The flood is a three-day event, and "The water level in the canyon will only rise a few feet." Water flows regularly in the area, but its a flood event when an abnormally high volume of water is released over a period of time. Think of the Nile river floods of ancient Egypt; they weren't sweeping away everything in their path, but gently raising the water levels to consume the banks, depositing sediment before receding and leaving revitalized agricultural grounds to the Egyptian farmers.
Its not so much about the volumes of water we are trying to bring downstream, in fact the Dam does regularly release water downstream (hence its function as a dam and not a reservoir barricade.) Instead, its about the material brought along with the water flow. The amount of sediment deposited by the regular flow is not enough to offset the sediment swept from the sandbars and it is hoped that periodical flood volumes of water would deposit much more sediment, enough to offset that which it takes as well as the regular flow takes. As you'll notice, although a larger volume of water is released in the artificial flood, the flow does not reach much farther up the sandbars than the regular flow.
Don't know if I should reiterate this or not, but the last dump was in 2004 and the one before that was 1996. It hardly seems as though they need to dump sediment again for the Dam's sake after 4 years if the previous dump span was 8 years. Furthermore, the article proposes the possibility of annual or biannual dumps, if the restoration attempt proves beneficial to the fish habitats.
The natural state of the river did not, according to theory, see the average flow building up sediment, but rather from the sound of the article swept away more sediment than it deposited. It was the natural flooding of the Arizona monsoon seasons that deposited enough sediment to replenish the habitat, often enough to prevent species populations from collapsing. The artificial floods are meant to mimic those flood, every one to two YEARS (if the practice proves beneficial then on a continuing basis) and restore the habitats to a state similar to before the Dam. Removing the Dam is out of the question. Frankly, I'd be happy they're concerned enough to warrant the possibility of making this an annual event; considering the last two times this flooding occured just to flush out the sediment were in 1996 and 2004. 8 years and 4 years before they need to dump sediment for the Dam's sake, but purpose every year or two years for the environment's sake.
Erm, wait what? I must be confusing our String variables here. So, the current Congress are Socialists for authorizing excessive spending and debt. Ok. But, placing Obama as President, which you state will raise taxes is also socialist? I would agree Obama is likely to raise taxes and has plans to spend more, I think the kind of spending he would work towards is a very different kind of spending than the current congress has approved. With a little dip towards the other party in Congress, I think the attitudes towards Obama's spending plans will sour. Not because of a great change in opinion in congress, but because of a change in party controls. Partisan machinations are very strong in this country, strong enough I believe to account for the bizarre actions of either party as they've held control of either or both branches. I'm betting on that partisanship and I think we'll find a congress of the opposite party snap back to in opposition to the Presidency. Is it a risk? Yes, and a scary one at that.
True also that I think this effect could be found if the opposite occured and McCain had to contend with a spendy congress. But at this time I see Obama's inexperience as putting him at an advantage (For those keeping score at home, that's disadvantage to the President's goals of working with Congress, which mean an advantage to us.) Obama knows one game right now, the charismatic people's leader game, and it's getting him far in the election. But that game will only get him along for so long when convincing the congress to work with him. Yes, at first the Congress (as the opposed party) will work with him, but not long enough to get anything meaningful accomplished. Before long, either a continuation of the current resession or outright character assassination from the Congress (likely centered on Iraq policy) will force his hand and his inexperience will carry the deadlock for a good while. Judging from recent history, either party is skilled enough to hold off giving the president's party "achievements" long enough to arrive 4 years later when both parties try to claim responsibility for the naturally rebounding economy as we get to play the politico game all over again.
Thank goodness we have a congress to check and balance the president! I think I'll take the Socialist President and make him live with the Fascist Congress. In choosing the President, no matter who wins we lose. But when we can balance the two forces to nearly cancel each other out; winning both sides practically nothing. And when neither one wins; the American public wins.
I think libraries will still need to exist. The heart of the concept exists in free (or atleast cheap) public access to information. Even if the libraries of the future turn mostly into public internet cafes, with some older multimedia and text resources stored in their original format, they will still be our libraries.
The Extinction Timeline is total garbage. "Mending things" and repair shops are going to be extinct in 2009? Laughable. Secrets and text based searching, and the computer mouse by 2020?
Erm, perhaps I misunderstand you or I have my terms mixed at this late hour, but do maybe mean an Inertial confinement fusion device, like the various laser-driven projects the US have pursued? I usually associate Inertial electrostatic containment with Farnsworth-Hirsch like devices, that seem like a dead research branch to me (for net generation, I mean; for commercial neutron production its a vibrant direction.) Maybe I have my terms mixed abit, but I do think magnetic confinement will not be as cheap as laser driven, but I do think both are valid avenues of research and, given time and funding, produce some form of viable commercial fusion.
I agree. Yes, its not very likely or probably even really possible. But the point is creative thinking works both ways. However, I think encryption is the solution to the wrong problem. The problem isn't "oh noes, how will I get teh music?" its "oh noes, my University will raise tuition rates for everybody if they can't stop teh pirates! (And most likely raise it even under threat of the funding loss the law presents.)
Arthur: What?
Maynard: '"...I would never be able to post this comm"'.
Bedevere: What is that?
Maynard: He must have been caught while typing it.
Lancelot: Oh, come on!
Maynard: Well, that's what it says.
Arthur: Look, if he was being taken away, he wouldn't bother to type 'comm'.
Maynard: Well, that's what's written in the post!
Galahad: Perhaps he was dictating.
Arthur: Oh, shut up. Well, does it say anything else?
Maynard: No. Just 'comm'.
[There is a thunderous roar, and the Knigh75 see a huge, animated Sys. Admin. behind them.]
Maynard: It's the Legendary Sys. Admin. of -- [the Admin b&s him] -- &#*$#NO_CARRIER!!!
Arthur/Knigh75: RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!...
What will state governments do next, mandate that schools become licensed distributors of RIAA/MPAA protected content, and that the revenue be used for funding the school. Schools already tried that something sort of like that themselves, (probably as a stop-gap against RIAA litigation,) it didn't really work out so great...
Or they could stop offering internet connections for personal devices and instead only offer connection through university run/approved labs and computer centers. Control over what gets installed or run on such computers could be more strictly controlled. "Off-campus" housing could still provide access, but the University could more easily claim that its outside its authority. You might laugh, but the computer lab used to be the only place you could get connected; why might it not be possible to become so again? Likely, no not really. But still a grim possible approach.
We always worry about what will happen if the robots aren't able to discern combatants and non combatants well enough, but what if we turn out to build robots that are better at it than us? Ones that can pinpoint the source of gunfire from a crowd. Ones of infinite calm, whom won't be startled, fatigued, or angered into making a terrible mistake or committing outright murder. Yes that technology has far to go, yes tele-communication as it currently stands is insufficient to replace ground patrol units, but those are challenges that I think can be met. Challenges that will be met, and will result in fewer casualties in war than ever before; for both our soldiers and innocent civilians.
I'm far too busy with my Web domination schemes to verify the context I'm attempting to represent in my posts!
In another way, I mean to say I read:
do people think that 'the internet' lives in the USA or something? and thought I'd casually throw out something about the majority of internet content coming from America, got stuck with a map of fiber, and mis-represented my writing as the main point instead of a semi-sarcastic sub-note. My real point was that I also think tagging is a poor system because it gives rise to misrepresentation, over-simplification, and even becomes mini-comments often used for controversial opinions. I think the best solution is to allow the story submitters to include 4 or 5 tags, subject to editor approval, for their stories and wipe out the whole mini-comment dynamic.
Not to be an elitist American, but... I couldn't find a substantive content map (well there's xkcd's) but I figure Fiber is illustrative enough.
At any rate, I also think the tagging system is garbage. I think the best fix would be to let the submitters specify the article tags. Yes, give me the POWER! I mean us! Us the article submitters!
The system detected there was a problem and automatically shut the reactors down; The system worked! Maybe massive blackouts aren't the best result, but they are by far better than the worst result.
but...but...but what if you forget to turn it off... Don't worry! If you forget to turn off your cell, some helpful people will come along and "turn off the cellphone" for you...
Shouldn't they have to wait until they can use what they already have properly? I do believe that this technology is enabling them to properly use what they already have.
Slashdot Mirror
My bad, I was trying for a meta-humor but my Dammed creativity ran dry...
The flood is a three-day event, and "The water level in the canyon will only rise a few feet." Water flows regularly in the area, but its a flood event when an abnormally high volume of water is released over a period of time. Think of the Nile river floods of ancient Egypt; they weren't sweeping away everything in their path, but gently raising the water levels to consume the banks, depositing sediment before receding and leaving revitalized agricultural grounds to the Egyptian farmers.
Its not so much about the volumes of water we are trying to bring downstream, in fact the Dam does regularly release water downstream (hence its function as a dam and not a reservoir barricade.) Instead, its about the material brought along with the water flow. The amount of sediment deposited by the regular flow is not enough to offset the sediment swept from the sandbars and it is hoped that periodical flood volumes of water would deposit much more sediment, enough to offset that which it takes as well as the regular flow takes. As you'll notice, although a larger volume of water is released in the artificial flood, the flow does not reach much farther up the sandbars than the regular flow.
Don't know if I should reiterate this or not, but the last dump was in 2004 and the one before that was 1996. It hardly seems as though they need to dump sediment again for the Dam's sake after 4 years if the previous dump span was 8 years. Furthermore, the article proposes the possibility of annual or biannual dumps, if the restoration attempt proves beneficial to the fish habitats.
The natural state of the river did not, according to theory, see the average flow building up sediment, but rather from the sound of the article swept away more sediment than it deposited. It was the natural flooding of the Arizona monsoon seasons that deposited enough sediment to replenish the habitat, often enough to prevent species populations from collapsing. The artificial floods are meant to mimic those flood, every one to two YEARS (if the practice proves beneficial then on a continuing basis) and restore the habitats to a state similar to before the Dam. Removing the Dam is out of the question. Frankly, I'd be happy they're concerned enough to warrant the possibility of making this an annual event; considering the last two times this flooding occured just to flush out the sediment were in 1996 and 2004. 8 years and 4 years before they need to dump sediment for the Dam's sake, but purpose every year or two years for the environment's sake.
Erm, wait what? I must be confusing our String variables here. So, the current Congress are Socialists for authorizing excessive spending and debt. Ok. But, placing Obama as President, which you state will raise taxes is also socialist? I would agree Obama is likely to raise taxes and has plans to spend more, I think the kind of spending he would work towards is a very different kind of spending than the current congress has approved. With a little dip towards the other party in Congress, I think the attitudes towards Obama's spending plans will sour. Not because of a great change in opinion in congress, but because of a change in party controls. Partisan machinations are very strong in this country, strong enough I believe to account for the bizarre actions of either party as they've held control of either or both branches. I'm betting on that partisanship and I think we'll find a congress of the opposite party snap back to in opposition to the Presidency. Is it a risk? Yes, and a scary one at that.
True also that I think this effect could be found if the opposite occured and McCain had to contend with a spendy congress. But at this time I see Obama's inexperience as putting him at an advantage (For those keeping score at home, that's disadvantage to the President's goals of working with Congress, which mean an advantage to us.) Obama knows one game right now, the charismatic people's leader game, and it's getting him far in the election. But that game will only get him along for so long when convincing the congress to work with him. Yes, at first the Congress (as the opposed party) will work with him, but not long enough to get anything meaningful accomplished. Before long, either a continuation of the current resession or outright character assassination from the Congress (likely centered on Iraq policy) will force his hand and his inexperience will carry the deadlock for a good while. Judging from recent history, either party is skilled enough to hold off giving the president's party "achievements" long enough to arrive 4 years later when both parties try to claim responsibility for the naturally rebounding economy as we get to play the politico game all over again.
We're merely using the ggp's $democratHyperbole value rather than defining our own locally...
Thank goodness we have a congress to check and balance the president! I think I'll take the Socialist President and make him live with the Fascist Congress. In choosing the President, no matter who wins we lose. But when we can balance the two forces to nearly cancel each other out; winning both sides practically nothing. And when neither one wins; the American public wins.
Free for certain values of direct cost to ones self. Libraries could die and my tax return wouldn't change a bit.
I think libraries will still need to exist. The heart of the concept exists in free (or atleast cheap) public access to information. Even if the libraries of the future turn mostly into public internet cafes, with some older multimedia and text resources stored in their original format, they will still be our libraries.
The Extinction Timeline is total garbage. "Mending things" and repair shops are going to be extinct in 2009? Laughable. Secrets and text based searching, and the computer mouse by 2020?
What are some of the differences between this and other parts of the military, in terms of application requirements, benefits, pay, etc?
Erm, perhaps I misunderstand you or I have my terms mixed at this late hour, but do maybe mean an Inertial confinement fusion device, like the various laser-driven projects the US have pursued? I usually associate Inertial electrostatic containment with Farnsworth-Hirsch like devices, that seem like a dead research branch to me (for net generation, I mean; for commercial neutron production its a vibrant direction.) Maybe I have my terms mixed abit, but I do think magnetic confinement will not be as cheap as laser driven, but I do think both are valid avenues of research and, given time and funding, produce some form of viable commercial fusion.
I agree. Yes, its not very likely or probably even really possible. But the point is creative thinking works both ways. However, I think encryption is the solution to the wrong problem. The problem isn't "oh noes, how will I get teh music?" its "oh noes, my University will raise tuition rates for everybody if they can't stop teh pirates! (And most likely raise it even under threat of the funding loss the law presents.)
Arthur: What?
Maynard: '"...I would never be able to post this comm"'.
Bedevere: What is that?
Maynard: He must have been caught while typing it.
Lancelot: Oh, come on!
Maynard: Well, that's what it says.
Arthur: Look, if he was being taken away, he wouldn't bother to type 'comm'.
Maynard: Well, that's what's written in the post!
Galahad: Perhaps he was dictating.
Arthur: Oh, shut up. Well, does it say anything else?
Maynard: No. Just 'comm'.
[There is a thunderous roar, and the Knigh75 see a huge, animated Sys. Admin. behind them.]
Maynard: It's the Legendary Sys. Admin. of -- [the Admin b&s him] -- &#*$#NO_CARRIER!!!
Arthur/Knigh75: RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY!...
Or they could stop offering internet connections for personal devices and instead only offer connection through university run/approved labs and computer centers. Control over what gets installed or run on such computers could be more strictly controlled. "Off-campus" housing could still provide access, but the University could more easily claim that its outside its authority. You might laugh, but the computer lab used to be the only place you could get connected; why might it not be possible to become so again? Likely, no not really. But still a grim possible approach.
You forgot "in Korea, only old people use kill-bots," you insensitive clod!
We always worry about what will happen if the robots aren't able to discern combatants and non combatants well enough, but what if we turn out to build robots that are better at it than us? Ones that can pinpoint the source of gunfire from a crowd. Ones of infinite calm, whom won't be startled, fatigued, or angered into making a terrible mistake or committing outright murder. Yes that technology has far to go, yes tele-communication as it currently stands is insufficient to replace ground patrol units, but those are challenges that I think can be met. Challenges that will be met, and will result in fewer casualties in war than ever before; for both our soldiers and innocent civilians.
Embedded Video? Sweet!
Loading...Loading...Loading...
This is awesome!
In another way, I mean to say I read: do people think that 'the internet' lives in the USA or something? and thought I'd casually throw out something about the majority of internet content coming from America, got stuck with a map of fiber, and mis-represented my writing as the main point instead of a semi-sarcastic sub-note. My real point was that I also think tagging is a poor system because it gives rise to misrepresentation, over-simplification, and even becomes mini-comments often used for controversial opinions. I think the best solution is to allow the story submitters to include 4 or 5 tags, subject to editor approval, for their stories and wipe out the whole mini-comment dynamic.
Not to be an elitist American, but... I couldn't find a substantive content map (well there's xkcd's) but I figure Fiber is illustrative enough.
At any rate, I also think the tagging system is garbage. I think the best fix would be to let the submitters specify the article tags. Yes, give me the POWER! I mean us! Us the article submitters!
The system detected there was a problem and automatically shut the reactors down; The system worked! Maybe massive blackouts aren't the best result, but they are by far better than the worst result.