Credit. A $600 credit, although they are basically the same thing. Look at mortgages: People think the interest isn't something they have to worry about because the government "gives it back". In reality, what you get is A) standard deduction; or B) interest deducted. So if you have little to no deductible expenses, and you're married, you might pay $12,000 in interest one year and get to deduct $400 more over your $11,600. This is deducted, so you get back 30% of $400; but people reason out the mortgage as "I'll get that $12,000 back on my taxes" and don't really consider it when they don't get a fat $12,000 paycheck. Have you ever met anyone who reasoned, "Well I'll get a third of it back," or "I'll pay per year, so much interest, but each year it's broken out into I'll have to subtract my standard deduction and add back all my other itemized deductions to figure out just what I can deduct... and then get like a third or a quarter of that back."
It's just "free money," so it's attractive. Something that costs $1000 is more attractive than the same thing for $600, if there's a $300 cash-back refund on the $1000 thing and you're not actually being offered one for $600. Sometimes something equivalent but not identical is taken because "it's a good deal"--a different model vacuum cleaner that costs twice as much but you get 40% of the purchase price back in a rebate will overall cost you 20% more (base on the lower model, i.e. $500 vs $1000-$400, you pay $100 more or 20% of $500 more), but people will pay an extra $100 because 1) it's different; 2) it's more expensive; but 3) I'm getting such a good deal on this $1000 vacuum cleaner, better than no deal on the $500 one.
Actually an electric car that isn't $100,000 and doesn't suck would be great for me. I pay about $3/mo more for electricity because I signed up for "100% Renewable" here. A few places were cheaper, but 100% WIND power and I want Wind/Solar/Hydro/whatever-magic-is-best. I live near a ton of coal plants--15 mile wide city with 13 coal plants IN IT--so I have some interest in clean air. I do accept wood, but we can't generate enough power via wood; even fast-growing pine (and let's face it, pine burns like awesome sauce) requires 1 acre of land to support my house, and I'm not an extremely huge user of electricity.
Now, for my $3/mo or $40/year investment, I pull away demand for roughly 6 tons of coal per year at $1200/year, instead supporting the clean energy industry with my $1200/year. That's a small price for a big impact--I don't mean "It's only 10% of your paycheck" or "It's half as much as your cell phone bill!" I mean I spend more in vending machine junk food 3 times over and have eliminated the cost by being more healthy.
If I move to an electric car... the Nissan Leaf gets 34kWh per 100 miles. It takes me, at 22mpg, about 4.5 gallons at $3.75/gal to drive 100 miles, or $16-ish. At 10 cents per kWh, that's $3.4, which is cheaper for me. Further my 400 miles per month shift my gasoline costs off oil refineries and onto clean energy. The Model S won't be in my price range for 4-5 years though; I won't have my car, mortgage (just bought a house with $3.5% down a few months ago!), and credit cards paid off for 3 years.:|
The best part is HOW they're paying it back. Around here I can get $600 off my taxes for installing high-efficiency heating systems and heat pumps. Trane advertises this strongly--and $600 cash back discount is bigger than $600 expense (psychology trick, people like free stuff, people like "good deals"), so a $1000 system becomes a $2000 system you get $600 for and spend $1400 on.
Given that the most read sectors probably contain parts of your OS and pagefile, and considering the size of a modern OS
If you're reading/writing to the pagefile more than just a very little, you're running the performance equivalent of a 200MHz Pentium 686. Not kidding. People seem to think swap is a thing that happens a lot; it isn't. You know how you have 16GB of RAM and you're like 1.2GB into swap somehow? That's 1.2GB of program initialization crap and other cruft that NEVER GETS TOUCHED and was paged out.
You know how you're only using 6GB of RAM, but somehow you have 1.2GB in swap? 10GB of that shit is pagecache so your OS doesn't have to re-read operating system files (among other shit) constantly. That stuff gets read at boot time.
Computers don't work by churning the hard disk a lot.
Prior to this RH was, as everyone else, suing, dropping unfavorable, pursuing favorable. Rejecting their cases would be 'unfavorable' and the abuse would continue, with cases landing in lucky courtroom roulette generating cash, and cases settled before entering court generating cash too.
But it's essentially blind if it's not crashing into things. It could at least employ visual imaging analysis if it has a camera. What are we going to do? Deploy UAV dragonflies that buzz around peoples' heads, but are mainly inoffensive? What the hell is the use case for something like this that's neither invisible nor able to avoid obstacles?
No, these cases should be heard. They should be heard, lost, have legal fees shoved back on them, and marked as a warning to others.
When a judge dismisses a case, it can be refiled elsewhere. When it's dismissed with prejudice, someone else can raise the same sort of suit. When YOU FUCKING LOSE, the next guy will face a defense lawyer who says "oh, but in Dickhead vs. BK Joe, Dickhead was found to be a moron" and THAT GUY FUCKING LOSES TOO.
Current approaches bounce radio, sound, and light off obstructions, using radar/sonar/laser mapping. This new approach bounces the physical object off obstructions, for the purpose of...? Being more easily detected? Making even more noise? Causing itself and everything around it more damage?
As my body metabolizes, it will react carbohydrates and potentially lipids with oxygen in my cells, producing biproducts of heat, water, and CO2. The CO2 levels in my bloodstream will increase as oxygen bound to hemoglobin in the blood is exchanged off for CO2 in the cells. Eventually CO2 concentrations in the cells will increase, which is irritating and will cause a strong desire to respire and remove the CO2 from the blood and exchange it with oxygen in the atmosphere.
I would probably respire less in an atmosphere without CO2 due to the reduced partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere, allowing for more rapid exchange of CO2 for O2 and thus keeping blood levels of O2 high and CO2 low more efficiently. There's not much CO2 in the atmosphere to begin with, so the effect may be minimal. Likely any deviation will be overshadowed by natural variation in my base respiration rate.
Constant pedaling is less stressful on the body, but it takes some training to be able to just spin. When the load goes down you just idle; climb a hill and you pedal harder.
Motorcycles are more efficient than cars up to 2-3 people total, depending on the motorcycle. 30mpg cars only seem to get 22-24 (I've made mine get 37mpg by fancy driving, but it gets 22 combined city/highway plenty), and they lose mileage as they age, and replacing them is more energy-intensive than the excess fuel use. Motorcycles at the 250cc range get between 50-70mpg. Cars with passengers quickly start to burn excess fuel--my car weighs 2800 pounds and the average 150-250lb person adds 5%-10% weight!
Honestly the most efficient way of traveling is to use a combined approach. Bicycle/ebike or even Zboard for short trips to the light rail--bicycle can haul groceries; motorcycle and motorscooter for puttering around the city on long trips (160mpg on a scooter?!); 2 motorcycles or 2+ in the car. You can take the bike/ebike out further--based on fitness, enjoyment, time constraints (I was doing a 7-9 mile trip to work in 5 minutes longer than driving the car, so I biked it), tolerance for weather conditions, etc. Similarly, drive the car more based on constraints.
It's funny because you can personally cut out 80% of your travel costs by skillful use of multiple transit methods including public transit, bicycles, ebikes, and even motorcycles.
I'm not sure democracy is universally "good". Political ideals are an infectious disease. Communism, fascism, and finally democracy--only the latest--have always spread by force of the great liberating the proletariat from the oppressions of tyranny.
I've made the observation several times that what America needs in these trying times is possibly a King, some form of powerful monarch who can actually fix things. Unfortunately that ship has sailed: when we fought with sticks and swords, global warfare was impossible and instability demanded uncompromising focus on restoring stability within. Now a powerful monarch has the great option to ignore internal stability, as it is pathetically unimportant to the external threat--you need a stable nation when you fight with pikes and axes, but when you fight with fighter jets and nuclear cruise missiles you only need a powerful military.
In an age passed, with similar conditions, America might best find its way out of its current political, economic, and social strife by a powerful monarch. Naturally, when said monarch outlived his urgency, he would have to provide great benefit to the people and great benevolence or else face an angry populous whose greatest threat was the monarch himself. When the monarch is less of an evil than the situation he is effectively stabilizing, he will be tolerated. Thus, when no longer useful, the monarch is replaced with a democratic system.
What we see now is the failure of the democratic system, and the lack of options for a context-correct system to replace it with. A strong monarchy would be ill-suited to a world where the external threats are addressable without concern for the well-being of the greater populous. It would be the correct stabilization system where the greater populous desperately needs stabilization for the nation to survive external threats, and thus to where the monarch's greatest pressure is to serve or to be threatened from all fronts both foreign and domestic.
What recourse have we? Strong socialism is a failure--it is as wrong as a strong monarch in our situation for the same reasons, albeit it is great and wonderful for small and unstable colonies of only a handful. Feudalism is best suited where resources are available but where capitalism cannot subsist, where the populous is too large and too disparate for socialism.
None of these options are very good. Not even Democracy, which has been made a show of disparate factions and ignorant masses incapable of self-governance and only operating under the illusion of choice and freedom.
I've always found PC gaming to be a terrible deal. But console FPS games are also ridiculous because the control scheme is wonky (forward/backward/strafe on one stick, turn/aim on another? it should be walk/turn and strafe/aim!)
The last time I had this argument, it came down to the other guy in the debate finally breaking down under the stress and iterating that, yes, your so-called "Inalienable," "Natural," "God-Given," whatever "Rights" can be--he wouldn't say "taken away"--"Infringed" (like patents I guess) by evil dictators, by people with big guns, big fists, armies, etc. He continued to claim that they were a real, absolute, physical thing that always exists not because it's an ideal of philosophers, but because rights simply exist, as a fact, as an integral part of being. Then: he pointed me at political philosophers like Franklin and Locke.
That's a religious stance. "It exists because it is the beginning and the end." The realist understands that when you live in a dictatorship where secret police come into your house and murder you, you don't have "rights" that are being "infringed upon"; you have "a body of people that hasn't risen up and killed all these assholes, then put in the next set with the understanding that certain privileges will be conveyed or there will be guillotines."
Rights don't simply exist, beaten and trampled until the arms of Liberty pull them from the mud; they are brought into existence by sweat, blood, fists and steel. If you let your government misbehave, your rights aren't being "infringed"; they have been "eliminated". That people are convinced somehow these magical properties are something real has taught them that sheep and cattle will continue to be treated as gods... except one day we will move the cattle out of India and they will mindlessly follow.
Slashdot Mirror
Credit. A $600 credit, although they are basically the same thing. Look at mortgages: People think the interest isn't something they have to worry about because the government "gives it back". In reality, what you get is A) standard deduction; or B) interest deducted. So if you have little to no deductible expenses, and you're married, you might pay $12,000 in interest one year and get to deduct $400 more over your $11,600. This is deducted, so you get back 30% of $400; but people reason out the mortgage as "I'll get that $12,000 back on my taxes" and don't really consider it when they don't get a fat $12,000 paycheck. Have you ever met anyone who reasoned, "Well I'll get a third of it back," or "I'll pay per year, so much interest, but each year it's broken out into I'll have to subtract my standard deduction and add back all my other itemized deductions to figure out just what I can deduct... and then get like a third or a quarter of that back."
It's just "free money," so it's attractive. Something that costs $1000 is more attractive than the same thing for $600, if there's a $300 cash-back refund on the $1000 thing and you're not actually being offered one for $600. Sometimes something equivalent but not identical is taken because "it's a good deal"--a different model vacuum cleaner that costs twice as much but you get 40% of the purchase price back in a rebate will overall cost you 20% more (base on the lower model, i.e. $500 vs $1000-$400, you pay $100 more or 20% of $500 more), but people will pay an extra $100 because 1) it's different; 2) it's more expensive; but 3) I'm getting such a good deal on this $1000 vacuum cleaner, better than no deal on the $500 one.
Actually an electric car that isn't $100,000 and doesn't suck would be great for me. I pay about $3/mo more for electricity because I signed up for "100% Renewable" here. A few places were cheaper, but 100% WIND power and I want Wind/Solar/Hydro/whatever-magic-is-best. I live near a ton of coal plants--15 mile wide city with 13 coal plants IN IT--so I have some interest in clean air. I do accept wood, but we can't generate enough power via wood; even fast-growing pine (and let's face it, pine burns like awesome sauce) requires 1 acre of land to support my house, and I'm not an extremely huge user of electricity.
Now, for my $3/mo or $40/year investment, I pull away demand for roughly 6 tons of coal per year at $1200/year, instead supporting the clean energy industry with my $1200/year. That's a small price for a big impact--I don't mean "It's only 10% of your paycheck" or "It's half as much as your cell phone bill!" I mean I spend more in vending machine junk food 3 times over and have eliminated the cost by being more healthy.
If I move to an electric car... the Nissan Leaf gets 34kWh per 100 miles. It takes me, at 22mpg, about 4.5 gallons at $3.75/gal to drive 100 miles, or $16-ish. At 10 cents per kWh, that's $3.4, which is cheaper for me. Further my 400 miles per month shift my gasoline costs off oil refineries and onto clean energy. The Model S won't be in my price range for 4-5 years though; I won't have my car, mortgage (just bought a house with $3.5% down a few months ago!), and credit cards paid off for 3 years. :|
The best part is HOW they're paying it back. Around here I can get $600 off my taxes for installing high-efficiency heating systems and heat pumps. Trane advertises this strongly--and $600 cash back discount is bigger than $600 expense (psychology trick, people like free stuff, people like "good deals"), so a $1000 system becomes a $2000 system you get $600 for and spend $1400 on.
Yes but that's not constantly loading/unloading OS files or screaming around the Swap file. If it is, you need more RAM.
Given that the most read sectors probably contain parts of your OS and pagefile, and considering the size of a modern OS
If you're reading/writing to the pagefile more than just a very little, you're running the performance equivalent of a 200MHz Pentium 686. Not kidding. People seem to think swap is a thing that happens a lot; it isn't. You know how you have 16GB of RAM and you're like 1.2GB into swap somehow? That's 1.2GB of program initialization crap and other cruft that NEVER GETS TOUCHED and was paged out.
You know how you're only using 6GB of RAM, but somehow you have 1.2GB in swap? 10GB of that shit is pagecache so your OS doesn't have to re-read operating system files (among other shit) constantly. That stuff gets read at boot time.
Computers don't work by churning the hard disk a lot.
That's why you do a decision analysis.
Prior to this RH was, as everyone else, suing, dropping unfavorable, pursuing favorable. Rejecting their cases would be 'unfavorable' and the abuse would continue, with cases landing in lucky courtroom roulette generating cash, and cases settled before entering court generating cash too.
Now they lose. Now they go to hell.
Vaporware product could make vaporware profits.
But it's essentially blind if it's not crashing into things. It could at least employ visual imaging analysis if it has a camera. What are we going to do? Deploy UAV dragonflies that buzz around peoples' heads, but are mainly inoffensive? What the hell is the use case for something like this that's neither invisible nor able to avoid obstacles?
No, these cases should be heard. They should be heard, lost, have legal fees shoved back on them, and marked as a warning to others.
When a judge dismisses a case, it can be refiled elsewhere. When it's dismissed with prejudice, someone else can raise the same sort of suit. When YOU FUCKING LOSE, the next guy will face a defense lawyer who says "oh, but in Dickhead vs. BK Joe, Dickhead was found to be a moron" and THAT GUY FUCKING LOSES TOO.
Current approaches bounce radio, sound, and light off obstructions, using radar/sonar/laser mapping. This new approach bounces the physical object off obstructions, for the purpose of...? Being more easily detected? Making even more noise? Causing itself and everything around it more damage?
As my body metabolizes, it will react carbohydrates and potentially lipids with oxygen in my cells, producing biproducts of heat, water, and CO2. The CO2 levels in my bloodstream will increase as oxygen bound to hemoglobin in the blood is exchanged off for CO2 in the cells. Eventually CO2 concentrations in the cells will increase, which is irritating and will cause a strong desire to respire and remove the CO2 from the blood and exchange it with oxygen in the atmosphere.
I would probably respire less in an atmosphere without CO2 due to the reduced partial pressure of CO2 in the atmosphere, allowing for more rapid exchange of CO2 for O2 and thus keeping blood levels of O2 high and CO2 low more efficiently. There's not much CO2 in the atmosphere to begin with, so the effect may be minimal. Likely any deviation will be overshadowed by natural variation in my base respiration rate.
Constant pedaling is less stressful on the body, but it takes some training to be able to just spin. When the load goes down you just idle; climb a hill and you pedal harder.
Breathing is only necessary to remove excess CO2 from the body and introduce new oxygen.
Motorcycles are more efficient than cars up to 2-3 people total, depending on the motorcycle. 30mpg cars only seem to get 22-24 (I've made mine get 37mpg by fancy driving, but it gets 22 combined city/highway plenty), and they lose mileage as they age, and replacing them is more energy-intensive than the excess fuel use. Motorcycles at the 250cc range get between 50-70mpg. Cars with passengers quickly start to burn excess fuel--my car weighs 2800 pounds and the average 150-250lb person adds 5%-10% weight!
Honestly the most efficient way of traveling is to use a combined approach. Bicycle/ebike or even Zboard for short trips to the light rail--bicycle can haul groceries; motorcycle and motorscooter for puttering around the city on long trips (160mpg on a scooter?!); 2 motorcycles or 2+ in the car. You can take the bike/ebike out further--based on fitness, enjoyment, time constraints (I was doing a 7-9 mile trip to work in 5 minutes longer than driving the car, so I biked it), tolerance for weather conditions, etc. Similarly, drive the car more based on constraints.
It's funny because you can personally cut out 80% of your travel costs by skillful use of multiple transit methods including public transit, bicycles, ebikes, and even motorcycles.
I want a CVT manual with one continuous slider including reverse!
People get arrested, thrown through mock trials, and have their lives destroyed for being politically unfavorable. The police are a mob.
Then: "You don't know what a police state is, don't bitch. You live in a wonderful utopia."
Okay shithead, just because you live under Putin's KGB, that doesn't mean the "less bad" isn't still a terrible hell.
Are you saying we should execute the Government?
You have terrible taste.
You can't prove a negitive.
I can prove that Martha Stewart doesn't have a penis.
I'm not sure democracy is universally "good". Political ideals are an infectious disease. Communism, fascism, and finally democracy--only the latest--have always spread by force of the great liberating the proletariat from the oppressions of tyranny.
I've made the observation several times that what America needs in these trying times is possibly a King, some form of powerful monarch who can actually fix things. Unfortunately that ship has sailed: when we fought with sticks and swords, global warfare was impossible and instability demanded uncompromising focus on restoring stability within. Now a powerful monarch has the great option to ignore internal stability, as it is pathetically unimportant to the external threat--you need a stable nation when you fight with pikes and axes, but when you fight with fighter jets and nuclear cruise missiles you only need a powerful military.
In an age passed, with similar conditions, America might best find its way out of its current political, economic, and social strife by a powerful monarch. Naturally, when said monarch outlived his urgency, he would have to provide great benefit to the people and great benevolence or else face an angry populous whose greatest threat was the monarch himself. When the monarch is less of an evil than the situation he is effectively stabilizing, he will be tolerated. Thus, when no longer useful, the monarch is replaced with a democratic system.
What we see now is the failure of the democratic system, and the lack of options for a context-correct system to replace it with. A strong monarchy would be ill-suited to a world where the external threats are addressable without concern for the well-being of the greater populous. It would be the correct stabilization system where the greater populous desperately needs stabilization for the nation to survive external threats, and thus to where the monarch's greatest pressure is to serve or to be threatened from all fronts both foreign and domestic.
What recourse have we? Strong socialism is a failure--it is as wrong as a strong monarch in our situation for the same reasons, albeit it is great and wonderful for small and unstable colonies of only a handful. Feudalism is best suited where resources are available but where capitalism cannot subsist, where the populous is too large and too disparate for socialism.
None of these options are very good. Not even Democracy, which has been made a show of disparate factions and ignorant masses incapable of self-governance and only operating under the illusion of choice and freedom.
The problem is none of you have considered that the asteroid is also gravitationally attracted to the earth!!!!
I've always found PC gaming to be a terrible deal. But console FPS games are also ridiculous because the control scheme is wonky (forward/backward/strafe on one stick, turn/aim on another? it should be walk/turn and strafe/aim!)
There are no flaws in my logic.
The last time I had this argument, it came down to the other guy in the debate finally breaking down under the stress and iterating that, yes, your so-called "Inalienable," "Natural," "God-Given," whatever "Rights" can be--he wouldn't say "taken away"--"Infringed" (like patents I guess) by evil dictators, by people with big guns, big fists, armies, etc. He continued to claim that they were a real, absolute, physical thing that always exists not because it's an ideal of philosophers, but because rights simply exist, as a fact, as an integral part of being. Then: he pointed me at political philosophers like Franklin and Locke.
That's a religious stance. "It exists because it is the beginning and the end." The realist understands that when you live in a dictatorship where secret police come into your house and murder you, you don't have "rights" that are being "infringed upon"; you have "a body of people that hasn't risen up and killed all these assholes, then put in the next set with the understanding that certain privileges will be conveyed or there will be guillotines."
Rights don't simply exist, beaten and trampled until the arms of Liberty pull them from the mud; they are brought into existence by sweat, blood, fists and steel. If you let your government misbehave, your rights aren't being "infringed"; they have been "eliminated". That people are convinced somehow these magical properties are something real has taught them that sheep and cattle will continue to be treated as gods... except one day we will move the cattle out of India and they will mindlessly follow.
Well good. Finally some sanity.