We'll still be using fossil fuels in 2050. Probably 2100 too. There really is no good substitute, except possibly smashing corn or sugarcane & extracting the juices.
But as long as we use electricity, we'll still be burning natural gas or coal in 2050. As long as we have jetplanes, we'll still be burning oil in 2050.
This is NOT a troll (baiting message). This is an opinion. I'm sorry you don't like my opinion, but it's still MY opinion, not a baiting message.
- If we were smart, we would SAVE our oil, drain the Mideast dry (circa 2050), and then say, "Hey guys; we've got oil over in America" and charge $1000 a barrel. We'd be rich.
- But of course, we're short-term thinkers; we won't do that. We'll use-up the Dakota (and Alaska NWR) oil immediately, rather than save it for the coming oil draught.
I'm just repeating what the EPA said, and they said "50000 miles og gasoline" is how much energy is needed to build a car. [b] Stop attacking the messenger. [/b]
"The energy required to build a car is equivalent to driving an average American car 50,000 miles." Don't shoot the messenger; I'm just repeating what they said.
Well that's really up to the people that live there, isn't it?
Most of the rural people I've met (farmers and small store owners) are independent-minded folk, and they really don't care if they only get 0.5 megabit connections. Same way they don't mind having only 1 TV station or analog-only cell coverage. That's their lifestyle choice & they like it that way. (Similar to how Amish-Americans are not hooked-up to electricity, except not that extreme.)
According to speedtest.net, the fastest state in the America is Washington. No surprise; that's where Microsoft lives and all the surrounding support companies.
Other fast states include those along the Northeast I-95 corridor (where it's densely populated like europe).
- The BBC pays for its connection to upload its content.
- The viewer payers for his/her connection to download the content. (And people who don't download; don't pay.)
That's the way everything else works. TV companies pay to transmit video; the customer pays to get a TV receiver. Radio companies pay to transmit sound; the customers pays to get a radio receiver. And so on.
>>>"fiber connection to my apartment for less than half of what a US subscriber pays"
Yep and the Japanese government charges you $10,000 more taxes per year for the privilege! Personally I'd rather pay $10 per month to my ISP, than 10 thousand more in taxes.
>>>"The US does not have a low population density"
Oh really? I challenge you to drive from NYC to California on I-80, and then repeat that statement. You won't be able to, because then you'll come to realize what I have realized from my cross-country journeys:
- The U.S. is one large cornfield, sprinkled with a few cities here and there.
Which "densely populated regions" have slow internet? Every major city I have examined in my area (Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, D.C.) is getting wired with 20 megabit cable or FiOs. I wouldn't call that slow.
Living in rural Greece with only 56k... that's slow (comparable to living in Wyoming).
Which if the point: When you compare ALL of europe, to ALL of the states, they are essentially equal (on average). Which is what you would expect for two closely-tied 1st world economies.
Why do these surveys keep comparing a 2500-mile wide continental nation to tiny little states? There's a huge difference between wiring metropolitan France and the cornfields of America. Apples and oranges.
A proper comparison would do one Federation versus another federation: - U.S. v. E.U. v. Canadian Confederation v. Australia v. China. Those are comparable territories with similar challenges to overcome (lots of empty space).
- I just picked-up a 333 megahertz laptop with Win98 for $40 on ebay. It does everything I want except play movies (drivers not 98 compatible).
- So I upgraded to a 1000 megahertz with WinXP for $150 on ebay. Works perfectly, and I'm using it right now to watch Torchwood. I'm very happy with it.
Back to the 333:
It's an AMD K6 with 6 gig hard drive and 96 megabyte RAM. Is that enough room to run a dual 98/Linux OS?
You could lay three or four more cables. There's room inside the underground pipe. Then let the customer decide.
BUT I wonder if that's necessary? You don't have to get Cable TV. You could get DishTV or DirecTV or Verizon TV or free tv (off the antenna). You're not locked in to just one option, thanks to these new technologies.
Certainly not in Europe. I hear lots of complaints coming from their citizens (example: the UK healthcare system rejecting patients because "there's not enough money to help everybody"). The idea of competant government is as much fantasy as the Harry Potter books. I think George Washington said it best:
"Government is like fire. A dangerous servant; and a deadly master." I also like James Madison's comment: "If leaders were angels, we would not need a Constitution. But men, being men, we needs restrain [limit] their power." And Thomas Jefferson: "If it were possible, we would have no government at all. It is only to protect our rights that we turn to government as a last resort." And let's not forget Philadelphian Benjamin Franklin: "The two great flaws of leadership are avarice and ambition. Love of money and love of power. Government attracts men desiring both."
Damn straight. Wherever power or money is concentrated, whether it's government or corporation, you will find "diseased" men desiring to serve THEMSELVES, not the people. You can not trust these people, because their goals are more power and more money, not helping us citizens.
>>>"If their ISP is advertising "unlimited bandwidth"
Please show me any U.S. ISP that advertises this. (Hint: Virtually all of them say, "upto xx bandwidth" not unlimited.) You clearer are not bothering to RTFC (contract).
Except it's usually $40,000 for unlimited kilowatt-hours (businesses). ISPs ought to have a similar option for unlimited gigabytes (albeit charge only $100 or $200).
Slashdot Mirror
We'll still be using fossil fuels in 2050. Probably 2100 too. There really is no good substitute, except possibly smashing corn or sugarcane & extracting the juices.
But as long as we use electricity, we'll still be burning natural gas or coal in 2050. As long as we have jetplanes, we'll still be burning oil in 2050.
This is NOT a troll (baiting message). This is an opinion. I'm sorry you don't like my opinion, but it's still MY opinion, not a baiting message.
- If we were smart, we would SAVE our oil, drain the Mideast dry (circa 2050), and then say, "Hey guys; we've got oil over in America" and charge $1000 a barrel. We'd be rich.
- But of course, we're short-term thinkers; we won't do that. We'll use-up the Dakota (and Alaska NWR) oil immediately, rather than save it for the coming oil draught.
(sigh)
I'm just repeating what the EPA said, and they said "50000 miles og gasoline" is how much energy is needed to build a car. [b] Stop attacking the messenger. [/b]
Because that's the way the EPA stated it.
"The energy required to build a car is equivalent to driving an average American car 50,000 miles." Don't shoot the messenger; I'm just repeating what they said.
Well that's really up to the people that live there, isn't it?
Most of the rural people I've met (farmers and small store owners) are independent-minded folk, and they really don't care if they only get 0.5 megabit connections. Same way they don't mind having only 1 TV station or analog-only cell coverage. That's their lifestyle choice & they like it that way. (Similar to how Amish-Americans are not hooked-up to electricity, except not that extreme.)
According to speedtest.net, the fastest state in the America is Washington. No surprise; that's where Microsoft lives and all the surrounding support companies.
Other fast states include those along the Northeast I-95 corridor (where it's densely populated like europe).
That pretty much supports my point about not comparing the huge U.S. versus a densely-populated E.U. state like France or Germany.
Apples v. oranges.
I think the answer is obvious.
- The BBC pays for its connection to upload its content.
- The viewer payers for his/her connection to download the content. (And people who don't download; don't pay.)
That's the way everything else works. TV companies pay to transmit video; the customer pays to get a TV receiver. Radio companies pay to transmit sound; the customers pays to get a radio receiver. And so on.
By definition a phoneline is narrowband (0.004 megahertz wide).
Therefore a line that is megahertz wide is broadband. For cable it's 6 megahertz per channel. DSL is about 1 megahertz wide per line.
Australia does have faster service than either the U.S. or the E.U.
I have no idea why.
Canada is 2 megabit/sec and 2.5 megabit/sec slower than the U.S. and E.U. averages.
I don't define that as a "Canadian lead".
>>>"fiber connection to my apartment for less than half of what a US subscriber pays"
Yep and the Japanese government charges you $10,000 more taxes per year for the privilege! Personally I'd rather pay $10 per month to my ISP, than 10 thousand more in taxes.
They do. I've got 50 megabit fiber running outside my house.
My state average is comparable to France or the U.K.
>>>"The US does not have a low population density"
Oh really? I challenge you to drive from NYC to California on I-80, and then repeat that statement. You won't be able to, because then you'll come to realize what I have realized from my cross-country journeys:
- The U.S. is one large cornfield, sprinkled with a few cities here and there.
Which "densely populated regions" have slow internet? Every major city I have examined in my area (Philadelphia, Wilmington, Baltimore, D.C.) is getting wired with 20 megabit cable or FiOs. I wouldn't call that slow.
Living in rural Greece with only 56k... that's slow (comparable to living in Wyoming).
Which if the point: When you compare ALL of europe, to ALL of the states, they are essentially equal (on average). Which is what you would expect for two closely-tied 1st world economies.
I don't understand:
Why do these surveys keep comparing a 2500-mile wide continental nation to tiny little states? There's a huge difference between wiring metropolitan France and the cornfields of America. Apples and oranges.
A proper comparison would do one Federation versus another federation:
- U.S. v. E.U. v. Canadian Confederation v. Australia v. China.
Those are comparable territories with similar challenges to overcome (lots of empty space).
Philadelphia?
I'd rather live & work in a small city like Lancaster, Scranton, or Frederick, even if that meant a cut in pay. Better quality of life; safer as well.
P.S. Forgot to answer the question:
- I just picked-up a 333 megahertz laptop with Win98 for $40 on ebay. It does everything I want except play movies (drivers not 98 compatible).
- So I upgraded to a 1000 megahertz with WinXP for $150 on ebay. Works perfectly, and I'm using it right now to watch Torchwood. I'm very happy with it.
Back to the 333:
It's an AMD K6 with 6 gig hard drive and 96 megabyte RAM.
Is that enough room to run a dual 98/Linux OS?
I have a job like that. 2 hours in the morning & 2.5 in the afternoon. The reason I put-up with it?
(1) They pay me $55 an hour. Big motivator.
(2) I got a hotel room, so I only have to make my commute once a week, which is not bad at all.
You could lay three or four more cables. There's room inside the underground pipe. Then let the customer decide.
BUT I wonder if that's necessary? You don't have to get Cable TV. You could get DishTV or DirecTV or Verizon TV or free tv (off the antenna). You're not locked in to just one option, thanks to these new technologies.
Competant government?
Where?
Certainly not in Europe. I hear lots of complaints coming from their citizens (example: the UK healthcare system rejecting patients because "there's not enough money to help everybody"). The idea of competant government is as much fantasy as the Harry Potter books. I think George Washington said it best:
"Government is like fire. A dangerous servant; and a deadly master." I also like James Madison's comment: "If leaders were angels, we would not need a Constitution. But men, being men, we needs restrain [limit] their power." And Thomas Jefferson: "If it were possible, we would have no government at all. It is only to protect our rights that we turn to government as a last resort." And let's not forget Philadelphian Benjamin Franklin: "The two great flaws of leadership are avarice and ambition. Love of money and love of power. Government attracts men desiring both."
Damn straight. Wherever power or money is concentrated, whether it's government or corporation, you will find "diseased" men desiring to serve THEMSELVES, not the people. You can not trust these people, because their goals are more power and more money, not helping us citizens.
The U.S. was never the "greatest" country (the European global empires (like the UK) were much greater than we ever were).
It was at one point the "free-est" which is not the same thing.
And now it's one of the least free ("numerous gov't agencies eating-out the substance of our citizens" to paraphrase the Declaration).
Please show me where Comcast advertised "unlimited gigabytes" (yes that exact phrase).
It doesn't exist!
You've been drinking too much of the Kool aid.
>>>"If their ISP is advertising "unlimited bandwidth"
Please show me any U.S. ISP that advertises this. (Hint: Virtually all of them say, "upto xx bandwidth" not unlimited.) You clearer are not bothering to RTFC (contract).
Yes they do.
Except it's usually $40,000 for unlimited kilowatt-hours (businesses). ISPs ought to have a similar option for unlimited gigabytes (albeit charge only $100 or $200).