Re:The problem is that landfills are too cheap
on
Recycling Is Dying
·
· Score: 1
If you live out in the country in the US, you have to take your trash/recycling into a dump or collection site.
The typical approach is that you charge enough extra for trash/dumping that it covers the cost of recycling.
It has the benefits of being self-funding, and it puts a price point on motivating consumers to recycle.
As a GP up the tree pointed out though, the more expensive trash is, the more likely you'll see people illegally dumping. So it's a balancing act of funding recycling without driving off low income citizens to cheaper (illegal) means.
There were some Marines that got good and dumb at 29 Palms years ago (20+) that mounted a M-2 50 cal machine gun in the back of a pickup truck and held up a gas station.
In the amount of time not spent beating my head against the wall.
I'm in management these days, so I only have to deal with it as it impacts my schedules and retention. Upgrading My Eclipse Blue was incredibly painful. I get complaints about memory management, crashes, and EARs missing files. The integrated SVN system makes me weep when I have to try to explain to devs what/move and/switch SVN commands are. Or the inane restrictions our support team puts on our use of the product because they're trying to steer us around issues that will corrupt workspaces and configurations to which their only solution is uninstall/reinstall.
Same crap with XCode. We use to have a daily pool to see who could pull off the longest up time.
Now, if you want to get into code, things get a bit mirkier. Java is catching back up, but the.Net framework's implementation of generics and more importantly LINQ is still leaps and bounds over Java. And while Spring and other libraries have improved the ease and speed of data access over Hibernate,.Net's Entity Framework is super easy to work with (so long as there are good drivers for the DB you're hitting).
Java's documentation is superior, no questions there. Microsoft's MSDN isn't bad, but if I run into something odd, it's almost always augmented by Stack Overflow.
And historically speaking, I've had less issues upgrading the.Net framework on servers/desktops than changing Java version. Especially since.Net 3.0 (1->1.1->2.0 was rockier than I would have liked).
Anyway, they are all 3 valid development platforms. I have my preference, others have their own.
Lets say the OP has a system that is designed to distribute money to a group of investors. He takes the money, divides it by the number of investors, distributes that money, then he reduce the account balance by the amount tagged for distribution.
So he has $1 mil, and a list of 4 investors. Each investor gets $250k and his account drops $1 mil.
Now lets say that the list of investors is empty, the code runs, and distributes $0 to no one, then his account drops by $1 mil.
Sure seems like there should have been an exception in there!
Ehh, Mono wasn't an enterprise class option. I gave it a sales pitch at a couple of different shops as a cross platform option. None of the brass felt comfortable going to it for fear of it diverging or lagging excessively from the.Net platform.
We'll see how it goes, but after developing in My Eclispe/Java, XCode/Objective-C, and Visual Studio/C#, I can say without a doubt that VS/C# was the most productive IDE/language I've dealt with.
I bought my wife a Motorola Tundra. She doesn't want a smart phone, but she does want something that will get reception in the boonies and survive the rigors of horse back riding (or falling off said horse). I have seen that phone light up while at the bottom of a 3' deep creek, and she called me on it after taking a dive off a horse and was in need of an ambulance. So it passes my tests;)
by "link" I assume you are using a colloquialism for directions to a specific resource. One might think of it as a "Universal Resource Locator".
For instance, there is a "link" to http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessm... but that does not identify the specific resources you are looking for. To do so, we would need to provide a more specific PAIR of links, for example:
Now, you can argue the quality of the data, the accuracy of the models, and the legitimacy of the authors all you like. But these are TWO fully defined links to the exact information you are looking for.
If you would like to offer up your home address, I will personally pay for a special needs assistant to come to your residence, open a web browser for you, scroll to page 131, show you figure 1.4, and read aloud to you the text and description.
The burden of proof my friend, now lays on your shoulders.
You have a point, if you spray a bee colony with neonicotinoids, the bees will die.
But how many people in the world are spraying bee colonies with neonicotinoids?
When you plant a neonicotinoid treated seed in a barren field, do you know where the bees are?
I'll give you a hint: no where's near the barren field. There's nothing growing yet, there are no flowers, no pollen, nothing to eat. Those bees are still holed up keeping warm and waiting for plants to start budding.
Are there idiots in the world that do spray neonicotinoids on flowering plants? I'd imagine so, but they are being retarded, not following instructions, and should be held accountable.
Neonicotinoids are not pleasant things, but they are a hell of a lot better than the previous generation of insecticides. Ideally the next generation will be even better with lower risks than these present. But to lump all pesticides into a bucket of "bad" is grossly inaccurate.
It would take a significant market penetration just to get to the point that night charging in this way would even offset the growth of electricity demand, let alone start counteracting the current incentives.
Up to 17 cents cheaper per KWH (22c day, 5c night).
Assuming you blow 10kWh per day, primarily between 6am and 11pm, that's upwards of $2.20/day.
If you move your entire 10kWh load to the battery system and charge it over night, it drops you down to $0.50/day.
$1.70 savings per day. That's 2058 days to recoup the $3500 expenditure, or just a bit over 5 1/2 years. Over the ten year warranty period you'll save ~$3000, assuming electricity prices remain constant.
Meanwhile I'm lucky to get 1.2mbps off my DSL and my new place doesn't have cable or dsl access. I might be able to get 802.11n wifi, but with all likelihood I'm going to be stuck with the gawdaweful lag of a satellite.:(
The US imported 3.3 billion barrels of oil last year.
So I guess my statement wasn't perfectly accurate as we don't produce more than 50% of our own oil, and a significant portion of what we do produce is distributed internationally.
Although, if you look at the trend, over the last 5 years we've reduced our oil imports by 900 million barrels a year while increasing our oil production by 1.2 billion barrels a year. At current rate by 2016 we will be producing more than we are importing.
So while I would admit to embellishing the statement a little, I think your dramatization is a bit much.;)
"1) Fossil fuels are a limited supply. Maybe enough for another 50 years. Maybe 100. But still limited."
Matters on the type of fuel you're talking about. The US has coal reserves for hundreds of years. Even NG and Crude reserves to last a loooooong time, but they will continue to cost more and more to extract and refine.
"2) We purchase large amounts of oil from countries that, in general, do not like us."
We buy most of our oil, from ourselves. The vast majority of the rest is bought from Mexico and Canada. The largest of the insignificant provider nations is Venezuela. The amount of oil we buy from countries that, "Do not like us", is insignificant.
"3) If it were not for oil, our interest in the middle east would decline greatly, which would be a good thing."
Our interest in Middle Eastern oil is due to the lack of oil reserves in western Europe. Even without any US demand on Middle Eastern oil, the US will have a continued interest in the region until Western Europe transitions off of crude.
"More fuel efficiency and alternative fuels just simply make long term sense, even without considering climate change. So, what is the problem?"
This is really the crux of it. So let's say that the Pope/Scientists are wrong. There is no global warming and any investment in improving vehicle efficiency, air quality, and use of renewable is a waste of economic output. Well, we still get more efficient vehicles, better air quality, and a bunch of jobs. So, no big loss.
On the other hand, say the Pope/Scientists are right, but we do nothing. We are at risk of creating a catastrophic level event that would dramatically alter life on the planet, and could result in the death of billions of people.
So option A, we possibly lose a percent or two off of economic growth. Option B, we die, and the economy no longer matters.
I'm going to turn this on in a heart beat for my wife's Mom and Grandma's PCs.
And I'm sure the sys admins here at work will deploy with it enabled and completely locked down. It sounds way easier than dealing with this Power Broker crap.
You cannot default on a student loan. You can be in bankruptcy, broke, homeless, unemployed, with kidney failure, and you still cannot default on your student loan. There are only two ways out: pay it off, or die. And seeing as how most folks incur student loans when they are 18-26, odds are strongly in favor of the lender.
You can refinance student loans, people didn't in the past because your student loan was at ~3%. When the House GOP refused to pass a continuation of the low rate program, they jumped to 6-7%. So at this point, if you have equity in your house, life insurance, or retirement fund, it may well be worth it to refi with a secured loan and get back to 3-5% APR.
Also, my credit union was just advertising new vehicle loans for 2.85% APR. And as far as secured loans go, vehicles suck on the secondary market, there's just too much depreciation as soon as you drive it off the lot. But if you're paying 7%, or the 18% number you mention, it's because your credit rating is likely crap. Heck, even my credit card is at 9%, and I'm sure there are better rates out there.
My last hiring blitz I had to bring in 28 contractors. Mainframe coders, Java devs, analysts, project managers, ETL/BI, reporting...
Trying to find 4 qualified Java developers took multiple postings. Sure, I'd get 40-100 resumes for each posting, but the majority were complete trash.
Most recently I've been looking for C#/Python/GIS devs.
And just yesterday I saw that Camelot Unchained was looking for a C# developer with threading knowledge and it's almost enough to make me quit my management life, move to DC, and get back into software development.
Getting a job as a good coder in Madison, WI isn't hard. Finding good labor available on the market in Madison WI... good luck.
I got him started on it when he was 10, and he completed all of the free levels in two weeks with minimal help after I worked with him through the first few.
There's a moving picture going on and this conversation is focusing on 1 frame.
The EPA is currently wrapped up in litigation over their legal authority to regulate CO2 emissions. One of the current arguments being put forward by the coal industry lobby is that even if AGW is real, it isn't having any immediate and measurable impact on the health of Americans. If there's no health concerns, then there's no reason fro the EPA to regulate.
So the President goes out and makes a statement, backed up by multiple research papers (someone posted links above if you're interested in digging into them and debating their merit), that say that no, in fact, AGW/AGCC is having a direct impact on the health of Americans.
Out of context, it seems like an odd thing to go on the stump about, but in the context of the EPA/coal industry court battles, it makes sense as the feds are trying to ensure the EPA retains it's legal authority to regulate CO2.
Uhh, did you even bother READING the article you linked?
"The Working Group classified glyphosate as âoeprobably carcinogenic to humansâ (Group 2A)."
The "Working Group" is:
"In March, 2015, 17 experts from 11 countries met at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC; Lyon, France) to assess the carcinogenicity of the organophosphate pesticides tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate"
NBC had nothing to do with the word "probably". The group of EXPERTS that met on the topic did.
Further more, if you actually read the article, and more importantly, the scientific studies they cite, you would probably realize a couple of things: 1) The concern is not for end consumers or even joe-schmoe gardener, it's for factory and field workers that are exposed to higher concentrations in greater volume than anything joe-schmoe would ever see. 2) Some of the studies are a bit tenuous. Sure, if you put a rat on an LD50-1 diet of glyphosate for their whole life, freaky things are going to happen.
Don't get me wrong, Monsanto is the fsking devil, just not for their work on glyphosate. Their business processes, the way they exploit farmers, their enforcement of IP, etc... is more than enough to warrant the hate that they deserve. But glyphosate, even with the risks we know about it, is so much better than the alternatives.
The part that intrigues me is that they claim to return a name with the face.
This would imply that their facial recognition isn't just a image match, but that it looks at the context of the photos it finds to attempt to identify meta data about the people within it. Assuming that their facial recognition is no better than anyone else's recognition, by adding meta data to the calculation, especially given Google's propensity to collect and search meta data, it would seem likely that they use the meta data to make stronger identifications and find more reference photos of potential matches.
For example, if they do the first facial only search and come up with 10,000 possible matches, then they do meta searches on those 10,000 to find more pictures of them, then those pictures are compared for stronger 'training', you wind up with a much higher level of accuracy.
I don't believe there was anything barring people from reading it. I sat down over quite a few evenings at the time reviewing the proposed bill.
The rush where Pelosi and others were pushing for a vote was after the amendments had been completed. The bill was readily available for reading for months before then, and the amendments were available to read, but some individuals attempting to slow the passage down (until after Kennedy was out of the picture) were arguing that we should have delayed the passage until a complete new reading could be completed.
Don't get me wrong, I strongly detest the idea of legislation more than a couple of pages long written at a 6th grade reading level. But to claim that people "were not allowed to see or read" is factually untrue.
The GOP introduced over 700 amendments to the ACA before it was put to the floor for a vote. Of those, 161 passed. Compared to the 36 Dem submitted amendments that passed.
To claim that the "GOP had nothing to do with the ACA" is verifiably untrue. To further claim that "They had no power to speak of at the time" highlights a complete lack of knowledge and understanding of how the legislative branch of our government works.
Slashdot Mirror
If you live out in the country in the US, you have to take your trash/recycling into a dump or collection site.
The typical approach is that you charge enough extra for trash/dumping that it covers the cost of recycling.
It has the benefits of being self-funding, and it puts a price point on motivating consumers to recycle.
As a GP up the tree pointed out though, the more expensive trash is, the more likely you'll see people illegally dumping. So it's a balancing act of funding recycling without driving off low income citizens to cheaper (illegal) means.
-Rick
There were some Marines that got good and dumb at 29 Palms years ago (20+) that mounted a M-2 50 cal machine gun in the back of a pickup truck and held up a gas station.
-Rick
Why would >I do that?
I wouldn't.
But the type of idiot who suggests that X/0 should return 0 instead of throwing an exception quite likely would. ;)
-Rick
In the amount of time not spent beating my head against the wall.
I'm in management these days, so I only have to deal with it as it impacts my schedules and retention. Upgrading My Eclipse Blue was incredibly painful. I get complaints about memory management, crashes, and EARs missing files. The integrated SVN system makes me weep when I have to try to explain to devs what /move and /switch SVN commands are. Or the inane restrictions our support team puts on our use of the product because they're trying to steer us around issues that will corrupt workspaces and configurations to which their only solution is uninstall/reinstall.
Same crap with XCode. We use to have a daily pool to see who could pull off the longest up time.
Now, if you want to get into code, things get a bit mirkier. Java is catching back up, but the .Net framework's implementation of generics and more importantly LINQ is still leaps and bounds over Java. And while Spring and other libraries have improved the ease and speed of data access over Hibernate, .Net's Entity Framework is super easy to work with (so long as there are good drivers for the DB you're hitting).
Java's documentation is superior, no questions there. Microsoft's MSDN isn't bad, but if I run into something odd, it's almost always augmented by Stack Overflow.
And historically speaking, I've had less issues upgrading the .Net framework on servers/desktops than changing Java version. Especially since .Net 3.0 (1->1.1->2.0 was rockier than I would have liked).
Anyway, they are all 3 valid development platforms. I have my preference, others have their own.
-Rick
This is exactly the problem!
Lets say the OP has a system that is designed to distribute money to a group of investors. He takes the money, divides it by the number of investors, distributes that money, then he reduce the account balance by the amount tagged for distribution.
So he has $1 mil, and a list of 4 investors. Each investor gets $250k and his account drops $1 mil.
Now lets say that the list of investors is empty, the code runs, and distributes $0 to no one, then his account drops by $1 mil.
Sure seems like there should have been an exception in there!
-Rick
Ehh, Mono wasn't an enterprise class option. I gave it a sales pitch at a couple of different shops as a cross platform option. None of the brass felt comfortable going to it for fear of it diverging or lagging excessively from the .Net platform.
We'll see how it goes, but after developing in My Eclispe/Java, XCode/Objective-C, and Visual Studio/C#, I can say without a doubt that VS/C# was the most productive IDE/language I've dealt with.
-Rick
I bought my wife a Motorola Tundra. She doesn't want a smart phone, but she does want something that will get reception in the boonies and survive the rigors of horse back riding (or falling off said horse). I have seen that phone light up while at the bottom of a 3' deep creek, and she called me on it after taking a dive off a horse and was in need of an ambulance. So it passes my tests ;)
-Rick
by "link" I assume you are using a colloquialism for directions to a specific resource. One might think of it as a "Universal Resource Locator".
For instance, there is a "link" to http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessm... but that does not identify the specific resources you are looking for. To do so, we would need to provide a more specific PAIR of links, for example:
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessm... Page 131, Figure 1.4, TAR predictions 2001-2030
and
http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessm... Page 131, Figure 1.4, Observed Temperature Anomalies
Now, you can argue the quality of the data, the accuracy of the models, and the legitimacy of the authors all you like. But these are TWO fully defined links to the exact information you are looking for.
If you would like to offer up your home address, I will personally pay for a special needs assistant to come to your residence, open a web browser for you, scroll to page 131, show you figure 1.4, and read aloud to you the text and description.
The burden of proof my friend, now lays on your shoulders.
-Rick
You have a point, if you spray a bee colony with neonicotinoids, the bees will die.
But how many people in the world are spraying bee colonies with neonicotinoids?
When you plant a neonicotinoid treated seed in a barren field, do you know where the bees are?
I'll give you a hint: no where's near the barren field. There's nothing growing yet, there are no flowers, no pollen, nothing to eat. Those bees are still holed up keeping warm and waiting for plants to start budding.
Are there idiots in the world that do spray neonicotinoids on flowering plants? I'd imagine so, but they are being retarded, not following instructions, and should be held accountable.
Neonicotinoids are not pleasant things, but they are a hell of a lot better than the previous generation of insecticides. Ideally the next generation will be even better with lower risks than these present. But to lump all pesticides into a bucket of "bad" is grossly inaccurate.
-Rick
It would take a significant market penetration just to get to the point that night charging in this way would even offset the growth of electricity demand, let alone start counteracting the current incentives.
-Rick
https://www.we-energies.com/re...
Up to 17 cents cheaper per KWH (22c day, 5c night).
Assuming you blow 10kWh per day, primarily between 6am and 11pm, that's upwards of $2.20/day.
If you move your entire 10kWh load to the battery system and charge it over night, it drops you down to $0.50/day.
$1.70 savings per day. That's 2058 days to recoup the $3500 expenditure, or just a bit over 5 1/2 years. Over the ten year warranty period you'll save ~$3000, assuming electricity prices remain constant.
-Rick
Meanwhile I'm lucky to get 1.2mbps off my DSL and my new place doesn't have cable or dsl access. I might be able to get 802.11n wifi, but with all likelihood I'm going to be stuck with the gawdaweful lag of a satellite. :(
-Rick
While you are facepalming you should wipe the egg off your face. And try googling for "USA oil production"
The US produced 3.1 billion barrels of oil last year.
http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pe...
The US imported 3.3 billion barrels of oil last year.
So I guess my statement wasn't perfectly accurate as we don't produce more than 50% of our own oil, and a significant portion of what we do produce is distributed internationally.
Although, if you look at the trend, over the last 5 years we've reduced our oil imports by 900 million barrels a year while increasing our oil production by 1.2 billion barrels a year. At current rate by 2016 we will be producing more than we are importing.
So while I would admit to embellishing the statement a little, I think your dramatization is a bit much. ;)
-Rick
"1) Fossil fuels are a limited supply. Maybe enough for another 50 years. Maybe 100. But still limited."
Matters on the type of fuel you're talking about. The US has coal reserves for hundreds of years. Even NG and Crude reserves to last a loooooong time, but they will continue to cost more and more to extract and refine.
"2) We purchase large amounts of oil from countries that, in general, do not like us."
We buy most of our oil, from ourselves. The vast majority of the rest is bought from Mexico and Canada. The largest of the insignificant provider nations is Venezuela. The amount of oil we buy from countries that, "Do not like us", is insignificant.
"3) If it were not for oil, our interest in the middle east would decline greatly, which would be a good thing."
Our interest in Middle Eastern oil is due to the lack of oil reserves in western Europe. Even without any US demand on Middle Eastern oil, the US will have a continued interest in the region until Western Europe transitions off of crude.
"More fuel efficiency and alternative fuels just simply make long term sense, even without considering climate change. So, what is the problem?"
This is really the crux of it. So let's say that the Pope/Scientists are wrong. There is no global warming and any investment in improving vehicle efficiency, air quality, and use of renewable is a waste of economic output. Well, we still get more efficient vehicles, better air quality, and a bunch of jobs. So, no big loss.
On the other hand, say the Pope/Scientists are right, but we do nothing. We are at risk of creating a catastrophic level event that would dramatically alter life on the planet, and could result in the death of billions of people.
So option A, we possibly lose a percent or two off of economic growth. Option B, we die, and the economy no longer matters.
As you said, "So, what is the problem?"
-Rick
I see what you did there.
-Rick
I'm going to turn this on in a heart beat for my wife's Mom and Grandma's PCs.
And I'm sure the sys admins here at work will deploy with it enabled and completely locked down. It sounds way easier than dealing with this Power Broker crap.
-Rick
Student loans are the most secure loans made.
You cannot default on a student loan. You can be in bankruptcy, broke, homeless, unemployed, with kidney failure, and you still cannot default on your student loan. There are only two ways out: pay it off, or die. And seeing as how most folks incur student loans when they are 18-26, odds are strongly in favor of the lender.
You can refinance student loans, people didn't in the past because your student loan was at ~3%. When the House GOP refused to pass a continuation of the low rate program, they jumped to 6-7%. So at this point, if you have equity in your house, life insurance, or retirement fund, it may well be worth it to refi with a secured loan and get back to 3-5% APR.
Also, my credit union was just advertising new vehicle loans for 2.85% APR. And as far as secured loans go, vehicles suck on the secondary market, there's just too much depreciation as soon as you drive it off the lot. But if you're paying 7%, or the 18% number you mention, it's because your credit rating is likely crap. Heck, even my credit card is at 9%, and I'm sure there are better rates out there.
-Rick
The positions are out there.
My last hiring blitz I had to bring in 28 contractors. Mainframe coders, Java devs, analysts, project managers, ETL/BI, reporting...
Trying to find 4 qualified Java developers took multiple postings. Sure, I'd get 40-100 resumes for each posting, but the majority were complete trash.
Most recently I've been looking for C#/Python/GIS devs.
And just yesterday I saw that Camelot Unchained was looking for a C# developer with threading knowledge and it's almost enough to make me quit my management life, move to DC, and get back into software development.
Getting a job as a good coder in Madison, WI isn't hard. Finding good labor available on the market in Madison WI... good luck.
-Rick
My kid loves this one: http://codecombat.com/
I got him started on it when he was 10, and he completed all of the free levels in two weeks with minimal help after I worked with him through the first few.
Lots of other great recommendations here: http://venturebeat.com/2014/06...
The board game one I've heard is good for younger kids, but once they have it down it's rather boring.
-Rick
Tack onto that the GI Bill, which helped the US become the world leader in post secondary education.
Taking a crap ton of able bodied unemployed men and paying for their education helped elongate that post-war economic boom.
-Rick
There's a moving picture going on and this conversation is focusing on 1 frame.
The EPA is currently wrapped up in litigation over their legal authority to regulate CO2 emissions. One of the current arguments being put forward by the coal industry lobby is that even if AGW is real, it isn't having any immediate and measurable impact on the health of Americans. If there's no health concerns, then there's no reason fro the EPA to regulate.
So the President goes out and makes a statement, backed up by multiple research papers (someone posted links above if you're interested in digging into them and debating their merit), that say that no, in fact, AGW/AGCC is having a direct impact on the health of Americans.
Out of context, it seems like an odd thing to go on the stump about, but in the context of the EPA/coal industry court battles, it makes sense as the feds are trying to ensure the EPA retains it's legal authority to regulate CO2.
-Rick
Uhh, did you even bother READING the article you linked?
"The Working Group classified glyphosate as âoeprobably carcinogenic to humansâ (Group 2A)."
The "Working Group" is:
"In March, 2015, 17 experts from 11 countries met at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC; Lyon, France) to assess the carcinogenicity of the organophosphate pesticides tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate"
NBC had nothing to do with the word "probably". The group of EXPERTS that met on the topic did.
Further more, if you actually read the article, and more importantly, the scientific studies they cite, you would probably realize a couple of things:
1) The concern is not for end consumers or even joe-schmoe gardener, it's for factory and field workers that are exposed to higher concentrations in greater volume than anything joe-schmoe would ever see.
2) Some of the studies are a bit tenuous. Sure, if you put a rat on an LD50-1 diet of glyphosate for their whole life, freaky things are going to happen.
Don't get me wrong, Monsanto is the fsking devil, just not for their work on glyphosate. Their business processes, the way they exploit farmers, their enforcement of IP, etc... is more than enough to warrant the hate that they deserve. But glyphosate, even with the risks we know about it, is so much better than the alternatives.
-Rick
The part that intrigues me is that they claim to return a name with the face.
This would imply that their facial recognition isn't just a image match, but that it looks at the context of the photos it finds to attempt to identify meta data about the people within it. Assuming that their facial recognition is no better than anyone else's recognition, by adding meta data to the calculation, especially given Google's propensity to collect and search meta data, it would seem likely that they use the meta data to make stronger identifications and find more reference photos of potential matches.
For example, if they do the first facial only search and come up with 10,000 possible matches, then they do meta searches on those 10,000 to find more pictures of them, then those pictures are compared for stronger 'training', you wind up with a much higher level of accuracy.
-Rick
I don't believe there was anything barring people from reading it. I sat down over quite a few evenings at the time reviewing the proposed bill.
The rush where Pelosi and others were pushing for a vote was after the amendments had been completed. The bill was readily available for reading for months before then, and the amendments were available to read, but some individuals attempting to slow the passage down (until after Kennedy was out of the picture) were arguing that we should have delayed the passage until a complete new reading could be completed.
Don't get me wrong, I strongly detest the idea of legislation more than a couple of pages long written at a 6th grade reading level. But to claim that people "were not allowed to see or read" is factually untrue.
-Rick
I believe you may be suffering from ODS.
http://www.slate.com/articles/...
The GOP introduced over 700 amendments to the ACA before it was put to the floor for a vote. Of those, 161 passed. Compared to the 36 Dem submitted amendments that passed.
To claim that the "GOP had nothing to do with the ACA" is verifiably untrue. To further claim that "They had no power to speak of at the time" highlights a complete lack of knowledge and understanding of how the legislative branch of our government works.
-Rick