Would being a lawyer who becomes a politician that writes laws be considered a conflict of interest? If they are complicated enough, you could make money interpreting them once you stop being a politician.
By the same token, shouldn't laws be written so that at least 90 percent of the people affected by them can understand them without the aid of a lawyer? This could be done by either lowering the readability level of the laws OR increasing the education level of those affected.
I read Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead every year or so, usually taking a rainy weekend for each book to do the reading. Rand has a lot of interesting points, as long as you take them with a grain of salt. These two books are more political philosophy wrapped around fiction as opposed to simple fiction.
Be warned that, toward the end of Atlas Shrugged, there is a very long speech from John Galt. It is part of a 'national' radio presentation that gets hijacked.
Range fed cattle, the ones that are marketed that way, eat grass or grass-like feed.
Feedlot cattle are the ones that get corn, soy or other items as part of the fattening up process. In some instances range fed cattle go to the stock yards for a few weeks for 'finishing'.
The ideal situation is as you describe, letting the various types of livestock graze on marginal land like hills and flood plains. You do have to worry about overgrazing though.
The article seems to be focusing on pond based algae biofuels as opposed to the bioreactor based ones that have been getting recent media attention.
They do mention the bioreactor based algae biofuels, but claim that the photo bioreactors are unlikely to scale efficiently and that unlined ponds are the most reasonable configuration. Of course, the paper they are using for this claim dates back to 1996. They really need to update their economic analysis reference.
Population size makes a big difference. It wasn't until around 1800 that the population of the Earth was close to 1 billion. We're now adding that many people in less than 20 years but we are NOT adding enough land to take care of that increase.
My wife and I were in college at the time we discovered D&D back in the late 1970's. We found a gaming shop in town and got interested in the miniatures they had, as well as the fact that various games involved science fiction or fantasy. One of our first purchases was the D&D rule set in the blue dragon box. We also picked up a few sets of dice, all of which were single color and many of which had sharp edges.
We've continued D&D over the decades, in addition to other role playing systems, introducing it to our kids when they were old enough to play. It is one of our substitutes for television.
Perhaps the document is from an outside agency, one that deals with corporate responses to blogging and responding to conspiracy theories and misinformation.
I can see this type of thing as being useful to counter misinformation created by conspiracy types.
Of course, trying to counter the hard core conspiracy types is like talking to rocks and trees. They don't listen very well.
I do hope that the Westboro people realize that they are putting themselves in a dangerous position by their protests. One of these years they may get on the bad side of people who have guns and know how to use them.
That's one of my favorite SF movies. I was very glad to find a copy of it on DVD a few years ago.
I sometimes wonder how much the Disney movie "Wall-E" and the Miyazaki movie "Castle in the Sky" draw from "Silent Running." Robots taking care of plants? An ecosystem drifting off into space? "Silent Running" predates both movies by at least a decade.
I remember attending a science fiction and fantasy convention and finding a note in the program explaining the difference between SF and SciFi. 'Old school' science fiction fans used the term SF and considered SciFi to be an insult. They did, after all, have do endure some of the worst of what Hollywood put out back when going to the moon was pure science fiction. Newer science fiction fans use SciFi and are used to some of the better quality science fiction in media and print.
Despite its failures, the Space Shuttle did a good job of hauling hardware and people into LEO while providing workspace. Perhaps it should be considered a space motorhome, with trailer, as opposed to a space truck.
But I had a thought about SpaceShipTwo. As configured, it should reach the one hundred kilometer 'limit' of space while hitting Mach 3. At that point it doesn't have to overcome much wind resistance because it is in space. Lacking the wind resistance barrier, what would it take to go to Mach 25, assuming its peak of flight velocity is zero or near that? (It has been a few decades since I've worked any physics problems.)
Wikipedia mentions that the energy required is about 60 times that to go suborbital, at least in the SpaceShipTwo entry. (Mach 3 for suborbital vs Mach 25 for orbital)
The question would be whether or not the extra fuel, and fuel handling hardware, would weigh as much as six passengers and a spare pilot, plus their life support. You would also have to consider reentry differences.
I did find a reference to SpaceShipThree. It was supposed to be an orbital ship, but it apparently has been scaled back to point to point suborbital. (London to Sydney in two hours.)
It is good to see that the digital video world has caught up with the Victorian era, in which stereo photos were extremely popular.
Of course, it did take a while before the RealD technology became available, making high quality COLOR 3D video possible. It would be interesting to see someone do a steampunked version of the camera.
Figure that Virgin Galactic and SpaceShipTwo are part of the baby steps needed to get to orbital manned commercial space flight. They are kind of like the barnstormers that flew from place to place around the country back in the infancy of manned flight, taking people into the air as a thrill.
I seem to recall reading that WhiteKnightTwo, the launch ship series for SpaceShipTwo, will also be used for launching other Earth to space vessels. I wouldn't be surprised if a version of SpaceShipTwo, with a reduced cargo load and a larger fuel supply, managed to reach LEO. (The first one would likely be a single pilot version.)
The hard part would be coming down, because the extra velocity would need to be shed without affecting the 'shuttlecock' wing configuration that made SpaceShipOne work.
Still, given Rutan's expertise, I wouldn't be surprised if there is an orbital flight not long before the commercial jumps start. (Yeah Cal Poly!)
Doing it solo wasn't a requirement of the Orteig Prize. The fact that he was able to go from a New York airfield to a Paris airfield was the big thing. It showed that transatlantic flight from one major destination to another was possible.
Several well known aviators, with tri-engine planes and multiple person air crews had attempted it but failed, sometimes fatally. Lindbergh, a relative unknown, did it solo, with a single engine monoplane.
Alcock and Brown flew from Newfoundland to Ireland in 1919. According to the specs from "The Daily Mail", "the aviator who shall first cross the Atlantic in an aeroplane in flight from any point in the United States of America, Canada or Newfoundland and any point in Great Britain or Ireland" in 72 continuous hours" would win the ten thousand pound prize.
Alcock and Brown did it non-stop. But a couple of weeks earlier an American airplane, the NC-4, was the first to cross the Atlantic under its own power. It took 19 days and multiple stops to do it though.
The Orteig Prize, the one Lindbergh won, required a non-stop flight from New York to Paris (Or vice versa). This was a longer flight than the Alcock-Brown flight, which landed in a bog in Ireland. Lindbergh had a lot more publicity for his landing since he landed at an airport. Some sources say that 150,000 spectators stormed the airfield where Lindbergh landed.
If you think about it, having the 'right' publicity can make a big difference in the history books. You could say that's why Columbus gets the credit for 'discovering' America as opposed to the Vikings, St. Brendan, or the original immigrants heading over the Bering Strait.
The Wright Brothers were based in Ohio when they started the experiments that lead to the flights at Kitty Hawk. They frequently returned to Ohio to do additional research. Kitty Hawk was 'just' the place that had the right conditions to test their theories because they were pushing the limits of technology at the time.
In 1904, after the Kitty Hawk flights, they improved on the design, with Flyer II and Flyer III. Those were flown out of a base in Ohio. These flights were measured in minutes and miles as opposed to the seconds and feet of the Kitty Hawk flights.
Sure they left Ohio to do the 'first' powered flights. But they returned to Ohio to improve upon that 'first' and accomplish a whole bunch of other firsts.
If the code has a comment field for special handling, you wouldn't need much to do this. The biggest problem would be to make it so that somebody can't correlate bad handling to the comment. You might want to have a 'bad handling' string that varies from hour to hour, one that is displayed as part of a 'quote of the moment'.
Slashdot Mirror
Would being a lawyer who becomes a politician that writes laws be considered a conflict of interest? If they are complicated enough, you could make money interpreting them once you stop being a politician.
By the same token, shouldn't laws be written so that at least 90 percent of the people affected by them can understand them without the aid of a lawyer? This could be done by either lowering the readability level of the laws OR increasing the education level of those affected.
I read Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead every year or so, usually taking a rainy weekend for each book to do the reading. Rand has a lot of interesting points, as long as you take them with a grain of salt. These two books are more political philosophy wrapped around fiction as opposed to simple fiction.
Be warned that, toward the end of Atlas Shrugged, there is a very long speech from John Galt. It is part of a 'national' radio presentation that gets hijacked.
Range fed cattle, the ones that are marketed that way, eat grass or grass-like feed.
Feedlot cattle are the ones that get corn, soy or other items as part of the fattening up process. In some instances range fed cattle go to the stock yards for a few weeks for 'finishing'.
The ideal situation is as you describe, letting the various types of livestock graze on marginal land like hills and flood plains. You do have to worry about overgrazing though.
The article seems to be focusing on pond based algae biofuels as opposed to the bioreactor based ones that have been getting recent media attention.
They do mention the bioreactor based algae biofuels, but claim that the photo bioreactors are unlikely to scale efficiently and that unlined ponds are the most reasonable configuration. Of course, the paper they are using for this claim dates back to 1996. They really need to update their economic analysis reference.
Population size makes a big difference. It wasn't until around 1800 that the population of the Earth was close to 1 billion. We're now adding that many people in less than 20 years but we are NOT adding enough land to take care of that increase.
My wife and I were in college at the time we discovered D&D back in the late 1970's. We found a gaming shop in town and got interested in the miniatures they had, as well as the fact that various games involved science fiction or fantasy. One of our first purchases was the D&D rule set in the blue dragon box. We also picked up a few sets of dice, all of which were single color and many of which had sharp edges.
We've continued D&D over the decades, in addition to other role playing systems, introducing it to our kids when they were old enough to play. It is one of our substitutes for television.
Perhaps the document is from an outside agency, one that deals with corporate responses to blogging and responding to conspiracy theories and misinformation.
I can see this type of thing as being useful to counter misinformation created by conspiracy types.
Of course, trying to counter the hard core conspiracy types is like talking to rocks and trees. They don't listen very well.
I do hope that the Westboro people realize that they are putting themselves in a dangerous position by their protests. One of these years they may get on the bad side of people who have guns and know how to use them.
That's one of my favorite SF movies. I was very glad to find a copy of it on DVD a few years ago.
I sometimes wonder how much the Disney movie "Wall-E" and the Miyazaki movie "Castle in the Sky" draw from "Silent Running." Robots taking care of plants? An ecosystem drifting off into space? "Silent Running" predates both movies by at least a decade.
I remember attending a science fiction and fantasy convention and finding a note in the program explaining the difference between SF and SciFi. 'Old school' science fiction fans used the term SF and considered SciFi to be an insult. They did, after all, have do endure some of the worst of what Hollywood put out back when going to the moon was pure science fiction. Newer science fiction fans use SciFi and are used to some of the better quality science fiction in media and print.
Despite its failures, the Space Shuttle did a good job of hauling hardware and people into LEO while providing workspace. Perhaps it should be considered a space motorhome, with trailer, as opposed to a space truck.
But I had a thought about SpaceShipTwo. As configured, it should reach the one hundred kilometer 'limit' of space while hitting Mach 3. At that point it doesn't have to overcome much wind resistance because it is in space. Lacking the wind resistance barrier, what would it take to go to Mach 25, assuming its peak of flight velocity is zero or near that? (It has been a few decades since I've worked any physics problems.)
Wikipedia mentions that the energy required is about 60 times that to go suborbital, at least in the SpaceShipTwo entry. (Mach 3 for suborbital vs Mach 25 for orbital)
The question would be whether or not the extra fuel, and fuel handling hardware, would weigh as much as six passengers and a spare pilot, plus their life support. You would also have to consider reentry differences.
I did find a reference to SpaceShipThree. It was supposed to be an orbital ship, but it apparently has been scaled back to point to point suborbital. (London to Sydney in two hours.)
It is good to see that the digital video world has caught up with the Victorian era, in which stereo photos were extremely popular.
Of course, it did take a while before the RealD technology became available, making high quality COLOR 3D video possible. It would be interesting to see someone do a steampunked version of the camera.
I found it nice that the first SpaceShipTwo is named the VSS Enterprise.
Figure that Virgin Galactic and SpaceShipTwo are part of the baby steps needed to get to orbital manned commercial space flight. They are kind of like the barnstormers that flew from place to place around the country back in the infancy of manned flight, taking people into the air as a thrill.
I seem to recall reading that WhiteKnightTwo, the launch ship series for SpaceShipTwo, will also be used for launching other Earth to space vessels. I wouldn't be surprised if a version of SpaceShipTwo, with a reduced cargo load and a larger fuel supply, managed to reach LEO. (The first one would likely be a single pilot version.)
The hard part would be coming down, because the extra velocity would need to be shed without affecting the 'shuttlecock' wing configuration that made SpaceShipOne work.
Still, given Rutan's expertise, I wouldn't be surprised if there is an orbital flight not long before the commercial jumps start. (Yeah Cal Poly!)
Doing it solo wasn't a requirement of the Orteig Prize. The fact that he was able to go from a New York airfield to a Paris airfield was the big thing. It showed that transatlantic flight from one major destination to another was possible.
Several well known aviators, with tri-engine planes and multiple person air crews had attempted it but failed, sometimes fatally. Lindbergh, a relative unknown, did it solo, with a single engine monoplane.
Alcock and Brown flew from Newfoundland to Ireland in 1919. According to the specs from "The Daily Mail", "the aviator who shall first cross the Atlantic in an aeroplane in flight from any point in the United States of America, Canada or Newfoundland and any point in Great Britain or Ireland" in 72 continuous hours" would win the ten thousand pound prize.
Alcock and Brown did it non-stop. But a couple of weeks earlier an American airplane, the NC-4, was the first to cross the Atlantic under its own power. It took 19 days and multiple stops to do it though.
The Orteig Prize, the one Lindbergh won, required a non-stop flight from New York to Paris (Or vice versa). This was a longer flight than the Alcock-Brown flight, which landed in a bog in Ireland. Lindbergh had a lot more publicity for his landing since he landed at an airport. Some sources say that 150,000 spectators stormed the airfield where Lindbergh landed.
If you think about it, having the 'right' publicity can make a big difference in the history books. You could say that's why Columbus gets the credit for 'discovering' America as opposed to the Vikings, St. Brendan, or the original immigrants heading over the Bering Strait.
The Wright Brothers were based in Ohio when they started the experiments that lead to the flights at Kitty Hawk. They frequently returned to Ohio to do additional research. Kitty Hawk was 'just' the place that had the right conditions to test their theories because they were pushing the limits of technology at the time.
In 1904, after the Kitty Hawk flights, they improved on the design, with Flyer II and Flyer III. Those were flown out of a base in Ohio. These flights were measured in minutes and miles as opposed to the seconds and feet of the Kitty Hawk flights.
Sure they left Ohio to do the 'first' powered flights. But they returned to Ohio to improve upon that 'first' and accomplish a whole bunch of other firsts.
I remember installing Mcafee on my wife's computer and having it trash the operating system. Thankfully I had backed it up before the installation.
After restoring the system I tried it again, thinking that it might have been a fluke.
I had to restore everything a second time. I went with Symantec and have avoided Mcafee ever since.
In some instances bottled water comes from municipal water, with additional filtering.
Did AT&T ever provide a web page that allows you to monitor usage so that you could cut back if it looks like you are about to go over the limit?
If they haven't, then people need to start getting their local politicians to demand it.
If you are at the top of one hill and the school is at the top of another hill, don't you have to walk uphill both ways for at least part of the time?
If the code has a comment field for special handling, you wouldn't need much to do this. The biggest problem would be to make it so that somebody can't correlate bad handling to the comment. You might want to have a 'bad handling' string that varies from hour to hour, one that is displayed as part of a 'quote of the moment'.
Ah, the liposuction place!
Hydrocarbon producing algae, perhaps? That or creatures with high fat content. (Thar she blows!)