A picture of the levers on lever voting machine is not proof of anything. When using a lever voting machine you enter a booth and pull a big lever which closes a curtain behind you. None of the levers used for making selections on the ballot are set. Until the big lever is pulled again you are free to make and change any of the levers. Once the big lever is pulled selections made with the levers are registered and all the levers are returned to their starting positions. Any pictures that might be taken are proof of nothing except that the levers were set a certain way at one point before the vote was registered. It doesn't confirm what the final vote really was. A detailed receipt on the other hand does say what your final vote was. Unless the receipt is issued outside the booth the person is free to take a picture with their mobile and transmit it in hardly any time at all.
When we had lever machines in our voting district you had to pull big lever to close the curtain before you could vote. Once you were finished you pulled the big lever again and your votes were registered and the curtain opened.
PoV machine also prints out a receipt for every voter after voting is complete, with detailed results that the voter can read and visually verify. Receipt includes a machine-readible 2D barcode.
A detailed receipt verifying who a person voted for is a bad idea. It can be used to verify that purchased votes were actually delivered. Also, lots of people would not be able to vote freely if there was the possibility of a paper trail of how they voted.
It's difficult to tell from the graphs on that page, but to me it looks like the peak for wages in the 70's would have occurred in the first half of the 70's. perhaps at the end of Nixon's administration or the beginning of Ford's. Wages wavered a bit after that but never again seemed to match the rise in productivity that happened from the end of WWII and the beginning of the 70's.
It really did refer to machine. When Watson named the company International Business Machines it manufactured all sorts of machines. Actual, real machines. Punch card tabulators, clocks, scales and cheese slicers. During WWII they even made rifles. At one time, machines were the heart of IBM.
They've still got System Z mainframe line, and I can't see them selling that business unit off, but they ought to just drop the M and call themselves 'International Business'.
Students have changed majors since there have been majors. What's the evidence that schools are enrolling more engineering majors recently than they have in years gone by?
If I had mod points I'd give you one. Back in the '80s and '90s that was the official line. All the creative jobs would remain in the US while we shipped all the boring and dangerous jobs overseas. Companies like Apple are the exception that prove the rule. From what I've seen, engineering jobs eventually follow manufacturing overseas when a company decides to offshore manufacturing. Maybe not all the engineering jobs, but certainly a large part of them. The decline in engineering employment in the US is related to the decline in its manufacturing capacity.
What evidence do you have that more people are applying for entry to engineering programs? It seems to me that your premise is likely only true if universities could be shown to enrolling significantly more engineering students over the years. If the number of people getting engineering degrees is any indication, the information in this article would indicate that universities have not significantly increased their engineering school enrollments. If anything they may be enrolling fewer engineering students overall.
The Samsung Chromebook is $250. The Acer C7 Chromebook, with a 320G hard drive, is $190. I purchased the Samsung for my wife when her laptop died. She's been very satisfied with it. She likes the size and weight, that it boots rapidly, lack of a fan, relatively cool operation, and that for her usage patterns the battery lasts all day. Outside of work all that she does on a computer is email and consume content from the web, so the Chromebook fits her needs extremely well.
Would new drugs be required to wait for the FDA to complete testing before being released? The FDA has barely enough funding to review studies the pharmaceutical companies produce, where would the extra money come from for it to do testing? If pharmaceutical companies are freed from the need to test would they flood the marketplace with so many new products that the FDA couldn't keep up? If the FDA's testing program can't keep up with the number of new drugs being introduced by drug companies, who sets the priorities of what's to be tested?
Your normal calling pattern would still be there even with the background noise of random calls. It would take a bit more processing to tease that pattern out, but it could still be identified. Calling random numbers would be more of an inconvenience for you and the people receiving those calls than the software analyzing your call patterns.
My thought when I saw this is that Keep's revenue model will be to encourage more people to store more data on Google Drive, resulting in more people going over the limit where Drive is free. Google isn't pushing a note keeping service, it's selling storage. Google may also be looking at the data it can extract from a service that it can then sell to advertisers and marketing companies. If Keep sells enough storage and produces sufficient revenue from the quality and quantity of data it generates it will stick around, if not it's a goner.
Yep, if you've got stairs in the building where you work get up an walk up and down stairs every 90 minutes or so. Ten minutes of stair walking is a bit of exercise. Last time I worked in an office it was in a building with four floors, with two flights of stairs for each floor and two more to the door to the roof. Over a nine or ten hour work day I could do about 40 minutes of stair climbing. And doing it in small amounts spread through out the day is better for you than doing it in one big session.
On the other hand, if that rat was growing my replacement tooth, up until it was time to harvest the tooth that rat would be the most pampered rat in the world.
So the Obama administration shouldn't have taken a position on this? I guess I expect a presidential administration to take a position on important issues regardless of whether or not the issue is controversial. The Obama administration takes positions on plenty of other things that generate political heat.
Some insurance companies can go bankrupt. Others, like AIG, apparently cannot. And probably, if any of the other large insurance companies that provide millions of seniors with retirement income through annuities was about to go bankrupt, the federal government and the Fed would likely figure out a way to keep it afloat and continue paying on its obligations. If you think Social Security has problems, it is nothing compared to the coming problems faced by China's pension system. It has worse demographics and the retirement age is much lower (55 for women, 60 for men) than in the U.S. And, it's not just China and the US. Japan, Europe in general, Brazil, and Russia face the same dilemma. I don't think every major country's currency is going to become worthless and I don't think they are going throw all their elderly out on the street, either. There are fixes for both Social Security and Medicare, but political gridlock in Washington prevents any meaningful change.
I thought the one small problem was the one cited in the article.
LENR is a very long way from the day when you can go out and buy a home nuclear reactor. In fact, it still has to be proven that the phenomenon even exists
Even if you don't sequester the carbon and just put it out a smoke stack you're still at an advantage over normal coal burning. One of the major problems with coal burning is not the CO2, but the fly ash that contains heavy metals and causes respiratory problems. This process allows for those heavy metals to be contained in the coal ash which is kept within the plant. Depending on the concentration of metals in the ash it may be economical to mine the ash.
The fly ash will stay within the plant unless it's containment pond has a catastrophic spill.
Slashdot Mirror
A picture of the levers on lever voting machine is not proof of anything. When using a lever voting machine you enter a booth and pull a big lever which closes a curtain behind you. None of the levers used for making selections on the ballot are set. Until the big lever is pulled again you are free to make and change any of the levers. Once the big lever is pulled selections made with the levers are registered and all the levers are returned to their starting positions. Any pictures that might be taken are proof of nothing except that the levers were set a certain way at one point before the vote was registered. It doesn't confirm what the final vote really was. A detailed receipt on the other hand does say what your final vote was. Unless the receipt is issued outside the booth the person is free to take a picture with their mobile and transmit it in hardly any time at all.
When we had lever machines in our voting district you had to pull big lever to close the curtain before you could vote. Once you were finished you pulled the big lever again and your votes were registered and the curtain opened.
PoV machine also prints out a receipt for every voter after voting is complete, with detailed results that the voter can read and visually verify. Receipt includes a machine-readible 2D barcode.
A detailed receipt verifying who a person voted for is a bad idea. It can be used to verify that purchased votes were actually delivered. Also, lots of people would not be able to vote freely if there was the possibility of a paper trail of how they voted.
It's difficult to tell from the graphs on that page, but to me it looks like the peak for wages in the 70's would have occurred in the first half of the 70's. perhaps at the end of Nixon's administration or the beginning of Ford's. Wages wavered a bit after that but never again seemed to match the rise in productivity that happened from the end of WWII and the beginning of the 70's.
It really did refer to machine. When Watson named the company International Business Machines it manufactured all sorts of machines. Actual, real machines. Punch card tabulators, clocks, scales and cheese slicers. During WWII they even made rifles. At one time, machines were the heart of IBM.
Revenue from power systems was down 32% compared to a year earlier. If they don't improve soon they'll get sold just like System X.
They've still got System Z mainframe line, and I can't see them selling that business unit off, but they ought to just drop the M and call themselves 'International Business'.
Students have changed majors since there have been majors. What's the evidence that schools are enrolling more engineering majors recently than they have in years gone by?
If I had mod points I'd give you one. Back in the '80s and '90s that was the official line. All the creative jobs would remain in the US while we shipped all the boring and dangerous jobs overseas. Companies like Apple are the exception that prove the rule. From what I've seen, engineering jobs eventually follow manufacturing overseas when a company decides to offshore manufacturing. Maybe not all the engineering jobs, but certainly a large part of them. The decline in engineering employment in the US is related to the decline in its manufacturing capacity.
What evidence do you have that more people are applying for entry to engineering programs? It seems to me that your premise is likely only true if universities could be shown to enrolling significantly more engineering students over the years. If the number of people getting engineering degrees is any indication, the information in this article would indicate that universities have not significantly increased their engineering school enrollments. If anything they may be enrolling fewer engineering students overall.
The Samsung Chromebook is $250. The Acer C7 Chromebook, with a 320G hard drive, is $190. I purchased the Samsung for my wife when her laptop died. She's been very satisfied with it. She likes the size and weight, that it boots rapidly, lack of a fan, relatively cool operation, and that for her usage patterns the battery lasts all day. Outside of work all that she does on a computer is email and consume content from the web, so the Chromebook fits her needs extremely well.
Would new drugs be required to wait for the FDA to complete testing before being released? The FDA has barely enough funding to review studies the pharmaceutical companies produce, where would the extra money come from for it to do testing? If pharmaceutical companies are freed from the need to test would they flood the marketplace with so many new products that the FDA couldn't keep up? If the FDA's testing program can't keep up with the number of new drugs being introduced by drug companies, who sets the priorities of what's to be tested?
What kind of people did Jobs tend to hire? Could two Steve Jobs work together productively?
Your normal calling pattern would still be there even with the background noise of random calls. It would take a bit more processing to tease that pattern out, but it could still be identified. Calling random numbers would be more of an inconvenience for you and the people receiving those calls than the software analyzing your call patterns.
My thought when I saw this is that Keep's revenue model will be to encourage more people to store more data on Google Drive, resulting in more people going over the limit where Drive is free. Google isn't pushing a note keeping service, it's selling storage. Google may also be looking at the data it can extract from a service that it can then sell to advertisers and marketing companies. If Keep sells enough storage and produces sufficient revenue from the quality and quantity of data it generates it will stick around, if not it's a goner.
Yep, if you've got stairs in the building where you work get up an walk up and down stairs every 90 minutes or so. Ten minutes of stair walking is a bit of exercise. Last time I worked in an office it was in a building with four floors, with two flights of stairs for each floor and two more to the door to the roof. Over a nine or ten hour work day I could do about 40 minutes of stair climbing. And doing it in small amounts spread through out the day is better for you than doing it in one big session.
Why 1,000? Why is 1,000 the magic number? Why not 10,000 or 50,000?
On the other hand, if that rat was growing my replacement tooth, up until it was time to harvest the tooth that rat would be the most pampered rat in the world.
So the Obama administration shouldn't have taken a position on this? I guess I expect a presidential administration to take a position on important issues regardless of whether or not the issue is controversial. The Obama administration takes positions on plenty of other things that generate political heat.
Texas Hurricanes.
And Florida doesn't have hurricanes?
China builds a reactor in under 24 months. The completed cost of an AP-1000 reactor in China is $2 billion as of 2009.
According to this construction on China's first AP-1000 reactor started in 2009 and is expected to be completed in October of 2014.
Some insurance companies can go bankrupt. Others, like AIG, apparently cannot. And probably, if any of the other large insurance companies that provide millions of seniors with retirement income through annuities was about to go bankrupt, the federal government and the Fed would likely figure out a way to keep it afloat and continue paying on its obligations. If you think Social Security has problems, it is nothing compared to the coming problems faced by China's pension system. It has worse demographics and the retirement age is much lower (55 for women, 60 for men) than in the U.S. And, it's not just China and the US. Japan, Europe in general, Brazil, and Russia face the same dilemma. I don't think every major country's currency is going to become worthless and I don't think they are going throw all their elderly out on the street, either. There are fixes for both Social Security and Medicare, but political gridlock in Washington prevents any meaningful change.
LENR is a very long way from the day when you can go out and buy a home nuclear reactor. In fact, it still has to be proven that the phenomenon even exists
Even if you don't sequester the carbon and just put it out a smoke stack you're still at an advantage over normal coal burning. One of the major problems with coal burning is not the CO2, but the fly ash that contains heavy metals and causes respiratory problems. This process allows for those heavy metals to be contained in the coal ash which is kept within the plant. Depending on the concentration of metals in the ash it may be economical to mine the ash.
The fly ash will stay within the plant unless it's containment pond has a catastrophic spill.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach.
And those who don't know shit like to use that worn out saying as if it's universally true.