Last year I bought a Ford Fusion plug-in hybrid. During the summer, it was great. Roughly 20 miles of range on electricity, and roughly 35 mpg for longer distances. The sweet spot seems to be between 65 and 80 degrees. At roughly 100 degrees, the car will run the gasoline engine to climate control the battery pack. At less than 40 degrees, the electric range ends up being about half. Below roughly 20 degrees, and the car will use the gasoline engine to run climate control in the cabin. Still working out way better than the old commuter car that it replaced (stopping for fuel about once per 4 weeks during typical driving, or when going out of town for a longer trip instead of once per week in the old commuter) but it's far from perfect. My experience in using a plug in hybrid gives me significant reservation about switching to BEV.
I'm not sure if it counts as an article, but the costs of healthcare really are issues for lots of people. Zachary Weinersmith (Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal) did a public announcement to bring attention to such: http://www.smbc-comics.com/com...
Infrastructure such as levies and dams tend to have ongoing maintenance requirements, meaning we are not looking at a one time cost. A typical infrastructure investment is expected to incur roughly 10% of its initial cost in maintenance expenses per year. And global income (you are measuring expense per person using global population) is around $3,000. If you ask people to pay a third of a year of wages up front, and another 1/30 of their wages every year to support just having cities continue to exist, you don't think that might be a burdensome request?
I'm quite certain that people said the same thing about the U.S. housing market pre-2007 (if smart people were worried, everyone would be bailing already) and the tulip mania of 1636 as well. Just because a market isn't responding rationally doesn't mean necessarily mean there isn't a problem.
So which is it? Warming from atmosphere affecting the water or carbon added to the oceans?
It's both. Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases the absorption of infrared light, which results in warmer temperatures that radiate mainly into the oceans. Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere also increases the carbon content of rain, which precipitates mainly into the oceans increasing acidity. Both affect global patterns in different ways and both are unlikely to be friendly to our current mode of civilization.
I've heard that this wasn't an oversight, or perhaps was retconned into making sense, via the narrative that the run involves a loop around a black hole.
The logic here says that a black hole bends space around it, so a ship being able to navigate closer to the black hole means the run is made in a shorter distance than in a ship that has to stay farther away. Speed is a component in how close you can skirt a gravity well. In this scenario, the ability to reduce the distance of the run is in fact a noteworthy accomplishment, and Han is boasting about it.
I've seen several news reports that islands in the Caribbean are facing up to a 90% destruction of buildings and infrastructure, so I'm not sure the added 20% cost is providing the value you claim.
Using a plug in hybrid, it takes me approximately 3 kilowatt hours of electricity to drive to work. If I let the battery drain completely and drive on hydrocarbons, it takes roughly a quarter of a gallon. 3 KWHs costs me around $0.115*3 = $0.35. A quarter of a gallon of gasoline costs $2.80/4 = $0.70. Gasoline doesn't have to cost $5/gallon to make electrics cheaper to drive. This also discounts the part where I have far less maintenance (oil change every 20,000 miles instead of every 5,000; less frequent brake pad changes, etc).
Regarding generation ships, I seriously question their feasibility. I have a difficult time getting a computer to last more than 10 years, and that's with a friendly environment and easily replaced components. Getting a ship to last between hundreds and millions (depending on how close we can get to / how far we can exceed light speed) years with no additional supplies, essentially nothing going wrong, etc. just seems unimaginably difficult.
Radio signals, and all forms of wave-based communication, still have a functional limit to range. The amount of power put into the signal will determine the range at which it fades into background radiation (https://briankoberlein.com/2015/02/19/e-t-phone-home/). And because the distance is related to the power put into the radio wave in the first place, there is huge incentive to NOT have radio waves be detectable in space. It's a waste of energy to broadcast in such a shot-gun method, even if it were technically feasible. The most powerful radio transmissions sent from earth were sent in 1974 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message). Since then, fewer of our messages would be heard, not more. There is a lot of incentive to get messages to their target audience, which for us, are all based on Earth. I would expect similar circumstances for intelligent life elsewhere. It simply isn't economical to broadcast to the entire universe, even if it were possible, and accidental broadcasts are unlikely due to increased efficiency in transmitting technology.
Because in practice, when you reduce the size and scope of government, you also reduce its effectiveness in enforcing the rules that remain. The typically paltry penalties that currently exist for massively screwing over the commons becomes even further diminished. This is in effective dismantling the protective element of government along with the pesky regulations that are supposed to be preventing companies from running roughshod in the first place.
The company that I work for recently sold a batch of debt that had seen no movement in 12+ months. As a part of the sale, we had to provide electronic copies of the master promissory note, the contract that our customers signed saying they would pay the debt and a letter for each customer that we were selling stating the amount of debt we were selling and who the buyer was. All of the documents are stored in a database as XML, so extraction was relatively easy, but no, an Excel spreadsheet with names, phone numbers, and debt amounts is insufficient if you are selling debt to a credible collection agency.
I'm pretty sure his assumption is that we aren't using phones to store energy for our grid. Maybe we could take the batteries out of the phones first? That would save a lot of space.
I'm not sure why you say his comment is dumb. When I was in college, if I tried to take notes, I'd inevitably end up with less understanding than if I was simply paying attention and interacting with the instructor when I didn't understand something. Taking notes meant I went from actively listening to passively listening while I tried to transcribe the words as quickly as possible. It didn't matter whether I was typing or writing, it was the act of writing that seemed to induce this response. Even worse, because I had no understanding of the material by the end of the lecture, the notes rarely even made any sense to me later. Different strokes for different folks.
The way I see it, standardization of testing is both necessary and self-defeating. Ideally, we want to ensure that people become useful adults with some ability to contribute to society. We believe that having a well rounded education promotes this goal. We want to make sure we are getting value from the resources we expend into this effort.
In order to ensure we are getting value, we need some way to measure the results of education. The measurement has to be applied equally across the board, or else things like styling preference of the test scorer unfairly impact the results of the test taker. Multiple choice tests do a lot to eliminate bias from test scoring.
The problem that we get is that multiple choice is at best a proxy for understanding. We use the proxy because it makes the process so much easier and so much fairer. But it doesn't actually measure the thing that we want. It is measuring whether people can draw the right conclusions from a simplified set of possibilities. This almost never comes up in real life. There is a reason that for graduate level degrees, an oral dissertation complete with a question and answer section is necessary to receive a diploma. This way, in addition to demonstrated ability to do something useful in a field (develop new research or create a new work), evaluators can actually see how well the student understands what they are talking about. But this probably wouldn't work at the grade school level. It simply requires too many resources to be an option for every child, and few people expect children to be able to demonstrate the level of mastery that we actually want.
It turns out that making Key Performance Indicators for important societal factors is difficult. It doesn't seem like we've come across the "best" method yet, and it's entirely possible that no "best" method (one that is feasible, affordable, and fair [and likely more criteria as well]) exists. In the mean time, we can keep attempting to improve the system even if the next improvement doesn't solve for all of the current problems.
"The presence of 120,000 horses in New York City, wrote one 1908 authority for example, is “an economic burden, an affront to cleanliness, and a terrible tax upon human life.”
I've had UPS / FedEx put small packages in my mailbox plenty of times. I'm also on an easy route for package delivery. Everything I have read on the subject in about 15 minutes of searching seems to indicate that FexEx and/or UPS don't WANT to deliver small packages to the mailbox for rural / inconvenient customers, so they contract with USPS to finish the last mile. Care to provide sources that disagree?
The way that the contracts are written, ESPN takes a cut for every subscriber to the network, regardless of the network package. This means that Comcast can not offer or charge a customer for access to ESPN, but Comcast would still be paying for that subscriber regardless.
As far as I can tell, the order to increase scrutiny on people traveling from specific countries is not in and of itself unconstitutional. The contents of the order have been found to be in violation, but that isn't the same thing.
Where the president may actually be running afoul of the constitution is in regards to his business holdings. Because of the non-standard method that Trump used to divest himself from his assets, profits from his business ventures may still be considered to be received by Trump. This hasn't been tested in court yet. If the court rules on this and finds that Trump is in fact receiving, even indirectly, payments from foreign governments using his businesses services, that could become grounds for impeachment due to constitutional violations.
The other word that keeps getting thrown around is treason. It looks like Trump may have overshared classified information with Russian officials, and many people are upset over this. The problem is it can't be treason. It might be good old fashioned espionage, but that isn't an impeachable crime. It can't be treason because an act of treason requires an enemy of the state, of which we don't have currently. We haven't been at war in over 50 years (military actions do not create state enemies).
Slashdot Mirror
Last year I bought a Ford Fusion plug-in hybrid. During the summer, it was great. Roughly 20 miles of range on electricity, and roughly 35 mpg for longer distances. The sweet spot seems to be between 65 and 80 degrees. At roughly 100 degrees, the car will run the gasoline engine to climate control the battery pack. At less than 40 degrees, the electric range ends up being about half. Below roughly 20 degrees, and the car will use the gasoline engine to run climate control in the cabin. Still working out way better than the old commuter car that it replaced (stopping for fuel about once per 4 weeks during typical driving, or when going out of town for a longer trip instead of once per week in the old commuter) but it's far from perfect. My experience in using a plug in hybrid gives me significant reservation about switching to BEV.
Clearly he was buying five one dollar tasers.
I'm not sure if it counts as an article, but the costs of healthcare really are issues for lots of people. Zachary Weinersmith (Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal) did a public announcement to bring attention to such: http://www.smbc-comics.com/com...
Infrastructure such as levies and dams tend to have ongoing maintenance requirements, meaning we are not looking at a one time cost. A typical infrastructure investment is expected to incur roughly 10% of its initial cost in maintenance expenses per year. And global income (you are measuring expense per person using global population) is around $3,000. If you ask people to pay a third of a year of wages up front, and another 1/30 of their wages every year to support just having cities continue to exist, you don't think that might be a burdensome request?
Are we not calling the XBox One X the XBOX? They went a full 360 with that one.
I'm quite certain that people said the same thing about the U.S. housing market pre-2007 (if smart people were worried, everyone would be bailing already) and the tulip mania of 1636 as well. Just because a market isn't responding rationally doesn't mean necessarily mean there isn't a problem.
How many bitcoins are in a ton?
You said:
So which is it? Warming from atmosphere affecting the water or carbon added to the oceans?
It's both. Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increases the absorption of infrared light, which results in warmer temperatures that radiate mainly into the oceans. Increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere also increases the carbon content of rain, which precipitates mainly into the oceans increasing acidity. Both affect global patterns in different ways and both are unlikely to be friendly to our current mode of civilization.
I've heard that this wasn't an oversight, or perhaps was retconned into making sense, via the narrative that the run involves a loop around a black hole.
The logic here says that a black hole bends space around it, so a ship being able to navigate closer to the black hole means the run is made in a shorter distance than in a ship that has to stay farther away. Speed is a component in how close you can skirt a gravity well. In this scenario, the ability to reduce the distance of the run is in fact a noteworthy accomplishment, and Han is boasting about it.
I've seen several news reports that islands in the Caribbean are facing up to a 90% destruction of buildings and infrastructure, so I'm not sure the added 20% cost is providing the value you claim.
Using a plug in hybrid, it takes me approximately 3 kilowatt hours of electricity to drive to work. If I let the battery drain completely and drive on hydrocarbons, it takes roughly a quarter of a gallon. 3 KWHs costs me around $0.115*3 = $0.35. A quarter of a gallon of gasoline costs $2.80/4 = $0.70. Gasoline doesn't have to cost $5/gallon to make electrics cheaper to drive. This also discounts the part where I have far less maintenance (oil change every 20,000 miles instead of every 5,000; less frequent brake pad changes, etc).
Regarding generation ships, I seriously question their feasibility. I have a difficult time getting a computer to last more than 10 years, and that's with a friendly environment and easily replaced components. Getting a ship to last between hundreds and millions (depending on how close we can get to / how far we can exceed light speed) years with no additional supplies, essentially nothing going wrong, etc. just seems unimaginably difficult.
Radio signals, and all forms of wave-based communication, still have a functional limit to range. The amount of power put into the signal will determine the range at which it fades into background radiation (https://briankoberlein.com/2015/02/19/e-t-phone-home/). And because the distance is related to the power put into the radio wave in the first place, there is huge incentive to NOT have radio waves be detectable in space. It's a waste of energy to broadcast in such a shot-gun method, even if it were technically feasible. The most powerful radio transmissions sent from earth were sent in 1974 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message). Since then, fewer of our messages would be heard, not more. There is a lot of incentive to get messages to their target audience, which for us, are all based on Earth. I would expect similar circumstances for intelligent life elsewhere. It simply isn't economical to broadcast to the entire universe, even if it were possible, and accidental broadcasts are unlikely due to increased efficiency in transmitting technology.
Because in practice, when you reduce the size and scope of government, you also reduce its effectiveness in enforcing the rules that remain. The typically paltry penalties that currently exist for massively screwing over the commons becomes even further diminished. This is in effective dismantling the protective element of government along with the pesky regulations that are supposed to be preventing companies from running roughshod in the first place.
Have you learned nothing from your literature classes? Trusting No One is exactly what got the cyclops blinded!
The company that I work for recently sold a batch of debt that had seen no movement in 12+ months. As a part of the sale, we had to provide electronic copies of the master promissory note, the contract that our customers signed saying they would pay the debt and a letter for each customer that we were selling stating the amount of debt we were selling and who the buyer was. All of the documents are stored in a database as XML, so extraction was relatively easy, but no, an Excel spreadsheet with names, phone numbers, and debt amounts is insufficient if you are selling debt to a credible collection agency.
I'm pretty sure his assumption is that we aren't using phones to store energy for our grid. Maybe we could take the batteries out of the phones first? That would save a lot of space.
I'm not sure why you say his comment is dumb. When I was in college, if I tried to take notes, I'd inevitably end up with less understanding than if I was simply paying attention and interacting with the instructor when I didn't understand something. Taking notes meant I went from actively listening to passively listening while I tried to transcribe the words as quickly as possible. It didn't matter whether I was typing or writing, it was the act of writing that seemed to induce this response. Even worse, because I had no understanding of the material by the end of the lecture, the notes rarely even made any sense to me later. Different strokes for different folks.
The way I see it, standardization of testing is both necessary and self-defeating. Ideally, we want to ensure that people become useful adults with some ability to contribute to society. We believe that having a well rounded education promotes this goal. We want to make sure we are getting value from the resources we expend into this effort.
In order to ensure we are getting value, we need some way to measure the results of education. The measurement has to be applied equally across the board, or else things like styling preference of the test scorer unfairly impact the results of the test taker. Multiple choice tests do a lot to eliminate bias from test scoring.
The problem that we get is that multiple choice is at best a proxy for understanding. We use the proxy because it makes the process so much easier and so much fairer. But it doesn't actually measure the thing that we want. It is measuring whether people can draw the right conclusions from a simplified set of possibilities. This almost never comes up in real life. There is a reason that for graduate level degrees, an oral dissertation complete with a question and answer section is necessary to receive a diploma. This way, in addition to demonstrated ability to do something useful in a field (develop new research or create a new work), evaluators can actually see how well the student understands what they are talking about. But this probably wouldn't work at the grade school level. It simply requires too many resources to be an option for every child, and few people expect children to be able to demonstrate the level of mastery that we actually want.
It turns out that making Key Performance Indicators for important societal factors is difficult. It doesn't seem like we've come across the "best" method yet, and it's entirely possible that no "best" method (one that is feasible, affordable, and fair [and likely more criteria as well]) exists. In the mean time, we can keep attempting to improve the system even if the next improvement doesn't solve for all of the current problems.
I have a OnePlus 3t and just this weekend got an OS update for security and enhanced features regarding BlueTooth and Android Auto.
"The presence of 120,000 horses in New York City, wrote one 1908 authority for example, is “an economic burden, an affront to cleanliness, and a terrible tax upon human life.”
http://www.banhdc.org/archives...
I've had UPS / FedEx put small packages in my mailbox plenty of times. I'm also on an easy route for package delivery. Everything I have read on the subject in about 15 minutes of searching seems to indicate that FexEx and/or UPS don't WANT to deliver small packages to the mailbox for rural / inconvenient customers, so they contract with USPS to finish the last mile. Care to provide sources that disagree?
The way that the contracts are written, ESPN takes a cut for every subscriber to the network, regardless of the network package. This means that Comcast can not offer or charge a customer for access to ESPN, but Comcast would still be paying for that subscriber regardless.
http://fortune.com/2015/04/27/espn-verizon-bundle-lawsuit/
Given the stories I've heard about Chinese pollution, you might be better off holding your breath.
As far as I can tell, the order to increase scrutiny on people traveling from specific countries is not in and of itself unconstitutional. The contents of the order have been found to be in violation, but that isn't the same thing.
Where the president may actually be running afoul of the constitution is in regards to his business holdings. Because of the non-standard method that Trump used to divest himself from his assets, profits from his business ventures may still be considered to be received by Trump. This hasn't been tested in court yet. If the court rules on this and finds that Trump is in fact receiving, even indirectly, payments from foreign governments using his businesses services, that could become grounds for impeachment due to constitutional violations.
The other word that keeps getting thrown around is treason. It looks like Trump may have overshared classified information with Russian officials, and many people are upset over this. The problem is it can't be treason. It might be good old fashioned espionage, but that isn't an impeachable crime. It can't be treason because an act of treason requires an enemy of the state, of which we don't have currently. We haven't been at war in over 50 years (military actions do not create state enemies).