Is there some way you could use the energy to break the CO2 and sequester the carbon?
I'd think a bacteria would be more efficient but if that wouldn't work, you could have a "balloon" with solar cells that broke the CO2 and released O2 and periodically dropped solid carbon masses to the planet.
I think mars was doomed from the beginning but I wonder if Venus could be terraformed with some kind of aerosol cloud to shade it and reduce the thermal input.
Congress passed a very onerous law that makes the postal service unique in having to pay billions of dollars *right now* to cover retirement benefits. They might recover in a decade or so after these funds have been paid.
Meantime, folks are handling bills electronically which removes most of their real mail.
To be honest, if we got back to just REAL mail (no junk mail), one mail carrier could probably cover an entire neighborhood since they would only be delivering mail to houses every few days or less.
I don't see any reason in subsidizing door vs curb delivery when so many americans have to go to a central mailbox (i.e. everyone in an apartment) (i.e. everyone in new neighborhoods).
David Marcus: Lieutenant Saavik was right: You never have faced death.
Kirk: No. Not like this. I haven't faced death. I've cheated death. I've tricked my way out of death and patted myself on the back for my ingenuity. I know nothing.
David Marcus: You knew enough to tell Saavik that how we face death is at least as important as how we face life.
Kirk: Just words.
David Marcus: But good words. That's where ideas begin. Maybe you should listen to them. I was wrong about you. And I'm sorry.
Kirk: Is that what you came here to say?
David Marcus: Mainly. And also that I'm proud - very proud - to be your son.
You don't KNOW what's going to happen in them. Seriously- there is no "chekov's" gun in Bollywood films. You may see 3 guns on the wall and only 1 of them will be used. You may have an entire subplot which is just interesting but doesn't mean go anywhere.
It's fantastic. When I go to a hollywood film- I can often guess the ending within the first 30 minutes. And it LOWERS the value I place on hollywood films by a couple bucks. I might pay 9-10 bucks to see a genuinely interesting surprising film. But only about 6 to 7 bucks for a mildly entertaining predictable film with a manipulative soundtrack (they tell you how to feel about the actions taken basically-- making the same action "good" or "bad" based on the accompanying soundtrack.)
I noticed several years ago that R rated films which are not "sex" films (like betty blue) have their first nude scene at 40 minutes into the movie (sometimes 39, sometimes 41 but you get the idea). Probably sets unrealistic expectations for dating people.
No no.. i want to see these set up in math statements as the parent poster said.
For example, you could show that love is a set of hormonal and biological systems which could be modeled with mathematics. It's actually the only one which can be resolved as the parent poster suggested.
The man born blind and question about math objects real or constructions are both classic unsolved philosophical problems. If you've solved them, prepare for fame.
As far as 6 goes. First -- can you set that up as a math problem. Second -- given that we still don't know more than we know (and it seems the more we know, the more we become aware we don't know), it's certainly possible that a deity exists. For example, a being of higher than 4 dimensions would effectively be a deity since it would be outside of time and space and able to see all of time and all of space simultaneously. And, from our frame of reference, that would be "supernatural".
For example, it could reach straight inside your body without breaking the surface. It could tell you what you would do before you did it. (See flatland- A Romance of Many Dimensions)
Your girlfriend asks you, do these pants make me look fat?
There are two attractive people, one with red hair and one with blond hair. Which is more attractive?
What is love?
If a man born blind, and able to distinguish by touch between a cube and a globe, were made to see, could he now tell by sight which was the cube and which the globe, before he touched them?
Are mathematical objects are real or merely formal constructions?
When both people are saying opposite things and are equally credible, you really have to go on slim pickings. Mostly gut feel or it may be as simple as having a motive to lie while the other has no apparent motive to lie.
One had one older criminals testifying against the other criminal and we based that on the fact that his testimony was impossible (i.e. you couldn't see the location he said he saw from his porch). After the trial, the court appointed defense attorney said we had probably chosen correctly since the two had had bad blood before the incident.
I would consider hard evidence over any human testimony if they conflicted because I know how unreliable even well meaning humans are.
Oh yea and Zim has multiple injuries and a broken nose while Martin only has cuts on his hands and a bullet wound.
If Zim hadn't shot Martin, we would be reading how a mysterious person in a dark hoodie killed a guy on neighborhood watch by beating him to death or shooting him with his own gun.
2:23 Dispatcher: Are you following him? Maybe the Dispatcher interprets the background noises as Zimmerman running. Zimmerman: Yeah. Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that. 2:28 Zimmerman: Ok. Zimmerman has stopped and talks to the dispatcher for 1m:38s. 4:06 Click and the call ends. ---
A running Martin had close to 2 minutes to get to his house 200'-300' away (5 houses away) before the end of the call.
It's almost another minute before the calls about the fight start- not near martin's house.
Obvious conclusion- Martin decided to confront Zim and did not go to his house but came back to confront Zim.
Within seconds the state's only eyewitness, Mr. Good, (the rest are just 'earwitnesses) saw Martin (guy in the black hoodie) on top of Zim (the guy in the red sweatshirt) and Martin was beating Zim so badly that Mr. Good immediately called 911.
In 2005, Zimmerman was charged with assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest, after shoving an officer while a friend of Zimmerman's was being questioned about underage drinking. The charges were reduced, then dropped when Zimmerman entered a pre-trial diversion program.
Also in 2005, Zimmerman's ex-fiance filed a restraining order against him, alleging domestic violence. Zimmerman requested a reciprocal restraining order. Both orders were granted.[67][68] The incidents were raised by prosecutors at Zimmerman's initial bond hearing. The judge described the incidents as "run of the mill" and "somewhat mild" and rejected the prosecution's claim that the incidents demonstrated that Zimmerman was violent or a threat to the community.[3][69][70]
Yea... the same racist who lead protests against the police (and got the disciplined) for kicking a black homeless guy.
And the same racist who helped underprivileged black kids.
And the same racist who called 911 to tell them what was going on right before he shot someone. Real bright, hunting people to kill them but calling the police in right before you shoot them.
I rarely call anyone an ignorant moron. In fact, I may have never done so.
But you-- are an ignorant moron.
Go read the testimony. Then... you'll just be moron.
No because deedee testified that she lied on her statement on the stand and two of the other witnesses admitted under cross examination that they had changed their story between when they made statements and the testimony they were giving. And one of the witnesses was contradicting the live 911 call and hard physical evidence (saying she heard Zim shoot Martin three times from behind) (martin was shot 1 time from the front- there were not shots on the 911 call she was on).
Meanwhile Mr Good's statement taken the night of the shooting and testifying on the stand were the same.
Also, Mr. Good was very close to the incident (it was apparently right out side his house).
Also Mr. Good had no incentive to lie the night of the shooting.
Also Mr. Good was an EYE witness- not an "EAR" witness. He saw the person "in the black hoodie" on top of and beating the person in the "red sweatshirt" in a "ground and pound" fashion.
It's clear to me you are not listening to the testimony of the case or you would know how terrible the other witnesses are proving to be for the state.
Almost every state witness has either turned out to think Zim was a polite, great guy or was caught lying or exaggerating or changing their story right on the stand by the defense attorney on cross.
I've been a juror three times. I could not convict Zim on 2nd degree murder. I have a reasonable doubt.
In fact, after the testimony, it's much stronger than doubt about 2nd degree murder and I'm pretty convinced it was a good self defense shooting and if he hadn't shot Martin, we would have been reading about a hunt for a person in a black hoodie who beat a neighborhood watch guy to death or shot him to death with his own gun.
However, I've been a juror multiple times and you don't have to have evidence. In 2 of my 3 juror trials, one or more people lied and we had to decide who was telling the truth.
You asked if I thought zimmerman was telling the truth when he said that martin said those things and I said that i don't. If I were on the juror, I would not believe martin said those things to Zimmerman. As a juror, I don't NEED evidence to decide someone is lying under oath. They look at the person testifying and make a gut check and a comparison of the testimony to the hard facts (video, 911 call, physical locations).
Martin was an experienced fighter (there is video evidence for that). And an eye witness (mr good) saw Martin at extremely short range on top of Zim and "raining" blows down on Zim MMF "Ground and pound" style. Mr Good's statement and testimony match. I just it as a result. He has no incentive to lie and certainly didn't the night of the shooting.
As a juror, I don't have to justify shooting Martin for beating Zimmerman. All I have to do is have a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed 2nd degree murder. And I do. So I would vote not guilty.
However, Any hit to the face (not just a "King hit") can be instantly fatal. If someone is hitting you in the face, they can kill you each time they hit you in several places on the face (either temple and the nose-- plus very likely to shatter your the fragile bones around your eyes, break your jaw, etc.) There was substantial damage to Zimmerman's face (including what looked like a broken nose) and the only damage Martin had were a couple scrapes on one finger.
Given that Martin had ample time to get away (close to three minutes) and the calm language Zimmerman was using on the 911 call- it seems like Martin came back in the mood to confront Zim for following Martin.
--- Anyway, i think we are in violent agreement that Zimmerman is not guilty of 2nd degree murder of Martin.
They seem implausible to me then and now. Some of it sounded like something out of a cheap dime store novel. I couldn't see martin making the leap to killing someone because they were carrying a gun to I could see him beating someone like he was observed doing.
Look up "King hit" and you can see how easy it is to kill or severely damage someone with one blow.
Testimony from eye witness Mr. Good is that Martin "in the black hoodie" was on top of and winning while "raining" down blows on Zim "in the red sweatshirt" and that it was "probably" Zim who was calling for help. Wasn't sure since Martin was facing away from Mr. Good.
OTH, why would I be beating the hell out of someone and calling for help.
We have testimony from an eye witness (mr. good) that martin was beating zimmerman in a "rain" of blows "MMA style" in a "ground and pound".
Agree?
We have a timeline from the 911 call that shows Zimmerman stopped and talked with the operator for close to 2 minutes.
Agree?
Martin's house was about 200' away from where he was last seen. A normal person walks that in under 60 seconds. It seems reasonable that Martin could have gotten to his house but didn't go there.
Agree?
I'd be unable to convict for 2nd degree murder if I were on the jury and I've been on several jurys.
On the 911 call Zim did chase down Martin for about 20 seconds until the 911 operator said, "we don't need you to do that" and he stopped (and he's already winded- terrible shape).
Zim talks to the operator for about 2 minutes and then the call ends.
Then about a minute later the fight is being observed by witnesses with martin on top of zimmerman.
Zimmerman is likely lying about several things (i.e. what martin said while beating Zim). But the 911 data shows that martin had ample time to get home (about 200' -five houses away on the maps).
If I were on the jury, I would have reasonable doubt about whether Zim committed 2nd degree murder and vote not guilty.
---
My personal theory is that a 17 year old hot head with fighting experience went back to beat up the creepy guy following him.
Slashdot Mirror
Is there some way you could use the energy to break the CO2 and sequester the carbon?
I'd think a bacteria would be more efficient but if that wouldn't work, you could have a "balloon" with solar cells that broke the CO2 and released O2 and periodically dropped solid carbon masses to the planet.
I think mars was doomed from the beginning but I wonder if Venus could be terraformed with some kind of aerosol cloud to shade it and reduce the thermal input.
Agreed.
Congress passed a very onerous law that makes the postal service unique in having to pay billions of dollars *right now* to cover retirement benefits. They might recover in a decade or so after these funds have been paid.
Meantime, folks are handling bills electronically which removes most of their real mail.
To be honest, if we got back to just REAL mail (no junk mail), one mail carrier could probably cover an entire neighborhood since they would only be delivering mail to houses every few days or less.
I don't see any reason in subsidizing door vs curb delivery when so many americans have to go to a central mailbox (i.e. everyone in an apartment) (i.e. everyone in new neighborhoods).
Don't you mean....
My... god... was Generations... ...bad.
oh. I like this one a lot.
David Marcus: Lieutenant Saavik was right: You never have faced death.
Kirk: No. Not like this. I haven't faced death. I've cheated death. I've tricked my way out of death and patted myself on the back for my ingenuity. I know nothing.
David Marcus: You knew enough to tell Saavik that how we face death is at least as important as how we face life.
Kirk: Just words.
David Marcus: But good words. That's where ideas begin. Maybe you should listen to them. I was wrong about you. And I'm sorry.
Kirk: Is that what you came here to say?
David Marcus: Mainly. And also that I'm proud - very proud - to be your son.
---
"I know nothing".
Be nice to see that from Mr. Pine some day.
And an amazing performance by the regulars.
And some excellent writing
And an existing history between the regulars and Khan.
And it had Ricardo Montalban's chest.
And of course... Melville (Moby Dick)
---
Saavik: On the test, sir... will you tell me what you did? I would really like to know.
McCoy: Lieutenant, you are looking at the only Starfleet cadet who ever beat the no-win scenario.
Saavik: How?
Kirk: I reprogrammed the simulation so it was possible to rescue the ship.
Saavik: What?
David Marcus: He cheated.
Kirk: I changed the conditions of the test; got a commendation for original thinking. I don't like to lose.
Saavik: Then you never faced that situation... faced death.
Kirk: I don't believe in the no-win scenario.
---
Saavik: You lied!
Spock: I exaggerated.
Kirk: Hours instead of days! Now we have minutes instead of hours!
---
It had loads of character interaction. The IMDB quotes page has half the movie.
It takes much longer to watch a video than to read an article.
On Yahoo/CNBC, I read the article over listening to the video.
Perhaps there is some way to feed the video into Google Voice.
You don't KNOW what's going to happen in them. Seriously- there is no "chekov's" gun in Bollywood films. You may see 3 guns on the wall and only 1 of them will be used. You may have an entire subplot which is just interesting but doesn't mean go anywhere.
It's fantastic. When I go to a hollywood film- I can often guess the ending within the first 30 minutes. And it LOWERS the value I place on hollywood films by a couple bucks. I might pay 9-10 bucks to see a genuinely interesting surprising film. But only about 6 to 7 bucks for a mildly entertaining predictable film with a manipulative soundtrack (they tell you how to feel about the actions taken basically-- making the same action "good" or "bad" based on the accompanying soundtrack.)
I noticed several years ago that R rated films which are not "sex" films (like betty blue) have their first nude scene at 40 minutes into the movie (sometimes 39, sometimes 41 but you get the idea). Probably sets unrealistic expectations for dating people.
No no.. i want to see these set up in math statements as the parent poster said.
For example, you could show that love is a set of hormonal and biological systems which could be modeled with mathematics. It's actually the only one which can be resolved as the parent poster suggested.
The man born blind and question about math objects real or constructions are both classic unsolved philosophical problems. If you've solved them, prepare for fame.
As far as 6 goes. First -- can you set that up as a math problem.
Second -- given that we still don't know more than we know (and it seems the more we know, the more we become aware we don't know), it's certainly possible that a deity exists. For example, a being of higher than 4 dimensions would effectively be a deity since it would be outside of time and space and able to see all of time and all of space simultaneously. And, from our frame of reference, that would be "supernatural".
For example, it could reach straight inside your body without breaking the surface. It could tell you what you would do before you did it. (See flatland- A Romance of Many Dimensions)
It's the advice I gave my daughter.
She graduated into a job as well. Others in her class are still struggling.
Companies will work you in college that won't work you 3 days after you graduate without experience.
She was lucky and able to get jobs that paid a small wage so it wasn't free.
Oh ... and
If a man guards a book year after year, which is more important? The man or the book?
And a horse has no udders, and a cow canâ(TM)t whinny. And up is down, and sideways is straight ahead.
Your girlfriend asks you, do these pants make me look fat?
There are two attractive people, one with red hair and one with blond hair. Which is more attractive?
What is love?
If a man born blind, and able to distinguish by touch between a cube and a globe, were made to see, could he now tell by sight which was the cube and which the globe, before he touched them?
Are mathematical objects are real or merely formal constructions?
Do deities exist?
When both people are saying opposite things and are equally credible, you really have to go on slim pickings. Mostly gut feel or it may be as simple as having a motive to lie while the other has no apparent motive to lie.
One had one older criminals testifying against the other criminal and we based that on the fact that his testimony was impossible (i.e. you couldn't see the location he said he saw from his porch). After the trial, the court appointed defense attorney said we had probably chosen correctly since the two had had bad blood before the incident.
I would consider hard evidence over any human testimony if they conflicted because I know how unreliable even well meaning humans are.
Oh yea and Zim has multiple injuries and a broken nose while Martin only has cuts on his hands and a bullet wound.
If Zim hadn't shot Martin, we would be reading how a mysterious person in a dark hoodie killed a guy on neighborhood watch by beating him to death or shooting him with his own gun.
2:23 Dispatcher: Are you following him? Maybe the Dispatcher interprets the background noises as Zimmerman running.
Zimmerman: Yeah.
Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that.
2:28 Zimmerman: Ok.
Zimmerman has stopped and talks to the dispatcher for 1m:38s.
4:06 Click and the call ends.
---
A running Martin had close to 2 minutes to get to his house 200'-300' away (5 houses away) before the end of the call.
It's almost another minute before the calls about the fight start- not near martin's house.
Obvious conclusion- Martin decided to confront Zim and did not go to his house but came back to confront Zim.
Within seconds the state's only eyewitness, Mr. Good, (the rest are just 'earwitnesses) saw Martin (guy in the black hoodie) on top of Zim (the guy in the red sweatshirt) and Martin was beating Zim so badly that Mr. Good immediately called 911.
In 2005, Zimmerman was charged with assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest, after shoving an officer while a friend of Zimmerman's was being questioned about underage drinking. The charges were reduced, then dropped when Zimmerman entered a pre-trial diversion program.
Also in 2005, Zimmerman's ex-fiance filed a restraining order against him, alleging domestic violence. Zimmerman requested a reciprocal restraining order. Both orders were granted.[67][68] The incidents were raised by prosecutors at Zimmerman's initial bond hearing. The judge described the incidents as "run of the mill" and "somewhat mild" and rejected the prosecution's claim that the incidents demonstrated that Zimmerman was violent or a threat to the community.[3][69][70]
Yea... the same racist who lead protests against the police (and got the disciplined) for kicking a black homeless guy.
And the same racist who helped underprivileged black kids.
And the same racist who called 911 to tell them what was going on right before he shot someone. Real bright, hunting people to kill them but calling the police in right before you shoot them.
I rarely call anyone an ignorant moron. In fact, I may have never done so.
But you-- are an ignorant moron.
Go read the testimony. Then... you'll just be moron.
No because deedee testified that she lied on her statement on the stand and two of the other witnesses admitted under cross examination that they had changed their story between when they made statements and the testimony they were giving. And one of the witnesses was contradicting the live 911 call and hard physical evidence (saying she heard Zim shoot Martin three times from behind) (martin was shot 1 time from the front- there were not shots on the 911 call she was on).
Meanwhile Mr Good's statement taken the night of the shooting and testifying on the stand were the same.
Also, Mr. Good was very close to the incident (it was apparently right out side his house).
Also Mr. Good had no incentive to lie the night of the shooting.
Also Mr. Good was an EYE witness- not an "EAR" witness. He saw the person "in the black hoodie" on top of and beating the person in the "red sweatshirt" in a "ground and pound" fashion.
It's clear to me you are not listening to the testimony of the case or you would know how terrible the other witnesses are proving to be for the state.
Almost every state witness has either turned out to think Zim was a polite, great guy or was caught lying or exaggerating or changing their story right on the stand by the defense attorney on cross.
I've been a juror three times. I could not convict Zim on 2nd degree murder. I have a reasonable doubt.
In fact, after the testimony, it's much stronger than doubt about 2nd degree murder and I'm pretty convinced it was a good self defense shooting and if he hadn't shot Martin, we would have been reading about a hunt for a person in a black hoodie who beat a neighborhood watch guy to death or shot him to death with his own gun.
Correct.
However, I've been a juror multiple times and you don't have to have evidence.
In 2 of my 3 juror trials, one or more people lied and we had to decide who was telling the truth.
You asked if I thought zimmerman was telling the truth when he said that martin said those things and I said that i don't. If I were on the juror, I would not believe martin said those things to Zimmerman. As a juror, I don't NEED evidence to decide someone is lying under oath. They look at the person testifying and make a gut check and a comparison of the testimony to the hard facts (video, 911 call, physical locations).
Martin was an experienced fighter (there is video evidence for that).
And an eye witness (mr good) saw Martin at extremely short range on top of Zim and "raining" blows down on Zim MMF "Ground and pound" style. Mr Good's statement and testimony match. I just it as a result. He has no incentive to lie and certainly didn't the night of the shooting.
As a juror, I don't have to justify shooting Martin for beating Zimmerman. All I have to do is have a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed 2nd degree murder. And I do. So I would vote not guilty.
However, Any hit to the face (not just a "King hit") can be instantly fatal. If someone is hitting you in the face, they can kill you each time they hit you in several places on the face (either temple and the nose-- plus very likely to shatter your the fragile bones around your eyes, break your jaw, etc.) There was substantial damage to Zimmerman's face (including what looked like a broken nose) and the only damage Martin had were a couple scrapes on one finger.
Given that Martin had ample time to get away (close to three minutes) and the calm language Zimmerman was using on the 911 call- it seems like Martin came back in the mood to confront Zim for following Martin.
---
Anyway, i think we are in violent agreement that Zimmerman is not guilty of 2nd degree murder of Martin.
They seem implausible to me then and now. Some of it sounded like something out of a cheap dime store novel. I couldn't see martin making the leap to killing someone because they were carrying a gun to I could see him beating someone like he was observed doing.
Look up "King hit" and you can see how easy it is to kill or severely damage someone with one blow.
Testimony from eye witness Mr. Good is that Martin "in the black hoodie" was on top of and winning while "raining" down blows on Zim "in the red sweatshirt" and that it was "probably" Zim who was calling for help. Wasn't sure since Martin was facing away from Mr. Good.
OTH, why would I be beating the hell out of someone and calling for help.
Evidence submitted by the state shows ZImmerman had a history of this kind of thing.
i.e. calling the police and reporting suspicious circumstances to them and not being overly aggressive.
It was very strange that they would submit all those 911 calls but apparently they were trying to show Zimmerman had reached the breaking point.
To me, it felt like they were making the defense's case for them.
Note
[2:28] (Z stops)
Z Talks to operator
[4:07] (call ends)
--
Martin fails to cover the 200' to his house while running since M is back on scene about 3 minutes after Zim stopped.
Perhaps it needs to be more specific.
We have testimony from an eye witness (mr. good) that martin was beating zimmerman in a "rain" of blows "MMA style" in a "ground and pound".
Agree?
We have a timeline from the 911 call that shows Zimmerman stopped and talked with the operator for close to 2 minutes.
Agree?
Martin's house was about 200' away from where he was last seen. A normal person walks that in under 60 seconds. It seems reasonable that Martin could have gotten to his house but didn't go there.
Agree?
I'd be unable to convict for 2nd degree murder if I were on the jury and I've been on several jurys.
On the 911 call Zim did chase down Martin for about 20 seconds until the 911 operator said, "we don't need you to do that" and he stopped (and he's already winded- terrible shape).
Zim talks to the operator for about 2 minutes and then the call ends.
Then about a minute later the fight is being observed by witnesses with martin on top of zimmerman.
Zimmerman is likely lying about several things (i.e. what martin said while beating Zim). But the 911 data shows that martin had ample time to get home (about 200' -five houses away on the maps).
If I were on the jury, I would have reasonable doubt about whether Zim committed 2nd degree murder and vote not guilty.
---
My personal theory is that a 17 year old hot head with fighting experience went back to beat up the creepy guy following him.