The cited statistic is enough to mock this report. It's warmer now than it has been 74% of the time in the past 11,300 years. Seriously? WOuldn't that mean for 25% of the past 11,300 years the average temperature was HIGHER?! WHat makes the current temp so noteworthy? Because it is above the average, but below the highest temperature in the past 11,300 years?
Fedex and UPS have perfected delivery of packages so why not the mail?
They don't stop at every house, and their business model falls apart if they had to.
I live in Maryland and it doesn't make sense to me that I can send a piece of first class mail to New York City and Nome Alaska for the same price.
You would prefer that the USPS adopt a weight/distance/delivery time model like FedEx and UPS? You really want to have to look up on a chart how much it costs to send out each holiday card? The flat-rate model is the best option.
Yes, preparing for future retirement that you agreed to is SOOOO unfair.
Congress has decided that the USPS must have 75 years of pension money IN THE BANK by 2016, and their shortfalls each year nearly match the size of the over-payment Congress requires the USPS to it's pension fund each year.
The USPS Pension is over-funded simply because in 2006 it was profitable, and Congress siezed upon that opportunity and decided to REQUIRE the USPS to over-fund it's pension to a level no other company has ever been required to do - 75 years of benefits in the bank! They are required to have pension money in the bank for employees that haven't even been born, let alone hired by the USPS.
First off, this fellow in a city council has no responsibility for the funding of the USPS.
Second, he has no ability to tax anyone outside his city - does he propose that Berkley alone fund the USPS?
Third, the issue with USPS solvency is, for the most part, inflicted upon the USPS by Congress, which has decided that since the USPS was profitable in 2006, that it should fully-fund 75 years of pension obligations by the end of 2016. This has resulted in over-funding the pension fund beyond any reasonable requirement by any conventional funding formula, and if you look closely, the losses the USPS reported these last few years is only slightly more than the annual over-payment of the pension system.
Sure, talk to the Senators in charge of the appropriate committee - you'll notice they are members of the same political party as the President putting forth this attack on the Constitution.
Imagine, instead of drones, Eric Holder said it is this administration's position that the President can dispatch a soldier to execute an American citizen that he alone has decided poses a threat to national security.
OK, what if instead of the President alone, he had to convince a few of his political appointees of this person's need to be executed for "national security"? How would you feel then?
There is nothing different about a drone attack as compared to an armed soldier carrying out an execution - the soldier example is wrong, and no one would support it, but if it's an armed mode airplane, suddenly it's legal?
The military can not fire on American citizens on US soil.
I, and probably you, can think of several instance where stopping an american with deadly force is what needs to be done.
Sure you can, it's easy, because you assume the person is caught "red-handed" in the act of attacking someone or something - Ron Paul's issue with the drone strikes are that there is no requirement that the american actually be engaged in an attack when they are killed by a drone.
That's why I sort of agree with Holder. My position at the moment is "While I cannot currently envision a scenario where a drone strike would be the best option against US Citizens on US Soil, I cannot rule out such a scenario occurring. The authorization for such action would have to come from the highest levels and be subject to the strictest scrutiny'.
That "strict scrutiny" will be a great comfort to those wrongly killed by the government...
People used to go to the (FREE) library and read actual books and learn things independently - why don't more 'students' avail themselves of this free education?
Is it because knowledge isn't the goal, a piece of paper is?
The contention is that the 'bandwidth divide' will keep low income students from participating in free online courses because they lack high-speed broadband is, to me, verging on the ridiculous.
College now costs over $10K a year, on-line courses can bring that cost down to a number approaching zero, but because it is 'unreasonable' to expect students getting thousands of dollars worth of free education to spring for reasonable broadband service (estimated at $50/mo) we are considering this a problem? Four years of the best service Verizon offers for home access ($200/mo x 48 months) is LESS than one year in university. Scale down the bandwidth demands and you can do it for much less.
Shouldn't free courses and free e-textbooks free-up some money for the student to buy broadband access if they don't already have it?
Or do we need to offer students free courses with free books accessed on free bandwidth from their free computers that run on free electricity?
What about a 'thin client' for your iPhone? Imagine an easily viewable display attached to your wrist (Dick Tacy-style) tethered via Bluetooth to your iPhone. It would only present one or two apps at a time, and with only minimal interaction the battery can be long-lasting.
A display half the size of an iPhone display would suffice, and could likely carry/hide a large enough battery to achieve several days of use.
I anticipate a display made out of seven segment LED displays, a throwback to the first digital watches - their kitsch-factor will win over skeptics and cause a resurgence in LED displays.
Jerry Pournell, famous sci-fi writer and technology commentator used to keep a simple computer in a 'writing room' that had no Internet access and no unneccessary applications/tools installed, for serious writing work.
I would imagine the answer is to avoid 'researching' while writing, and simply pull the Network connection when writing. Most serious writers I've read about tend to drop 'markers' in their text to indicate something to be looked up/researched during editing.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you Mr. Kennedy, I'd love a ride home after the party...
Sincerely,
Mary Jo Kopechne
The cited statistic is enough to mock this report. It's warmer now than it has been 74% of the time in the past 11,300 years. Seriously? WOuldn't that mean for 25% of the past 11,300 years the average temperature was HIGHER?! WHat makes the current temp so noteworthy? Because it is above the average, but below the highest temperature in the past 11,300 years?
Cow farts are the scourge of today, I guess the cavemen had to deal with Dinosaur farts "back in the day'...
They don't stop at every house, and their business model falls apart if they had to.
You would prefer that the USPS adopt a weight/distance/delivery time model like FedEx and UPS? You really want to have to look up on a chart how much it costs to send out each holiday card? The flat-rate model is the best option.
Seventy-five years - that means they are putting money away for future USPS employees that haven't even been born yet!
Congress has decided that the USPS must have 75 years of pension money IN THE BANK by 2016, and their shortfalls each year nearly match the size of the over-payment Congress requires the USPS to it's pension fund each year.
The USPS Pension is over-funded simply because in 2006 it was profitable, and Congress siezed upon that opportunity and decided to REQUIRE the USPS to over-fund it's pension to a level no other company has ever been required to do - 75 years of benefits in the bank! They are required to have pension money in the bank for employees that haven't even been born, let alone hired by the USPS.
That is nuts! You do understand the entire model of the USPS is the SENDER PAYS, right?
Spam snail-mail isn't a problem, in fact it's helping support the USPS (remember, the sender pays cash money for every piece of mail sent).
Parcel delivery is on the rise while first class mail volume drops - the USPS makes significant money on thier parcel delivery business.
First off, this fellow in a city council has no responsibility for the funding of the USPS.
Second, he has no ability to tax anyone outside his city - does he propose that Berkley alone fund the USPS?
Third, the issue with USPS solvency is, for the most part, inflicted upon the USPS by Congress, which has decided that since the USPS was profitable in 2006, that it should fully-fund 75 years of pension obligations by the end of 2016. This has resulted in over-funding the pension fund beyond any reasonable requirement by any conventional funding formula, and if you look closely, the losses the USPS reported these last few years is only slightly more than the annual over-payment of the pension system.
Pretty sure that was local police acting unilaterally (as I recall).
Or an armed soldier. Soldiers are not allowed to operate in a law enforcement/peace keeping capacity on US soil except under very specific conditions.
Seriously? You take him at his word?
Sure, talk to the Senators in charge of the appropriate committee - you'll notice they are members of the same political party as the President putting forth this attack on the Constitution.
Imagine, instead of drones, Eric Holder said it is this administration's position that the President can dispatch a soldier to execute an American citizen that he alone has decided poses a threat to national security.
OK, what if instead of the President alone, he had to convince a few of his political appointees of this person's need to be executed for "national security"? How would you feel then?
There is nothing different about a drone attack as compared to an armed soldier carrying out an execution - the soldier example is wrong, and no one would support it, but if it's an armed mode airplane, suddenly it's legal?
The military can not fire on American citizens on US soil.
Sure you can, it's easy, because you assume the person is caught "red-handed" in the act of attacking someone or something - Ron Paul's issue with the drone strikes are that there is no requirement that the american actually be engaged in an attack when they are killed by a drone.
That "strict scrutiny" will be a great comfort to those wrongly killed by the government...
What if we agree to limit the drones to magazines of less than ten rounds, would that be OK?
His publicity stunt is bringing the constitutional threat the President's Drone policy represents to the attention of most Americans.
He has said repeatedly what he wants, and you are right, it is nothing legislative - he simply wants the President to say in a clear statement that the government will not kill non-enemy combatants inside the United States.
That makes the previous poster what we now refer to as a 'low information voter'
Once they have broadband Internet they can order food, water, and clothes from Amazon - problem solved! /sarc
People used to go to the (FREE) library and read actual books and learn things independently - why don't more 'students' avail themselves of this free education?
Is it because knowledge isn't the goal, a piece of paper is?
The contention is that the 'bandwidth divide' will keep low income students from participating in free online courses because they lack high-speed broadband is, to me, verging on the ridiculous.
College now costs over $10K a year, on-line courses can bring that cost down to a number approaching zero, but because it is 'unreasonable' to expect students getting thousands of dollars worth of free education to spring for reasonable broadband service (estimated at $50/mo) we are considering this a problem? Four years of the best service Verizon offers for home access ($200/mo x 48 months) is LESS than one year in university. Scale down the bandwidth demands and you can do it for much less.
Shouldn't free courses and free e-textbooks free-up some money for the student to buy broadband access if they don't already have it?
Or do we need to offer students free courses with free books accessed on free bandwidth from their free computers that run on free electricity?
What about a 'thin client' for your iPhone? Imagine an easily viewable display attached to your wrist (Dick Tacy-style) tethered via Bluetooth to your iPhone. It would only present one or two apps at a time, and with only minimal interaction the battery can be long-lasting.
A display half the size of an iPhone display would suffice, and could likely carry/hide a large enough battery to achieve several days of use.
I anticipate a display made out of seven segment LED displays, a throwback to the first digital watches - their kitsch-factor will win over skeptics and cause a resurgence in LED displays.
If every number I made up turns out to be true, this product I know nothing about could represent $6BN in revenue for Apple.
Seriously, it's speculation built on top of more speculation... Oh, wait, it's slashdot, never mind.
Uhm, thanks for sharing...
Jerry Pournell, famous sci-fi writer and technology commentator used to keep a simple computer in a 'writing room' that had no Internet access and no unneccessary applications/tools installed, for serious writing work.
I would imagine the answer is to avoid 'researching' while writing, and simply pull the Network connection when writing. Most serious writers I've read about tend to drop 'markers' in their text to indicate something to be looked up/researched during editing.