No, it doesn't generate power -- but it prevents me from needing as much. The less I need, the more I can make myself. If I can cut my use from say, 200Mega Watts to 800Kilo Watts by proper deployment of insulation, energy star appliances, replacing a desktop PC with a Pico-ITX system, etc -- then if I can generate half what I need with solar panels or a wind mill (if I live in an area where I can fit one), then I'd no longer be that big of a draw on the grid, would I?
Of course, those numbers are all just pulled out of my ass for an example, but still -- you get the point. Cost saving measures at home are also going to lead to energy savings at large. With power prices going up ~30% next month, I think more people will start looking at the alternatives and where they can cut costs.
I agree that things need to be done on the supply side as well, but they should be done in a responsible manner. Building more nuclear plants, for instance. But by reducing consumption, we can then close down fossil plants instead of doing a 1:1 replacement.
On the other hand, it might be the final push that people need to start making their homes and businesses as energy efficient as possible, up to and including home solar and/or wind; use of more energy-efficient appliances, low-power-consumption electronics, etc.
I would dare say that the future looks good for ARM and Via on that last account, at least.
No, I think you missed the point of his post. Judges aren't there to make law. They are there to interpret the law, as written, and weigh the merits of the case at hand as to what precedents apply based on current facts.
The Supreme Court also is supposed to do this, its just that at that level they are almost exclusively supposed to put the law in the context of the Constitution. Then the thing is, if they are strict constructionist or not, as to what "side" they're likely to come down upon.
Thing is, When Washington was appointing judges, its not like they had to reach very hard to find out what the guys who wrote the Constitution meant -- they were alive and kicking and hanging out down the block. The system was created before political parties when it was just assumed that people would know what they were supposed to do.
Of course, things are different now. People who see themselves as "Democrats" or "Republicans," "Liberals" or "Conservatives," instead of just as "Americans" are in the position to appoint judges who will agree with their specific neo-tribalist sensibilities, slants and biases.
However, I would venture to say that no matter what form of government was constituted, the end result would have been the same because the pattern is obvious since the time of Rome, if not before.
Re:Don't forget the all too common: Giving yoursel
on
Bone-Headed IT Mistakes
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Clicking on a link that my trusted IT friend sent me... Would that one be directly responsible for your current career as "posting on slashdot in the middle of the day?"
the amount of FPSism that abounds in certain sectors of the geek community, you'd think that they'd be desensitized to guns by now. FPSes tell me that headshots are easy, and that all it takes is a moment of not listening for footsteps, or a moment's hesitation with my own gun, and I'm dead. And here I am without even a knife... You'd think FPSes would make geeks even more sensitive to guns. No, that should just make them more sensitive to death. From watching "SAW IV" I discovered that its easy to get two people to rip each others guts out with meathooks. If anything that should make me more sensitive to meathooks, right?
A tool is just a tool.
They're just there for a math joke, but for all he knows they're trying to set up the next woodstock. I somehow doubt woodstock would be his biggest fear. For that matter, if that's what they're doing, seems like a perfect opportunity to cash in on his previously-undervalued property. Some people value peace and quiet more than contributing to urban sprawl and getting a cash payout -- no matter how big it is. Selling off the family farmstead is for his children who have been corrupted by modern society. or something.
Well, it did happen in California, in the Bay area. That is an area more well known for acid tests and "medical marijuana" protests than it is for the 2nd amendment.
Except for Ron "Pig Pen" McKern, original keyboardist for the Grateful Dead. He had quite the collection. He must be rolling over in his grave right now.
the amount of FPSism that abounds in certain sectors of the geek community, you'd think that they'd be desensitized to guns by now.
I grew up in the sticks and shot in rifle competitions when I was a kid. I grew up around guns and I have some now. The gun isn't the scary thing.
The scary thing is an unknown person with one. Especially an unknown person whose private property you've just invaded without permission - and apparently in numbers.
Why does that guy take the gun with him? Because how the hell does he know what this large group of hippies that just showed up in his property wants? They're just there for a math joke, but for all he knows they're trying to set up the next woodstock.
The moral of the story is, don't tresspass and then bitch when the owner of the property asserts his rights. Then again, around here people root for the cracker kids and the mp3 traders, so I'm not really surprised.
Drugs are illegal, and there are penalties for possession and trafficing which determine the period of incarceration. However the "war on drugs" is absurd, as it will never stop the flow of drugs. The "war on drugs" will never be over.
"Terror," likewise, is a "war" on an abstract idea. They may as well include roller-coasters and Rob Zomby movies as part of the "axis of evil" as things which inflict "terror."
A "war on terror" can never be finished, as you can never eliminate "terror" through military operations.
My comparison had nothing to do with the length of incarceration of drug trafficers, merely with the duration of the operations -- indefinite.
No, I'm saying that they were POWs, and these people we have in our control now are POWs. -- that or we need to stop using the term "war." It's nothing more than a police action, using the military as the cops in that case.
"enemy combatant" is a bullshit term. They are either prisoners of war because they were soldiers or militia members, or they were partisans. If they were partisans, then it is standard practice to execute them, not try to "bring them to justice" with some stupid fucking trial.
They have not committed a crime, so they are not criminals.
The british had treated IRA members as political prisoners until Thatcher came in and revoked it. That is what the 1981 Hunger Strike was about. Political prisoner status for paramilitary was then reinstated.
Also, there was no Geneva Convention during the American Revolution.
My point was merely that they were considered "soldiers" to a degree, regardless of uniform.
How many IRA folk were wearing uniforms? How many Americans were wearing uniforms in the early skirmishes against the British?
All that is required is some sort of command structure and something they use to identify themselves (Hamas has the green bandana things) and then they're a "militia"
I agree with you in principle, however it's a little late for that distinction now. This is the way we can expect to get into "wars" from now, as much as that sucks.
Well, then I guess John McCain wasn't really a "prisoner of war." There goes his entire campaign platform! My great uncle did 3 years in a Chinese prison camp during the Korean war. You ought to listen to some of his stories before you start trying to draw legal distinctions, as if they'd mean anything.
Ok -- so we capture people on the battle field in Afghanistan and take them prisoner. Bush &co. don't want to classify them as "prisoners of war," because then they'd get Geneva Convention protection.
So, reaching back to FDR, they pull this "enemy combatant" thing out of their ass and say that now they can do whatever they want. Now, the Supreme Court is saying that "enemy combatants" are somehow criminals who are entitled to the protections of the civilian legal system.
If they were just reclassified as POWs, then they could be held until the war is over -- which, like the war on drugs, it never will be. So, they could be held forever, without any need for a trial - because you can't be tried for "murder" or "conspiring to murder Americans" if you are a soldier in time of war.
But yet, Bush &co still aren't going to want to reclassify them as POWs.
Jeebus. I seriously can't wait to get a new administration that will just settle on what the status of these prisoners is so that we don't have to hear about this crap anymore. Want to keep them forever? Call them POWs. Want to try them to make some sort of b.s. point like Nuremberg? Then they get the protection of a court system.
I'm really not seeing how they can have it both ways, but then again I'm not a lawyer -- just a human (usually an exclusive option).
And at some point in between you get Apollo 13. The key to everything is to hope for the best, but plan for the worst.
Skepticism should lead to contingency plans, not cop-outs. Then again, Skepticism being a branch of classical philosophy, I'm not sure its really exactly the right term to apply here.
They mean "re-educate," in that sort of Stalinist way, like Cuba -- many a Cuban "dissident" was just a Marxist that didn't buy into totalitarianism.
Hijack the ideology, tell people they didn't really "get it," then lock them in jail for heresy. I think its a common enough thread in human history.
Being educated he should know what he's doing. However, even Goebbels earned a PhD. People still do what is good for them, much of the time, regardless of what they believe to be "right" or recognize as flawed.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it doesn't generate power -- but it prevents me from needing as much. The less I need, the more I can make myself. If I can cut my use from say, 200Mega Watts to 800Kilo Watts by proper deployment of insulation, energy star appliances, replacing a desktop PC with a Pico-ITX system, etc -- then if I can generate half what I need with solar panels or a wind mill (if I live in an area where I can fit one), then I'd no longer be that big of a draw on the grid, would I?
Of course, those numbers are all just pulled out of my ass for an example, but still -- you get the point. Cost saving measures at home are also going to lead to energy savings at large. With power prices going up ~30% next month, I think more people will start looking at the alternatives and where they can cut costs.
I agree that things need to be done on the supply side as well, but they should be done in a responsible manner. Building more nuclear plants, for instance. But by reducing consumption, we can then close down fossil plants instead of doing a 1:1 replacement.
On the other hand, it might be the final push that people need to start making their homes and businesses as energy efficient as possible, up to and including home solar and/or wind; use of more energy-efficient appliances, low-power-consumption electronics, etc.
I would dare say that the future looks good for ARM and Via on that last account, at least.
No, I think you missed the point of his post. Judges aren't there to make law. They are there to interpret the law, as written, and weigh the merits of the case at hand as to what precedents apply based on current facts.
The Supreme Court also is supposed to do this, its just that at that level they are almost exclusively supposed to put the law in the context of the Constitution. Then the thing is, if they are strict constructionist or not, as to what "side" they're likely to come down upon.
Thing is, When Washington was appointing judges, its not like they had to reach very hard to find out what the guys who wrote the Constitution meant -- they were alive and kicking and hanging out down the block. The system was created before political parties when it was just assumed that people would know what they were supposed to do.
Of course, things are different now. People who see themselves as "Democrats" or "Republicans," "Liberals" or "Conservatives," instead of just as "Americans" are in the position to appoint judges who will agree with their specific neo-tribalist sensibilities, slants and biases.
However, I would venture to say that no matter what form of government was constituted, the end result would have been the same because the pattern is obvious since the time of Rome, if not before.
So, just like women, right?
Maybe that's the key after all!
Are you saying one of them was a tranny?
Smith and Wesson with combat trigger, extended beavertail; wood grip with blued steel. Also, with Wilson Combat mags - 8 + 1.
Yeah, that's in the top ten reasons why I carry a 1911.
A tool is just a tool. They're just there for a math joke, but for all he knows they're trying to set up the next woodstock. I somehow doubt woodstock would be his biggest fear. For that matter, if that's what they're doing, seems like a perfect opportunity to cash in on his previously-undervalued property. Some people value peace and quiet more than contributing to urban sprawl and getting a cash payout -- no matter how big it is. Selling off the family farmstead is for his children who have been corrupted by modern society. or something.
Well, it did happen in California, in the Bay area. That is an area more well known for acid tests and "medical marijuana" protests than it is for the 2nd amendment.
Except for Ron "Pig Pen" McKern, original keyboardist for the Grateful Dead. He had quite the collection. He must be rolling over in his grave right now.
the amount of FPSism that abounds in certain sectors of the geek community, you'd think that they'd be desensitized to guns by now.
I grew up in the sticks and shot in rifle competitions when I was a kid. I grew up around guns and I have some now. The gun isn't the scary thing.
The scary thing is an unknown person with one. Especially an unknown person whose private property you've just invaded without permission - and apparently in numbers.
Why does that guy take the gun with him? Because how the hell does he know what this large group of hippies that just showed up in his property wants? They're just there for a math joke, but for all he knows they're trying to set up the next woodstock.
The moral of the story is, don't tresspass and then bitch when the owner of the property asserts his rights. Then again, around here people root for the cracker kids and the mp3 traders, so I'm not really surprised.
They had a bunch of SGI computers in the lab scenes and stuff. Only the fat guy had Macs with AU/X on them.
I don't think Apple would want to play to that customer base anymore... might destroy their brand.
Yeah, but it sure looked cool in Jurassic Park :-p
Well, most users are comparing against Windows on a Dell, not Irix on an O2. "stability and performance" seem like luxuries in comparison.
Or so I've heard.
Drugs are illegal, and there are penalties for possession and trafficing which determine the period of incarceration. However the "war on drugs" is absurd, as it will never stop the flow of drugs. The "war on drugs" will never be over.
"Terror," likewise, is a "war" on an abstract idea. They may as well include roller-coasters and Rob Zomby movies as part of the "axis of evil" as things which inflict "terror."
A "war on terror" can never be finished, as you can never eliminate "terror" through military operations.
My comparison had nothing to do with the length of incarceration of drug trafficers, merely with the duration of the operations -- indefinite.
No, I'm saying that they were POWs, and these people we have in our control now are POWs. -- that or we need to stop using the term "war." It's nothing more than a police action, using the military as the cops in that case.
"enemy combatant" is a bullshit term. They are either prisoners of war because they were soldiers or militia members, or they were partisans. If they were partisans, then it is standard practice to execute them, not try to "bring them to justice" with some stupid fucking trial.
They have not committed a crime, so they are not criminals.
The british had treated IRA members as political prisoners until Thatcher came in and revoked it. That is what the 1981 Hunger Strike was about. Political prisoner status for paramilitary was then reinstated.
Also, there was no Geneva Convention during the American Revolution.
My point was merely that they were considered "soldiers" to a degree, regardless of uniform.
How many IRA folk were wearing uniforms? How many Americans were wearing uniforms in the early skirmishes against the British?
All that is required is some sort of command structure and something they use to identify themselves (Hamas has the green bandana things) and then they're a "militia"
I agree with you in principle, however it's a little late for that distinction now. This is the way we can expect to get into "wars" from now, as much as that sucks.
also see my response above to "edheler."
Well, then I guess John McCain wasn't really a "prisoner of war." There goes his entire campaign platform! My great uncle did 3 years in a Chinese prison camp during the Korean war. You ought to listen to some of his stories before you start trying to draw legal distinctions, as if they'd mean anything.
Ok -- so we capture people on the battle field in Afghanistan and take them prisoner. Bush &co. don't want to classify them as "prisoners of war," because then they'd get Geneva Convention protection.
So, reaching back to FDR, they pull this "enemy combatant" thing out of their ass and say that now they can do whatever they want. Now, the Supreme Court is saying that "enemy combatants" are somehow criminals who are entitled to the protections of the civilian legal system.
If they were just reclassified as POWs, then they could be held until the war is over -- which, like the war on drugs, it never will be. So, they could be held forever, without any need for a trial - because you can't be tried for "murder" or "conspiring to murder Americans" if you are a soldier in time of war.
But yet, Bush &co still aren't going to want to reclassify them as POWs.
Jeebus. I seriously can't wait to get a new administration that will just settle on what the status of these prisoners is so that we don't have to hear about this crap anymore. Want to keep them forever? Call them POWs. Want to try them to make some sort of b.s. point like Nuremberg? Then they get the protection of a court system.
I'm really not seeing how they can have it both ways, but then again I'm not a lawyer -- just a human (usually an exclusive option).
And at some point in between you get Apollo 13. The key to everything is to hope for the best, but plan for the worst.
Skepticism should lead to contingency plans, not cop-outs. Then again, Skepticism being a branch of classical philosophy, I'm not sure its really exactly the right term to apply here.
They mean "re-educate," in that sort of Stalinist way, like Cuba -- many a Cuban "dissident" was just a Marxist that didn't buy into totalitarianism.
Hijack the ideology, tell people they didn't really "get it," then lock them in jail for heresy. I think its a common enough thread in human history.
Being educated he should know what he's doing. However, even Goebbels earned a PhD. People still do what is good for them, much of the time, regardless of what they believe to be "right" or recognize as flawed.
You must not have had fraternities at your school.