Well, I don't know how to do it off the top of my head. I'd Google it, but I might end up with all these pornographic pictures...:^)
Seriously, I agree that this is a good thing and there are ways to not have Google index your pages if you'd prefer that they don't. I have to admit, I'm curious if there's a way to not have Google do images or videos but do text. That seems like it would be a feature worth having...
I think the concept was "Wouldn't it be nice to have a robotic garbageman who spends his life cruising along the river and picking up discarded crap that people have left."
It's kind of a nice concept, assuming that everything worked correctly...
Besides, terrorist could have got the President, if they wanted it, instead of killing innocent people in the WTC. Don't forget the plane that tried to hit the Pentagon (legitimate military target) and the plane that crashed before it could hit any targets (I'm not sure if we know what the target was--I'd heard the White House or the Capitol Dome).
Well, there are obviously things that developed nations can do to assist developing nations develop without polluting. Boy, that was a tough sentence.
I'll use a fun analogy--cell phones. When I was over in Vietnam, years ago, my friend had a phone. She was the only one around for miles who had a phone and she had one because someone in the government decided that it was important for her to have one (I believe she was a supervisor at a government-owned business). Phones are very expensive things to wire up--running wires around and things like that. (I'm sure there were other appropriate socialist reasons, but bear with me)
Today in Vietnam, lots of people have cell phones. One cell tower can handle, say, 1000 calls and it's cheaper to build one tower than it is to run wires to 1000 homes. There's also the whole convenience factor and all the other benefits to portable phones.
The US spent tons of money and time and effort running wires all over the place 60 or 70 years ago and we have enjoyed the benefits of our government doing this for many years. But nowadays the whole thing can be done cheaper by planting a batch of cell phone towers in various places. So why would a developing nation do what the US did and run wires all over the country when they could just build a bunch of cell towers and have phone service?
So it's a similar thing. Developed nations have learned alot about making things less polluting. If I have a factory in America and I produce widgets and create x amount of pollution in doing so, there's no reason that a factory in a developing nation which produces widgets should be able to produce 2x the amount of pollution when the technology exists for them to only produce x amount of pollution.
TFA says that the trend of the total population -- the rising of which being the myth -- is unknown. So, therefore, wouldn't it be safe to say that the polar bears are dying is also a myth, since we don't know the answer?
In the past, global warming and CO2/Greenhouse gas levels rose at the same time. In the present, global temperatures and CO2/Greenhouse gas levels are rising. So we seem to have yet another level of correlation.
If someone could CONCLUSIVLY prove that humans are the sole cause of global warming, and that global warming is not natural, and that it is bad, I would listen. Well, first, go RTFA. There's a bunch of things in there about why global warming is not natural and why it is bad.
This is science. There is very little "Conclusive" evidence in science. Hell, Gravity is still a theory! So is evolution, to use a more recent bickering-point. So, by your sentiment, because Darwin's theory of evolution is not "Conclusive" and there could be a higher power at work, we shouldn't be teaching evolution in schools?!
Could global warming be caused by other things as well as human production? Absolutely. But, then, should we be enhancing global warming? No.
The fact that you fall so easily for Viking marketing [...] In his defense, Viking marketing is pretty good. Right there behind pirate and ninja marketing. So you can't blame the guy for being taken in by it.
In fact, I'm considering starting a class action suit against those who are descended from the Vikings for false advertising. Who's with me?
One that you, say, value at $5, not the $29.99 the MPAA wants for a new release? As an aside, it's not up to you, the infringer, to decide the value, it is up to the person who is being infringed upon.
Just because I think a Ferrari is a piece-of-shit car and I wouldn't pay $5 for one doesn't make a Ferrari worth $5.
I'm an old Jeeper. I grew up driving a CJ-3a and I bought a Wrangler several years ago. I like the Jeep's ability to go pretty much anywhere. Back when I was a kid in Vermont, I had an old map of the area and I would follow roads that no longer existed (eg, the town had decided 70 years ago that nobody lived on the road and it wasn't worth maintaining). The roads were still sort of there--you could see where they had been but sometimes trees had grown up in the middle or part of the road had been washed out by some rainstorm.
Out here in California, I went and explored a lot of the "off road trails" in my Wrangler. It was lots of fun.
I don't own the Jeep anymore. I have a cute little roadster that gets better gas mileage and is lots of fun to drive on roads. I do miss the Jeep from time to time, though.
That said, I have my own pet theory in the popularity of SUVs in America. It has mostly to do with the image of the vehicle.
Way back when, families bought minivans. They were practical vehicles--you could put a lot of stuff or a lot of people in them. Minivans were marketed on this practicality. You could haul your two kids and bikes and have room left over. Perfect "Family" vehicle.
Problem? Not macho.
Minivan commercials generally showed women driving the kids around. Any guy driving a minivan was seen as being forced into getting one by his wife (ie, "Whipped"). Any guy having a minivan was obviously married, had 2.4 kids, a dog, lived in the suburbs, etc. There was no way you were a single, devil-may-care, adventurous sort. You were humdrum. You were boring.
SUVs solved this problem. Marketed as vehicles for the adventurous soul who climbs mountains and kayaks rivers, they also fit in well with the hauling the kids and picking up groceries. It was a car that Dad could drive without feeling less-than-manly but was practical for transporting the kids, dog, toys, etc.
That's why I refer to most SUVs as "macho minivans."
Well, I think you misinterpret cold fusion (based on comments above).
That said, "cheap electricity," even if it's from the grid, would hurt production of heating oil for northern homes (which is pretty good business). Oil burning power plants would also become a thing of the past. Needless to say, this would free up the refineries to produce more gasoline which would cause gasoline prices to drop and cut into profitability.
yes - because they were both shown on normal broadcast networks, as opposed to a cable/satellite-only channel. Not quite.
Voyager and DS9 were syndicated to individual stations in individual markets. So in one market, it might be shown on an NBC affiliate and in another market, it might be shown on an ABC affiliate. There was never a "network" behind Voyager and DS9--just Paramount Studios.
It used to be that many larger markets also had an "independent" station--not affiliated with any network. These stations would also give a boost to syndication-only programming. But as we got Fox, UPN, and WB networks, "independent" stations became fewer and fewer which hurt syndication-only programming. Also contributing to this were changes to media ownership rules, but that's another story...
Actually, the place that I lived had a big red button. But when I pushed it, nothing happened. So I'd push it every now and then. About six months later, I got a call from some lady in Germany. She said, "Cut it out."
There are also several famous stories about people with modems setting up their calling prefix to be 9-1 and then the area code and the number. Of course, someone else comes along and enters 1 and the area code. So the modem dials 9-1-1-714...
I'll be playing it in the Impossiball Lottery twice a week until it pays off. Now that's an entertaining thought.
Suppose the number wins the lottery, but someone else played that number. You could argue that you own that number and that no one else should be allowed to play it and, therefore, you get the whole jackpot. If you forgot to fill out your lottery card that week and the number came up, you could sue to prevent other people from winning.
How about candy cigarettes? Should we ban those because it might desensitize kids to the idea that smoking is bad for them?
How about video games where the main character is a criminal and he shoots policemen? That's a pretty vile and disgusting idea. Should there be a law that bans these videogames? After all, when they "experience the experience" vicariously through virtual means, it's more than likely they'll try the real thing some day or at least become desensitized to how wrong it is.
Not only do Microsoft fans call everything they disagree with "FUD" because they can't address it, but they're being very ironic by using a Microsoft-coined term. FUD has been around much longer than Microsoft. It was generally used by IBM to dissuade people from buying non-IBM peripherals to go with their IBM mainframes.
The blurry glass effect in Aero alone is actually really expensive. (And stupid) Uh, there is no blurry glass effect in Aero. It's time to clean your monitor.
(I don't know if Aero has a blurry glass effect. I've never used Vista and I've only seen it once or twice. I'm just trying to be funny.)
You see, this is the problem with Mars: One half has all the ice and the other half has none. There should be an equitable sharing of the ice. We need to get some Marsxists up there ASAP.
Either that, or the other half of Mars needs to get some ice quickly. After all, we cannot have an Ice gap...
"We choose to go to Pluto in 2015 not because it is easy, but because it is hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."
"Because it's a really cool way to spend $675 million."
Way back when, kidnapping was a pretty good way to make some quick cash. Grab somebody's significant other and tell them to deliver money to see them again. The automobile was pretty new and you could grab somebody and get them far enough away in a short amount of time that local law enforcement couldn't deal with it.
Thus, the feds were immediately brought in to any kidnapping case. Because the FBI had kidnapping specialists who knew all the angles, kidnapping for ransom became very unsuccessful. Nowadays, you rarely hear of a kidnapping case with a ransom demand here in the United States. It's just not worh it.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I don't know how to do it off the top of my head. I'd Google it, but I might end up with all these pornographic pictures... :^)
Seriously, I agree that this is a good thing and there are ways to not have Google index your pages if you'd prefer that they don't. I have to admit, I'm curious if there's a way to not have Google do images or videos but do text. That seems like it would be a feature worth having...
I think the concept was "Wouldn't it be nice to have a robotic garbageman who spends his life cruising along the river and picking up discarded crap that people have left."
It's kind of a nice concept, assuming that everything worked correctly...
Well, there are obviously things that developed nations can do to assist developing nations develop without polluting. Boy, that was a tough sentence.
I'll use a fun analogy--cell phones. When I was over in Vietnam, years ago, my friend had a phone. She was the only one around for miles who had a phone and she had one because someone in the government decided that it was important for her to have one (I believe she was a supervisor at a government-owned business). Phones are very expensive things to wire up--running wires around and things like that. (I'm sure there were other appropriate socialist reasons, but bear with me)
Today in Vietnam, lots of people have cell phones. One cell tower can handle, say, 1000 calls and it's cheaper to build one tower than it is to run wires to 1000 homes. There's also the whole convenience factor and all the other benefits to portable phones.
The US spent tons of money and time and effort running wires all over the place 60 or 70 years ago and we have enjoyed the benefits of our government doing this for many years. But nowadays the whole thing can be done cheaper by planting a batch of cell phone towers in various places. So why would a developing nation do what the US did and run wires all over the country when they could just build a bunch of cell towers and have phone service?
So it's a similar thing. Developed nations have learned alot about making things less polluting. If I have a factory in America and I produce widgets and create x amount of pollution in doing so, there's no reason that a factory in a developing nation which produces widgets should be able to produce 2x the amount of pollution when the technology exists for them to only produce x amount of pollution.
This is science. There is very little "Conclusive" evidence in science. Hell, Gravity is still a theory! So is evolution, to use a more recent bickering-point. So, by your sentiment, because Darwin's theory of evolution is not "Conclusive" and there could be a higher power at work, we shouldn't be teaching evolution in schools?!
Could global warming be caused by other things as well as human production? Absolutely. But, then, should we be enhancing global warming? No.
In fact, I'm considering starting a class action suit against those who are descended from the Vikings for false advertising. Who's with me?
My first thought was that we should be able to generate at least 1.21 gigawatts...
Just because I think a Ferrari is a piece-of-shit car and I wouldn't pay $5 for one doesn't make a Ferrari worth $5.
Different appeal.
I'm an old Jeeper. I grew up driving a CJ-3a and I bought a Wrangler several years ago. I like the Jeep's ability to go pretty much anywhere. Back when I was a kid in Vermont, I had an old map of the area and I would follow roads that no longer existed (eg, the town had decided 70 years ago that nobody lived on the road and it wasn't worth maintaining). The roads were still sort of there--you could see where they had been but sometimes trees had grown up in the middle or part of the road had been washed out by some rainstorm.
Out here in California, I went and explored a lot of the "off road trails" in my Wrangler. It was lots of fun.
I don't own the Jeep anymore. I have a cute little roadster that gets better gas mileage and is lots of fun to drive on roads. I do miss the Jeep from time to time, though.
That said, I have my own pet theory in the popularity of SUVs in America. It has mostly to do with the image of the vehicle.
Way back when, families bought minivans. They were practical vehicles--you could put a lot of stuff or a lot of people in them. Minivans were marketed on this practicality. You could haul your two kids and bikes and have room left over. Perfect "Family" vehicle.
Problem? Not macho.
Minivan commercials generally showed women driving the kids around. Any guy driving a minivan was seen as being forced into getting one by his wife (ie, "Whipped"). Any guy having a minivan was obviously married, had 2.4 kids, a dog, lived in the suburbs, etc. There was no way you were a single, devil-may-care, adventurous sort. You were humdrum. You were boring.
SUVs solved this problem. Marketed as vehicles for the adventurous soul who climbs mountains and kayaks rivers, they also fit in well with the hauling the kids and picking up groceries. It was a car that Dad could drive without feeling less-than-manly but was practical for transporting the kids, dog, toys, etc.
That's why I refer to most SUVs as "macho minivans."
Well, I think you misinterpret cold fusion (based on comments above). That said, "cheap electricity," even if it's from the grid, would hurt production of heating oil for northern homes (which is pretty good business). Oil burning power plants would also become a thing of the past. Needless to say, this would free up the refineries to produce more gasoline which would cause gasoline prices to drop and cut into profitability.
Voyager and DS9 were syndicated to individual stations in individual markets. So in one market, it might be shown on an NBC affiliate and in another market, it might be shown on an ABC affiliate. There was never a "network" behind Voyager and DS9--just Paramount Studios.
It used to be that many larger markets also had an "independent" station--not affiliated with any network. These stations would also give a boost to syndication-only programming. But as we got Fox, UPN, and WB networks, "independent" stations became fewer and fewer which hurt syndication-only programming. Also contributing to this were changes to media ownership rules, but that's another story...
Actually, he already has one.
But I like the conspiracy theory!
Actually, the place that I lived had a big red button. But when I pushed it, nothing happened. So I'd push it every now and then. About six months later, I got a call from some lady in Germany. She said, "Cut it out."
(Modified from an old Steven Wright bit)
There are also several famous stories about people with modems setting up their calling prefix to be 9-1 and then the area code and the number. Of course, someone else comes along and enters 1 and the area code. So the modem dials 9-1-1-714...
Suppose the number wins the lottery, but someone else played that number. You could argue that you own that number and that no one else should be allowed to play it and, therefore, you get the whole jackpot. If you forgot to fill out your lottery card that week and the number came up, you could sue to prevent other people from winning.
Hmm...
Ooh. And down the slippery slope we go.
How about candy cigarettes? Should we ban those because it might desensitize kids to the idea that smoking is bad for them?
How about video games where the main character is a criminal and he shoots policemen? That's a pretty vile and disgusting idea. Should there be a law that bans these videogames? After all, when they "experience the experience" vicariously through virtual means, it's more than likely they'll try the real thing some day or at least become desensitized to how wrong it is.
Is that really what you're trying to say?
Hang them both. Let God sort it out. :-)
(I don't know if Aero has a blurry glass effect. I've never used Vista and I've only seen it once or twice. I'm just trying to be funny.)
Either that, or the other half of Mars needs to get some ice quickly. After all, we cannot have an Ice gap...
- "We choose to go to Pluto in 2015 not because it is easy, but because it is hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."
- "Because it's a really cool way to spend $675 million."
You choose.Way.
Frankly, since Jobs return, I can only think of 2 products: AppleTV and iPhone. Can you think of other ones?
It's sort of like kidnapping.
Way back when, kidnapping was a pretty good way to make some quick cash. Grab somebody's significant other and tell them to deliver money to see them again. The automobile was pretty new and you could grab somebody and get them far enough away in a short amount of time that local law enforcement couldn't deal with it.
Thus, the feds were immediately brought in to any kidnapping case. Because the FBI had kidnapping specialists who knew all the angles, kidnapping for ransom became very unsuccessful. Nowadays, you rarely hear of a kidnapping case with a ransom demand here in the United States. It's just not worh it.