It is a bit disturbing how easy an access to internet can be either stopped or limited. Is not it the time for the New Internet? -
https://www.wired.com/2017/06/...
I always look at the Wikipedia articles which are in the area where I am currently travel or live. I use for the is this web-application: http://ausleuchtung.ch/geo_wik...
Just click on the map and it shows articles in the radius of 10 km. It is possible to select the Wikipedia language in this web-application, I mean it works not only for English (en), but also for French (fr), Russian (ru), German (de), Ukrainian (uk), Chinese (zh), etc.
In my opinion, it was wrong to keep the road open until the 1000 tons bridge was fully functional and well tested.
But they could not close the road because there are basically no other modes of transportation. No bicycle routes worth mentioning, no pedestrian alleys, no trams.
Close the road for two days and the town collapses.
Criminal recidivists (and their crimes) are well known to authorities. I mean why harass millions of travelers at airports to catch dealers when they deal practically openly on city streets.
I have a hard time understanding some EU initiatives. For example, encouraging immigration into EU from the 3rd world countries while nothing is organized in place. So that people have to sleep in parks, walk over the mountain passes without proper equipment, etc.
Or dumbing down the DJI quad-copters. The range of the DJI Spark in the US (FCC) is 2000 meters. In the EU (EC) it is 500 meters https://www.dji.com/products/c... . In reality it is even less, at about 200 meters the warnings began to appear on the screen that the video signal is too weak.
OK, I could understand 1500 meters, 1000 meters, but why make it practically unusable?
So I would not be surprised if they make the Amason and Goggle unusable either.
...
Or the planet's population is kept small or localized (due to hospitable surface area or resource location) such that factionalization is impossible, it effectively remains one tribe....
There was a sociological research when a large group of monkeys, several hundreds, were placed on an isolated island. There were always factions, politics, and war. One after another. I saw a documentary about it.
But human history also shows the same pattern. One war after another, more and more destructive. Even after the war to end all wars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Anyway, there are billions of planets, which exist for billions of years, and practically no intelligent life, no intelligent radio signals.
It is quite possible that biological system appear and develop in accordance with the same fundamental laws of nature. In this case the Great Silence is well explained by the civilization bottleneck theory.
There is most probably no one up there to read these messages due to the Civilization Bottleneck theory.
The bottleneck theory postulates that the life evolves via natural selection, i.e. the survival of the fittest. As a result any civilization is based on the same principle. It leads to creation of competing imperialistic groups, and finally to a nuclear war between them. And consequently a quick end to a civilization.
The Great Silence, the total absence of any intelligent radio signals whatsoever from the space, makes this theory quite plausible.
Who could think that a relatively poor nation would be capable influence elections thousand of miles away, over the oceans, in a large land, without even investing in radio-stations along the borders?
Nonsense! 99.99% of the trees will be chopped down and used for firewood for heating and cooking, so they won't have a chance to die and decompose. Stuff tastes better when cooked on an open fire. And a an open fireplace is much more pleasant than heat from a radiator.
It is what probably happened in Ancient Egypt. The woods were over-exploited and finally disappeared. It would be very hard to reintroduce.
By the way, it is the same in jungles. If the trees are cut completely, the land does not turn back into jungles by itself. So it make sense to plant trees and protect the forests.
It were the plants in the first place which created oxygen on our planet. Actually trees do not need oxygen. It is kind of toxic for them, but they adjusted.
br
There are even plans to make Mars livable by introducing photosynthesis.
EPAs do not reduce the CO2, carbon dioxide, emissions. The carbon in the fossil fuel burns and produces the CO2. No way around it due to Newton's second law of motion: F=m*a. As long as a car has got a mass (weight) and it accelerates (drives), it requires a force (fuel).
In other words the net force is equated to the product of the mass times the acceleration.
Planting trees on the contrary reduces CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is the most dangerous pollutant as it is impossible to reduce it in principle while burning fossil or even bio fuel. One car produces during one day about the same quantity of the CO2, which one tree consumes during one year. So we need a lot of additional trees.
There are jobs which are to be done. No matter how. And this is it. I would only advise to use not only spades and shovels, but also some mechanization.
I lived for quite a while in a poor country, and even there people overeat and do not move enough nowadays. There are a lot of cases of obesity in poor countries too.
Massive automation and mechanization are global phenomenons.
I agree with you that there should be strict food control on toxins, infections, etc. Still, if a person does not move and overeat, any food would be dangerous.
If a man (or a woman) works in say a mine, eight hour a day, with a heavy hammer, then he can eat about anything he wants.
But it is very different for an office worker. The problem is that we engineered out the physical movement from our lives. And any food becomes dangerous in such circumstances.
The best way to deal with it is to widen sidewalks, build bicycle trails, nice stairs in buildings, etc. So that we can start move again regularly.
I don't know why you're talking about light bulbs, because Daylight Saving Time does not save energy. Period.
Still in the Wikipedia article the energy saving is stated as the first raison d'être: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Proponents of DST generally argue that it saves energy, promotes outdoor leisure activity in the evening (in summer)..."
I agree with you that it does not save time. Besides, I like to run in the morning before work, and because of the DST I have to run in darkness. I cannot wait when it is abolished.
LED lamps consume several times less electrical energy than incandescent bulbs.
I mean nowadays it is possible to save energy on lighting by less radical measures.
However, it would be very hard to cancel Daylight Saving Time. As there will be undoubtedly political populists trying to construct a career by defending this tradition.
Slashdot Mirror
It could be very convenient. No further audits are possible, since all documents are gone. All is to start from zero.
If he has no means to communicate with the outside world or to travel freely...that's the definition of incarceration. Finally.
At least if he is incarcerated he will finally have one hour outdoors every day. Every cloud has a silver lining.
It is a bit disturbing how easy an access to internet can be either stopped or limited. Is not it the time for the New Internet? - https://www.wired.com/2017/06/...
I always look at the Wikipedia articles which are in the area where I am currently travel or live. I use for the is this web-application: http://ausleuchtung.ch/geo_wik...
Just click on the map and it shows articles in the radius of 10 km. It is possible to select the Wikipedia language in this web-application, I mean it works not only for English (en), but also for French (fr), Russian (ru), German (de), Ukrainian (uk), Chinese (zh), etc.
In my opinion, it was wrong to keep the road open until the 1000 tons bridge was fully functional and well tested.
But they could not close the road because there are basically no other modes of transportation. No bicycle routes worth mentioning, no pedestrian alleys, no trams.
Close the road for two days and the town collapses.
Criminal recidivists (and their crimes) are well known to authorities. I mean why harass millions of travelers at airports to catch dealers when they deal practically openly on city streets.
A young man who is going out on a date may need to understand how hardware works.
Speaking seriously, the RPI 3 B+ is a good start to learn hardware and computing of the physical world.
They had to cacel the DST, but not make it permanent. Now it will be total confusion. Some countries cancel it, some make it permanent.
I have a hard time understanding some EU initiatives. For example, encouraging immigration into EU from the 3rd world countries while nothing is organized in place. So that people have to sleep in parks, walk over the mountain passes without proper equipment, etc.
Or dumbing down the DJI quad-copters. The range of the DJI Spark in the US (FCC) is 2000 meters. In the EU (EC) it is 500 meters https://www.dji.com/products/c... . In reality it is even less, at about 200 meters the warnings began to appear on the screen that the video signal is too weak.
OK, I could understand 1500 meters, 1000 meters, but why make it practically unusable?
So I would not be surprised if they make the Amason and Goggle unusable either.
... Or the planet's population is kept small or localized (due to hospitable surface area or resource location) such that factionalization is impossible, it effectively remains one tribe. ...
There was a sociological research when a large group of monkeys, several hundreds, were placed on an isolated island. There were always factions, politics, and war. One after another. I saw a documentary about it.
But human history also shows the same pattern. One war after another, more and more destructive. Even after the war to end all wars: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Anyway, there are billions of planets, which exist for billions of years, and practically no intelligent life, no intelligent radio signals.
It is quite possible that biological system appear and develop in accordance with the same fundamental laws of nature. In this case the Great Silence is well explained by the civilization bottleneck theory.
There is most probably no one up there to read these messages due to the Civilization Bottleneck theory.
The bottleneck theory postulates that the life evolves via natural selection, i.e. the survival of the fittest. As a result any civilization is based on the same principle. It leads to creation of competing imperialistic groups, and finally to a nuclear war between them. And consequently a quick end to a civilization.
The Great Silence, the total absence of any intelligent radio signals whatsoever from the space, makes this theory quite plausible.
The back should board first...
If one types in a search engine: aircraft tail sitting, and sees the images, it would become clear that it is not a good idea.
Aircraft is not a bus. The common sense does not always work in aviation.
itself, not the world became a village.
Who could think that a relatively poor nation would be capable influence elections thousand of miles away, over the oceans, in a large land, without even investing in radio-stations along the borders?
some issues as any map. Still it is the good map.
I use mostly the OpenStreetMap, Maps.ME on smartphone, where I can download the whole country, and I also use Google map.
Nonsense! 99.99% of the trees will be chopped down and used for firewood for heating and cooking, so they won't have a chance to die and decompose. Stuff tastes better when cooked on an open fire. And a an open fireplace is much more pleasant than heat from a radiator.
It is what probably happened in Ancient Egypt. The woods were over-exploited and finally disappeared. It would be very hard to reintroduce.
By the way, it is the same in jungles. If the trees are cut completely, the land does not turn back into jungles by itself. So it make sense to plant trees and protect the forests.
It were the plants in the first place which created oxygen on our planet. Actually trees do not need oxygen. It is kind of toxic for them, but they adjusted.
br There are even plans to make Mars livable by introducing photosynthesis.
EPAs do not reduce the CO2, carbon dioxide, emissions. The carbon in the fossil fuel burns and produces the CO2. No way around it due to Newton's second law of motion: F=m*a. As long as a car has got a mass (weight) and it accelerates (drives), it requires a force (fuel).
In other words the net force is equated to the product of the mass times the acceleration.
Planting trees on the contrary reduces CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is the most dangerous pollutant as it is impossible to reduce it in principle while burning fossil or even bio fuel. One car produces during one day about the same quantity of the CO2, which one tree consumes during one year. So we need a lot of additional trees.
There are jobs which are to be done. No matter how. And this is it. I would only advise to use not only spades and shovels, but also some mechanization.
petards and fireworks.
I lived for quite a while in a poor country, and even there people overeat and do not move enough nowadays. There are a lot of cases of obesity in poor countries too.
Massive automation and mechanization are global phenomenons.
I agree with you that there should be strict food control on toxins, infections, etc. Still, if a person does not move and overeat, any food would be dangerous.
If a man (or a woman) works in say a mine, eight hour a day, with a heavy hammer, then he can eat about anything he wants.
But it is very different for an office worker. The problem is that we engineered out the physical movement from our lives. And any food becomes dangerous in such circumstances.
The best way to deal with it is to widen sidewalks, build bicycle trails, nice stairs in buildings, etc. So that we can start move again regularly.
I was both in California and in Germany. I understand what you mean, however, in comparison with Germany there is no public transport in California.
In Germany pubic transport is rather clean and efficient.
...I agree with you that it does not save time....
Oops, my typing error. Rather: ... that it does not save energy.
I don't know why you're talking about light bulbs, because Daylight Saving Time does not save energy. Period.
Still in the Wikipedia article the energy saving is stated as the first raison d'être: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... "Proponents of DST generally argue that it saves energy, promotes outdoor leisure activity in the evening (in summer)..."
I agree with you that it does not save time. Besides, I like to run in the morning before work, and because of the DST I have to run in darkness. I cannot wait when it is abolished.
LED lamps consume several times less electrical energy than incandescent bulbs.
I mean nowadays it is possible to save energy on lighting by less radical measures.
However, it would be very hard to cancel Daylight Saving Time. As there will be undoubtedly political populists trying to construct a career by defending this tradition.
I noticed on TV that Mike Pence looked kind of upset during the opening ceremony.