Sure, but not to sue a government official. The system of government work there basically ensures everyone's somebody else's friend. That's why they work for the state to begin with - they knew someone. I don't think a foreign corporation will be able to buy judges. That's what's kept many american firms out of brazil in the past decade. At least, that's the perspective from the american side. Could be different over there.
I agree. If college really isn't challenging, be a math major. It'll get hard, no matter how smart you are, if you want it to. I remember my first couple years where I'd never go to calculus, show up for the exams, ace them with no outside work. I thought, "so what?" Yeah, well, no matter how smart you are, you aren't just going to pick up things like tensor calculus without trying. It's usually taught in the graduate level, but if you ask nicely, you might get a professor to do it as an independent study and it WILL be hard. Part of it is realizing that you're pretty smart, even as smart as you think you are (which my girlfriend HATES about me), but that there will be things out there that challenge and humble you. The last sentence might be the most important thing I learned in college, and because of it, I'm continuing my education into graduate work. I hope the kid who asked the original question figures this out for himself before he quits out of frustration.
You're right on with that post. If only I had some mod points. I'm 23 now, and exactly the same way, though. It doesn't wear off. The trick is to figure out that your grades ARE important and to work at it like anything else. It's much easier to pursue knowledge if you can stay in school, and grades keep you going up the chain of education. You CAN learn something in college if you try. I always thought I was a lousy writer before college, but it turned out I was great at technical writing. I just had to take a course and figure it out. There's a lot of exploration to do in those 4 years. But being really smart and getting bored with busy work is NO excuse to fail and be miserable in life. In the end, jobs need to get done and we all have to contribute.
I'll say this, when you are how this poster describes, other people who aren't just don't get it. It's just a certain way a mind can work. You're constantly thinking and you don't want to be bored in school doing shitty tasks. For me, I realized that if I didnt pay enough attention to get good grades, the doors of higher education would be closed to me, so school became one of those things I just did because I had to. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong, you ARE judged on your education in life. At least, that's my experience. It doesn't mean you shouldn't pursue your outside interests, but a person of this type will have to realize that most of their learning will come in their spare time. There's nothing wrong with that. At least I hope not, because I identify very well with the original post. For me, college was a 4 year party. I had a great GPA, but that was secondary because I wasn't really interested until my junior year when I found a major I really liked. I look at it this way, though, there's going to reach a point where this kid learns enough that he's gonna put it to good use. Curiosity is a good thing, and that's really what his post boils down to. Especially in high school, there's little room for that. I remember having teachers who personally disliked me because I always worked ahead and showed the material to others. They took it the wrong way, I was just bored in class. I suspect this kid is too.
Hey, don't listen to this guy. I was just like you in high school. I ended up at a pretty good university here in the US, changed my major a few times, and for me, settled in with economics. Even then, I wasn't 100% focused on my school work. I barely read my texts, but I sure did read. I didn't want to be a physics major, but read about 10 books a semester in various subjects just to learn something new. Cooking is good, keep doing that too. For a "technical" person like myself, I felt that it was one of the few artistic things I was good at. By the way, I'm a matriculating law student in the fall and don't plan to stop there. The bottom line is, keep your grades up. Like it or not, employers and graduate schools WILL judge you on that pretty heavily. Believe me, college isn't as hard as they make it out to be in high school. You'll do fine if you just keep your head in the game long enough to get your work done. Just go to class. In my case, attendance meant that I could read less and get A's. I don't plan to stop after finishing law. I always wanted to go to med school, or culinary school. I'd be happy with either:) Grades are most of the picture in higher education, though. Don't lose sight of that. If anything, think of maintaining your GPA as a means to opening the door to new learning experiences. Otherwise, you can be really smart and still go nowhere. Its very important to keep doors open, and GPA is one way.
Finally, don't be afraid to try new things. Change your major a few times if you need to. I did and still managed to get out in 4 years all while having a great time in the process. I may be partial, but try economics if you get a chance. I spent time in biology, chemistry, comp sci, etc. Only chem and econ challenged me. I settled with econ and a BBA just in case i needed to get a job right out of college. Our school just happened to place its business majors very quickly and at good salaries. Otherwise, chem was cool as hell too.
Oh, and dont forget to have a good time. You'll meet a lot of new people in college, and make some really good friends along the way. They'll wonder how you can drink so much during the week and still get A's. You'll have no explanation, except that you manage to get to class even on the worst hangover. It's more than that, though, but you probably can't explain it. Now go get yourself a 40 (I like Ballantine's or Colt 45) and read a book. Malt liquor will probably be something you drink a lot of in college, even as 99% of the student body thinks it is (and you are) disgusting for drinking it. Good luck, you'll do fine in life.
Yeah, I agree. Start with a quieter hard drive. I have an 80GB Western Digital which is super quiet to begin with. Add some soundproofing and you're good to go. In any case you'd probably want to keep the machine away from the recording area anyhow.
This looks like something a lot of part time musicians would love. I remember back in high school, we would record on a new but still shitty 4-track, direct to cassette. Sound quality always sucked.
I wish I had thought of/seen this while still in college. It would've been a blast to play around with.
Are you under the impression that a mugger or robber in the US is going to go through the process of legally obtaining a gun? Hell no, they get their weapons illegally just like their European counterparts.
Most CCW permit owners in the US are responsible citizens. If they werent, they would have skipped the CCW permit step and just carried their gun anyway.
A universal ban on handguns may make you FEEL safer, but the jury's still out on whether or not you actually ARE safer. Last I checked, nations like the UK and Germany didn't have their violent crime rates drop all that much after they banned most firearms. If your intention is to rob someone, an illegal act, what's to stop you from getting an illegal handgun? Certainly not conscience, because you're ready to commit a violent crime anyway! Here in the US, there are very few crimes committed by the legal bearer of a handgun using that weapon.
As others have said, accelerating expansion means that objects very distant are moving away from us faster than closer objects are moving away from us. If you have time for some interesting reading, I'd recommend a title called Atom which is very readable and is a good primer on theory from the big bang to present time. It won't answer many questions about dark energy, but if anything, it'll give you a good idea of what we know in very readable terms and most likely get you to want to read more:) It was my first book on the subject, and it certainly had that effect. Note that I'm no physicist, just a curious reader.
As others have said, accelerating expansion means that objects very distant are moving away from us faster than closer objects are moving away from us. If you have time for some interesting reading, I'd recommend a title called Atom which is very readable and is a good primer on theory from the big bang to present time. It won't answer many questions about dark energy, but if anything, it'll give you a good idea of what we know in very readable terms and most likely get you to want to read more:) It was my first book on the subject, and it certainly had that effect. Note that I'm no physicist, just a curious reader.
First, reforestation was one of the biggest advances as a result of the timber bust. We've been doing it ever since. The third world is generally the most responsible for clearcutting to make way for pasture and crops.
We do dump a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere, you're right. Whether or not it's doing damage really still isnt certain. Should we cut back? Sure. Will we? Most likely. Give it time. Remember, humans have no incentive to knowingly destroy their own environment. Not in the long run.
I think the dynamite is just a few overhyped firecrackers. That's the best analogy for these types of books. I like that they get people thinking for the future, but there's no need to think we're on the brink of collapse. There's time to make good decisions.
You want to apply the idea of a non-autoregressive market to our achievements in the physical sciences? That's really amazing that you could even come up with something like that. There certainly are physical limits, but with the amount of energy reaching the earth JUST in the form of sunlight every day, i think we have a long way to go before we hit that wall.
No, but it's capitalism. Take it or leave it, you certainly wont change it. And its your inference that the products stay cheap through exploitation. I didn't make any assumption or allusion towards anything remaining low cost, i simply said we used it until it didnt remain low cost. The idea is that when something becomes prohibitively expensive, we have incentive to change.
Re:Price of a gallon of...
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
Sure, but you don't require a gallon of milk for every 20 or 30 miles you travel, do you?:)
Well, the proof doesn't yet exist. I believe it will, though, in some time. Even if we can't get fission to work, more efficient solar or use of hydrogen might come about. We're capitalists living in a world of free markets, though. We use what's cheap 'til it ain't cheap no more. By that point, something else is the new cheapest, and we use that. Not just with energy, but with any good or commodity. Believe me, I'm not saying you're wrong in believing there's a limit. I just can't come to believe that centuries of technological breakthrough are ready to just come to a halt. I'm also an optimist in the sense that I don't believe half the world's population will die off before we find that alternative. The outcome of all of this, thouogh, really proves that we're thinking about the next generation's problems. That, in itself, is a step in the right direction.
Re:It's only a matter of time
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
Sure, when the price goes up, the search for alternatives will be increasingly lucritive. BUT, will we have the underlying technology ready in time?
Historically, the answer has been "yes". Alternatives may seem expensive now, but they'll progress nicely as the price of oil rises. Then, once in full production, you'll probably have economies of scale (like in most energy markets) which will drive the price down to what we were used to. Do you honestly believe that we'll scramble once we run out of oil? I, for one, really believe there's plenty of research going into alternatives at this moment. Sure, not as much as we'd all like, but oil's still cheap.
Re:Another "Beyond the Limits"
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
The fact that the substitutes we've found don't work well yet really isn't much of an argument. Of course they don't work well yet. I'm sure we were inefficient in using oil at some point in history as well. It doesn't mean further research won't make these new alternatives viable in the near future. Don't make the assumption that technology has peaked, that's the mistake of every other doomsdayer in the past.
Re:Another "Beyond the Limits"
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
Absolutely. I wasn't using that as an example on how we got away from oil. Oil wasnt in short supply then. Natural rubber was, though.
Re:Another "Beyond the Limits"
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
Beyond the Limits isn't written by any economists. In fact, the only economist contributing to the writing is in the foreword, a nobel prize winner, no less. Might want to do your research before picking apart an argument.
Also, the concept of a zero sum game would be heavily studied in economics. Ever heard of game theory?
I won't argue that Goodstein doesn't know his shit, but science tends to swing both ways. You're right, it isn't black and white, but your reply seems to be. I've done my research, now its your turn.
Re:Dismally Realistic Science
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
You're right, there is a finite limit to growth. We just aren't there yet. When oil gets expensive, we'll switch to a cheaper source of energy, find more oil, or something else. I don't have a problem with people thinking there's a limit, I have a problem with people assuming we're at our technological peak (which IS the assumption that you make when you say we cant get past fossil fuels).
Re:It's only a matter of time
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
You're speaking like an overpopulation fanatic.
Markets. When the price goes up, we'll find something better. Timber, rubber, and soon oil.
Remember, Julian Simon won his bet with Paul Erlich. If you don't know what I'm talking about, read this: http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/People/julian_si mon.html
Another "Beyond the Limits"
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
For those that have read it, you know what I'm talking about. Any of these titles disregard markets as a means to force the hand of technology. Believe me, markets reflect scarcity, and new solutions arise as a result. Read back to the timber crisis in the early 1800's during the railroad boom, or the rubber crisis which led the way to synthetics and recovery/recycle programs. If we're running out of oil, it WILL get damn expensive and we'll find a better way of doing things. Many of these books seem to ignore this, making them very aggrivating to read. For a change, I suggest "The Doomsday Myth". For the record, I have a degree in economics and I've done a lot of environmental economic research. I'm tired of turning page after page of text basically written to shock the public.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, but not to sue a government official. The system of government work there basically ensures everyone's somebody else's friend. That's why they work for the state to begin with - they knew someone. I don't think a foreign corporation will be able to buy judges. That's what's kept many american firms out of brazil in the past decade. At least, that's the perspective from the american side. Could be different over there.
Ever research Brazil's judicial system? I don't think Microsoft will sue in their courts anytime soon. For one, corruption is rampant.
"Nuts and Gum: Together at last!"
I agree. If college really isn't challenging, be a math major. It'll get hard, no matter how smart you are, if you want it to. I remember my first couple years where I'd never go to calculus, show up for the exams, ace them with no outside work. I thought, "so what?" Yeah, well, no matter how smart you are, you aren't just going to pick up things like tensor calculus without trying. It's usually taught in the graduate level, but if you ask nicely, you might get a professor to do it as an independent study and it WILL be hard. Part of it is realizing that you're pretty smart, even as smart as you think you are (which my girlfriend HATES about me), but that there will be things out there that challenge and humble you. The last sentence might be the most important thing I learned in college, and because of it, I'm continuing my education into graduate work. I hope the kid who asked the original question figures this out for himself before he quits out of frustration.
You're right on with that post. If only I had some mod points. I'm 23 now, and exactly the same way, though. It doesn't wear off. The trick is to figure out that your grades ARE important and to work at it like anything else. It's much easier to pursue knowledge if you can stay in school, and grades keep you going up the chain of education. You CAN learn something in college if you try. I always thought I was a lousy writer before college, but it turned out I was great at technical writing. I just had to take a course and figure it out. There's a lot of exploration to do in those 4 years. But being really smart and getting bored with busy work is NO excuse to fail and be miserable in life. In the end, jobs need to get done and we all have to contribute.
I'll say this, when you are how this poster describes, other people who aren't just don't get it. It's just a certain way a mind can work. You're constantly thinking and you don't want to be bored in school doing shitty tasks. For me, I realized that if I didnt pay enough attention to get good grades, the doors of higher education would be closed to me, so school became one of those things I just did because I had to. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong, you ARE judged on your education in life. At least, that's my experience. It doesn't mean you shouldn't pursue your outside interests, but a person of this type will have to realize that most of their learning will come in their spare time. There's nothing wrong with that. At least I hope not, because I identify very well with the original post. For me, college was a 4 year party. I had a great GPA, but that was secondary because I wasn't really interested until my junior year when I found a major I really liked. I look at it this way, though, there's going to reach a point where this kid learns enough that he's gonna put it to good use. Curiosity is a good thing, and that's really what his post boils down to. Especially in high school, there's little room for that. I remember having teachers who personally disliked me because I always worked ahead and showed the material to others. They took it the wrong way, I was just bored in class. I suspect this kid is too.
Hey, don't listen to this guy. I was just like you in high school. I ended up at a pretty good university here in the US, changed my major a few times, and for me, settled in with economics. Even then, I wasn't 100% focused on my school work. I barely read my texts, but I sure did read. I didn't want to be a physics major, but read about 10 books a semester in various subjects just to learn something new. Cooking is good, keep doing that too. For a "technical" person like myself, I felt that it was one of the few artistic things I was good at. By the way, I'm a matriculating law student in the fall and don't plan to stop there. The bottom line is, keep your grades up. Like it or not, employers and graduate schools WILL judge you on that pretty heavily. Believe me, college isn't as hard as they make it out to be in high school. You'll do fine if you just keep your head in the game long enough to get your work done. Just go to class. In my case, attendance meant that I could read less and get A's. I don't plan to stop after finishing law. I always wanted to go to med school, or culinary school. I'd be happy with either :) Grades are most of the picture in higher education, though. Don't lose sight of that. If anything, think of maintaining your GPA as a means to opening the door to new learning experiences. Otherwise, you can be really smart and still go nowhere. Its very important to keep doors open, and GPA is one way.
Finally, don't be afraid to try new things. Change your major a few times if you need to. I did and still managed to get out in 4 years all while having a great time in the process. I may be partial, but try economics if you get a chance. I spent time in biology, chemistry, comp sci, etc. Only chem and econ challenged me. I settled with econ and a BBA just in case i needed to get a job right out of college. Our school just happened to place its business majors very quickly and at good salaries. Otherwise, chem was cool as hell too.
Oh, and dont forget to have a good time. You'll meet a lot of new people in college, and make some really good friends along the way. They'll wonder how you can drink so much during the week and still get A's. You'll have no explanation, except that you manage to get to class even on the worst hangover. It's more than that, though, but you probably can't explain it. Now go get yourself a 40 (I like Ballantine's or Colt 45) and read a book. Malt liquor will probably be something you drink a lot of in college, even as 99% of the student body thinks it is (and you are) disgusting for drinking it. Good luck, you'll do fine in life.
Yeah, I agree. Start with a quieter hard drive. I have an 80GB Western Digital which is super quiet to begin with. Add some soundproofing and you're good to go. In any case you'd probably want to keep the machine away from the recording area anyhow.
This looks like something a lot of part time musicians would love. I remember back in high school, we would record on a new but still shitty 4-track, direct to cassette. Sound quality always sucked.
I wish I had thought of/seen this while still in college. It would've been a blast to play around with.
With all due respect, you're an idiot.
Are you under the impression that a mugger or robber in the US is going to go through the process of legally obtaining a gun? Hell no, they get their weapons illegally just like their European counterparts.
Most CCW permit owners in the US are responsible citizens. If they werent, they would have skipped the CCW permit step and just carried their gun anyway.
A universal ban on handguns may make you FEEL safer, but the jury's still out on whether or not you actually ARE safer. Last I checked, nations like the UK and Germany didn't have their violent crime rates drop all that much after they banned most firearms. If your intention is to rob someone, an illegal act, what's to stop you from getting an illegal handgun? Certainly not conscience, because you're ready to commit a violent crime anyway! Here in the US, there are very few crimes committed by the legal bearer of a handgun using that weapon.
As others have said, accelerating expansion means that objects very distant are moving away from us faster than closer objects are moving away from us. If you have time for some interesting reading, I'd recommend a title called Atom which is very readable and is a good primer on theory from the big bang to present time. It won't answer many questions about dark energy, but if anything, it'll give you a good idea of what we know in very readable terms and most likely get you to want to read more :) It was my first book on the subject, and it certainly had that effect. Note that I'm no physicist, just a curious reader.
Whoops, this is in the wrong thread. Doh!
As others have said, accelerating expansion means that objects very distant are moving away from us faster than closer objects are moving away from us. If you have time for some interesting reading, I'd recommend a title called Atom which is very readable and is a good primer on theory from the big bang to present time. It won't answer many questions about dark energy, but if anything, it'll give you a good idea of what we know in very readable terms and most likely get you to want to read more :) It was my first book on the subject, and it certainly had that effect. Note that I'm no physicist, just a curious reader.
First, reforestation was one of the biggest advances as a result of the timber bust. We've been doing it ever since. The third world is generally the most responsible for clearcutting to make way for pasture and crops.
We do dump a lot of CO2 into the atmosphere, you're right. Whether or not it's doing damage really still isnt certain. Should we cut back? Sure. Will we? Most likely. Give it time. Remember, humans have no incentive to knowingly destroy their own environment. Not in the long run.
I think the dynamite is just a few overhyped firecrackers. That's the best analogy for these types of books. I like that they get people thinking for the future, but there's no need to think we're on the brink of collapse. There's time to make good decisions.
You want to apply the idea of a non-autoregressive market to our achievements in the physical sciences? That's really amazing that you could even come up with something like that. There certainly are physical limits, but with the amount of energy reaching the earth JUST in the form of sunlight every day, i think we have a long way to go before we hit that wall.
No, but it's capitalism. Take it or leave it, you certainly wont change it. And its your inference that the products stay cheap through exploitation. I didn't make any assumption or allusion towards anything remaining low cost, i simply said we used it until it didnt remain low cost. The idea is that when something becomes prohibitively expensive, we have incentive to change.
Sure, but you don't require a gallon of milk for every 20 or 30 miles you travel, do you? :)
Well, the proof doesn't yet exist. I believe it will, though, in some time. Even if we can't get fission to work, more efficient solar or use of hydrogen might come about. We're capitalists living in a world of free markets, though. We use what's cheap 'til it ain't cheap no more. By that point, something else is the new cheapest, and we use that. Not just with energy, but with any good or commodity. Believe me, I'm not saying you're wrong in believing there's a limit. I just can't come to believe that centuries of technological breakthrough are ready to just come to a halt. I'm also an optimist in the sense that I don't believe half the world's population will die off before we find that alternative. The outcome of all of this, thouogh, really proves that we're thinking about the next generation's problems. That, in itself, is a step in the right direction.
Sure, when the price goes up, the search for alternatives will be increasingly lucritive. BUT, will we have the underlying technology ready in time?
Historically, the answer has been "yes". Alternatives may seem expensive now, but they'll progress nicely as the price of oil rises. Then, once in full production, you'll probably have economies of scale (like in most energy markets) which will drive the price down to what we were used to. Do you honestly believe that we'll scramble once we run out of oil? I, for one, really believe there's plenty of research going into alternatives at this moment. Sure, not as much as we'd all like, but oil's still cheap.
The fact that the substitutes we've found don't work well yet really isn't much of an argument. Of course they don't work well yet. I'm sure we were inefficient in using oil at some point in history as well. It doesn't mean further research won't make these new alternatives viable in the near future. Don't make the assumption that technology has peaked, that's the mistake of every other doomsdayer in the past.
Absolutely. I wasn't using that as an example on how we got away from oil. Oil wasnt in short supply then. Natural rubber was, though.
Beyond the Limits isn't written by any economists. In fact, the only economist contributing to the writing is in the foreword, a nobel prize winner, no less. Might want to do your research before picking apart an argument.
Also, the concept of a zero sum game would be heavily studied in economics. Ever heard of game theory?
I won't argue that Goodstein doesn't know his shit, but science tends to swing both ways. You're right, it isn't black and white, but your reply seems to be. I've done my research, now its your turn.
You're right, there is a finite limit to growth. We just aren't there yet. When oil gets expensive, we'll switch to a cheaper source of energy, find more oil, or something else. I don't have a problem with people thinking there's a limit, I have a problem with people assuming we're at our technological peak (which IS the assumption that you make when you say we cant get past fossil fuels).
You're speaking like an overpopulation fanatic.
i mon.html
Markets. When the price goes up, we'll find something better. Timber, rubber, and soon oil.
Remember, Julian Simon won his bet with Paul Erlich. If you don't know what I'm talking about, read this: http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/People/julian_s
For those that have read it, you know what I'm talking about. Any of these titles disregard markets as a means to force the hand of technology. Believe me, markets reflect scarcity, and new solutions arise as a result. Read back to the timber crisis in the early 1800's during the railroad boom, or the rubber crisis which led the way to synthetics and recovery/recycle programs. If we're running out of oil, it WILL get damn expensive and we'll find a better way of doing things. Many of these books seem to ignore this, making them very aggrivating to read. For a change, I suggest "The Doomsday Myth". For the record, I have a degree in economics and I've done a lot of environmental economic research. I'm tired of turning page after page of text basically written to shock the public.