Your problem is that you have to convince people that nuclear accidents won't happen again. This is a tough argument to make because nobody is going to believe what a govt or a corporation says especially when it is phrased as "trust us, this time we got it right".
Other factors??
Coal power plants are cheaper and faster to build. They pollute more but nobody cares about that because polluting doesn't cost money to the company selling the power.
Nuclear power plants make ideal terrorist targets.
Nuclear power plants have to be built on prime waterfront property. That property is either owned by rich and powerful people or the state. If you take away state property you are going to piss off hunters and fishermen and farmers who will not want to water their crops or animals with that water.
Nuclear power plants can not be built on geologically unstable areas.
You have to shove the waste down somebodies throat. Nobody wants it in their back yard so you have to force people to live near radioactive waste. This pisses off conservatives and libertarians and also opens up the govt to takings lawsuits as peoples property values hit rock bottom.
It also pisses off environmentalists but in a republican controlled white house, congress and supreme court that's not such a big deal.
"Here's a bit of trivia. Because we don't use nuclear power (which upsets its detractors), a large portion of the US power is provided by coal (we don't build so many plants). Burning coal puts more uranium into the atmosphere than nuclear power does. So, instead of storing uranium safely, we blast it into the atmosphere."
The real problem with nuclear power is that it's cheaper, faster and easier to build coal power plants. Sure coal pollutes more and generates CO2 but the only people that have to pay for that are your grandchildren. Pollution and CO2 are officially somebody elses problem.
Corporations and governments are faced with two choices. Choice 1 is to spend a buttload of money and take 15 years to build a nuke or spend 100 times less money and build a coal plant in half the time. The choice is a no brainer.
Until somebody is charged for polluting and generating CO2 the cost benefit analysis won't change.
Too much comittee thinking on both of those. They tried to solve a problem that so few people had. They listened to the corporate CxOs instead the developers and got J2EE. This is a good lesson for all.
I think they should have renamed EJB3 to something else, it is going to suffer from it's name being associated with the madness that was EJB.
When you think about it.Mac is a pretty good alternative to exchange. You get shared disk space, shared calendering, email, and other groupware features. I think it would be worth it for some companies who do not want the hassle and expense of maintaining an exchange server.
People who own stock in MS and Sun for one. There are also many many companies such as SAP, Oracle etc who see a tremendous threat from the open source ecosystem.
"Quite a few of these drive heavier vehicles. I suppose it makes them feel safer, being in a heavier vehicle (which they probably are)."
They probably are safer in their huge SUV. Too bad they are not thinking about the people they will murder though. If they were driving a lighter car which would more effectively crumple and absorb impact the people in the other could maybe survive.
I guess it re-inforces the stereotype of the SUV driver as the guy who doesn't give a shit about anybody else except themselves. Don't care about the environment, don't care about foreign oil dependency, don't care about the survival of the other guys in the crash.
You know what amazes me? What amazes me is that the Judge in this case has never even once asked "can you show me any evidence that you actually own any of this intellectual property". You would think that would be the first thing to get settled no?
Both Sun and MS paid for licenses which pumped them up with tens of millions in cash. Then MS acted as a middlemen to funnel cash in from the canadian banking interest. Those guys got royally shafted on the stock price but they probably had some short interest to try and hedge that. I bet they never listen to MS again though.
Recently some current bagholders came up with some more money to try and continue the lawsuit.
Don't worry, there are lots of really rich and powerful people who benefit from the FUD generated by this lawsuit so SCO will not ever run out of money. Bill G himself will fund it if he has to.
"Choice is a fundamental doctrine of Christianity. That's why you see Christian conservative's wanting lower taxes, then donating to churches and charitys. Charitys are much more efficient with donations than the government will ever be; churches are even more so."
If that was true then during the years of no taxation there would be no poor in America. Alas the churches were not doing enough and a govt socialism had to be put in place.
This line of bullshit is routinely spewed by people who want their taxes cut but there is no correlation between tax cuts and increased giving to the poor. Even in church dominated cultures like Utah there are homeless people and indigent. You would think that if everybody in Utah who called themselves a christian actually acted like a christian and gave 10% of their salary to the poor then poverty would not exist in Utah.
"yet he didn't force the young rich man to give all he had to the poor and come follow him. "
Err are we reading the same bible? Jesus said it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. Jesus will condemn the rich to burn in hell forever. He specifically and repeatedly said similar things.
Yes, he not only ran up huge deficits but he also grew the size of the govt significantly. I believe in smaller government. Of course I didn't know what he was going to do before he was elected I didn't vote for him because he was such an obvious chauncy gardner idiot.
"What about municipal, county, and state elections? "
I have voted for republicans in some of those election but we are not talking about that.
"Our war-related expenditures account for a large amount of our current deficit."
go check the figures, the total cost of the war is only 200 billion or so.
"Iraq was not Socialist by a long shot."
Yes it was.
"I also have a hard time calling a government that persecutes members of certain religious sects secular. "
Saddam due to his hatred of religious fundamentalists kept the shia under check. The shia were/are being controlled/influenced by the fundamentalists govt in Iran. This is why saddam was such a valuable tool for us. He was so hated by the muslim fundamentalists that Osama routinely insulted him by calling him a "communist" which to a fundamentalist means atheist, socialist who believes in a secular govt.
"Then again, I have a hard time seeing Democrats as being more fiscally conservative than Republicans."
Just check the figures yourself. Under democratic white houses deficits have gone down, the dollar strenghtened, the govt shrank. Under republican white houses the opposite. You don't have to believe me, just check the numbers yourself.
"Our GDP is increasing rapidly, the stock market has been doing quite well, and unemployment is very low. Aren't these normally signals our economy is diong well?"
No they are not. You need to take a look at what the economy was doing under clinton in terms of GDP growth, employment, deficits, etc. Then you need to take the trends established by those years and project them into this administration as where the numbers would have been if everything was being handled the same way. Then you need to compare the expected numbers with what the actual numbers are.
You seem to be kind of a person who goes on "gut feelings" or "beliefs" as opposed to actually examining the numbers themselves. You say "stock market is doing quite well" without saying where the market is in comparison to clinton or where the market was predicted to be given the growth of the clinton years now. Same with "unemployment is very low". What does that mean? Is it lower then clinton years, is it better then what other countries are experiencing? is it better then the reign on other presidents? How about the dollar? How about the deficit? Don't those count? How about the trade imbalances? Health care coverages, life expentency, and all those other economic factors.
Pyton does though and so does ruby (kinda!). I honestly don't know why anybody would prefer to use java or c# unless they were forced to by their boss. Overly verbose bondage languages suck. Programming with C# or java is like beating yourself with a whip while trying to dance the tango.
"Though I do have a hard time believing there was not one fiscally responsible Republican you had an opportunity to vote for the in the past 30 years."
For president, yes. Not one.
"Additionally, bearing in mind that most of our current spending can be accounted for in a foreign war,"
First of all that's bullshit. The war "only" costs 200 billion or so. Secondly the war itself was discretionary spending. There was no reason to invade iraq which was a secular socialist state which opposed religious fundamentalism.
"do not forget the amount of spending Democratic Presidents Kennedy and Johnson did on Vietnam."
Once again discretionary spending but in their case they kind of inherited the problem.
"Also, most economic indicators would also suggest we are doing better than we were at the end of Clinton's second term."
Yea right, and Iraq is going to join OPEC any day now. Thanks for the laugh though.
Your comment would make a lot of sense if a crack squad of firefox goons broke into your house, put a gun to your head and made you install this plug in. Since there is no such thing your comment is pretty much a non sequitor.
Err, I voted for Ford. I haven't voted for a republican since then mainly because the republicans haven't ran anybody who had brains or morals since then. I might have voted for Dole, I probably would have voted for McCain.
The trouble is that I vote mainly for fiscally responsible candidates and in recent history democrats have managed the economy better then republicans. Take a look for yourself and you will see. Republicans tend to run up debt like it's going out of style, I don't run my house that way and I don't want my country run like that either. They also tend to grow the govt. Under democrats the size of the govt shrinks, under republicans it grows. Hard to believe but it's true. Look it up for yourself.
"but I am not willing to trade on moral issues. (By the way, you forgot abortion.) "
Bingo! Yes I did indeed forget about abortion. Of course it goes without saying that a state full of religious fundamentalists would vote on abortion.
"Your second paragraph just makes you sound crazy and/or angry. I have never heard the term "demoncrat". I've also never heard of "hitlery"."
reall? I don't believe you. I don't believe that you actually live in Utah and have never heard anybody refer to hillary clinton as "hitlery" or democrats as "demoncrats"
"Where are you sending this commentary from? "
Montana, just down the road from you. We are right behind you in our reflexive hatred of democrats.
"As a side note, I think Jesus has the political clout to make it as an independant. "
Jesus would run as a democrat. The sermon on the mount is the most important socialist document in history. If jesus ran in Utah he would lose in a landslide.
"And finally, I would like to agree with you. Everyone should visit Utah and see for themselves. We could use the tourism money."
Yes, they would visit, see the kind of kooks that live there, and make sure they never attend or host a convention there. It's all good.
But you don't live in Utah. People who do live in Utah don't care about this stuff. All they know is that if they elect a democrat the homosexuals will be marrying all over the place and their family values will be eroded and the UN will control the US and their kids will not be able to pray in school.
Those are only the issues they really care about. And let's be honest here, if Jesus ran as a democrat (or a demoncrat as they are called over there) and satan ran as a republican in Utah satan would win in a landslide. It's just in their makeup for utans to vote for a democrat no matter who is running. Hell they are gearing up to defeat hillary (or hitlery as they refer to her down there)
You think I am kidding but I am not. Visit Utah one day and you will see.
You know I really like python and prefer it to Ruby in many many ways but I still end up using Ruby. This is due to the community of the language rather then the language itself. It seems like the Ruby community learned the right lessons from perl and build GEM. Gem alone is reason to prefer ruby over python and the RAA and rubyforge are just icing on the cake. The python community is just now trying to build something like CPAN or GEM and they still haven't gotten it right. I don't know why this is and I sorely wish it was different but for some reason the people who have advocated "the one true way" over "there is more then one way to do it" completely neglected a centralized, searchable, automatically updateable library for python. Pity because python was just made for such a thing.
Now that rails has become a juggernaut ruby is even a stronger player. It's funny how the ruby community seems to very quickly settle on "the one true thing" and pour their efforts into that while the python community suffers from having dozens of equally popular (and meritorious) frameworks to choose from.
What kills minority parties is a lack of a parlimentary body combined with a winner take all system. In the US you can get one more vote then the next guy and then fuck everybody who didn't vote for you without harm. As the grandparent stated due to gerrymandering for the vast majority of the US population there is no sense in even voting for the house of reps, over 90% of the districts are strictly one party affairs.
It's funny how we preach democracy while working so hard to deny people choices and quash minority representation.
Holy Crap. And I thought compiling a new kernel was too much of a hassle.
Honestly, I just bought my parents a new PC with windows XP. I could not believe how utterly confused they were with it. Within hours of using it popped up a message about a vulnaribility and when they clicked on it the browser opened up a MS site explaining the JPEG security hole. Now both of my parents are over 65 and they had no fucking idea what any of this gibberish on the computer was so they called me. I walked them through the process and they called me a hour later because the anti virus popped up while they were cruising the web and told them they were infected. So of course they called me again.
I should have bought them a freaking piano or something, buying new users a windows machine is the biggest mistake anybody can ever make. Next time a Mac, for the next few years though I can expect a tech support call every fucking day.
Interesting. So you are saying it's OK to torture people as long as you lable them "terrorists mass murderer" first. I think China is doing pretty much the same thing no? I mean aren't they labling the people they torture "terrorists mass murderers" too? Like the US. I don't think they are using a trial process to get to a guilty verdict either. They simply call somebody a terrorists and then carry them off to some secret prison to be tortured. Just like the US.
Slashdot Mirror
Your problem is that you have to convince people that nuclear accidents won't happen again. This is a tough argument to make because nobody is going to believe what a govt or a corporation says especially when it is phrased as "trust us, this time we got it right".
Other factors??
Coal power plants are cheaper and faster to build. They pollute more but nobody cares about that because polluting doesn't cost money to the company selling the power.
Nuclear power plants make ideal terrorist targets.
Nuclear power plants have to be built on prime waterfront property. That property is either owned by rich and powerful people or the state. If you take away state property you are going to piss off hunters and fishermen and farmers who will not want to water their crops or animals with that water.
Nuclear power plants can not be built on geologically unstable areas.
You have to shove the waste down somebodies throat. Nobody wants it in their back yard so you have to force people to live near radioactive waste. This pisses off conservatives and libertarians and also opens up the govt to takings lawsuits as peoples property values hit rock bottom.
It also pisses off environmentalists but in a republican controlled white house, congress and supreme court that's not such a big deal.
"Here's a bit of trivia. Because we don't use nuclear power (which upsets its detractors), a large portion of the US power is provided by coal (we don't build so many plants). Burning coal puts more uranium into the atmosphere than nuclear power does. So, instead of storing uranium safely, we blast it into the atmosphere."
The real problem with nuclear power is that it's cheaper, faster and easier to build coal power plants. Sure coal pollutes more and generates CO2 but the only people that have to pay for that are your grandchildren. Pollution and CO2 are officially somebody elses problem.
Corporations and governments are faced with two choices. Choice 1 is to spend a buttload of money and take 15 years to build a nuke or spend 100 times less money and build a coal plant in half the time. The choice is a no brainer.
Until somebody is charged for polluting and generating CO2 the cost benefit analysis won't change.
Too much comittee thinking on both of those. They tried to solve a problem that so few people had. They listened to the corporate CxOs instead the developers and got J2EE. This is a good lesson for all.
I think they should have renamed EJB3 to something else, it is going to suffer from it's name being associated with the madness that was EJB.
When you think about it .Mac is a pretty good alternative to exchange. You get shared disk space, shared calendering, email, and other groupware features. I think it would be worth it for some companies who do not want the hassle and expense of maintaining an exchange server.
People who own stock in MS and Sun for one. There are also many many companies such as SAP, Oracle etc who see a tremendous threat from the open source ecosystem.
"Quite a few of these drive heavier vehicles. I suppose it makes them feel safer, being in a heavier vehicle (which they probably are)."
They probably are safer in their huge SUV. Too bad they are not thinking about the people they will murder though. If they were driving a lighter car which would more effectively crumple and absorb impact the people in the other could maybe survive.
I guess it re-inforces the stereotype of the SUV driver as the guy who doesn't give a shit about anybody else except themselves. Don't care about the environment, don't care about foreign oil dependency, don't care about the survival of the other guys in the crash.
You know what amazes me? What amazes me is that the Judge in this case has never even once asked "can you show me any evidence that you actually own any of this intellectual property". You would think that would be the first thing to get settled no?
The American legal system is a joke.
Both Sun and MS paid for licenses which pumped them up with tens of millions in cash. Then MS acted as a middlemen to funnel cash in from the canadian banking interest. Those guys got royally shafted on the stock price but they probably had some short interest to try and hedge that. I bet they never listen to MS again though.
Recently some current bagholders came up with some more money to try and continue the lawsuit.
Don't worry, there are lots of really rich and powerful people who benefit from the FUD generated by this lawsuit so SCO will not ever run out of money. Bill G himself will fund it if he has to.
"Choice is a fundamental doctrine of Christianity. That's why you see Christian conservative's wanting lower taxes, then donating to churches and charitys. Charitys are much more efficient with donations than the government will ever be; churches are even more so."
If that was true then during the years of no taxation there would be no poor in America. Alas the churches were not doing enough and a govt socialism had to be put in place.
This line of bullshit is routinely spewed by people who want their taxes cut but there is no correlation between tax cuts and increased giving to the poor. Even in church dominated cultures like Utah there are homeless people and indigent. You would think that if everybody in Utah who called themselves a christian actually acted like a christian and gave 10% of their salary to the poor then poverty would not exist in Utah.
"yet he didn't force the young rich man to give all he had to the poor and come follow him. "
Err are we reading the same bible? Jesus said it is harder for a rich man to get into heaven then for a camel to go through the eye of a needle. Jesus will condemn the rich to burn in hell forever. He specifically and repeatedly said similar things.
"So Reagan was not fiscally conservative? "
Yes, he not only ran up huge deficits but he also grew the size of the govt significantly. I believe in smaller government. Of course I didn't know what he was going to do before he was elected I didn't vote for him because he was such an obvious chauncy gardner idiot.
"What about municipal, county, and state elections? "
I have voted for republicans in some of those election but we are not talking about that.
"Our war-related expenditures account for a large amount of our current deficit."
go check the figures, the total cost of the war is only 200 billion or so.
"Iraq was not Socialist by a long shot."
Yes it was.
"I also have a hard time calling a government that persecutes members of certain religious sects secular. "
Saddam due to his hatred of religious fundamentalists kept the shia under check. The shia were/are being controlled/influenced by the fundamentalists govt in Iran. This is why saddam was such a valuable tool for us. He was so hated by the muslim fundamentalists that Osama routinely insulted him by calling him a "communist" which to a fundamentalist means atheist, socialist who believes in a secular govt.
"Then again, I have a hard time seeing Democrats as being more fiscally conservative than Republicans."
Just check the figures yourself. Under democratic white houses deficits have gone down, the dollar strenghtened, the govt shrank. Under republican white houses the opposite. You don't have to believe me, just check the numbers yourself.
"Our GDP is increasing rapidly, the stock market has been doing quite well, and unemployment is very low. Aren't these normally signals our economy is diong well?"
No they are not. You need to take a look at what the economy was doing under clinton in terms of GDP growth, employment, deficits, etc. Then you need to take the trends established by those years and project them into this administration as where the numbers would have been if everything was being handled the same way. Then you need to compare the expected numbers with what the actual numbers are.
You seem to be kind of a person who goes on "gut feelings" or "beliefs" as opposed to actually examining the numbers themselves. You say "stock market is doing quite well" without saying where the market is in comparison to clinton or where the market was predicted to be given the growth of the clinton years now. Same with "unemployment is very low". What does that mean? Is it lower then clinton years, is it better then what other countries are experiencing? is it better then the reign on other presidents? How about the dollar? How about the deficit? Don't those count? How about the trade imbalances? Health care coverages, life expentency, and all those other economic factors.
It really sounds like you need to read up a lot.
Err c# does not have multiple inheritance either.
Pyton does though and so does ruby (kinda!). I honestly don't know why anybody would prefer to use java or c# unless they were forced to by their boss. Overly verbose bondage languages suck. Programming with C# or java is like beating yourself with a whip while trying to dance the tango.
"Though I do have a hard time believing there was not one fiscally responsible Republican you had an opportunity to vote for the in the past 30 years."
For president, yes. Not one.
"Additionally, bearing in mind that most of our current spending can be accounted for in a foreign war,"
First of all that's bullshit. The war "only" costs 200 billion or so. Secondly the war itself was discretionary spending. There was no reason to invade iraq which was a secular socialist state which opposed religious fundamentalism.
"do not forget the amount of spending Democratic Presidents Kennedy and Johnson did on Vietnam."
Once again discretionary spending but in their case they kind of inherited the problem.
"Also, most economic indicators would also suggest we are doing better than we were at the end of Clinton's second term."
Yea right, and Iraq is going to join OPEC any day now. Thanks for the laugh though.
sound like ifolder.. Is there an idea MS hasn't ripped off yet?
Your comment would make a lot of sense if a crack squad of firefox goons broke into your house, put a gun to your head and made you install this plug in. Since there is no such thing your comment is pretty much a non sequitor.
Err, I voted for Ford. I haven't voted for a republican since then mainly because the republicans haven't ran anybody who had brains or morals since then. I might have voted for Dole, I probably would have voted for McCain.
The trouble is that I vote mainly for fiscally responsible candidates and in recent history democrats have managed the economy better then republicans. Take a look for yourself and you will see. Republicans tend to run up debt like it's going out of style, I don't run my house that way and I don't want my country run like that either. They also tend to grow the govt. Under democrats the size of the govt shrinks, under republicans it grows. Hard to believe but it's true. Look it up for yourself.
"but I am not willing to trade on moral issues. (By the way, you forgot abortion.) "
Bingo! Yes I did indeed forget about abortion. Of course it goes without saying that a state full of religious fundamentalists would vote on abortion.
"Your second paragraph just makes you sound crazy and/or angry. I have never heard the term "demoncrat". I've also never heard of "hitlery"."
reall? I don't believe you. I don't believe that you actually live in Utah and have never heard anybody refer to hillary clinton as "hitlery" or democrats as "demoncrats"
"Where are you sending this commentary from? "
Montana, just down the road from you. We are right behind you in our reflexive hatred of democrats.
"As a side note, I think Jesus has the political clout to make it as an independant. "
Jesus would run as a democrat. The sermon on the mount is the most important socialist document in history. If jesus ran in Utah he would lose in a landslide.
"And finally, I would like to agree with you. Everyone should visit Utah and see for themselves. We could use the tourism money."
Yes, they would visit, see the kind of kooks that live there, and make sure they never attend or host a convention there. It's all good.
But you don't live in Utah. People who do live in Utah don't care about this stuff. All they know is that if they elect a democrat the homosexuals will be marrying all over the place and their family values will be eroded and the UN will control the US and their kids will not be able to pray in school.
Those are only the issues they really care about. And let's be honest here, if Jesus ran as a democrat (or a demoncrat as they are called over there) and satan ran as a republican in Utah satan would win in a landslide. It's just in their makeup for utans to vote for a democrat no matter who is running. Hell they are gearing up to defeat hillary (or hitlery as they refer to her down there)
You think I am kidding but I am not. Visit Utah one day and you will see.
This is why I have always prefered the PHP optional if/endif while/endwhile blocks. I much prefer to see.
endif
endforeach
endif
then
}
}
}
You know I really like python and prefer it to Ruby in many many ways but I still end up using Ruby. This is due to the community of the language rather then the language itself. It seems like the Ruby community learned the right lessons from perl and build GEM. Gem alone is reason to prefer ruby over python and the RAA and rubyforge are just icing on the cake. The python community is just now trying to build something like CPAN or GEM and they still haven't gotten it right. I don't know why this is and I sorely wish it was different but for some reason the people who have advocated "the one true way" over "there is more then one way to do it" completely neglected a centralized, searchable, automatically updateable library for python. Pity because python was just made for such a thing.
Now that rails has become a juggernaut ruby is even a stronger player. It's funny how the ruby community seems to very quickly settle on "the one true thing" and pour their efforts into that while the python community suffers from having dozens of equally popular (and meritorious) frameworks to choose from.
What kills minority parties is a lack of a parlimentary body combined with a winner take all system. In the US you can get one more vote then the next guy and then fuck everybody who didn't vote for you without harm. As the grandparent stated due to gerrymandering for the vast majority of the US population there is no sense in even voting for the house of reps, over 90% of the districts are strictly one party affairs.
It's funny how we preach democracy while working so hard to deny people choices and quash minority representation.
Holy Crap. And I thought compiling a new kernel was too much of a hassle.
Honestly, I just bought my parents a new PC with windows XP. I could not believe how utterly confused they were with it. Within hours of using it popped up a message about a vulnaribility and when they clicked on it the browser opened up a MS site explaining the JPEG security hole. Now both of my parents are over 65 and they had no fucking idea what any of this gibberish on the computer was so they called me. I walked them through the process and they called me a hour later because the anti virus popped up while they were cruising the web and told them they were infected. So of course they called me again.
I should have bought them a freaking piano or something, buying new users a windows machine is the biggest mistake anybody can ever make. Next time a Mac, for the next few years though I can expect a tech support call every fucking day.
Here is what get from their home page.
//global.asa, line 72
Microsoft OLE DB Provider for SQL Server error '80040e31'
½Ã£ Á¦ÇÑÀÌ áǾú½ÀÏÙ.
WTF???
Interesting. So you are saying it's OK to torture people as long as you lable them "terrorists mass murderer" first. I think China is doing pretty much the same thing no? I mean aren't they labling the people they torture "terrorists mass murderers" too? Like the US. I don't think they are using a trial process to get to a guilty verdict either. They simply call somebody a terrorists and then carry them off to some secret prison to be tortured. Just like the US.
I guess I just don't see the difference there.
"And you can continue to believe whatever you like, that doesn't make it true, even when a WHOPPING THREE sources say it!"
Dude Bush went to war with less then three sources saying Saddam was going to nuke NY.
Really? You didn't get that option during the install? There is not an option in your administration menu? Cos there is in mine.