I suppose it depends on if the labeling is forced, optional, or prohibited. Optional is the most free. Forced is sometimes appropriate for some dangerous products. I can't think of a good reason to prohibit informative labeling.
pushing human culture forward; fostering the next new thing; getting humans out of the stone age; ensuring that the next generation of humans knows more than the previous one. It's not about job training.
Fast breeders are much more dangerous than light water reactors. If a LWR goes supercritical, then the boiling of the water tends to separate the fuel enough to slow down the reaction. In a fast breeder reactor, you have to depend on thermal expansion to stop the reaction or else boom. The radiation released into the environment is potentially several orders of magnitude greater in a fast breeder accident.
Another possibility is fission-fusion hybrid, where fission is kept subcritical and fusion is used to generate the excess neutrons needed for destruction of nuclear wastes. The concept is a lot safer than a fast breeder reactor.
The presence of a viable alternative could change the market considerably. No longer will the vendor feel the need to accept credit cards. This would help break the stranglehold that the credit card companies have, and perhaps they will start competing by lowering their rates.
The essay isn't correct in suggesting that the ruling class is idle. The rich tend to work many hours as well. For the most part, they can be idle if they want, but they create work for themselves. All the excess labor just somehow gets converted into waste, competition, and war. We manufacture products designed to fail and be thrown away. Highly contested domains are saturated with advertising because we make too much stuff that we need to fight each other for customers. We've been told since birth that competition is good and competition increases efficiency, but all it means is that if you don't work as hard as everyone else, you will fall behind, because everyone else is working to put you down. Ok, they probably aren't meaning to put you down, but the thing is, labor beyond what is necessary mostly gets used for competitive purposes like opening another business by yours, advertising, suing you, manipulating the political landscape, or straight up war.
Natural gas is an obvious dead-end. Is it really buying any time to develop alternatives? All the development in fracking could have gone into something else.
Slashdot Mirror
I suppose it depends on if the labeling is forced, optional, or prohibited. Optional is the most free. Forced is sometimes appropriate for some dangerous products. I can't think of a good reason to prohibit informative labeling.
I'd say when you aren't really sure if you are in a simulation or not.
a flying trike
Reasonably low cost, fuel efficient, and compact, 1-2 seater. These things actually exist.
pushing human culture forward; fostering the next new thing; getting humans out of the stone age; ensuring that the next generation of humans knows more than the previous one. It's not about job training.
Only that the UN is in a better position to recognize a nation than pretty much any other entity.
Segways have their niche: sightseeing tours and maybe the occasional mall cop.
Really? I know people with motorcycles who don't have cars.
The problem with Segways is that bikes are way better.
Presumably, the students learned what this specific text string was and printed it to the screen.
I imagine it's tough to get enough vitamin D for a black person in Alaska.
Fast breeders are much more dangerous than light water reactors. If a LWR goes supercritical, then the boiling of the water tends to separate the fuel enough to slow down the reaction. In a fast breeder reactor, you have to depend on thermal expansion to stop the reaction or else boom. The radiation released into the environment is potentially several orders of magnitude greater in a fast breeder accident.
Another possibility is fission-fusion hybrid, where fission is kept subcritical and fusion is used to generate the excess neutrons needed for destruction of nuclear wastes. The concept is a lot safer than a fast breeder reactor.
Which bank offers this? As far as I know, there's always an interchange fee for the merchant.
But, is 3% less than the cost of dealing with MintChip? Because that is the question.
The contracts also typically require you charge the same price for goods whether it be paid for by cash or credit.
Is this still true? I thought that the antitrust settlement was supposed to change that. http://money.cnn.com/2012/07/13/news/companies/visa-mastercard-settlement/index.htm
The presence of a viable alternative could change the market considerably. No longer will the vendor feel the need to accept credit cards. This would help break the stranglehold that the credit card companies have, and perhaps they will start competing by lowering their rates.
The evidence has to first enter the courtroom to be thrown out of court.
So, are you saying that ICBMs aren't used to kill people?
Err, you still want the best, even if you aren't going to get them.
I sure couldn't hack together a robot like that in 90 minutes
That kind of "contract" sounds likely to be invalid due to unconscionability.
The essay isn't correct in suggesting that the ruling class is idle. The rich tend to work many hours as well. For the most part, they can be idle if they want, but they create work for themselves. All the excess labor just somehow gets converted into waste, competition, and war. We manufacture products designed to fail and be thrown away. Highly contested domains are saturated with advertising because we make too much stuff that we need to fight each other for customers. We've been told since birth that competition is good and competition increases efficiency, but all it means is that if you don't work as hard as everyone else, you will fall behind, because everyone else is working to put you down. Ok, they probably aren't meaning to put you down, but the thing is, labor beyond what is necessary mostly gets used for competitive purposes like opening another business by yours, advertising, suing you, manipulating the political landscape, or straight up war.
deterrents don't work on extremists
If it pays for itself by the end of life, then there's little reason NOT to use it.
Natural gas is an obvious dead-end. Is it really buying any time to develop alternatives? All the development in fracking could have gone into something else.
Naturally, you had no choice in the matter.