Why is that the first thing you think of? This is a geek site, you're supposed to be thinking that one more "d" and they'd have to pay royalties to the Paramount.
What are you talking about? Bicycle carbon-carbon is the scraps from the aerospace industry. It wouldn't be possible to have carbon fiber bicycle parts without the aerospace industry driving down the cost. In fact, there's a pretty good chance that your carbon fiber frame parts were made by Boeing....
The disturbing thing about that historical ratio wasn't how small it was, but how large. By all rights, people who don't have any rights, and especially who aren't permitted to vote shouldn't have been counted at all when determining relative representation in congress.
States shouldn't have been encouraged to create non-voting populations.
I don't know about coca cola, or the specific brand of cigarette, but cigarettes in general are a crutch for body puppets who can't think of something to do with their hands.
Yeah, the phone company sends a bill, and if you pay it in full you've satisfied your obligation. The government doesn't sent a bill, but you're supposed to figure it out all on your own, and if you make any mistakes, you might be liable for far more than your mistake was worth.
Government already has a mondo conflict of interest: writing the tax laws and collecting the taxes...
The tax code is longer than I could *read* in my lifetime, a step which is necessary but not sufficient for picking out the pieces of the code that apply to me. Then there's actually figuring out how to apply those pieces, which could take another lifetime of effort...every year.
It might be my responsibility, but it's impossible to be sure of compliance, which is an immoral state of affairs for a government to put its citizens in.
Testable yes. Fixable....not by the scientists it isn't.
They're not just presenting a theory. They're presenting a course of action which will result in worldwide suffering and decreased standard of living, because they're asking us to "make due with less energy."
Not just carbon-spewing energy either, or the focus on shutting things down would be coal before oil before natural gas, and on bring things online like nuclear, geothermal, and hydroelectric power, as well as increased grid capacity because we'd be using electricity for ever increasing percentages of things.
But that's not what we're being asked to do. We're being asked to replace all of our lights with mercury-filled, uv-leaking arc-lamps, even in places where they really aren't better than conventional incandescents. We're being asked to take shorter showers, and they better not be hot showers. And a whole host of other retail-level measures that will save maybe one plant in aggregate.
We're being asked to switch to lower yield farming techniques. And to mingle our food supply with our transportation fuel supply.
And we're being asked this by people who can't find parking for their private jets that they flew to the conference in. And we're being asked this because if we only just don't enjoy life, we'll save enough energy to be able to skip putting in a nuclear power plant or wind farm near a rich person's view of the nantucket shoals.
If the proponents believed in the problem (and I'm not saying there isn't one, only that the proponents are doing a terrible job of communicating it. It's almost as if they want to shed doubt....) then they would be working to replace current levels of energy use with cleaner sources, not proselytizing the ascetic lifestyle that is every Calvinist's wet dream.
And after we go down that road, suppose the evidence suggests we didn't need to. What will we do about the people who wasted time doing things the eco way that they could have spent doing things they enjoy? What about the people who will have to use the 3kW medical machine that replaced the 5kW model that only worked 10% more effectively? What about the people who simply can't get food because there isn't enough energy somewhere in the chain to deliver it to them? Or the coastal nation that must weather severe drought because they are prevented from building (energy intensive) desalination plants?
How will the scientists fix "monkeying with the economy" if they turn out to have made grave errors in the calculation? It isn't a matter of publishing some errata and having work for another dozen grad students to write papers about. There are real lives that will be affected if we base policy on this, so they better the f put some effort into keeping mistakes out of policy recommendations.
Not really. It makes green phosphor look like laggy shareware. Somthing with no effort spent on beautifying the interface and even less effort spent on cheating enough to make it visually smooth.
It made me think, "that's a really cool idea. If I had to do that kind of visualization (large dataset over two independent variables), I'd definitely be interested in something like that. But done well, instead."
Probably a good idea not to give them access to your credit card, either. They're a pretend bank, and much like a child's pretend grocery store, you don't want to do actual business with it.
Even if you had been a pornographer, it'd still have been wrong of them to just freeze your account. Pornography is a legitimate business in the United States.
On a more serious note, not to diminish the gravity of your classism, why the F are they taking your SSN? They're not employing you, or paying into the social security system on your behalf so they shouldn't need that number. Too many people get away with taking that number and correlating it to things which only serves to make it too precious to ever mention.
The real question is why the other banks don't step up and stop doing business with them. I mean, they come right out and say "we'll run your credit card so you can do business with shady characters who can't meet the requirements to get a merchant account."
I mean, I suppose they like them because they screw up the charge dispute process, but they also are skimming off business who could be getting real merchant accounts.
The description in the summary is really only *half* a heat engine. It turns electricity into work, yah, but it also turns work (in the form of electricity) into temperature difference.
What it does not do is turn a temperature difference into work, which is the other half of the equation. A heat engine must do at least one of the two, and it has been proved that the maximum efficiency occurs for reversible processes, so many heat engines are capable of both.
The people that tend to get all vitriolic about the Osprey are generally the people who don't like any spending on military hardware ever. There tend to be a lot of tin-foil hats (where to they even find it. All I can find is lousy aluminum foil..) and eisenhower quotes. Actually, just one eisenhower quote, but repeated, a lot.
Hunches are just what you call it when the evidence was gathered illegally. "Police Psychics" are similar evidence launderers. Either that or they're straight up scammers. Frankly, I'm not sure which is worse.
No, what google should do is charge them to be included in the listing. They don't have to be mean about it either. If it's behind a pay wall, then they just don't spider it unless the owner specifically requests to be added, which, for a fee, is always possible.
The question of just who is trying to eat who's lunch would be solved pretty quickly I should think.
They don't charge to pay for the ink. They charge to establish the value of the eyes. "Free" papers are valued less by advertisers because the think the readers aren't invested enough in the product to read it as much as "paid for" papers.
This "free/paid-for" model absolutely extends to web operations.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is that the first thing you think of? This is a geek site, you're supposed to be thinking that one more "d" and they'd have to pay royalties to the Paramount.
What are you talking about? Bicycle carbon-carbon is the scraps from the aerospace industry. It wouldn't be possible to have carbon fiber bicycle parts without the aerospace industry driving down the cost. In fact, there's a pretty good chance that your carbon fiber frame parts were made by Boeing....
The disturbing thing about that historical ratio wasn't how small it was, but how large. By all rights, people who don't have any rights, and especially who aren't permitted to vote shouldn't have been counted at all when determining relative representation in congress.
States shouldn't have been encouraged to create non-voting populations.
Will you shut up. It's getting so that for environmental reasons, you can't build any kind of power plant except coal...
Would you say that Apple's employees are worried about their Jobs?
I don't know about coca cola, or the specific brand of cigarette, but cigarettes in general are a crutch for body puppets who can't think of something to do with their hands.
Yeah, the phone company sends a bill, and if you pay it in full you've satisfied your obligation. The government doesn't sent a bill, but you're supposed to figure it out all on your own, and if you make any mistakes, you might be liable for far more than your mistake was worth.
Government already has a mondo conflict of interest: writing the tax laws and collecting the taxes...
The tax code is longer than I could *read* in my lifetime, a step which is necessary but not sufficient for picking out the pieces of the code that apply to me. Then there's actually figuring out how to apply those pieces, which could take another lifetime of effort...every year.
It might be my responsibility, but it's impossible to be sure of compliance, which is an immoral state of affairs for a government to put its citizens in.
Dog is my co-pilot.
He's there to bite you if you try to touch the controls?
Society as a hole is a good metaphor, though. Or simile.
Oooh, cherry picking? I love that sport. Let me zoom in a little for you. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.C.lrg.gif
Testable yes. Fixable....not by the scientists it isn't.
They're not just presenting a theory. They're presenting a course of action which will result in worldwide suffering and decreased standard of living, because they're asking us to "make due with less energy."
Not just carbon-spewing energy either, or the focus on shutting things down would be coal before oil before natural gas, and on bring things online like nuclear, geothermal, and hydroelectric power, as well as increased grid capacity because we'd be using electricity for ever increasing percentages of things.
But that's not what we're being asked to do. We're being asked to replace all of our lights with mercury-filled, uv-leaking arc-lamps, even in places where they really aren't better than conventional incandescents. We're being asked to take shorter showers, and they better not be hot showers. And a whole host of other retail-level measures that will save maybe one plant in aggregate.
We're being asked to switch to lower yield farming techniques. And to mingle our food supply with our transportation fuel supply.
And we're being asked this by people who can't find parking for their private jets that they flew to the conference in. And we're being asked this because if we only just don't enjoy life, we'll save enough energy to be able to skip putting in a nuclear power plant or wind farm near a rich person's view of the nantucket shoals.
If the proponents believed in the problem (and I'm not saying there isn't one, only that the proponents are doing a terrible job of communicating it. It's almost as if they want to shed doubt....) then they would be working to replace current levels of energy use with cleaner sources, not proselytizing the ascetic lifestyle that is every Calvinist's wet dream.
And after we go down that road, suppose the evidence suggests we didn't need to. What will we do about the people who wasted time doing things the eco way that they could have spent doing things they enjoy? What about the people who will have to use the 3kW medical machine that replaced the 5kW model that only worked 10% more effectively? What about the people who simply can't get food because there isn't enough energy somewhere in the chain to deliver it to them? Or the coastal nation that must weather severe drought because they are prevented from building (energy intensive) desalination plants?
How will the scientists fix "monkeying with the economy" if they turn out to have made grave errors in the calculation? It isn't a matter of publishing some errata and having work for another dozen grad students to write papers about. There are real lives that will be affected if we base policy on this, so they better the f put some effort into keeping mistakes out of policy recommendations.
Not really. It makes green phosphor look like laggy shareware. Somthing with no effort spent on beautifying the interface and even less effort spent on cheating enough to make it visually smooth.
It made me think, "that's a really cool idea. If I had to do that kind of visualization (large dataset over two independent variables), I'd definitely be interested in something like that. But done well, instead."
Probably a good idea not to give them access to your credit card, either. They're a pretend bank, and much like a child's pretend grocery store, you don't want to do actual business with it.
Even if you had been a pornographer, it'd still have been wrong of them to just freeze your account. Pornography is a legitimate business in the United States.
On a more serious note, not to diminish the gravity of your classism, why the F are they taking your SSN? They're not employing you, or paying into the social security system on your behalf so they shouldn't need that number. Too many people get away with taking that number and correlating it to things which only serves to make it too precious to ever mention.
The real question is why the other banks don't step up and stop doing business with them. I mean, they come right out and say "we'll run your credit card so you can do business with shady characters who can't meet the requirements to get a merchant account."
I mean, I suppose they like them because they screw up the charge dispute process, but they also are skimming off business who could be getting real merchant accounts.
What if everyone who approaches a problem doesn't arrive at a solution, and instead just uses the already known solution?
Why didn't you just turn the phone off?
Actually most of the rocket science was settled over a century ago. Most of what we've seen from NASA is rocket engineering.
The description in the summary is really only *half* a heat engine. It turns electricity into work, yah, but it also turns work (in the form of electricity) into temperature difference.
What it does not do is turn a temperature difference into work, which is the other half of the equation. A heat engine must do at least one of the two, and it has been proved that the maximum efficiency occurs for reversible processes, so many heat engines are capable of both.
The people that tend to get all vitriolic about the Osprey are generally the people who don't like any spending on military hardware ever. There tend to be a lot of tin-foil hats (where to they even find it. All I can find is lousy aluminum foil..) and eisenhower quotes. Actually, just one eisenhower quote, but repeated, a lot.
Hunches are just what you call it when the evidence was gathered illegally. "Police Psychics" are similar evidence launderers. Either that or they're straight up scammers. Frankly, I'm not sure which is worse.
No, what google should do is charge them to be included in the listing. They don't have to be mean about it either. If it's behind a pay wall, then they just don't spider it unless the owner specifically requests to be added, which, for a fee, is always possible.
The question of just who is trying to eat who's lunch would be solved pretty quickly I should think.
The SSL vulnerability is somewhat disturbing. Read the date on the linked article.
They don't charge to pay for the ink. They charge to establish the value of the eyes. "Free" papers are valued less by advertisers because the think the readers aren't invested enough in the product to read it as much as "paid for" papers.
This "free/paid-for" model absolutely extends to web operations.