this is sort of a "who's playing who"moment. I think your both right, and it simply a matter of alignment and perspective.
For example, if you where a member of the socialist party at the time you mentioned, and your movement was essentially absorbed by the democratic party as the democratic party began to extol some of your doctrine, you would pat yourself on the back and say "What a fine job we did, changing the democratic party like that."
Conversely, If you where a democrat at that time, and your party saw a threat from a growing socialist party, and subsequently absorbed them by adapting slightly to their doctrine, you would pat yourself on the back and say "How clever we where, absorbing them into the party and strengthening our position by removing a third party"
Of course, there are always a few outliers on both sides, that recognize the scam for what it is, but for the most part, they are ignored because even their own party thinks they are extremist wackos.
And this is exactly what the republicans and the tea party have done. and both sides are patting themselves on the back (except for the far extremists in either group) and being proud of how they got what they wanted out of the other.
Want wait wait, we can't have you coming in here with a coherent and intelligent breakdown of political alignments. We're trying to argue about politics here, you'll ruin everything!
I hold an apparently bizarre position on global warming:
Yes, the climate is changing, and evidence suggests it is following a warming trend. However, I do not fully attribute that change to anthropocentric causes. In light of these two statements, I am firmly opposed to knee-jerk high cost outcome-vague reactionary measures that serve to drastically affect the economic stability of the nation, or even the world. I am however, in favor of further study, while implementing 'gentle' changes, ie, more efficient power generation, reduction of emissions as quickly as is cost feasible, development of more efficient homes, tools, and machines to reduce our energy needs, etc.
The bizarre and potentially harmful ideas people are floating as serious solutions to global warming are absolutely terrifying. I have seen serious proposals ranging from genetically re-engineering cows and kangaroos(?) to produce less methane, to blanketing the seas with iron oxide to cause algae blooms to absorb carbon, to anchoring giant mylar bags of C02 to the ocean floor, to scattering reflective particles in the stratosphere to reflect sunlight back into space. These, along with a host of other ideas, are beyond insane. I don't claim that global warming is a complete farce, but ideas like this, in the off chance that we are actually *wrong* could do immense and possibly irreparable damage to the environment in their own ways.
Effectively, in terms of climate change 'repair' we need a planetary version of the Hippocratic oath. "First, Do No Harm." any corrective action we take simply must not put the planet at further risk down the road. However, that is not an excuse to do nothing, greater energy efficiency across the board, and cleaner energy production are a must, and a long term benefit to humanity, no mater the final result of 'climate change science'.
You know, I always used to imagine myself as 'middle class'. And then during all the health care screaming match, they used an example that went about like this:
"Now, a middle class single mother, struggling along, making 90,000$ a year, this bill is to help her be able to afford health care."
That was when I realized that I was actually poor.
Not so much "Things that don't work" as "Things that are a joke" like the fore mentioned shrimp on treadmills. In the day and age of kickstarter and whatnot, if you want to study the mating habits of the Bolivian shrew flea or some such nonsense, ask the public for funds, and people who actually care about that sort of thing can pay for it, instead of leaching the tax dollars of the general public.
though not a Navy, which looking back from today's world is an interesting perspective)
probably because in those days, you could not launch an ICBM from a sub and hit Kansas. The best you could do would be shell a harbor, and maybe deploy some troops.
Mainly because we've spent almost every year of our nations existence involved in some armed conflict or another, so we've never had the occasion for the military to disband after two years of peace. (And I'll stop being pedantic now.)
Yes, the re-entry capsule just miracle'd itself stable. I'd almost forgotten about that fiasco. Not to mention the fact that if you just randomly re-enter, there is almost no chance your re-entry profile will be even close to right, and you'll probably burn up, oriented or not.
They did do a little bit of cool stuff with the bomb's gravity. (like how the bomb was a cube, and the guy fell off the edge of it, and slid until friction against the side stopped him, then he stood up on that side of the cube)
The "Bad Physics becoming a pivotal plot point" in 'Gravity' that made me nearly yell at the screen was when Bullock was hanging by her foot from the parachute lines, and had a hand on the rope attached to Clooney, and their motion is arrested by the parachute lines attached to the station (making them 3 orbital bodies with essentially no relative motion to one another) and SUDDENLY, WE ARE WATCHING "VERTICAL LIMIT: IN SPACE" and for some strange reason, Clooney is being pulled by some mysterious force, and he sacrificially unhooks his lifeline, and FALLS OFF THE MOUNTAIN^^^^SPACE STATION.
Worst part of the ENTIRE movie right there. forget line of sight between 3 orbital bodies that are no where near each other, forget this magical debris field, forget the floating hair, this was the worst physics scene in the movie.
I went through a weird stage between the ages of roughly 7 and say, 16 where I was extremely uncomfortable with needles. Then I had to get a lot of blood drawn for some tests, and something just clicked, and I was like "this is no big deal. Sure, its uncomfortable, but its not really scary". It was a good time for it to happen to, because the nurse that was taking my blood was semi-incompitant or something, and had to stab me about 30 times to get a vein.
The math is an example, not 'required' to find a short route. And if the design is so flawed, then tell me why they've not torn down the Pentagon, and a dozen other round layout buildings like it around the world, several of which where lauded for their intelligent and functional design.
And there's the thing.
This design gets everyone into 4 stories, and probably will use long ramps between floors, instead of stairs (like the Pentagon does) This means you can easily *walk* to any office, instead of spending time standing in a box being lifted up and down, or powering up or down 15 flights of stairs. And like a poster above me says, in a long straight building, the maximum distance between two offices is L, in this building it is L/2 (because the ends are connected) Couple that with being able to cut across the hub, (with California's generally decent weather, this remains a highly viable route) and your transit time starts to get pretty short. (design docs say its 14 minutes to walk the entire loop of the building, so a maximum of 7 minutes if you stay indoors to get to the office farthest from you, and much less if you cut across the hub)
Plus, despite the 'sunlight is evil to my delicate skin' people posting here, Designers tend to really like natural light, and this torus shape allows more offices to be lit by natural light than a cube. With all the modern tech in multi-panel insulated glass (to cut down on heat) these days, the ability to light your office building with natural sunlight most working hours saves you a LOT of money on power. (which looks good on your 'environmental resumé')
As for sprawl, they are dedicating a ton of space to parkland around and 'in' the structure, so who cares if the building is 1/3rd a mile across. I'd rather have that then a big cube surrounded by asphalt parking lot. (but that may just be me.)
If your using a credit card, any privacy from the government you thought you had was merely a delusion. I did not say as tracking, I said as a replacement for the existing electronic pen signatures (which are wildly inconsistent in quality.)
This is why I think that POS terminals where you swipe your card, then sign your name should be replaced with a system where you swipe your card, then place your finger, which then attaches a high rez scan of your print to the sale.
Also, while we're at it, can we standardize fsking customer side POS systems finally? every one of them you come to is different, button layout, number of screen prompts for cash back or amount purchase confirmation. Working customer service in a store has taught me, despite their ubiquitousness, people are completely confused by credit card POS terminals, because they ALL work differently.
God, I've been looking for this for ages. Saw it years a go, and never forgot "and for some reason, they follow this cartoon rabbit into the swamp". Best review ever.
Slashdot Mirror
Great! I'll be able to go back to heating my house with a coal fire!
this is sort of a "who's playing who"moment. I think your both right, and it simply a matter of alignment and perspective.
For example, if you where a member of the socialist party at the time you mentioned, and your movement was essentially absorbed by the democratic party as the democratic party began to extol some of your doctrine, you would pat yourself on the back and say "What a fine job we did, changing the democratic party like that."
Conversely, If you where a democrat at that time, and your party saw a threat from a growing socialist party, and subsequently absorbed them by adapting slightly to their doctrine, you would pat yourself on the back and say "How clever we where, absorbing them into the party and strengthening our position by removing a third party"
Of course, there are always a few outliers on both sides, that recognize the scam for what it is, but for the most part, they are ignored because even their own party thinks they are extremist wackos.
And this is exactly what the republicans and the tea party have done. and both sides are patting themselves on the back (except for the far extremists in either group) and being proud of how they got what they wanted out of the other.
Want wait wait, we can't have you coming in here with a coherent and intelligent breakdown of political alignments. We're trying to argue about politics here, you'll ruin everything!
I hold an apparently bizarre position on global warming:
Yes, the climate is changing, and evidence suggests it is following a warming trend. However, I do not fully attribute that change to anthropocentric causes. In light of these two statements, I am firmly opposed to knee-jerk high cost outcome-vague reactionary measures that serve to drastically affect the economic stability of the nation, or even the world. I am however, in favor of further study, while implementing 'gentle' changes, ie, more efficient power generation, reduction of emissions as quickly as is cost feasible, development of more efficient homes, tools, and machines to reduce our energy needs, etc.
The bizarre and potentially harmful ideas people are floating as serious solutions to global warming are absolutely terrifying. I have seen serious proposals ranging from genetically re-engineering cows and kangaroos(?) to produce less methane, to blanketing the seas with iron oxide to cause algae blooms to absorb carbon, to anchoring giant mylar bags of C02 to the ocean floor, to scattering reflective particles in the stratosphere to reflect sunlight back into space. These, along with a host of other ideas, are beyond insane. I don't claim that global warming is a complete farce, but ideas like this, in the off chance that we are actually *wrong* could do immense and possibly irreparable damage to the environment in their own ways.
Effectively, in terms of climate change 'repair' we need a planetary version of the Hippocratic oath. "First, Do No Harm." any corrective action we take simply must not put the planet at further risk down the road. However, that is not an excuse to do nothing, greater energy efficiency across the board, and cleaner energy production are a must, and a long term benefit to humanity, no mater the final result of 'climate change science'.
"Now, a middle class single mother, struggling along, making 90,000$ a year, this bill is to help her be able to afford health care."
That was when I realized that I was actually poor.
Not so much "Things that don't work" as "Things that are a joke" like the fore mentioned shrimp on treadmills. In the day and age of kickstarter and whatnot, if you want to study the mating habits of the Bolivian shrew flea or some such nonsense, ask the public for funds, and people who actually care about that sort of thing can pay for it, instead of leaching the tax dollars of the general public.
though not a Navy, which looking back from today's world is an interesting perspective)
probably because in those days, you could not launch an ICBM from a sub and hit Kansas. The best you could do would be shell a harbor, and maybe deploy some troops.
Mainly because we've spent almost every year of our nations existence involved in some armed conflict or another, so we've never had the occasion for the military to disband after two years of peace. (And I'll stop being pedantic now.)
Most of the other quibbles require quite a high threshold of domain knowledge to pick up on.
That, or simply having played Kerbal Space Program for a while, and watched Apollo 13 a few times.
Yes, the re-entry capsule just miracle'd itself stable. I'd almost forgotten about that fiasco. Not to mention the fact that if you just randomly re-enter, there is almost no chance your re-entry profile will be even close to right, and you'll probably burn up, oriented or not.
They did do a little bit of cool stuff with the bomb's gravity. (like how the bomb was a cube, and the guy fell off the edge of it, and slid until friction against the side stopped him, then he stood up on that side of the cube)
The "Bad Physics becoming a pivotal plot point" in 'Gravity' that made me nearly yell at the screen was when Bullock was hanging by her foot from the parachute lines, and had a hand on the rope attached to Clooney, and their motion is arrested by the parachute lines attached to the station (making them 3 orbital bodies with essentially no relative motion to one another) and SUDDENLY, WE ARE WATCHING "VERTICAL LIMIT: IN SPACE" and for some strange reason, Clooney is being pulled by some mysterious force, and he sacrificially unhooks his lifeline, and FALLS OFF THE MOUNTAIN^^^^SPACE STATION.
Worst part of the ENTIRE movie right there. forget line of sight between 3 orbital bodies that are no where near each other, forget this magical debris field, forget the floating hair, this was the worst physics scene in the movie.
probably. It was late and I was tired.
I went through a weird stage between the ages of roughly 7 and say, 16 where I was extremely uncomfortable with needles. Then I had to get a lot of blood drawn for some tests, and something just clicked, and I was like "this is no big deal. Sure, its uncomfortable, but its not really scary". It was a good time for it to happen to, because the nurse that was taking my blood was semi-incompitant or something, and had to stab me about 30 times to get a vein.
The math is an example, not 'required' to find a short route. And if the design is so flawed, then tell me why they've not torn down the Pentagon, and a dozen other round layout buildings like it around the world, several of which where lauded for their intelligent and functional design.
"On a given floor"
And there's the thing.
This design gets everyone into 4 stories, and probably will use long ramps between floors, instead of stairs (like the Pentagon does) This means you can easily *walk* to any office, instead of spending time standing in a box being lifted up and down, or powering up or down 15 flights of stairs. And like a poster above me says, in a long straight building, the maximum distance between two offices is L, in this building it is L/2 (because the ends are connected) Couple that with being able to cut across the hub, (with California's generally decent weather, this remains a highly viable route) and your transit time starts to get pretty short. (design docs say its 14 minutes to walk the entire loop of the building, so a maximum of 7 minutes if you stay indoors to get to the office farthest from you, and much less if you cut across the hub)
Plus, despite the 'sunlight is evil to my delicate skin' people posting here, Designers tend to really like natural light, and this torus shape allows more offices to be lit by natural light than a cube. With all the modern tech in multi-panel insulated glass (to cut down on heat) these days, the ability to light your office building with natural sunlight most working hours saves you a LOT of money on power. (which looks good on your 'environmental resumé')
As for sprawl, they are dedicating a ton of space to parkland around and 'in' the structure, so who cares if the building is 1/3rd a mile across. I'd rather have that then a big cube surrounded by asphalt parking lot. (but that may just be me.)
If your using a credit card, any privacy from the government you thought you had was merely a delusion. I did not say as tracking, I said as a replacement for the existing electronic pen signatures (which are wildly inconsistent in quality.)
This is why I think that POS terminals where you swipe your card, then sign your name should be replaced with a system where you swipe your card, then place your finger, which then attaches a high rez scan of your print to the sale.
Also, while we're at it, can we standardize fsking customer side POS systems finally? every one of them you come to is different, button layout, number of screen prompts for cash back or amount purchase confirmation. Working customer service in a store has taught me, despite their ubiquitousness, people are completely confused by credit card POS terminals, because they ALL work differently.
there already is a teaching tool for this. Cuisenaire Rods. Its how I learned fractions, and an assortment of other mathematical principles
God, I've been looking for this for ages. Saw it years a go, and never forgot "and for some reason, they follow this cartoon rabbit into the swamp". Best review ever.
well, you would not want to miss a hilarious opportunity to void your bowels in public.
calling bullshit on this one, because I watched a lady text back and forth from gate to gate on a recent flight across Texas.(less than 4 days ago).
You know, the passengers around you hope you are beaten to death with as many whiffle bats as it takes when you do shit like that.
If i remember correctly, Octopus have an extremely high flicker fusion frequency as well. (heck, I think I learned that from a /. article ages ago)
I've actually got a 2 source KVM switch that supports usb keyboard and mouse. Been years since i've used it, but I can attest that they exist.