need to lift itself.
"This project doesn't make any sense"
Sure it does. It moves twice the cargo, but generates only 2/3 the lift, so it's probably three times more efficient than the helicopter. Maybe if this one works, they can build a bigger one.
You need to read the article. This is a neutrally buoyant craft when it's under no load. It uses rotors (like a helicopter) to lift the cargo itself. So when it's not carrying anything it is neutrally buoyant, but when it has a load it needs it's rotors to generate lift.
Obviously, the craft would be useless if it had the problems you describe, but the engineers at Boeing aren't as brainless as you imagine them to be.
I usually don't mind when people don't RTFA, but you just look really stupid right now and I think in the future you might want to consider it.
Unfortunately, the origin of life as it is currently taught in schools does require a lot of faith (or ignorance) as well. Maybe it's not something that should be taught in science class either.
Are you saying that the 10 commandments were not meant to be taken literally? I'll agree that the creation story is too ambiguous to be taken literally, but most to the Bible is meant to be taken literally.
How does she want to enforce this rule? I sounds . . . unconstitutional, and irrational, and unfair.
This is exactly the kind of thinking I was talking about. You think about the inner workings first, without ever considering how it will be used. You don't even seem to realize that every piece of software has a user interface.
Linux has it's strengths, but it seems that Linux programmers tend to focus on the inner workings of the software, and implement the UI as almost an afterthought. I always thought this approach was backward. I think the UI is really the heart of any piece of software (since it is the interface between the user and the computer). Most people would agree that Linux is rather lacking in the UI department.
That's a nice theory, but since Apple sells a product, they can always pay programmers to make up the difference. It's hard to measure "goodness" but I don't think there's any reason to believe that Linux is getting better any faster than OSX.
That sounds remarkably similar to the argument the RIAA uses to go after file sharers. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
I don't see how they could enforce a clause claiming you aren't allowed to campaign for the green party, but they should definitely be able to prohibit you from posting signs in their yard.
"The best solution is a combined solution in a small footprint."
No, it really isn't. Nuclear is 10 times cheaper and significantly more reliable than solar power. It is also cheaper and much more reliable than wind. We have plentiful uranium, and we have even more if we use breeder reactors (especially it we can use thorium).
Why should we expend more resources than we have to to build our energy infrastructure? Why pay more for a less reliable option. While you think of an answer to that, keep in mind that the more resources you spend, the more you tax the environment. That means that nuclear is also less of an environemtnal concern.
Social programs would be good, if they were able to accomplish their goals. The problem is that social problems can only be solved through hard work, compassion, understanding, and above all freedom and independent thought.
It's easy to sell stupid people on easy answers. They say that if you give up your economic freedom, they will give you guaranteed security. Of course, this is not how it plays out and in the end these naive voters give away their own freedom and take mine by force, and get nothing, absolutely nothing in return.
Of course, the fault lies partly with us conservative voters who often fail to act pro-actively to explain our viewpoints and stand up for what we believe in.
I've seen a lot of molded plastic manufacturing facilities (mostly spa manufacturers or boat manufactures. . . or custom car parts). They all look just like this because they all do the same thing. They build plugs, then molds, then finished pieces. I don't know why anyone would expect this factory to be clean. They are always grinding and cutting and spraying. It's just not a clean process.
The important thing is they clean each piece before each step. It doesn't matter if some dust gets into the finished product, because it will be encapsulated in resin. As long as it's not too much, it won't have an appreciable effect. I know it's nice to think that it can be perfect and dust free, but it's just not possible.
Cost estimates for things that have never been build are not reliable. Your $30 billion number seems . . . conservative. Seriously, this is a large, dynamic structure. They don't really know how they'd put it in place. They don't know how they would confine the ribbon, or how reliable that system would be. With so many unknowns, you're really just pulling numbers out of your ass. Moreover, the odds that it is actually build-able are not great. The odds of it staying up for any usable period of time are much worse.
"Do you realize how much money you'd save in fuel costs each year?"
Well, since I currently spend about $2,000 a year on gas (even at $4.60/gal) I'd say that it couldn't possibly save me more than that. Since you could buy a used subcompact in fairly good condition for less than $10,000 it sounds like it would take 10 to 15 years for this care to pay back on the investment. Then again, you never know what fuel prices will do in the future. . .
" I think you'll find an array of mirrors a bit cheaper than a nuclear containment vessel" Not likely. Consider the size difference.
"The environmental impact of large-scale solar deployment is almost certainly less than that of most conventional power generation mechanisms."
No, any large structure will hurt the environment. Plus there is the issue of chemicals used for maintenance, or noise from the power generation. The endangered species act and the environmental protection act can be surprisingly unforgiving if you fail to do the proper research beforehand.
Better to ask forgiveness though, right? The lawsuits will be along shortly.
If anyone has used ATT in southern california, you've probably noticed that it needs all the help it can get. It would be wonderful if I could use my wireless internet to make calls out of my apartment. As it is now, I have to run outside whenever my phone rings. More bars in more places my ass!
It takes too long to get anywhere at that speed. And you aren't a lot less likely to get hit, since people driving slowly are more easily distracted. Can't you just carpool rather than riding your bike? Riding a bike is really pretty dangerous even if there aren't cars on the road.