You know, planting the waste at the bottom of some mountain in the middle of Nevada sounds pretty well though out when compared to our current, pull-the-shit-out-of-the-ground-and-pump-it-into-t he-atmosphere solution.
I agree, microsoft is far from being in decline. Just because microsoft does things in a manner that the mac/linux elite disagrees with, doesn't mean that microsoft isn't, or shouldn't be making a ton of money.
As far as I understand, all or most of the sources of hydroelectric power in the United States have been tapped; there is a very limited amount of energy that can be harnessed from such schemes in comparison with our energy demands.
Personally, I believe we will continue the trend towards more centralized energy production, perhaps from nuclear methods--despite the political opposition. The energy demand and its growth are just too great.
While we should capitalize on practical renewable energy sources, I think our time and effort would be better spent on investing in technology that makes more efficient use of our energy. LED lighting is a prime example of a way to drastically reduce energy consumption, with little sacrafice in the quality of the desired output.
The real challenge though is managing the bottom line. New technologies not only have to be more energy efficient, but less expensive than their conventional counterparts to gain acceptance.
Wouldn't it be fun to be involved in that kind of development work?
The connection between global warming and carbon dioxide emissions is an anti-development boogie-man fabricated by elitist, self-righteous, unscientific, volvo-driving, mac-using, eco-nazis.
Please don't ever again say the words "wavelet technology," it sounds retarded--it might make someone want to introduce some "fist technology" to your "face technology."
I fail to see how increased military spending on research is harmful to our scientific base. DoD & DoE spending on military related technology has directly supported a great number of very capable American researchers. And let's face it, researchers with the resources they need to pursue their desires are the beating heart of our tech base.
IMHO, it has been the decline of research in the non-silicon commercial sector that has most rapidly depleted our tech base. I think this could very easily be correlated with our eroding manufacturing base.
It's not that I am working harder, it's not that I have more entertainment options, it's not that I like my friends more than I like TV, it's not that there are exceptionally annoying ads on TV; these are all true, but they just don't quite capture what's wrong.
What's wrong is that TV is just not the real world. It is a box that is constantly trying to get my attention with shock-value programming or advertising. The most precious thing I have is my attention span, and it seems like people are trying to scream harder, louder, and longer to get it, without offering anything worthwhile in return.
I am desensitized to everything that comes out of that box, and I have realized that it consistantly fails to satisfy me. So I am back to entertaining myself, and frankly, I do a better job than TV can.
Slashdot Mirror
You know, planting the waste at the bottom of some mountain in the middle of Nevada sounds pretty well though out when compared to our current, pull-the-shit-out-of-the-ground-and-pump-it-into-t he-atmosphere solution.
"Welcome to the club," said the engineers.
I agree, microsoft is far from being in decline. Just because microsoft does things in a manner that the mac/linux elite disagrees with, doesn't mean that microsoft isn't, or shouldn't be making a ton of money.
As far as I understand, all or most of the sources of hydroelectric power in the United States have been tapped; there is a very limited amount of energy that can be harnessed from such schemes in comparison with our energy demands.
Personally, I believe we will continue the trend towards more centralized energy production, perhaps from nuclear methods--despite the political opposition. The energy demand and its growth are just too great.
While we should capitalize on practical renewable energy sources, I think our time and effort would be better spent on investing in technology that makes more efficient use of our energy. LED lighting is a prime example of a way to drastically reduce energy consumption, with little sacrafice in the quality of the desired output.
The real challenge though is managing the bottom line. New technologies not only have to be more energy efficient, but less expensive than their conventional counterparts to gain acceptance.
Wouldn't it be fun to be involved in that kind of development work?
But how many excess votes went to Kerry?
Oh, didn't you get the memo from the recent meeting?
Everything mac is better than everything else...
and we should all drive hybrid cars...and, and global warming...
Honestly, how does this crap get posted?
The connection between global warming and carbon dioxide emissions is an anti-development boogie-man fabricated by elitist, self-righteous, unscientific, volvo-driving, mac-using, eco-nazis.
Remember the good old days when bloated liberal relics were above the law?
Please don't ever again say the words "wavelet technology," it sounds retarded--it might make someone want to introduce some "fist technology" to your "face technology."
I fail to see how increased military spending on research is harmful to our scientific base. DoD & DoE spending on military related technology has directly supported a great number of very capable American researchers. And let's face it, researchers with the resources they need to pursue their desires are the beating heart of our tech base.
IMHO, it has been the decline of research in the non-silicon commercial sector that has most rapidly depleted our tech base. I think this could very easily be correlated with our eroding manufacturing base.
It's not that I am working harder, it's not that I have more entertainment options, it's not that I like my friends more than I like TV, it's not that there are exceptionally annoying ads on TV; these are all true, but they just don't quite capture what's wrong.
What's wrong is that TV is just not the real world. It is a box that is constantly trying to get my attention with shock-value programming or advertising. The most precious thing I have is my attention span, and it seems like people are trying to scream harder, louder, and longer to get it, without offering anything worthwhile in return.
I am desensitized to everything that comes out of that box, and I have realized that it consistantly fails to satisfy me. So I am back to entertaining myself, and frankly, I do a better job than TV can.