Is there a reason the children can't take a nap? Or, for that matter, sleep in that morning?
Assuming you're legally entitled to take religious holidays off work, school, etc., you can restructure your day around the daylight and not business hours.
Just to clarify, you recover part of a cost--the recycling overhead. The claim is that, even after revenue, this exceeds landfill overhead for the same ton of garbage.
It's partly a question of scale, and fluctuates wildly. In my state, it can cost 4x more to recycle, or 2x more to landfill, with no clear trend. The graph there doesn't justify the clever use of bolding in the text. The longer version is an insult to high school stats projects.
I'm tempted to think intelligent management makes the difference. We should tune in to local details and do cost analysis, rather than assume recycling's always cheaper (like we tend to). Your university could be saving $200K with recycled paper, or your city could be throwing away $200M for a municipal recycling program. There's no way to know until you run the numbers.
Apparently they think we've gotten dumber. Ask your average retiree whether they'd prefer robotic cars or affordable health care. I s'pose the ones who can't walk will also benefit from civillian apps of bionic commando gear.
they can't help but to keep repeating this propaganda about religon in an attempt to get others to believe it. Otherwise what would they say?
I'm not sure. Without muscling some imagined US Christian persecution, politicians and commentators have no stupidity to capitalize on except "liberal is evil," a mantra becoming all the more naked as neo-con politicking becomes indistinguishable from the liberal socialism of its intellectual forebears. They need a wedge; as per my original reply, that wedge is Baby Gee.
Most people don't have a problem with Christians, but many take issue with some dickhead saying the religion is UNDER ATTACK by or AT WAR with the rest of us. See the difference?
It's my personal feeling that the fundamental tenets of the religion will quite literally come under attack in the not-too-distant future, as they're flagrantly ridiculous, but from libertarians and not democrats. If you think the GOP's had a problem reconciling cheap labor with xenophobia, wait until the people with truly conservative fiscal policy talk frankly about mythology.
I suggest you follow your own wisdom about current events. When you can't tell which stories Jon Stewart and SNL fabricate outright, versus when they take shots at real people for deserved reasons, you live in a bubble. Blowing steam out your ears at "those damn liberals" for their incisive material doesn't make your point of view attractive to educated people.
I was just pointing out what I thought was a glaring error in Doom3's plot. To my understanding, there's no energy to get out of fusing iron, whereas the game treats it as a vast store of energy that can be tapped with futuristic tech.
It'd be nice if you could source that--P&T assert that exactly this common knowledge is false, except for aluminum.
Considering the whole system--separate pickup, sorting, storage--there's a lot of money and energy spent before recyclable trash gets processed. It's not terribly hard for me to believe this costs more (net) than virgin production, as they can move raw materials in bulk rather than go house-to-house collecting them. The show's evidence is IIRC $80M annual federal subsidies for something that's supposed to save money--Coke should be paying us to recycle bottles.
I'm open to counter-evidence, but they make a compelling argument. Watch the episode if you haven't already.
I'll hope car batteries and motor oil still fall under common sense as things we all know not to throw away.
But you missed their point about nonbiodegradables. IIRC 13 50-mi-square landfills would cover our waste disposal needs for the next n-hundred years. One hopes/assumes they took growth into account. The "landfill crisis" was caused by news hype from a garbage barge in the 80's and a misleading EPA report whose author they interview.
They say when it's cheaper to recycle glass and plastic than make new, you will be paid to do so. For now it's a taxpayer-subsidy drain.
I wouldn't put it past them to fudge some of that info--will recycling plants pay for themselves in the long term?--but I'm inclined to believe that recycling aluminum and dumping everything else is reasonable.
Clarence Ladson is currently a college student in Tocoma
Cheers. I wanted to punch you back at point 1 when I saw "being ran," FYI. Congratulations on winning the contest, because no "real considerable change" is going to happen while these contests sponsor R&D suggestions from people who can't be bothered to put any thought whatsoever into them.
nowhere in here does it mention how I can get a date?
Whoa there, cowboy. Let's not get ahead of ourselves. First you'll need a shower, then we can work on that habit of saying "nyrrrrrr" between phrases. Then another shower just to be on the safe side. Then you get to decide which of Excelsior, Enterprise, and Exeter gets disconnected from the network so we can move it to a closet.
what's really insightful are the men's numbers
on
Women Control the DVR
·
· Score: 1
Results from a survey of 1000 married woman say that 48 percent made the decision to purchase a DVR on their own and 55 percent claimed they understood the system more than their husband
In a survey of 5,000 men, approximately 0% admitted to not understanding how a DVR system works, even those who had never heard of it before.
Similarly, 100% of men made the decision to purchase a DVR on their own. 98% then asked their wives' permission to spend the money and/or have that ugly thing be on the entertainment center.
I get up before dawn, put on Woodland pajamas, douse the living room in consumer urine, power on the telly and sit for hours, silent and motionless behind the couch, waiting to spot that elusive creature: the ten-point news program.
My weapon of choice? A Sony Universal with rechargeable AA Ni-MH rounds at 1.5V.
And an eight-inch call that goes "market share! market share!"
The classic example of this is a parrot that would bite someone, and then apologize and act all sorrowful. The humans, of course, would attempt to pet the parrot again. The parrot would then bite the huam and laugh like a maniac.
And then apologize, act contrite, and see if he could bite the human again.
And then, when the human introduces the parrot to the concept of being thumped in the head...
Seriously. That the bird learned to say "none" as in "none of the above" when asked which color block was bigger, and applied "none of the above" to a quantitative question, doesn't mean it "grasps the concept of zero." He's got the concept of "no correct choice," which is cool, but it's just another element of his answer vocabulary, along with red, four, and big.
Let me know when the bird goes "SQUAWK! NEGATIVE FIVE!" The next logical step, when we're not whoring ourselves for media attention, is to see whether he does "all of the above."
This said, I'll let you savvy people in on the future. The cars of the future are going to be several generation advanced hybrid cars. They will be flexible fuel hybrids that you can directly charge with your house's power. They will also be augmented with solar panels on the roof, which will also be used to charge the batteries.
Don't sound so smug. Other people have been to Epcot too.
TFA: Despite the criticism from Net advocates such as O'Reilly, Amazon can't simply give up its patents, said Rich Gray, an attorney with Outside General Counsel of Silicon Valley. Doing so would open up the company to lawsuits from shareholders...
Assuming this is legit, it says "I'm sorry but we've already filed our frivolous patents; they can't be helped."
Assuming their competitors would snap up these patents if Amazon didn't, it's a survival tactic.
Both dubious assumptions. #1 is a cow because Bezos' reform-minded remarks from TFA already "betray" his shareholders. #2 moos because I don't hear about this silliness from B&N every week.
A sensible policy is for USPTO to sub-contract this research to the tech sector. Or rather, job-seeking college grads happy to draw up Google research for peanuts. Patent seekers can shoulder the cost (as they should be doing anyway), perhaps with incentives for innovative startup companies.
The current setup encourages e-commerce giants with nothing to lose to abuse the system. Enterprise wielding the legal system as a weapon of coercion and intimidation against competition-- though older than the Boston tea party--is antithetical to the American spirit. The patent office is manifestly incapable of keeping up with development in IT.
"Teen unemployment rate?" That's his evidence? More teenagers are unemployed today than in the aftermath of World War II?
If I were trying to get anyone to take me seriously, I'd probably make the ensuing sales pitch a little more convincing. Perhaps argue from my economics degree more than persuasion and analogy.
Especially if the title of my piece included the phrase "A Minority View." But then, I'd never date my article with "RELEASE: Today, and thereafter."
I'm sure you meant "as you go up the table, you get less gain on the amount of energy you put in, until you do it with iron on Mars, at which point portals to Hell open."
Slashdot Mirror
STFU
Is there a reason the children can't take a nap? Or, for that matter, sleep in that morning?
Assuming you're legally entitled to take religious holidays off work, school, etc., you can restructure your day around the daylight and not business hours.
Dinosaurs.
Hefty trout.
Not seeing it.
Netstumbler just gave me
http://www.numberspiral.com/index.html
a few hours ago.
Just to clarify, you recover part of a cost--the recycling overhead. The claim is that, even after revenue, this exceeds landfill overhead for the same ton of garbage.
It's partly a question of scale, and fluctuates wildly. In my state, it can cost 4x more to recycle, or 2x more to landfill, with no clear trend. The graph there doesn't justify the clever use of bolding in the text. The longer version is an insult to high school stats projects.
I'm tempted to think intelligent management makes the difference. We should tune in to local details and do cost analysis, rather than assume recycling's always cheaper (like we tend to). Your university could be saving $200K with recycled paper, or your city could be throwing away $200M for a municipal recycling program. There's no way to know until you run the numbers.
Apparently they think we've gotten dumber. Ask your average retiree whether they'd prefer robotic cars or affordable health care. I s'pose the ones who can't walk will also benefit from civillian apps of bionic commando gear.
I much rather they do this than give the money to some University so that a graduate student can waste it.
Psst...Don't let on I told you this...(leans in close)...that's where scientists come from.
"40...41...$2,407,842.53. Ice cream's on me!", or something to that effect.
You say "suitable for company" as if cup-o-noodles don't fit the bill.
Cooking's a lost art, I think, and awesomely sexy. Where I become useless is the mall.
they can't help but to keep repeating this propaganda about religon in an attempt to get others to believe it. Otherwise what would they say?
I'm not sure. Without muscling some imagined US Christian persecution, politicians and commentators have no stupidity to capitalize on except "liberal is evil," a mantra becoming all the more naked as neo-con politicking becomes indistinguishable from the liberal socialism of its intellectual forebears. They need a wedge; as per my original reply, that wedge is Baby Gee.
Most people don't have a problem with Christians, but many take issue with some dickhead saying the religion is UNDER ATTACK by or AT WAR with the rest of us. See the difference?
It's my personal feeling that the fundamental tenets of the religion will quite literally come under attack in the not-too-distant future, as they're flagrantly ridiculous, but from libertarians and not democrats. If you think the GOP's had a problem reconciling cheap labor with xenophobia, wait until the people with truly conservative fiscal policy talk frankly about mythology.
I suggest you follow your own wisdom about current events. When you can't tell which stories Jon Stewart and SNL fabricate outright, versus when they take shots at real people for deserved reasons, you live in a bubble. Blowing steam out your ears at "those damn liberals" for their incisive material doesn't make your point of view attractive to educated people.
I was just pointing out what I thought was a glaring error in Doom3's plot. To my understanding, there's no energy to get out of fusing iron, whereas the game treats it as a vast store of energy that can be tapped with futuristic tech.
It'd be nice if you could source that--P&T assert that exactly this common knowledge is false, except for aluminum.
Considering the whole system--separate pickup, sorting, storage--there's a lot of money and energy spent before recyclable trash gets processed. It's not terribly hard for me to believe this costs more (net) than virgin production, as they can move raw materials in bulk rather than go house-to-house collecting them. The show's evidence is IIRC $80M annual federal subsidies for something that's supposed to save money--Coke should be paying us to recycle bottles.
I'm open to counter-evidence, but they make a compelling argument. Watch the episode if you haven't already.
I'll hope car batteries and motor oil still fall under common sense as things we all know not to throw away.
But you missed their point about nonbiodegradables. IIRC 13 50-mi-square landfills would cover our waste disposal needs for the next n-hundred years. One hopes/assumes they took growth into account. The "landfill crisis" was caused by news hype from a garbage barge in the 80's and a misleading EPA report whose author they interview.
They say when it's cheaper to recycle glass and plastic than make new, you will be paid to do so. For now it's a taxpayer-subsidy drain.
I wouldn't put it past them to fudge some of that info--will recycling plants pay for themselves in the long term?--but I'm inclined to believe that recycling aluminum and dumping everything else is reasonable.
Clarence Ladson is currently a college student in Tocoma
Cheers. I wanted to punch you back at point 1 when I saw "being ran," FYI. Congratulations on winning the contest, because no "real considerable change" is going to happen while these contests sponsor R&D suggestions from people who can't be bothered to put any thought whatsoever into them.
Lifetime says most women understand their Tivo system better than their husbands.
I wonder what percentage of these take-charge independent wives feigned absolute helplessness at the prospect of hooking the unit up.
nowhere in here does it mention how I can get a date?
Whoa there, cowboy. Let's not get ahead of ourselves. First you'll need a shower, then we can work on that habit of saying "nyrrrrrr" between phrases. Then another shower just to be on the safe side. Then you get to decide which of Excelsior, Enterprise, and Exeter gets disconnected from the network so we can move it to a closet.
Results from a survey of 1000 married woman say that 48 percent made the decision to purchase a DVR on their own and 55 percent claimed they understood the system more than their husband
In a survey of 5,000 men, approximately 0% admitted to not understanding how a DVR system works, even those who had never heard of it before.
Similarly, 100% of men made the decision to purchase a DVR on their own. 98% then asked their wives' permission to spend the money and/or have that ugly thing be on the entertainment center.
When hunting you have some target.
I get up before dawn, put on Woodland pajamas, douse the living room in consumer urine, power on the telly and sit for hours, silent and motionless behind the couch, waiting to spot that elusive creature: the ten-point news program.
My weapon of choice? A Sony Universal with rechargeable AA Ni-MH rounds at 1.5V.
And an eight-inch call that goes "market share! market share!"
The classic example of this is a parrot that would bite someone, and then apologize and act all sorrowful. The humans, of course, would attempt to pet the parrot again. The parrot would then bite the huam and laugh like a maniac.
And then apologize, act contrite, and see if he could bite the human again.
And then, when the human introduces the parrot to the concept of being thumped in the head...
Professor: Alex, tell me what color 4? Alex: Blue, no Yelllllllllloooooooooooooooowww
To do: Buy parrot with synesthesia. Feed it drugs.
Seriously. That the bird learned to say "none" as in "none of the above" when asked which color block was bigger, and applied "none of the above" to a quantitative question, doesn't mean it "grasps the concept of zero." He's got the concept of "no correct choice," which is cool, but it's just another element of his answer vocabulary, along with red, four, and big.
Let me know when the bird goes "SQUAWK! NEGATIVE FIVE!" The next logical step, when we're not whoring ourselves for media attention, is to see whether he does "all of the above."
This said, I'll let you savvy people in on the future. The cars of the future are going to be several generation advanced hybrid cars. They will be flexible fuel hybrids that you can directly charge with your house's power. They will also be augmented with solar panels on the roof, which will also be used to charge the batteries.
Don't sound so smug. Other people have been to Epcot too.
TFA: Despite the criticism from Net advocates such as O'Reilly, Amazon can't simply give up its patents, said Rich Gray, an attorney with Outside General Counsel of Silicon Valley. Doing so would open up the company to lawsuits from shareholders...
Assuming this is legit, it says "I'm sorry but we've already filed our frivolous patents; they can't be helped."
Assuming their competitors would snap up these patents if Amazon didn't, it's a survival tactic.
Both dubious assumptions. #1 is a cow because Bezos' reform-minded remarks from TFA already "betray" his shareholders. #2 moos because I don't hear about this silliness from B&N every week.
A sensible policy is for USPTO to sub-contract this research to the tech sector. Or rather, job-seeking college grads happy to draw up Google research for peanuts. Patent seekers can shoulder the cost (as they should be doing anyway), perhaps with incentives for innovative startup companies.
The current setup encourages e-commerce giants with nothing to lose to abuse the system. Enterprise wielding the legal system as a weapon of coercion and intimidation against competition-- though older than the Boston tea party--is antithetical to the American spirit. The patent office is manifestly incapable of keeping up with development in IT.
"Teen unemployment rate?" That's his evidence? More teenagers are unemployed today than in the aftermath of World War II?
If I were trying to get anyone to take me seriously, I'd probably make the ensuing sales pitch a little more convincing. Perhaps argue from my economics degree more than persuasion and analogy.
Especially if the title of my piece included the phrase "A Minority View." But then, I'd never date my article with "RELEASE: Today, and thereafter."
I'm sure you meant "as you go up the table, you get less gain on the amount of energy you put in, until you do it with iron on Mars, at which point portals to Hell open."