The maximum speed is what he is referring to. You can go faster on the water, by planing (essentially skipping across the surface) but heavy or deep hulls do not plane, and so are limited to the maximum hull speed above, regardless of the power of the engines.
I do not believe that filling out the form had to be mailed out. It could have a number of shapes and configurations, but the census would need to be signed as a legal document (for its veracity) which even in this day and age, requires a physical paper to be signed.
My apologies for using voluntary, in the discussion on taxes. What I meant to say, is that our taxes are paid with a very high level of compliance with a minimal amount of enforcement. It is most certainly not voluntary in the way of say charitable donations are voluntary.
It would be ridiculous (IMO) to place someone in jail for 3 months for failing to complete the census. However, completing the census remains mandatory. If it is only a survey, then the data will be biased as many people will simple consider it too much of a bother to deal with.
If someone is so very dead set against filling in a census document with generalized information about their household, then the fine might actually be used. Given that no one has ever been fined (if the gov't comments concerning this are correct) then this speaks to rational discussions between officials and the delinquent household in question. By making it mandatory, you get better data (so say the statisticians who are the experts on this). If this means people complete the census under threat of punishment, it may decrease the number of delinquent households that officials will need to deal with to get the information completed.
Voluntary methods don't cut this kind of data collection.
Also bear in mind, we Canadians pay our taxes voluntarily at a very high level of compliance. Oh, there are penalties for not paying taxes, but you be amazed at the length the gov't will go through to have the proper amount paid without penalties. If you're a jerk about it, or have been intentionally hiding taxable income, then you get the stick. Most folks who'f delayed paying taxes (several years behind) or made honest mistakes can get the proper taxes paid up with no penalties. However, without the threat of actual, live penalties, you'd never get the level of compliance needed.
Architectural certification is no more stringent than that for engineering. Its a different discipline than engineering, but it is not more strictly regulated.
And yet the asshole who preceded him spent years trying to "fix" a criminal court/prison system that had all forms of crime rates decreasing for years.
Most of us want the government we have to do better with the money they are given from us. This means making rational, well-thought out, science supported decisions. To do this, one needs good data. Statistics Canada were world renowned experts in this, and yet the previous government decided they were irrelevant to their decision making.
The previous government made all sort of criminal justice policy decisions with very long term repercussions WITHOUT any evidence to support this "Canada is better with tougher sentences" position.
I guess you're mixing up our previous hard right conservative government who basically ended evidence-based decision making. Its our centralist government we now have that is returning to the use of science, technical experts, and read data to make policy.
A census can only be mandatory. If its not mandatory, its a survey. Requiring residents to complete a census of their households is hardly onerous. At no time has anyone ever faced a fine or spent time in jail for failing to complete the census. There is a penalty, because under law you cannot have an action declared mandatory without a statement of penalty for failing to comply.
A sign of good things to come. A return to rational, science and evidence based decision making. Not basing policy on unsupported beliefs and ideology.
Dear USA
Had you done what other non-European countries did, and get involved at the start of the wars instead of the ends, millions would have been spared. Instead, you continued to trade with Germany during the war and held back your support.
Oh well, better late than never, I suppose.
"And the business model is proven around the world."
This is why he wants traditional methods. Control the wire, control the cost of the signal.
using satellites, balloons, drones - they work with beams to a spot in the sky. who can control the beams? If someone other than the local bully . . . err telcom controls access to the 'net, their business model.
Give me the ability to walk around my local telcom to get an internet feed from someone who ONLY does internet (not a subsidiary of an integrated tv/telephone/broadcast media producer, distributor and internet provider) and I'll jump in an instance.
magnetosphere is useful for keeping an atmosphere in geological time frames. As we are all finding out, man does not function in geological time frames, but much faster. An atmosphere on Mars would degrade over time, without replenishment if we don't have a magnetosphere. So basically, we'd need to crash a comet or two onto the planet every century. If we have the ability to create an atmosphere in the first place, maintaining it would be several orders of magnitude easier.
What is being proposed is terraforming, which even with nukes is not "quick" in human terms.
The ameoba can live in biofilm like the ones in some piping. Fine. But when in the biofilm it is not exposed to chlorinated water. So this animal does NOT scoff in the face of chlorinated water.
Where I live, three months of the year we need our central air conditioning. The remainder of the year we either need a small amount of heating, or a LOT of heating. Having my gaming machine add to the heat of the house is just a bonus. My TV providing 700W of heat? Bonus! Of course, the cost of electrical heat is higher than natural gas heat, but that heat pushed out from the computer reduces the total heat I need from natural gas. A bit of lost efficiency ($/but) yes, but you cannot consider it waste heat for most of the year.
Oh, and I upgrade on a 3 or 4 year cycle, so there is ongoing power efficiency gains, but there is absolutely no way that spending $1000s every 3 years will balance out the "savings" in lost electricity. In terms of effect on the environment, where I live the only fossil fuel used to generate electricity is natural gas, and that represents 15% of electrical generation.
I am well aware of the magnitude difference between the heat load from the total solar flux to the planet and the electrical output of a nuclear power plant. However, that still doesn't change the fact that the statement "A nuclear plant does not contribute to global warming" is incorrect.
The generation of energy does contribute to global warming. What you are implying is that as the generation of power doesn't use fossil fuels, the waste products do not contribute to the greenhouse effect. However, 100's of megawatts of electricity will 100% turn into 100's of megawatts of heat. unlike solar and wind energy, nuclear energy is a net generator of heat. Solar and wind are heat energy neutral, as the energy is pulled from the environment, used as electricity, and then released as heat where the sun's energy was going anyway. The energy from the nuclear material never originated in solar energy smacking into the earth.
With all due respect, this article indicated two factors leading to national water stress, the first is the currently recognized changes in rainfall patterns. The second is the political/population aspect to those nations. In many cases, it is not a total lack of water resources that will affect the population, but its distribution within the country and the lack of infrastructure or political will/means to match the distribution of water to the distribution of usage.
While many might focus on the "man-made" side of the issue regarding the changes in water distribution, the far far greater calamity is the 100% man-made factors that make up the political problems.
The US has unmatched monetary resources to easily manage the water distribution changes caused by changes to the climate, regardless of their cause. However, the political environment makes usage of those monetary resources to change the water usage distribution to match the future water resource distribution impossible. And sadly, there is next to zero chance of any change in the collective political will to alter US use of water to match future water distribution.
Politicians haven't been instructed by their owners to pursue it yet. What is the point of owning oil and gas supplies if someone makes owning them pointless? Let us finish pulling the oil from the ground and making money with it, THEN we'll allow you to spend the taxpayers money to develop the technology that we will acquire to sell energy to the taxpayers. Let's just make sure we maximize our profits on oil/gas BEFORE we agree to make oil and gas worth less than they are now. Of course we realize that oil and gas will still have value in the fusion future, just they will be work a lot less than they are now.
So remember, maximize our profits now, spend taxpayers money a bit later to ensure profits for us in the future.
One of the simplest questions is How big an NEO do we need to stop? Once you realize our ability to stop NEOs is very limited (in terms of mass) and is 100% dependent on early detection, the initial focus should be on improving detection of NEOs. And even then, the future may be : "INBOUND NEO >90% CHANCE OF EARTH IMPACT --- MASS IS ESTIMATED TO BE . . . oh crap" and now we're back at the current stage of hoping it misses.
Sorry, but I'm having trouble imagining such a facility being run by a typical American for-profit entity. Bad morale, low standards, high staff turnover, no loyalty to the employee, so no loyalty from the employee back to looking after the public.
So how's about we agree, that we'll make the operating entity an crown (or state) owned utility (not for profit) and run with a well paid, well trained, workforce ?
Is the colour meant to display for the condition of the wearer (which could be a display in advance of coitus) or for the condition of the partner (which is a display after coitus)?
Folks seem to be focusing on the partner's condition here. I think this idea would be far more valuable to the partner. Here put this on and we'll - hang on - blue plus yellow means clamidia and the clap - sorry fella - no joy for you. Warning of impending risk is far better than - hey wow, she's was really loaded up with bugs.
A raincoat will keep you dry in the rain, checking the weather may keep you from going out in the rain in the first place.
US did not defeat Great Britain in the War of 1812. The boundaries were reset to where they were before the conflict. If anything, American expansion into Upper Canada was repulsed.
this kind of nerd glee is nothing more than typical human pattern recognition. The fact that your brain picks out mathematical patterns, is your peculiarity. Some of us pick up on language patterns, on movement (dynamic) patterns, some on patterns in the layout of bricks in a wall. Humans are pre-programmed to detect patterns. Its how we survive things that are trying to eat us, and how we figure out how we can eat other things.
1) The yeast can make the same proteins. However, what makes spider silk's properties so amazing is what the spider does with them inside/with its spinnerets. simply making the building blocks of the silk does not give you spider silk. The chemical work has been done before in a lab.
2. My comment was that this material was made to be aritificial spider silk. Both the article and the summary headline read "spider silk". Even if this material was 100% exactly the same as natural silk,it would not be spider silk. t would be artificial spider silk, as true spider silk only comes from spiders.
So "spider silk is ready for commercialization" is not the same thing as "artificial spider silk is ready for commercialization". I was very interested in what innovation they had created to allow the commercialization of spider silk harvesting. The current methods involves actually tying the buggers down on their backs and pulling the thread out. Seeing that they had only managed to utilize yeast to make the replicate the principal ingredient in spider silk left me disappointed.
These folks have come up with an idea to market a threat with some (but not all) the properties of spider silk. Using yeast. While I am more than willing to admit that this material sounds interesting, it is most certainly not spider silk.
But it's not the first time we've seen an utterly misleading headline in both the article and in the Slashdot post.
So basically, they've identified bacteria that can fight the fungus. This isn't a cure - its the suggestion of the basis to develop a cure. We're not out of the woods yet.
Slashdot Mirror
The maximum speed is what he is referring to. You can go faster on the water, by planing (essentially skipping across the surface) but heavy or deep hulls do not plane, and so are limited to the maximum hull speed above, regardless of the power of the engines.
I do not believe that filling out the form had to be mailed out. It could have a number of shapes and configurations, but the census would need to be signed as a legal document (for its veracity) which even in this day and age, requires a physical paper to be signed.
My apologies for using voluntary, in the discussion on taxes. What I meant to say, is that our taxes are paid with a very high level of compliance with a minimal amount of enforcement. It is most certainly not voluntary in the way of say charitable donations are voluntary.
It would be ridiculous (IMO) to place someone in jail for 3 months for failing to complete the census. However, completing the census remains mandatory. If it is only a survey, then the data will be biased as many people will simple consider it too much of a bother to deal with.
If someone is so very dead set against filling in a census document with generalized information about their household, then the fine might actually be used. Given that no one has ever been fined (if the gov't comments concerning this are correct) then this speaks to rational discussions between officials and the delinquent household in question. By making it mandatory, you get better data (so say the statisticians who are the experts on this). If this means people complete the census under threat of punishment, it may decrease the number of delinquent households that officials will need to deal with to get the information completed.
Voluntary methods don't cut this kind of data collection.
Also bear in mind, we Canadians pay our taxes voluntarily at a very high level of compliance. Oh, there are penalties for not paying taxes, but you be amazed at the length the gov't will go through to have the proper amount paid without penalties. If you're a jerk about it, or have been intentionally hiding taxable income, then you get the stick. Most folks who'f delayed paying taxes (several years behind) or made honest mistakes can get the proper taxes paid up with no penalties. However, without the threat of actual, live penalties, you'd never get the level of compliance needed.
Architectural certification is no more stringent than that for engineering. Its a different discipline than engineering, but it is not more strictly regulated.
And yet the asshole who preceded him spent years trying to "fix" a criminal court/prison system that had all forms of crime rates decreasing for years.
Most of us want the government we have to do better with the money they are given from us. This means making rational, well-thought out, science supported decisions. To do this, one needs good data. Statistics Canada were world renowned experts in this, and yet the previous government decided they were irrelevant to their decision making.
The previous government made all sort of criminal justice policy decisions with very long term repercussions WITHOUT any evidence to support this "Canada is better with tougher sentences" position.
I guess you're mixing up our previous hard right conservative government who basically ended evidence-based decision making. Its our centralist government we now have that is returning to the use of science, technical experts, and read data to make policy.
A census can only be mandatory. If its not mandatory, its a survey. Requiring residents to complete a census of their households is hardly onerous. At no time has anyone ever faced a fine or spent time in jail for failing to complete the census. There is a penalty, because under law you cannot have an action declared mandatory without a statement of penalty for failing to comply. A sign of good things to come. A return to rational, science and evidence based decision making. Not basing policy on unsupported beliefs and ideology.
Dear USA Had you done what other non-European countries did, and get involved at the start of the wars instead of the ends, millions would have been spared. Instead, you continued to trade with Germany during the war and held back your support. Oh well, better late than never, I suppose.
"And the business model is proven around the world."
This is why he wants traditional methods. Control the wire, control the cost of the signal. using satellites, balloons, drones - they work with beams to a spot in the sky. who can control the beams? If someone other than the local bully . . . err telcom controls access to the 'net, their business model.
Give me the ability to walk around my local telcom to get an internet feed from someone who ONLY does internet (not a subsidiary of an integrated tv/telephone/broadcast media producer, distributor and internet provider) and I'll jump in an instance.
magnetosphere is useful for keeping an atmosphere in geological time frames. As we are all finding out, man does not function in geological time frames, but much faster. An atmosphere on Mars would degrade over time, without replenishment if we don't have a magnetosphere. So basically, we'd need to crash a comet or two onto the planet every century. If we have the ability to create an atmosphere in the first place, maintaining it would be several orders of magnitude easier.
What is being proposed is terraforming, which even with nukes is not "quick" in human terms.
The ameoba can live in biofilm like the ones in some piping. Fine. But when in the biofilm it is not exposed to chlorinated water. So this animal does NOT scoff in the face of chlorinated water.
Where I live, three months of the year we need our central air conditioning. The remainder of the year we either need a small amount of heating, or a LOT of heating. Having my gaming machine add to the heat of the house is just a bonus. My TV providing 700W of heat? Bonus! Of course, the cost of electrical heat is higher than natural gas heat, but that heat pushed out from the computer reduces the total heat I need from natural gas. A bit of lost efficiency ($/but) yes, but you cannot consider it waste heat for most of the year.
Oh, and I upgrade on a 3 or 4 year cycle, so there is ongoing power efficiency gains, but there is absolutely no way that spending $1000s every 3 years will balance out the "savings" in lost electricity. In terms of effect on the environment, where I live the only fossil fuel used to generate electricity is natural gas, and that represents 15% of electrical generation.
I am well aware of the magnitude difference between the heat load from the total solar flux to the planet and the electrical output of a nuclear power plant. However, that still doesn't change the fact that the statement "A nuclear plant does not contribute to global warming" is incorrect.
The generation of energy does contribute to global warming. What you are implying is that as the generation of power doesn't use fossil fuels, the waste products do not contribute to the greenhouse effect. However, 100's of megawatts of electricity will 100% turn into 100's of megawatts of heat. unlike solar and wind energy, nuclear energy is a net generator of heat. Solar and wind are heat energy neutral, as the energy is pulled from the environment, used as electricity, and then released as heat where the sun's energy was going anyway. The energy from the nuclear material never originated in solar energy smacking into the earth.
With all due respect, this article indicated two factors leading to national water stress, the first is the currently recognized changes in rainfall patterns. The second is the political/population aspect to those nations. In many cases, it is not a total lack of water resources that will affect the population, but its distribution within the country and the lack of infrastructure or political will/means to match the distribution of water to the distribution of usage.
While many might focus on the "man-made" side of the issue regarding the changes in water distribution, the far far greater calamity is the 100% man-made factors that make up the political problems.
The US has unmatched monetary resources to easily manage the water distribution changes caused by changes to the climate, regardless of their cause. However, the political environment makes usage of those monetary resources to change the water usage distribution to match the future water resource distribution impossible. And sadly, there is next to zero chance of any change in the collective political will to alter US use of water to match future water distribution.
Politicians haven't been instructed by their owners to pursue it yet. What is the point of owning oil and gas supplies if someone makes owning them pointless? Let us finish pulling the oil from the ground and making money with it, THEN we'll allow you to spend the taxpayers money to develop the technology that we will acquire to sell energy to the taxpayers. Let's just make sure we maximize our profits on oil/gas BEFORE we agree to make oil and gas worth less than they are now. Of course we realize that oil and gas will still have value in the fusion future, just they will be work a lot less than they are now.
So remember, maximize our profits now, spend taxpayers money a bit later to ensure profits for us in the future.
One of the simplest questions is How big an NEO do we need to stop? Once you realize our ability to stop NEOs is very limited (in terms of mass) and is 100% dependent on early detection, the initial focus should be on improving detection of NEOs. And even then, the future may be : "INBOUND NEO >90% CHANCE OF EARTH IMPACT --- MASS IS ESTIMATED TO BE . . . oh crap" and now we're back at the current stage of hoping it misses.
Sorry, but I'm having trouble imagining such a facility being run by a typical American for-profit entity. Bad morale, low standards, high staff turnover, no loyalty to the employee, so no loyalty from the employee back to looking after the public.
So how's about we agree, that we'll make the operating entity an crown (or state) owned utility (not for profit) and run with a well paid, well trained, workforce ?
We'd monitor God too, but he's got better wifi security than we do
Is the colour meant to display for the condition of the wearer (which could be a display in advance of coitus) or for the condition of the partner (which is a display after coitus)?
Folks seem to be focusing on the partner's condition here. I think this idea would be far more valuable to the partner. Here put this on and we'll - hang on - blue plus yellow means clamidia and the clap - sorry fella - no joy for you. Warning of impending risk is far better than - hey wow, she's was really loaded up with bugs.
A raincoat will keep you dry in the rain, checking the weather may keep you from going out in the rain in the first place.
US did not defeat Great Britain in the War of 1812. The boundaries were reset to where they were before the conflict. If anything, American expansion into Upper Canada was repulsed.
this kind of nerd glee is nothing more than typical human pattern recognition. The fact that your brain picks out mathematical patterns, is your peculiarity. Some of us pick up on language patterns, on movement (dynamic) patterns, some on patterns in the layout of bricks in a wall. Humans are pre-programmed to detect patterns. Its how we survive things that are trying to eat us, and how we figure out how we can eat other things.
1) The yeast can make the same proteins. However, what makes spider silk's properties so amazing is what the spider does with them inside/with its spinnerets. simply making the building blocks of the silk does not give you spider silk. The chemical work has been done before in a lab.
2. My comment was that this material was made to be aritificial spider silk. Both the article and the summary headline read "spider silk". Even if this material was 100% exactly the same as natural silk,it would not be spider silk. t would be artificial spider silk, as true spider silk only comes from spiders.
So "spider silk is ready for commercialization" is not the same thing as "artificial spider silk is ready for commercialization". I was very interested in what innovation they had created to allow the commercialization of spider silk harvesting. The current methods involves actually tying the buggers down on their backs and pulling the thread out. Seeing that they had only managed to utilize yeast to make the replicate the principal ingredient in spider silk left me disappointed.
These folks have come up with an idea to market a threat with some (but not all) the properties of spider silk. Using yeast. While I am more than willing to admit that this material sounds interesting, it is most certainly not spider silk.
But it's not the first time we've seen an utterly misleading headline in both the article and in the Slashdot post.
So basically, they've identified bacteria that can fight the fungus. This isn't a cure - its the suggestion of the basis to develop a cure. We're not out of the woods yet.