Except the ban signed by Bush didn't dictate the terms of the technology. Just that the common application light bulb was to have a higher energy efficiency. The free market that everyone is so fond of come up with the CFL solution. That said the life cycle mercury dump when combining the coal power plant and the bulb itself still has the CFL coming out leaps and bounds ahead of the incandescent.
Given that the most of the country's power comes from coal it really doesn't matter anyway. If you do a life cycle comparison between the power consumed by both bulbs, the resultant mercury released by coal fired power plants and the mercury dumped into the environment by the bulb itself you will find that the CFL still comes out far better than and common incandescent.
They aren't telling you what kind of bulbs to f*****g bulbs to buy. The energy efficiency standards set to take effect do not specify the specific technology that must replace them. It just says that common application bulbs need to be more efficient. CFLs happen to fit that standard but there are actually alternatives including other incandescent bulbs.
Probably not. It is treating a symptom rather than the cause. It is highly likely that the underlying problem will simply manifest itself as some other symptom.
Still missing it... When people speak in generalities they are almost always granting the possibility of outliers though I specifically spelled that out for you. Your example was just such a thing. Your tone and communication skills quite obviously place your class.
[The] Secretary of Transportation may authorize an individual who carries out air transportation security duties– (2) to make arrests without warrant for an offense against the United States committed in the presence of the individual or for a felony under the laws of the United States, if the individual reasonably believes the individual to be arrested has committed or is committing a felony.
I don't believe you caught the "middle-class" part. Obviously you'll find outliers regardless of where you go on the scales. The media also tends to distort perspectives when it comes to the wealthy, educated, elite. Again outliers, but in this case the natural desire for people to "eat the rich".
Dressing them in a uniform and giving them arrest-authority would suddenly make a poorly educated, under-class person magically transform into an upstanding middle-class person with a passion for doing their job to the best of their abilities?
That would only make sense if you dropped the "change" part. The original marketing campaign was just myopic. Displacement of climates is far more probable given the varied geography of the earth.
Spoken like a teenage virgin with raging hormones and no brains. Or, someone who holds no more value for women than an amusement park ride and is trying to persuade them of the casual nature of sex so as to let him go for as many rides with as many different women as he sees fit. Either way, to state that you were being self-serving would be an understatement. Is it natural that you want to jackhammer anything in a skirt? Yes. Are you being considerate of women and their needs and desires? No. Will your value of and attitude towards women ultimately get you laid? On occasion. Will I have far more sex with my wife in this coming week than you will have with whatever women you choose to chase after? Absolutely.
I think they were going for the calculate then transmit idea. That means only going in/out require the electrons as opposed to the present, in/out and calculate. The overwhelming majority of electrons suffer their fate during the calculate portion. Are we going to get the napkin research results hinted at? No. But if we can achieve even an order of magnitude reduction in power costs it's still "game changing" significant.
Phallus jokes aside. It would be great to understand how this works. We've somewhat recently started looking more closely at the notion of acoustic levitation for solving all manner of problems. Particularly containerless manufacturing. It's been suggested based upon various ancient texts that this may well have been the means by which so many of these massive megaliths far exceeding modern engineering capabilities were transported and placed. The ability for something so small to produce such a relatively massive acoustic pressure definitely helps bolster the case.
That's the point of it being a class action suit. In so doing the lawyers are able to extract a percentage of the sum total of damages awarded. If the plaintiff was Joe Blogs the lawyer would expect the usual $200+/hr fee. Because the plaintiff is Joe Blogs [1-10000] the lawyer is certainly taking the case on contingent. It's highly likely that it was the lawyer that sought out these people and convinced them to participate using the 3x return of fees as bait rather than the other way around.
It sounds as as if you folks believe lawyers to be unscrupulous individuals whose sole motivation is the extraction of money from others with no regards for propriety.
There's no need for clever new strategies to promote adoption. If you want to sell something just give it sex appeal. Sex sells. Always has, always will.
That sounds reasonable enough. However, with that in mind I think there's a huge discrepancy between the contents of most patents and the fulfillment of their obligation to communicate how to reproduce an invention. Patents are being specifically crafted so as to only provide sufficient information to be useful as leverage against competitors and/or a stream of license revenue.
Unless I'm misunderstanding the reason for the language in the present legislation being worked on the USPTO does NOT retain the fees from applications.
Government did the locomotive, government did the car, the airplane, semiconductors, off-shore oil drilling, plastics, etc. etc.. Pull your head out for a minute... Government does not have a monopoly on innovation. Government is in a unique position to sponsor high-risk research, government is bad at maturing, and delivering cost-effective products derived from that research. I didn't say kill NASA, I said don't look for the "golden-age" to be heralded in by NASA. NASA has an important role as the risk taker. NASA is hamstrung by congress critters and an executive that perpetually, and prematurely pull the plug on this research all while demanding they build something awesome. Even if government stopped micromanaging NASA and allowed them to complete something, their work isn't mass producible. It would never be available for non-government actors in any meaningful way. Business is required to commercialize, make affordable and accessible for mass consumption. It's what they do best.
Too much money running around in patents to move forward with reform. Not enough money to develop a time machine and b*tch slap the *sswipes that put this crap in the Constitution. You sir are looking at what we call an intractable situation. We're stuck with them until there no longer exists an authority to enforce them.
Slashdot Mirror
Except the ban signed by Bush didn't dictate the terms of the technology. Just that the common application light bulb was to have a higher energy efficiency. The free market that everyone is so fond of come up with the CFL solution. That said the life cycle mercury dump when combining the coal power plant and the bulb itself still has the CFL coming out leaps and bounds ahead of the incandescent.
Given that the most of the country's power comes from coal it really doesn't matter anyway. If you do a life cycle comparison between the power consumed by both bulbs, the resultant mercury released by coal fired power plants and the mercury dumped into the environment by the bulb itself you will find that the CFL still comes out far better than and common incandescent.
The Bush ban did not ban incandescents. Incandescents will still be produced, just that they are more effeceint.
Like these
They aren't telling you what kind of bulbs to f*****g bulbs to buy. The energy efficiency standards set to take effect do not specify the specific technology that must replace them. It just says that common application bulbs need to be more efficient. CFLs happen to fit that standard but there are actually alternatives including other incandescent bulbs .
Probably not. It is treating a symptom rather than the cause. It is highly likely that the underlying problem will simply manifest itself as some other symptom.
D/E ($25-44K) for an ordinary TSO. They don't bother listing "Inspector - Dangerous Goods & Cargo". Probably for a reason...
Still missing it... When people speak in generalities they are almost always granting the possibility of outliers though I specifically spelled that out for you. Your example was just such a thing. Your tone and communication skills quite obviously place your class.
[The] Secretary of Transportation may authorize an individual who carries out air transportation security duties– (2) to make arrests without warrant for an offense against the United States committed in the presence of the individual or for a felony under the laws of the United States, if the individual reasonably believes the individual to be arrested has committed or is committing a felony.
I don't believe you caught the "middle-class" part. Obviously you'll find outliers regardless of where you go on the scales. The media also tends to distort perspectives when it comes to the wealthy, educated, elite. Again outliers, but in this case the natural desire for people to "eat the rich".
Dressing them in a uniform and giving them arrest-authority would suddenly make a poorly educated, under-class person magically transform into an upstanding middle-class person with a passion for doing their job to the best of their abilities?
That would only make sense if you dropped the "change" part. The original marketing campaign was just myopic. Displacement of climates is far more probable given the varied geography of the earth.
Spoken like a teenage virgin with raging hormones and no brains. Or, someone who holds no more value for women than an amusement park ride and is trying to persuade them of the casual nature of sex so as to let him go for as many rides with as many different women as he sees fit. Either way, to state that you were being self-serving would be an understatement. Is it natural that you want to jackhammer anything in a skirt? Yes. Are you being considerate of women and their needs and desires? No. Will your value of and attitude towards women ultimately get you laid? On occasion. Will I have far more sex with my wife in this coming week than you will have with whatever women you choose to chase after? Absolutely.
I think they were going for the calculate then transmit idea. That means only going in/out require the electrons as opposed to the present, in/out and calculate. The overwhelming majority of electrons suffer their fate during the calculate portion. Are we going to get the napkin research results hinted at? No. But if we can achieve even an order of magnitude reduction in power costs it's still "game changing" significant.
You people make me sad. :'(
Phallus jokes aside. It would be great to understand how this works. We've somewhat recently started looking more closely at the notion of acoustic levitation for solving all manner of problems. Particularly containerless manufacturing. It's been suggested based upon various ancient texts that this may well have been the means by which so many of these massive megaliths far exceeding modern engineering capabilities were transported and placed. The ability for something so small to produce such a relatively massive acoustic pressure definitely helps bolster the case.
Right and we'd also be speaking in terms of pounds per foot of cable.
Shouldn't you turn the client upside down and shake them "before" offering follow up advice?
That's the point of it being a class action suit. In so doing the lawyers are able to extract a percentage of the sum total of damages awarded. If the plaintiff was Joe Blogs the lawyer would expect the usual $200+/hr fee. Because the plaintiff is Joe Blogs [1-10000] the lawyer is certainly taking the case on contingent. It's highly likely that it was the lawyer that sought out these people and convinced them to participate using the 3x return of fees as bait rather than the other way around.
It sounds as as if you folks believe lawyers to be unscrupulous individuals whose sole motivation is the extraction of money from others with no regards for propriety.
There's no need for clever new strategies to promote adoption. If you want to sell something just give it sex appeal. Sex sells. Always has, always will.
That sounds reasonable enough. However, with that in mind I think there's a huge discrepancy between the contents of most patents and the fulfillment of their obligation to communicate how to reproduce an invention. Patents are being specifically crafted so as to only provide sufficient information to be useful as leverage against competitors and/or a stream of license revenue.
Unless I'm misunderstanding the reason for the language in the present legislation being worked on the USPTO does NOT retain the fees from applications.
Government did the locomotive, government did the car, the airplane, semiconductors, off-shore oil drilling, plastics, etc. etc.. Pull your head out for a minute... Government does not have a monopoly on innovation. Government is in a unique position to sponsor high-risk research, government is bad at maturing, and delivering cost-effective products derived from that research. I didn't say kill NASA, I said don't look for the "golden-age" to be heralded in by NASA. NASA has an important role as the risk taker. NASA is hamstrung by congress critters and an executive that perpetually, and prematurely pull the plug on this research all while demanding they build something awesome. Even if government stopped micromanaging NASA and allowed them to complete something, their work isn't mass producible. It would never be available for non-government actors in any meaningful way. Business is required to commercialize, make affordable and accessible for mass consumption. It's what they do best.
Too much money running around in patents to move forward with reform. Not enough money to develop a time machine and b*tch slap the *sswipes that put this crap in the Constitution. You sir are looking at what we call an intractable situation. We're stuck with them until there no longer exists an authority to enforce them.
I believe the poster is thinking of this.