Let's see... to make a card for the PC you generally use the PCI interface and to make a card for the mac you generally use... the PCI interface. Oh, if you want to do something with a consumer mac you'd use a firewire interface and if you wanted to do something with one of those sealed box, no slot pcs (they do exist) it'd be either firewire or USB.
Oooh, big difference in capabilities. The fact is that for low level hardware hacking, it's likely going to be easier on a mac because you get to have the full source of the core OS while at the same time you get the nice, sleek high end user experience that keeps you focused on the mod you're trying to make and not diddling with a hundred incidental settings along the way.
The fact is that greenhouse gases are considered pollutants for their non-greenhouse effects, not because they are greenhouse gases. The biggest one, CO2 is not considered pollutant at all. Industry also issues albedoizing emissions. Do they get credit for that? No, they don't since a lot of those are categorized as pollutants as well.
The US legal system has specific laws and schedules for which emissions are controlled and anything that's not on the schedules is just not controlled, including CO2. Sorry, any greenhouse effect in other countries is just not covered at all unless there's a treaty specifically delineating the relationship.
A lot of ag programs have a price floor on them. That is, the govt. will spend whatever it takes to get the price of x commodity to the floor in order for "the small farmer" not to go broke (the fact that most of it ends up in the pockets of the agribusiness giants like ADM is ignored in polite political circles in both parties). Thus a climate situation that caused the the amount bought to be halved would actually not change the market price as in both cases it would still be at the floor but would reduce tax expenditures.
The climate change speculated on here is going to be generally in the N. Atlantic oceanic conveyor system, i.e. in the area with the highest overproduction of food and worst sinners in raising food prices by destroying or stockpiling crops until they rot or otherwise interfering in the market like the US policy on sugar.
The point is that there's a lot of extra production built into the 1st world ag system. Depending on the degree of change, this could have a net benefit *without starving a single person*.
These payment systems set a floor price and often buy up the excess to reach the floor price as a rural income maintenance program. If they buy up only half the commodity of previous years, you get exactly the same amount of food on the market but with less tax expenditures. This would not be bad, but good. Obviously, if the effect is too high, it would start to be bad but the problem is that enviros start with an a priori assumption that change in the climate *must* be bad and that attitude is what is wrong. Dealing with all the possibilities realistically, including those where climate change would be beneficial, is a superior approach.
"it's a simple legal principle" under which law system? Farting in a crowded elevator is not legally actionable even though there might be real emotional and aesthetic damage. You're talking about a huge application of ex post facto law, a no no in a lot of legal systems.
The fact is that if the PRC or Russia or most any other country were a larger share of global production and the US were a smaller one, the net global emission of pollutants and greenhouse gases would go up as the US is a very clean producer. Going after the cleanest producer is a good secondary marker for somebody with a hidden agenda.
Ok, so what's the fluid volume figure? When you do your dump, could you string out your salt insertion in periodic injections (think like a bead of pearls)? Would that lead to a reduction in the amount of salt required overall and how much of one?
If the govt. condemns land to allow the building of a private commercial district it *does* have to compensate the owners. This kind of taking is similar.
You're right that environmental regulations takings have been ruled pretty much not a taking in the past. This is why the liberals are so up in arms about conservative justices. The conservatives are starting to shift that around so that such regulations are considered takings.
You don't get very much political fundraising mail, do you? All fundraising mail is designed to either make you scared or angry. This article, viewed in a fundraiser's context would make a great insert in a future campaign.
We are not ordinary animals. Our actions can and regularly do increase the carrying capacity of any given area of land. Carrying capacity analysis taken from animal studies just doesn't properly carry over.
OK, so how much salt do you need to dump at the traditional sinking water column areas to restart the conveyor? We're talking a problem that will show up over a decade and last centuries. If it's really going to impact hard we might as well run the numbers to see at what point it's economic to just add salt.
Those countries put out less in absolute numbers, more in greenhouse gas/dollar of GNP. In other words, the solution given by most rad-enviros is to make the world significantly poorer by devasting the leading efficient producer.
With responsibilities come rights, if the US gets paid by all the countries that benefit from the change, I think we might just come out ahead. But then again, what you're proposing would lead to the US essentially taking over the world. Is that what you're really advocating or are you just an anti-american taking cheap shots?
Some countries will lose, others will win *whenever* the climate changes. If the losers have to get paid, the winners should pay.
1. The greatest global trade problem that exists today is agricultural overproduction caused by massive government subsidies across the 1st world with EU nations the worst offenders and the US not very far behind. There's a lot of agricultural failure that could happen that would actually better the food production system of the world and lower taxes. Nobody's done the numbers so we don't really know the specifics.
2. Taking a look at Zimbabwe, you can see how bad government takes huge tracts of agricultural land out of production, or out of meaningful , non-subsitance production. If things get bad enough, the 1st world will no longer tolerate 3rd world thugocracies doing this anymore and dictators will be falling left and right to movements that will lead to that land coming into (or coming back into) production sufficient to affect the world food markets in a good way.
3. We're likely going to lose a lot of traditional growth areas but they'll switch to other, shorter timeframe crops and new areas will shift into olives, grapes, et al. The key problem is starvation avoidance, not keeping cultural traditions alive.
Companies like Disney, Pixar, et al. have the choice to do derivative works or original ones. The original ones are very much more hit and miss than old reliable favorites and there is a natural tendency to go more and more the safe, derivative route. This does not optimally promote the progress of the arts and sciences. By, on a well known schedule, eliminating the monopoly after a period of time it shifts the equation more towards original works and promotes greater progress.
If Disney can't cut it, can't take its huge pile of cash and make a new character to replace its old, now public domain revenue streams, it doesn't deserve to survive. I think the creative people at Disney could do it, why don't you?
If Ashcroft resigned tomorrow and a new AG was appointed, the case would be renamed to Eldred v. [insert AG name here]. It's just a tradition. When filed, the case was called Eldred v. Reno.
Essentially, the retroactive provisions are a taking that is uncompensated, not even by any progress in the arts and sciences.
On another point, is anybody else disgusted that Disney's putting out a new derivative reworking of Treasure Island while all this is going on? They have no shame.
Actually, setting copyright/patent to 1000 years would run up against the law of perpetuities. There is a common law and statutory rule against arbitrarily setting periods too high.
There are two reasonable grounds for overturning that I can see.
1. It violates "limited times" 2. It's a taking on behalf of special interests from the general public in the amount of collected royalties during the extension term.
Both my and my wife's parents use computers. All four are talented, retired white collar professionals. Mine have a mac and limp around getting things done, my wife's have a pc and limp around getting things done. These are both very common use cases for PCs. My wife's parents continually make the mistake of clicking the wrong mouse button and after the 10th time of telling them which one to use, I just gave up and when I hear "it didn't work" I just say try the other mouse button.
Creating an experience where the system is set up for the novice out of the box is a good move. If you like your multi-button mouse, plug any USB mouse into your mac. It'll work just fine.
I've been using a Mac since 1987. My current mouse is a Kensington Mouse-in-a-box which has four buttons and a clickable scroll wheel (essentially a fifth button). They all work just fine on my Mac and if you're running CAD, I'd suggest getting something similar.
Let's be honest, CAD users generally aren't happy with those $5 mice that ship with most PCs anyway so what's the big deal? Put the 1 button wonders up on e-bay and move on.
Ok, let's take your figures, instead of $80,000:$1 it's $12000:$1. Somehow I think that 10GB ethernet is going to stay out of the disk array field for quite some time while Firewire has realistic possibilities in the relatively near future (ie as soon as somebody releases the necessary drivers).
Slashdot Mirror
Snapz Pro from Ambrosia Software does that and a lot more
http://www.ambrosiasw.com/utilities/snapzprox/
According to the web page, Apple has a bundle that includes a lite version of the software.
The guys over at Ambrosia have a lot of good titles, some serious, others very silly.
Let's see... to make a card for the PC you generally use the PCI interface and to make a card for the mac you generally use... the PCI interface. Oh, if you want to do something with a consumer mac you'd use a firewire interface and if you wanted to do something with one of those sealed box, no slot pcs (they do exist) it'd be either firewire or USB.
Oooh, big difference in capabilities. The fact is that for low level hardware hacking, it's likely going to be easier on a mac because you get to have the full source of the core OS while at the same time you get the nice, sleek high end user experience that keeps you focused on the mod you're trying to make and not diddling with a hundred incidental settings along the way.
The fact is that greenhouse gases are considered pollutants for their non-greenhouse effects, not because they are greenhouse gases. The biggest one, CO2 is not considered pollutant at all. Industry also issues albedoizing emissions. Do they get credit for that? No, they don't since a lot of those are categorized as pollutants as well.
The US legal system has specific laws and schedules for which emissions are controlled and anything that's not on the schedules is just not controlled, including CO2. Sorry, any greenhouse effect in other countries is just not covered at all unless there's a treaty specifically delineating the relationship.
Making stuff up is just not an answer.
A lot of ag programs have a price floor on them. That is, the govt. will spend whatever it takes to get the price of x commodity to the floor in order for "the small farmer" not to go broke (the fact that most of it ends up in the pockets of the agribusiness giants like ADM is ignored in polite political circles in both parties). Thus a climate situation that caused the the amount bought to be halved would actually not change the market price as in both cases it would still be at the floor but would reduce tax expenditures.
The climate change speculated on here is going to be generally in the N. Atlantic oceanic conveyor system, i.e. in the area with the highest overproduction of food and worst sinners in raising food prices by destroying or stockpiling crops until they rot or otherwise interfering in the market like the US policy on sugar.
The point is that there's a lot of extra production built into the 1st world ag system. Depending on the degree of change, this could have a net benefit *without starving a single person*.
These payment systems set a floor price and often buy up the excess to reach the floor price as a rural income maintenance program. If they buy up only half the commodity of previous years, you get exactly the same amount of food on the market but with less tax expenditures. This would not be bad, but good. Obviously, if the effect is too high, it would start to be bad but the problem is that enviros start with an a priori assumption that change in the climate *must* be bad and that attitude is what is wrong. Dealing with all the possibilities realistically, including those where climate change would be beneficial, is a superior approach.
"it's a simple legal principle" under which law system? Farting in a crowded elevator is not legally actionable even though there might be real emotional and aesthetic damage. You're talking about a huge application of ex post facto law, a no no in a lot of legal systems.
The fact is that if the PRC or Russia or most any other country were a larger share of global production and the US were a smaller one, the net global emission of pollutants and greenhouse gases would go up as the US is a very clean producer. Going after the cleanest producer is a good secondary marker for somebody with a hidden agenda.
Ok, so what's the fluid volume figure? When you do your dump, could you string out your salt insertion in periodic injections (think like a bead of pearls)? Would that lead to a reduction in the amount of salt required overall and how much of one?
If the govt. condemns land to allow the building of a private commercial district it *does* have to compensate the owners. This kind of taking is similar.
You're right that environmental regulations takings have been ruled pretty much not a taking in the past. This is why the liberals are so up in arms about conservative justices. The conservatives are starting to shift that around so that such regulations are considered takings.
You don't get very much political fundraising mail, do you? All fundraising mail is designed to either make you scared or angry. This article, viewed in a fundraiser's context would make a great insert in a future campaign.
We are not ordinary animals. Our actions can and regularly do increase the carrying capacity of any given area of land. Carrying capacity analysis taken from animal studies just doesn't properly carry over.
OK, so how much salt do you need to dump at the traditional sinking water column areas to restart the conveyor? We're talking a problem that will show up over a decade and last centuries. If it's really going to impact hard we might as well run the numbers to see at what point it's economic to just add salt.
Those countries put out less in absolute numbers, more in greenhouse gas/dollar of GNP. In other words, the solution given by most rad-enviros is to make the world significantly poorer by devasting the leading efficient producer.
With responsibilities come rights, if the US gets paid by all the countries that benefit from the change, I think we might just come out ahead. But then again, what you're proposing would lead to the US essentially taking over the world. Is that what you're really advocating or are you just an anti-american taking cheap shots?
Some countries will lose, others will win *whenever* the climate changes. If the losers have to get paid, the winners should pay.
1. The greatest global trade problem that exists today is agricultural overproduction caused by massive government subsidies across the 1st world with EU nations the worst offenders and the US not very far behind. There's a lot of agricultural failure that could happen that would actually better the food production system of the world and lower taxes. Nobody's done the numbers so we don't really know the specifics.
2. Taking a look at Zimbabwe, you can see how bad government takes huge tracts of agricultural land out of production, or out of meaningful , non-subsitance production. If things get bad enough, the 1st world will no longer tolerate 3rd world thugocracies doing this anymore and dictators will be falling left and right to movements that will lead to that land coming into (or coming back into) production sufficient to affect the world food markets in a good way.
3. We're likely going to lose a lot of traditional growth areas but they'll switch to other, shorter timeframe crops and new areas will shift into olives, grapes, et al. The key problem is starvation avoidance, not keeping cultural traditions alive.
Companies like Disney, Pixar, et al. have the choice to do derivative works or original ones. The original ones are very much more hit and miss than old reliable favorites and there is a natural tendency to go more and more the safe, derivative route. This does not optimally promote the progress of the arts and sciences. By, on a well known schedule, eliminating the monopoly after a period of time it shifts the equation more towards original works and promotes greater progress.
If Disney can't cut it, can't take its huge pile of cash and make a new character to replace its old, now public domain revenue streams, it doesn't deserve to survive. I think the creative people at Disney could do it, why don't you?
If Ashcroft resigned tomorrow and a new AG was appointed, the case would be renamed to Eldred v. [insert AG name here]. It's just a tradition. When filed, the case was called Eldred v. Reno.
Essentially, the retroactive provisions are a taking that is uncompensated, not even by any progress in the arts and sciences.
On another point, is anybody else disgusted that Disney's putting out a new derivative reworking of Treasure Island while all this is going on? They have no shame.
The standard is a little tougher to prove. The Court must determine, not that they do provide incentive, but, that they could do so.
Actually, setting copyright/patent to 1000 years would run up against the law of perpetuities. There is a common law and statutory rule against arbitrarily setting periods too high.
There are two reasonable grounds for overturning that I can see.
1. It violates "limited times"
2. It's a taking on behalf of special interests from the general public in the amount of collected royalties during the extension term.
I wouldn't want to crack a numbers station, I'd want to know how to receive it, and generate a cancellation broadcast.
Now that'd be an interesting project.
Both my and my wife's parents use computers. All four are talented, retired white collar professionals. Mine have a mac and limp around getting things done, my wife's have a pc and limp around getting things done. These are both very common use cases for PCs. My wife's parents continually make the mistake of clicking the wrong mouse button and after the 10th time of telling them which one to use, I just gave up and when I hear "it didn't work" I just say try the other mouse button.
Creating an experience where the system is set up for the novice out of the box is a good move. If you like your multi-button mouse, plug any USB mouse into your mac. It'll work just fine.
I've been using a Mac since 1987. My current mouse is a Kensington Mouse-in-a-box which has four buttons and a clickable scroll wheel (essentially a fifth button). They all work just fine on my Mac and if you're running CAD, I'd suggest getting something similar.
Let's be honest, CAD users generally aren't happy with those $5 mice that ship with most PCs anyway so what's the big deal? Put the 1 button wonders up on e-bay and move on.
Ok, let's take your figures, instead of $80,000:$1 it's $12000:$1. Somehow I think that 10GB ethernet is going to stay out of the disk array field for quite some time while Firewire has realistic possibilities in the relatively near future (ie as soon as somebody releases the necessary drivers).
Supposedly, IBM is going to be unveiling that consumer grade successor chip in October. It's also likely to have Altivec or clone as well.
FWIW, the article writer didn't seem to know that fink existed at the time of writing (he states there is no apt-get which fink uses).